 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / March 2007Snorkler shot
http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 Yep, we sure do need more laws on guns. Oh, wait, this guy was breaking the law by having one. Maybe another law about it would help--yeah, that would solve the problem.. Dan > http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 > > Yep, we sure do need more laws on guns. Oh, wait, this > guy was breaking the law by having one. Maybe another > law about it would help--yeah, that would solve the problem.. What law was he breaking by having a gun? Were there some details left out of the story? JF Maybe the law he broke was shooting snorklers out of season, or without a license? >> http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > JF > Maybe the law he broke was shooting snorklers out of season, or without a > license? Nope. Danlw said he broke the law by "having one". Of course the shooter probably broke some laws by shooting the snorkeler, or using the gun while under the influence of meth, or who knows how many other things. On the other hand the shooter may be able to convince the judge that the snorkeler appeared to be breaking into his home via the sewer outlet and the snorkel looked for all the world like the muzzle of a shotgun. But Danlw clearly said - "Yep, we sure do need more laws on guns. Oh, wait, this guy was breaking the law by having one" Perhaps you can explain if it was actually more than just another puerile snicker meant to draw high fives from the other progunners here. To me it ranks favourably for abysmal stupidity with the brilliant notion some of you have that it's a victory for your cause to have crooked cops selling confiscated guns to crooks, and is a rational argument for doing away with gun laws instead of creating better ones. JF > Perhaps you can explain if it was actually more than just another > puerile snicker meant to draw high fives from the other progunners [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > rational argument for doing away with gun laws instead of creating > better ones. Once again, it's obvious you speak from complete ignorance. I don't even have to ask if you've read the laws you think may be faulty or before you decide more or better ones are needed. Your comments and lack of understanding make it obvious to anyone who has bothered to read them. Now tell us how effective your better laws are likely to be if even you can't take the time to read them. Lee > Maybe the law he broke was shooting snorklers out of season, or without a > license? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >> JF Another version of the story stated that he was a convicted felon. He would not be allowed to own any firearm. Dan I think he was a felon with a gun...hmm....but no mention of that in this story.....maybe I read it somewhere else. >> http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > JF > I think he was a felon with a gun...hmm....but no mention of that in this > story.....maybe I read it somewhere else. That's what I'm looking for. The cite we saw made no indication of it. JF "JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> sputtered: >> I think he was a felon with a gun...hmm....but no mention of >> that in this story.....maybe I read it somewhere else. > > That's what I'm looking for. The cite we saw made no > indication of it. ROSEBURG: The Reedsport man accused of shooting a man who was snorkeling in the Smith River Tuesday has been arraigned in Douglas County Circuit Court. William Roderick, 60, was arraigned on charges of third-degree assault, five counts of felon in possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of methamphetamine and unlawful possession of marijuana. http://www.newsreview.info/article/20070209/NEWS/70209015  SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> I think he was a felon with a gun...hmm....but no mention of that in this >> story.....maybe I read it somewhere else. > That's what I'm looking for. The cite we saw made no indication of it. Read the f.cking laws. Hint, look for reference to controlled substances, meth, for example. ahhh..here it is.... http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/10/snorkeler.shot.ap/index.html >I think he was a felon with a gun...hmm....but no mention of that in this >story.....maybe I read it somewhere else. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >> JF > ahhh..here it is.... > http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/10/snorkeler.shot.ap/index.html 60 years old, felony conviction, meth and pot. Yep, it was the guns fault that a snorkeler was mistaken for a nutria, or that a senile meth head was in illegally in possession of a firearm and shooting at what he thought was nutria... rec.scuba's resident pussy "Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> sputtered: > a senile meth head was in illegally in possession of a firearm That would describe quite a few of the gunhugging rec.scuba fuckwits you call your friends. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Yep, it was the guns fault that a snorkeler was mistaken for a nutria, or > that a senile meth head was in illegally in possession of a firearm and > shooting at what he thought was nutria... Well, as we all know, guns don't kill people -- romantic Italians with rocks do... http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/02/11/italy.verde.deaths.ap/index.html > > ahhh..here it is.... > >http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/10/snorkeler.shot.ap/index.html [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that a senile meth head was in illegally in possession of a firearm and > shooting at what he thought was nutria... I don't think it's fair to blame the gun for it's owner's stupidity, but hey, you're the expert. JF >> > ahhh..here it is.... >> >http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/10/snorkeler.shot.ap/index.html [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I don't think it's fair to blame the gun for it's owner's stupidity, Another direct contradiction to your established posting history. >>>>ahhh..here it is.... >>>>http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/10/snorkeler.shot.ap/index.html [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Another direct contradiction to your established posting history. que sera sera > >>>"Buhda" <akha...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > que sera sera Is Sera a rec.scuban? JF >>>>>"Buhda" <akha...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > JF To you - probably yes On Feb 12, 10:39 am, "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > >> "Buhda" <akha...@houston.rr.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Another direct contradiction to your established posting history. Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) JF > On Feb 12, 10:39 am, "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > JF Real world - something you have no realization of - and I doubt ever will - EVER > > Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting > > history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) > Real world - something you have no realization of - and I doubt ever > will - EVER- Oh Joe. If only you knew. JF >>>Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting >>>history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > JF Please explain, John Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ On Feb 12, 11:38 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote: > >>>Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting > >>>history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Please explain, John It's stupid to assume that any of us hasn't been exposed to our share of reality. I shouldn't have mentioned it. JF >>>Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting >>>history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > JF I know perfectly - I Know many of your type - closed mind, unable to listen to a different point of view - always expanded the non issue at home, then convolutes the issues as to confused the opponent - it has now and will not work here. > On Feb 12, 10:39 am, "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting > history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) But you want to confiscate guns you don't like from law abiding citizens. In -reality-, that's blaming the gun, right? (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well) On Feb 13, 11:12 pm, "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > > On Feb 12, 10:39 am, "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > In -reality-, that's blaming the gun, right? Is it? I would say it's more an expression of doubt about the logic in allowing certain kinds of people to tote guns around. Since some of you object to any control on that then perhaps the next best option is limiting the damage potential of the weapons allowed. None of that suggests the guns go off by themselves. > (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is > akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well)- I have? Can you quote the words? I've never suggested (or believed) that legal ownership of a weapon is anything remotely close to a criminal act. There's an argument to be made however that some of my comments could be construed as suggesting that the unwillingness of some gun owners to admit to the potential for damage by a proliferation of privately held guns borders on irresponsible, perhaps even criminal. JF > On Feb 13, 11:12 pm, "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: >> > Actually only a contradiction of your biased version of my posting >> > history. In the real world there's a distinction. 8) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Is it? Yes, it is. > I would say it's more an expression of doubt about the logic in > allowing certain kinds of people to tote guns around. The term "logic" is mis-applied here, "certain kinds of people" is something you've repeatedly defined as bigotry, in several forms, and you "doubt" the right or reason for anyone to possess firearms at any times, in accordance with your personal, irrational, abject fears. > Since some of you One of us, rhetorically, but it was a nice attempt at a straw man. >object to any control on that then perhaps the next best option is > limiting the damage potential of the weapons allowed. Not that you know how to quantify it. You can't come up with any factual data to leverage against the many kinds of guns you fear. In fact, you can barely tell one from the other. > None of that suggests the guns go off by themselves. > >> (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is >> akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well)- > > I have? Can you quote the words? Sure. Re-read your posts from yesterday, it was clear as a bell. >I've never suggested (or believed) > that legal ownership of a weapon is anything remotely close to a > criminal act. That's a lie. You're a liar. >There's an argument to be made however that some of my > comments could be construed as suggesting that the unwillingness of > some gun owners to admit to the potential for damage by a > proliferation of privately held guns borders on irresponsible, perhaps > even criminal. And there's the lie, although there's no argument to be made by the rational. -Especially- since by -any- aspect of the description, private firearms ownership in this country is already proliferated. According to you, then, this "criminal" act has already occurred. What makes you a laughing stock, a true a.s, is the convoluted logic through which you generally attribute any gun related crime to the law abiding gun owner. You were quite succinct about it in yesterday's flailings. > JF "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> spewed: >>> (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun >>> ownership is [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Re-read your posts from yesterday, it was clear as a bell. IOW, you're lying and can't back up your claim, Typical. > IOW, you're lying and can't back up your claim, > > Typical. Lost another ISP, eh Carl? You are the leprosy of USENET. How many servers are you hiding behind this time? rec.scuba's resident pussy Scott Koplin <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: > Lost another ISP, eh Carl? Nope. I've never 'lost an ISP' ever, pussy. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> But you want to confiscate guns you don't like from law abiding >> citizens. >> In -reality-, that's blaming the gun, right? > Is it? I would say it's more an expression of doubt about the logic in > allowing certain kinds of people to tote guns around. You mean the law abiding citizen type? That, by the way is a direct quote from the exchange above. > Since some of you object to any control on that then perhaps the next best > option is > limiting the damage potential of the weapons allowed. None of that > suggests the guns > go off by themselves. How do you figure that's not "any control?" How about the next best option is to mind your own business and let law abiding citizens do the same. >> (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is >> akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well)- > I have? Can you quote the words? No, but I can paraphrase them. Remember a recent exchange and words to the effect that gun advocates were closely aligned with criminals? > I've never suggested (or believed) that legal ownership of a weapon is > anything remotely close to a > criminal act. Only that it should be, right? > There's an argument to be made however that some of my comments could be > construed as suggesting that the unwillingness of > some gun owners to admit to the potential for damage by a proliferation of > privately held guns borders on irresponsible, perhaps > even criminal. Only because it's not the case. The number of guns privately held by law abiding citizens has absolutely nothing to do with irresponsible or criminal behavior. 53 years ago, I got my first gun. I didn't commit any crime or do any damage with it. Today, I have enough guns that I'd have to search the house to figure out just how many there are. I can see a shotgun and 7 rifles from where I'm sitting. 53 years and still no crimes or damage. Feel free to point out how I've been irresponsible or criminal. Lee > >> (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is > >> akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well)- > > I have? Can you quote the words? > > No, but I can paraphrase them. Remember a recent exchange and words to the > effect that gun advocates were closely aligned with criminals? Perhaps you should check the language. > > I've never suggested (or believed) that legal ownership of a weapon is > > anything remotely close to a > > criminal act. > > Only that it should be, right? Wrong. > > There's an argument to be made however that some of my comments could be > > construed as suggesting that the unwillingness of [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Feel free to point out how I've been irresponsible or criminal. How many legal guns are stolen? How many legal gun owners turn criminal? How many legally owned guns get sold off at gun shows? JF >>>> (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is >>>>akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well)- [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > How many legal guns are stolen? How many legal gun owners turn > criminal? How many legally owned guns get sold off at gun shows? Legally? close to 99.99 percent. THe gun show dealers have to follow the law. As for face to face sales by private parties, I doubt that any happen inside the gun show proper. Perhaps people meet and then sell them later. But that could happen anywhere. Gun show dealers are under the same laws as "brick and mortar" dealers. You'd know that if you'd ever bothered to find out. > JF Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ On Feb 14, 7:06 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote: > >>>> (Although in -reality- you've made it clear that legal gun ownership is > >>>>akin to a criminal act in your eyes, as well)- [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Legally? close to 99.99 percent. THe gun show dealers have to follow the > law. Just out of curiosity, do those laws vary by state? I was under the impressson that at least some gun laws are state level. > As for face to face sales by private parties, I doubt that any happen > inside the gun show proper. Perhaps people meet and then sell them later. > > But that could happen anywhere. That occurred to me, although now that you mention it, the shows would be a good place to prospect, wouldn't they? > Gun show dealers are under the same laws as "brick and mortar" dealers. In all states? > You'd know that if you'd ever bothered to find out. With a wealth of "experts" here ready and more than willing to share their gun knowledge, why go digging? JF > On Feb 14, 7:06 pm, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > Just out of curiosity, do those laws vary by state? I was under the > impressson that at least some gun laws are state level. Look up NICS >>As for face to face sales by private parties, I doubt that any happen >>inside the gun show proper. Perhaps people meet and then sell them later. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That occurred to me, although now that you mention it, the shows would > be a good place to prospect, wouldn't they? Perhaps. But in reality, it's not. Unless you have a collectible firearm, or a hard to find one, gun shows are usually the last place that you'd go. >>Gun show dealers are under the same laws as "brick and mortar" dealers. > > In all states? I believe that the NICS check must be done. If you are a licensed dealer. If not, then it doesn't matter where the deal goes down, does it? The dealer gets his/her license from the feds....Hence the term FFL. >>You'd know that if you'd ever bothered to find out. > > With a wealth of "experts" here ready and more than willing to share > their gun knowledge, why go digging? So you wouldn't look like an a.s? > JF Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ > So you wouldn't look like an a.s? Hilarious. As if that is anyone elses fault. Good people have been patiently trying to educate this f.cking idiot for years. Again, for like the thousandth time, we get back to this is _America_, and a _Canadian_ has no voice or vote. If he was one fifth as smart as he likes to think, he would realize that, and butt the f.ck out. He is the poster child for fighting for gun rights. "Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: > Again, for like the thousandth time, we get back to this is > _America_, and a _Canadian_ has no voice or vote. I have both a voice and a vote in USA politics. > "Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: > >>Again, for like the thousandth time, we get back to this is >>_America_, and a _Canadian_ has no voice or vote. > > I have both a voice and a vote in USA politics. So why then, do you appear to hide in Canada? Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: >> rec.scuba's resident pussy "Scott" >> <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > So why then, do you appear to hide in Canada? 1) I'm not hiding, fuckwit. 2) A person doesn't have to reside in the USA to vote in USA elections, fuckwit. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > 1) I'm not hiding, fuckwit. Post your location. Otherwise you are hiding. Or meet someone on this NG. > 2) A person doesn't have to reside in the USA to vote in USA > elections, fuckwit. No sh.t. Did you just fogure that out? Why do you reside in canada BTW? Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: > Or meet someone on this NG. I invited Scotty up to meet me last year, fuckwit. He ran like the pussy he is. Mikey hid behind his wife's skirt in Toronto when he lied about bringing his Baretta up with him. You fuckwits wuss out every time. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You fuckwits wuss out every time. Not the same thing. And a real man would know the difference. Bluster won't hide the fact that you seem to try to be hard to find, and won't come out into the open. Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: >> dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Not the same thing. AAAWWWW, poor baby didn't get what he wanted. Scotty and Mikey had the chance. They ran. Live with it. > dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> spewed: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Live with it. Nice snippage. Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ > Nice snippage. Is he still around? Funny that he didn't have the balls to do a meet & greet when I was up in Toronto... I guess the prospect of actually meeting someone from the newsgroup just couldn't compete with the allure of sniffing his mother's soiled panties in her closet... Obviously, it was a conspiracy between John and I to delude him into thinking that I was actually in Toronto, Canada instead of Toronto, TX... Damn, we sure fooled him, didn't we? >>Nice snippage. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > thinking that I was actually in Toronto, Canada instead of Toronto, > TX... Damn, we sure fooled him, didn't we? Say itsn't so, Gru Sure ya were > Say itsn't so, Gru > > Sure ya were Well, Carl will never know because he's too scared to come out and play... <snip> > Not the same thing. And a real man would know the difference. > > Bluster won't hide the fact that you seem to try to be hard to find, and > won't come out into the open. Do remember that Scott had invited Carl to a meet in Seattle, several times. Never accepted. Fails to mention that for some reason :-) Dennis "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> sputtered: > Do remember that Scott had invited Carl to a meet in Seattle Of course that was only after Scotty ran like a pussy and failed to meet me at the Peace Arch. Just like Mikey wussed out and hide under his wife's skirt in Toronto to keep from meeting me there. But since he knew he had lied about having his gun with him, that's expected. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Of course that was only after Scotty ran like a pussy and failed to > meet me at the Peace Arch. > > Just like Mikey wussed out and hide under his wife's skirt in > Toronto to keep from meeting me there. I seem to remember it more like you didn't have the balls to show up and meet them instead. "Mike Shelley-is-an-idiot" <Scott Koplin-is-a-pussy@nospam.com> sputtered: > I seem to remember it more like you didn't have the balls to > show up and meet them instead. Mikey was too scared to tell me his room number. Scotty demonstrated that he was a pussy when he failed to show up at the Peace Arch. I was there. He wasn't. Mikey got reamed by Canadian Customs when he showed up at the airport. That's why you're hiding behind a sockpuppet, pussy. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > I have both a voice and a vote in USA politics. You are a liar and a punk, so it doesnt matter. Another permutation of the absolute coward in the hole. rec.scuba's resident pussy Scott Koplin <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: > Another permutation of Scotty running and sticking his head up Douggy's a.s. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > rec.scuba's resident pussy Scott Koplin <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> > Scotty running and sticking his head up Douggy's a.s. And Carlita comes out of the closet and finally admits his homosexual fantasies. > Scotty running and sticking his head up Douggy's a.s. There you go with those homosexual fantasies again. Now you're fantasizing about Doug's a.s? rec.scuba's resident pussy Scott Koplin <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: > "Carl Nisarel" <hostlbuddha@postmaster.uk.co> wrote in message > >> I have both a voice and a vote in USA politics. > > You are a liar and a punk, so it doesnt matter. Give me a kiss, Scotty. Then go ask Mikey and Douggy about their experiences with Canada Customs. > Give me a kiss, Scotty. And Carl displays his homosexual tendencies yet again. Is carlito still here? :-) SignaturePopeye "A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with." - Tennessee Williams www.finalprotectivefire.com >> Give me a kiss, Scotty. > > And Carl displays his homosexual tendencies yet again. > Is carlito still here? :-) When he's not out blowing black dicks and claiming that he's influencing votes. "Douglas W \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> spewed: > Is carlito still here? Still making sure you can't bring your guns into Canada, Fatboy. Quit whining. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > I have both a voice and a vote in USA politics. Sucking black cock behind the polling place and claiming that you are trying to convince them to vote Democrat is not the same as having a voice and vote in US politics no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise. > "Scott" <pugetsounddiver@gmail.com> spewed: > >> Again, for like the thousandth time, we get back to this is >> _America_, and a _Canadian_ has no voice or vote. > > I have both a voice and a vote in USA politics. More like a whine and a hanging chad. Besides, you would actually have to register with a real address to vote--can't use them proxy servers for that. Dan "Danlw" <danlw7@nospamcomcast.net> spewed: > Besides, you would actually have to > register with a real address to vote I do have one and I vote in USA elections. Those facts drives you fuckwits crazy. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > I believe that the NICS check must be done. If you are a licensed dealer. > If not, then it doesn't matter where the deal goes down, does it? Actually, it does matter. In some parts of Florida, even the private sellers at gun shows are required to perform a NICS background check and some states prohibit any sale between private individuals. Lee > > I believe that the NICS check must be done. If you are a licensed dealer. > > If not, then it doesn't matter where the deal goes down, does it? > > Actually, it does matter. In some parts of Florida, even the private > sellers at gun shows are required to perform a NICS background check and > some states prohibit any sale between private individuals. In this state, *all* gun show sales have to be NICS'ed, and all dealers or table holders have to have a background on file. The whole thing is just another blinding illumination of Futile's ignorance and bigotry. >>I believe that the NICS check must be done. If you are a licensed dealer. >>If not, then it doesn't matter where the deal goes down, does it? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Lee My point is, it doesn't have to be at a gun show. It can be anywhere that 2 individuals who wish to sell/buy a gun might find themselves. The decision to do it legally is another matter. Signature“TAANSTAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ Something to think about, from a wise man now long dead….: “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. “There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. “We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” --Theodore Roosevelt...1907 ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 ____________________________________________________________________________ >> Legally? close to 99.99 percent. THe gun show dealers have to follow the >> law. > Just out of curiosity, do those laws vary by state? I was under the > impressson that at least some gun laws are state level. The ones being discussed are federal laws. Some states, including some part of Florida, impose more stringent requirements. Why don't you know that already? Why haven't you bothered to look? Why is it that I can find the information within seconds with a Google search and you can't find it at all? >> Gun show dealers are under the same laws as "brick and mortar" dealers. > In all states? In the entire country. It's federal law. >> You'd know that if you'd ever bothered to find out. > With a wealth of "experts" here ready and more than willing to share > their gun knowledge, why go digging? Because you'd not make quite as much of a fool out of yourself if you bothered to understand, even a little, the things you are basing your conclusions on. Because it's the ethical thing to do. Because, if you understood just how many laws and controls there already are, you would never, ever, even think of suggesting that gun owners have proven unwilling to compromise. Lee JOF wrote: > How many legal gun owners turn criminal? Substantially less than the number of legal drivers who commit vehicular homicide. Substantially less than the number of responsible drinkers that become alcoholics. Substantially less than the number of peaceful people that pick up a hockey stick and hit someone with it. Substantially less than the number of real estate salesmen that falsify information to obtain a desired appraisal or desired financing. Lee > JOF wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Substantially less than the number of peaceful people that pick up a hockey > stick and hit someone with it. You can add golf clubs here, also > Substantially less than the number of real estate salesmen that falsify > information to obtain a desired appraisal or desired financing. > > Lee > Substantially less than the number of real estate salesmen that falsify > information to obtain a desired appraisal or desired financing. How would you know? What gives you the right to have a gun or 50, even if you havent broken the law? I met you, and you dont wear no $500 slacks. sh.t, we are happy when you wear anything but a SPEEDO. =;-) > How many legal guns are stolen? Once again, faulting the victim of a crime for it's commission. These police that are supposed to prevent this, of course, are the same ones you base your personal defense on. >How many legal gun owners turn criminal? Then they're not, uh...."legal gun owners", Futile. >How many legally owned guns get sold off at gun shows? An insignificant number, that go on to commit crimes. In many cases, the sale -could- be illegal as well. State laws (concessions) vary. > JF >> How many legal guns are stolen? > > Once again, faulting the victim of a crime for it's commission. > > These police that are supposed to prevent this, of course, are the same > ones you base your personal defense on. how can even an idiot like jof miss this?? how dumb can one person get? >>> How many legal guns are stolen? >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > how dumb can one person get? Well, there was this one poster, no, no, it wasn't quite that bad. Sorry! Dan > >> How many legal guns are stolen? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > how dumb can one person get? Find a flat spot on yer shiniest gun, then stare intently at the image reflected at you. See it? JF > Perhaps you should check the language. Perhaps you should. Your audience heard you quite clearly. >> > I've never suggested (or believed) that legal ownership of a weapon is >> > anything remotely close to a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Wrong. You just finished saying it. It's directly below this statement. >> > There's an argument to be made however that some of my comments could >> > be [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> > privately held guns borders on irresponsible, perhaps >> > even criminal. >> Only because it's not the case. The number of guns privately held by law >> abiding citizens has absolutely nothing to do with irresponsible or [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >> Feel free to point out how I've been irresponsible or criminal. > How many legal guns are stolen? How many legal gun owners turn > criminal? How many legally owned guns get sold off at gun shows? How many legal guns are stolen? None. Once they are stolen, they are not legal guns. How many are sold at gun shows? I don't know, but I can tell you that, by far, the majority of them are sold by federally licensed gun dealers who must comply with the same identification, background check and delivery delay laws during the gun shows that they do when selling out of their shops. Nobody without a license is allowed to sell guns as a business without a license. That means you can sell your private gun, but not buy and sell for profit. Not only that, in the more densely populated counties of Florida, even those selling their own guns at a gunshow are required to perform a background check. Of course you didn't know that. It's just one more thing you didn't bother to check on before you spouted off about it. "The Gun Control Act prohibited the direct mail order of firearms by consumers and mandated that anyone who wants to buy a gun from a source other than a private individual must go to a Federally licensed firearms dealer to buy the gun. The Act also banned unlicensed individuals from acquiring handguns outside their state of residence, although long guns (rifles and shotguns) may (under Federal law) be acquired from federally licensed firearms dealers located in other States, provided this is allowed by both the state of purchase and the state of residence. Private sales between residents of two different states are also prohibited without going through an FFL, except for the case of a buyer holding a Curio & Relic license purchasing a firearm that qualifies as a curio or relic. Private sales between residents of the same state are allowed under federal law. Current law mandates that a background check be performed if the seller has a federal firearms license. However, two private parties living in the same state may buy and sell firearms without going through an FFL in 24 states. A person who does not have a Federal Firearms License may not sell or buy guns from other people for the purpose of being in the trade. They must be buying for or selling from their own personal collection. States that do not allow private sales include California, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Additionally in Florida, the state constitution was amended to make this a county option for sales transacted at gun shows. (Private sales between private individuals outside gun shows remain legal throughout Florida.) The densely populated counties of Florida now require either a NICA check at gun shows for private transactions (all FFL transactions require this by federal law), or that the buyer must possess a CCW license, in which case this allows the buyer to take possession immediately upon purchase without any NICS check, paperwork, or 3 day delay. Rural and less densely populated counties in Florida have elected not to control private sales between individuals at gun shows." Before you claim something's a problem, you might want to do a little better job of understanding what you are complaining about. Lee > > Perhaps you should check the language. > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > How many legal guns are stolen? None. Once they are stolen, they are not > legal guns. That answer is as good as the truth, perhaps even better for my purpose. > How many are sold at gun shows? I don't know, but I can tell you that, by > far, the majority of them are sold by federally licensed gun dealers who [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > perform a background check. Of course you didn't know that. It's just one > more thing you didn't bother to check on before you spouted off about it. I didn't need to study it a lot. What little I know is making you and Doug get all twisty. > "The Gun Control Act prohibited the direct mail order of firearms by > consumers and mandated that anyone who wants to buy a gun from a source [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Before you claim something's a problem, you might want to do a little better > job of understanding what you are complaining about. I only asked, but your answer was informative. JF >>>Perhaps you should check the language. >> [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > I didn't need to study it a lot. What little I know is making you and > Doug get all twisty. hardly - it just basically showed your ignorance - again >>"The Gun Control Act prohibited the direct mail order of firearms by >>consumers and mandated that anyone who wants to buy a gun from a source [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > JF > I didn't need to study it a lot. What little I know is making you and > Doug get all twisty. If that was your goal, you've succeeded. Congratulations. You're a troll. > I only asked, but your answer was informative. You didn't ask. At best, you presumed without checking or asking. You based your decisions and your arguments, at best, on nothing but propaganda by those with an anti gun agenda, people proven, time and time again, to be consistent and deliberate liars. In the process, you've joined their ranks. You're trying to affect the freedom and rights of others based on smoke, deception and cowardice, someone else's if not your own. Remember when you said we were trying to make you look inferior? We weren't. You were doing it yourself. You were successful. Bye <snip> > Before you claim something's a problem, you might want to do a little better > job of understanding what you are complaining about. Fat chance. We, all of here, and the entirety of rec.scuba have been explaining for years, he doesnt get it because he cant. He has painted himself so tightly into a corner that he can only continue his idiocy. > Feel free to point out how I've been irresponsible or criminal. Au contraire; http://tinyurl.com/39l9cz > ahhh..here it is....http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/10/snorkeler.shot.ap/index.html > >> What law was he breaking by having a gun? Were there some details left > >> out of the story? That would be a detail that changes the interpretation. Thanks. And the dude must have been really wasted to think a water rat would be using a snorkel. JF > What law was he breaking by having a gun? Were there some details left > out of the story? It was an unconstitutional law, so it doesn't matter... Easy enough mistake to make, I guess... Who would think anyone would be crazy enough to go swimming in the middle of the winter... He mistook the guy for a nutria... They're a pest and he probably actually thought that he was doing a good thing... Well, up until the point where the "nutria" started bitching about being shot, I guess... <sick-grin> Grumman-581 <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> sputtered: >> What law was he breaking by having a gun? Were there some >> details left out of the story? > > It was an unconstitutional law, so it doesn't matter... The law that prevented you from bringing your handgun into Canada mattered, Mikey. You're all talk and no action. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Grumman-581 <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> sputtered: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > You're all talk and no action. Who needs a firearm in Canada? I do have a really nice speargun though Carl. Get the point? Dan "Danlw" <danlw7@nospamcomcast.net> spewed forth: >> Grumman-581 <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> >> sputtered: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Who needs a firearm in Canada? Ask Mikey why he thought he had to claim that he did. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > JF WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH > >>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH- Pay attention now Joe. Some kind soul will explain it to you in really easy words. JF >>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > JF WHOOOOOOOOOOSH - again > >>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > WHOOOOOOOOOOSH - again- And you misspelled it ... again. But it's nice to see that the chorus is warming up. I can feel something truly inspiring may be about to happen here and it would be a shame for you and the others to miss your cue. 8) JF >>>>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > JF u want 2 stert ponting out spilling misteaks jonhe? > >>>>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > u want 2 stert ponting out spilling misteaks jonhe?- Heaven forbid. When I achieve perfection I'll start pointing out faults in the rest of you. JF >>>>>>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > JF I was referring to - And you misspelled it ... sorry your memory is so short > >>>>>>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > sorry your memory is so short- Ah yes, well, whoosh is not such a tough word - sarcasm on the other hand. JF >>>>>>>>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > JF Of with you have no concept - WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH! >>>>>>>http://www.koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=6061902 >>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> > u want 2 stert ponting out spilling misteaks jonhe? It's his best gun-hater tactic, having nothing of substance to offer. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message |