| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 2/24/05 10:44 PM: snip No look at what you said: "You're the one that claimed that the drug dealers were buying assault weapons at the corner gun-mart, and that they killed 1000s of people every year" ============== Yes, I repeated the gist of your previous spew... A spew that is so full of ignorance and idiocy that it only gets the derision it deserves. Your "gist" include a specific claim that I did not make. Thus, your "gist" was an attempt to deceive that was exposed. ===================== No, it was not. Whatever it was, it wasn't truthful. Because, the truth is, I never said what you claimed I said. ======================== Your intent was the same... I remain confident that the Framers did not have in mind that a crack dealer could buy an assault weapon at the store on the corner and spray the park with semi-automatic gunfire. ======================= No, they didn't have that in mind, and only you belive it or are trying to say that that occurs. Crack dealers have no rights to buy arms. Crack dealers who have not lost their rights to buy arms can buy them. You do realize that not every crack dealer ends up being convicted, right? Heck, all they have to do is go down to the corner and buy the right weapon to shoot any witnesses against them! ===================== LOL Do you make this up as you go, or has your fantasies been the main part of your life for years now? What's to stop an accused crack dealer from buying an assault rifle at the shop on the corner and shooting a witness? ======================== Tellwhen it has happened. Setting up mythical what-ifs isn't a discussion of rights. What I did not say was that such incidents aco****ed for 1000s of deaths each year, and thus, you are wrong to attribute that position. ================== Yet you keep implying it. How many crack dealers are there, how many parks? Adds up to 1000s of people killed in your fantasy world of make-believe. I never said any such thing, nor implied it. If even one person is killed with an assault weapon - a gun that is designed to kill many people quickly - that's obviously too many. ===================== Yes, that is exactly what you keep implying when you talk about spraying in parks. I'm not implying anything. I'm saying it: if more than one person is killed with an assault weapon that is one too many. ======================= Why? Why only these so-called assault weapons? Again, what makes then so much more dangerous than other weapons? Oh, and I see that you are in fact capable of re-posting information. We are all still waiting for your repost of the evidence that Canadians are dying in waiting lines. ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. What was the date and time of your most recent posting of this information? It does not seem to be available on usenet. ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. Anyone else see it? It doesn't seem to be available. Why won't you share the date and time of yoru most recent post with this information? ====================== What is apparent is your complete ignorance in the use of your computer. Why are you afraid of the facts? |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
in article t, rick at
wrote on 2/25/05 12:13 AM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 2/24/05 10:44 PM: snip No look at what you said: "You're the one that claimed that the drug dealers were buying assault weapons at the corner gun-mart, and that they killed 1000s of people every year" ============== Yes, I repeated the gist of your previous spew... A spew that is so full of ignorance and idiocy that it only gets the derision it deserves. Your "gist" include a specific claim that I did not make. Thus, your "gist" was an attempt to deceive that was exposed. ===================== No, it was not. Whatever it was, it wasn't truthful. Because, the truth is, I never said what you claimed I said. ======================== Your intent was the same... My intent was exactly what I stated, not something you made up. I remain confident that the Framers did not have in mind that a crack dealer could buy an assault weapon at the store on the corner and spray the park with semi-automatic gunfire. ======================= No, they didn't have that in mind, and only you belive it or are trying to say that that occurs. Crack dealers have no rights to buy arms. Crack dealers who have not lost their rights to buy arms can buy them. You do realize that not every crack dealer ends up being convicted, right? Heck, all they have to do is go down to the corner and buy the right weapon to shoot any witnesses against them! ===================== LOL Do you make this up as you go, or has your fantasies been the main part of your life for years now? What's to stop an accused crack dealer from buying an assault rifle at the shop on the corner and shooting a witness? ======================== Tellwhen it has happened. Setting up mythical what-ifs isn't a discussion of rights. Sure. http://www.freep.com/news/locway/shoot4_20040604.htm Now where's your link that proves Canadians are dying in wait lines for health care? What I did not say was that such incidents aco****ed for 1000s of deaths each year, and thus, you are wrong to attribute that position. ================== Yet you keep implying it. How many crack dealers are there, how many parks? Adds up to 1000s of people killed in your fantasy world of make-believe. I never said any such thing, nor implied it. If even one person is killed with an assault weapon - a gun that is designed to kill many people quickly - that's obviously too many. ===================== Yes, that is exactly what you keep implying when you talk about spraying in parks. I'm not implying anything. I'm saying it: if more than one person is killed with an assault weapon that is one too many. ======================= Why? Why only these so-called assault weapons? Again, what makes then so much more dangerous than other weapons? Uhm. The fact that you can fire a lot of bullets in a short period of time? Duh. Oh, and I see that you are in fact capable of re-posting information. We are all still waiting for your repost of the evidence that Canadians are dying in waiting lines. ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. What was the date and time of your most recent posting of this information? It does not seem to be available on usenet. ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. Anyone else see it? It doesn't seem to be available. Why won't you share the date and time of yoru most recent post with this information? ====================== What is apparent is your complete ignorance in the use of your computer. Why are you afraid of the facts? Please share them. As you are aware, thus far you are the only person that can see them. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article t, rick at wrote on 2/25/05 12:13 AM: snip Whatever it was, it wasn't truthful. Because, the truth is, I never said what you claimed I said. ======================== Your intent was the same... My intent was exactly what I stated, not something you made up. ==================== Yes, spewing your ignorance. That wasn't something I made up. I remain confident that the Framers did not have in mind that a crack dealer could buy an assault weapon at the store on the corner and spray the park with semi-automatic gunfire. ======================= No, they didn't have that in mind, and only you belive it or are trying to say that that occurs. Crack dealers have no rights to buy arms. Crack dealers who have not lost their rights to buy arms can buy them. You do realize that not every crack dealer ends up being convicted, right? Heck, all they have to do is go down to the corner and buy the right weapon to shoot any witnesses against them! ===================== LOL Do you make this up as you go, or has your fantasies been the main part of your life for years now? What's to stop an accused crack dealer from buying an assault rifle at the shop on the corner and shooting a witness? ======================== Tellwhen it has happened. Setting up mythical what-ifs isn't a discussion of rights. Sure. http://www.freep.com/news/locway/shoot4_20040604.htm ===================== NAme the corner store they bought their weapons from, fool. thanks again for displaying your ignorant ideology. But I'll see your corner gun-marts and raise you a corner gun rent-a-center, like they have in Toronto. http://www.diversitywatch.ryerson.ca...globe_jan7.htm Now where's your link that proves Canadians are dying in wait lines for health care? ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. What I did not say was that such incidents aco****ed for 1000s of deaths each year, and thus, you are wrong to attribute that position. ================== Yet you keep implying it. How many crack dealers are there, how many parks? Adds up to 1000s of people killed in your fantasy world of make-believe. I never said any such thing, nor implied it. If even one person is killed with an assault weapon - a gun that is designed to kill many people quickly - that's obviously too many. ===================== Yes, that is exactly what you keep implying when you talk about spraying in parks. I'm not implying anything. I'm saying it: if more than one person is killed with an assault weapon that is one too many. ======================= Why? Why only these so-called assault weapons? Again, what makes then so much more dangerous than other weapons? Uhm. The fact that you can fire a lot of bullets in a short period of time? Duh. =========================== DUH, fool. Thanks again for proving your ignorance. Lots of non-assault styled weapons can fire 'lots of bullets in a short period of time', dolt. Thanks again for proving its all about your ignorant ideology. Oh, and I see that you are in fact capable of re-posting information. We are all still waiting for your repost of the evidence that Canadians are dying in waiting lines. ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. What was the date and time of your most recent posting of this information? It does not seem to be available on usenet. ================= I have, and I've told you where else to check several times. that you wish to remain willfully ignorant is your decision. Anyone else see it? It doesn't seem to be available. Why won't you share the date and time of yoru most recent post with this information? ====================== What is apparent is your complete ignorance in the use of your computer. Why are you afraid of the facts? Please share them. As you are aware, thus far you are the only person that can see them. ==================== As everyone is now aware, you are too stupid to use your computer, even when told where to look. Like I said before fool, that you are too afraid to know the facts is no skin off my nose. I gave you the opportunity to find them yourself, because if I bring them up, you claim they are biased sources. Whay a hoot you are. thabnks again for proving your ignorant ideology... \ |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:
What's to stop an accused crack dealer from buying an assault rifle at the shop on the corner and shooting a witness? Well, a couple of things: First, there's the background check prior to purchase and second, and most importantly, there's the likelyhood that the witness will himself be armed and capable of defending himself. Third, there may be other armed citizens around who can likewise take down the crack dealer. Then there's the fact that he'll probably be in jail and won't be able to even attempt to buy a gun. But, sometimes that happens, though quite rarely. Most crack dealers are crack dealers, not murderers. These days, a lot of them don't even carry guns, because the penalties for dealing crack while in possession of a gun are positively draconian...and should be. I'm not implying anything. I'm saying it: if more than one person is killed with an assault weapon that is one too many. Utopian nonsense. How about if that "one person" is a child-molester/murderer just about to slit the throat of a little boy he's just finished raping? Is it okay to shoot him with an "assault weapon?" How about if that "one person" is about to slit YOUR throat? Would you be hoping someone might kill him before he finishes, or is your dedication to non-violence deep enough that you would rather be brutally and painfully murdered rather than have your attacker killed by someone with a gun? How about if it's your wife, or your child? How deep is your belief? I've never met anybody who didn't have a limit somewhere that would provoke them to use deadly force to defend someone dear to them. Are you the first? Somehow I doubt it. -- Regards, Scott Weiser "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM © 2005 Scott Weiser |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Crimes Against Nature-- RFK, Jr. Interview | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
