When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:15:23 -0400, "Don"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote
Right, which is why someone who is as concerned about crop damage as
you are, would be well advised to take preventative measure, such as
erecting a fence. Don't rely on everyone else to protect your
investment. You have as much (if not more) responsibility to keep your
valuables away from harm.

Was this clipped from the Marxist manifesto? Seriously.....LOL

You really need to study marxism and socialism. Seriously.......

If you think that personal responsibility is a socialist trait, you
are really out there......

There's something wrong with this boys circuit board.
Hey Dave, if your neighbor can't keep himself out of your yard it is not
your responsibility to put up a fence, now is it?

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote
Nature does not include guns. Nor do animals kill for sport or
revenge. But a few weeks of rain will dissolve dog droppings.

Then you would have no problem with someone else's dogs ****ting in your
yard on a regular basis?

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote
I have mixed feelings about the pool/fence thing. On the one hand,
unauthorized people have no business trespassing on your yard, and any
problems they get into should be on them. On the other hand, since
many laws are made to protect the irresponsible, they transferred the
responsibility to everyone else when they require you to prevent kids
from wandering into your pool. But while I disagree with the law in
principle, the amount of effort to put up a fence is not that great,
and if it saves even one life, it's probably worth it.

Then why shouldn't the irresponsible people that let their kids run loose
foot the bill for the fence, around their yard?
Why should the people with the pool have to pay for the fence?

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:30:55 -0400, "Don"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 17:57:05 -0400, "Don"
wrote:

I design million dollar+ custom homes for wealthy island residents and
live
in an area called *Simply Paradise* (run that past google for a clue)
and
am
always in a good mood and in good company.
I get a little frustrated at times when I go into usenet and encounter
legions of complete idiots like you.


"legions of idiots" who understand the law,

**** you and the law you rode in on.

Temper, temper. There is no need to resort to such language. It
certainly does not help your point.


YOU have no say at all in how I conduct my life and that galls you
something
fierce.

Sorry to have to tell you this, but despite your feelings to the
contrary, in any civilized society there are laws which you are
obligated to follow, irrespective of your anarchistic and nihilistic
nature. The reality of this would seem to "gall" you.


YOU are one of the members of the *legion* I mentioned above.
Completely devoid of logic and socialist in nature.

Logic? What's logical about anarchy? Anarchy is chaos, and chaos is
the antithesis of logic.

You're full of ****.
Here, I'll help you out : www.m-w.com
Go look it up and get back with us.


Socialist? You are SERIOUSLY barking up the wrong tree. I am as far
away from socialist as you can get, without abandoning sensible
societal laws.

Yes, Dave, socialist.
You go with the flow, the collective, for you haven't the mental capacity to
do otherwise.
You simply parrot what you have seen on TEEVEE.
Example: You silly notion that anarchy = chaos, just like the bought media
has taught you.

Do you really know what socialism is and what it entails?

It is you that doesn't know that you are a socialist.
You don't seem to know much about anything at all, Dave.
You don't have a spine nor a brain and you speak like a child.
And you expect anyone at all to lend you any creedence?

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

YOU have no say at all in how I conduct my life and that galls you
something
fierce.

Sorry to have to tell you this, but despite your feelings to the
contrary, in any civilized society there are laws which you are
obligated to follow, irrespective of your anarchistic and nihilistic
nature. The reality of this would seem to "gall" you.

Aren't you the same guy who has said, at least 12 million times in the
past,
that there are too many laws, and that personal responsibility, if taught
correctly, would obviate the need for more laws? Why is it, then, that a
place like NYC finally instituted a scooper law, and began busting people
who let their dogs crap right on the sidewalk and then left it there?
We're
talking about dogs on a leash, with their owners watching.

You seem to enjoy using the law to support your arguments as long as the
laws in question have no effect on you.

Dave likes laws when they are in his favor, ie., they keep bad men from
hurting him, just like the bought media tells him every day.
The poor oaf hasn't the where with all to figure it out.
He was programed to be an idiot by the public school system and kept stupid
since by massive daily doses of media.
Nothing that a burning tire around the neck won't cure.

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote
In theory that would be true. But you and I both know that there are
too many people in the world who do not rise to the occasion when it
comes to personal responsibility.

Yeah, and one of them is you.
You would prefer a bureaucracy to enforce your rights for you because you
are too stupidcowardly to do it yourself.
Anarchy = chaos. LOL
Yeah right, keep telling yourself that moron.

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:41:02 -0400, "Don"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:19:38 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:sUcic.11851$w96.1132701@attbi_s54...
Don,

Do you believe you have the right to do whatever you please?

Everyone has the right to do as they please, as long as they
understand
and
accept the consequences.

Because there are certain laws which address specific consequences to
certain unlawful activities, does not mean that you have a right to
"take your chances" and do as you please. Any moral person should
understand that.

I always find it humorous when a socialist attempts to talk bout morals.

I find it equally humorous when a neophyte calls me a socialist.

Of course you do, you have no choice. LOL

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 13:39:16 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:
What would you REALLY do?

I guess this is the difference between you and I Doug. I suspect that
we both would get really ****ed off, and would desire to retaliate in
some way, which would ensure that it never happened again. The
difference is that you would probably carry it through, while I would
likely restrain myself by a very strong sense of ignorance and cowardice.

Duh. It's more than obvious.

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:47:16 -0400, "Don"
wrote:

You're trying to debate with a socialist.
It's not possible to do so, they lack the intellect.
The best you can do is ridicule them.

Doug knows me well enough to know that I'm no socialist.

Yes you are.
Your collectivist nature is reflected in many of your posts.
The *pool/fence* post for example, and many others.
Combine that with the fact that you think anarchy = chaos and it's clear
that you're braindead.

When would you board someone else's boat??
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Dave Hall" wrote in message

Ok, if we stick to your binary view of property, you are either on
your property or someone else's. When you leave your property, am I to
assume that you are intending to damage someone else's property?

Don't say stupid things. We're talking about a dog, not a person.

You're kidding, right?
I'm still wondering why you are trying to argue with a child?