I thought there were only nice people to the north

> Who might that be? Law-abiding citizens normally dobn't socialize with
> prostitutes and junkies...so who's left? Their pimps and dealers?

Perhaps you need to look again. How many Presidents, politicians, religious
leaders, movie and sports starts have you read about who socialized with
prostitutes or took controlled substances? Are you under the impression
that all prostitutes are illegal? You do know that prostitution is legal in
some parts of the US, right? How would you know if you were socializing
with a prostitue or junkie? Do you think they wear glow in the dark signs?

You don't have to socialize with someone to defend them in their time of
need . . . well, I don't have to. Those that choose to delegate their
defense option to the police can only stand by and watch.

Lee

Mike from Ottawa wrote

>>> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed
>>> security
>>> guards?
>>
>>Interesting question. Obviously I don't know the answer as stated.
>>
>>Here, the answer is yes. Many churches down here, and even more
>>synagogues,
>>hire police to help with both pedestrian and vehicular traffic control.
>>For
>>the visibly Jewish people in my area, it seems to be mostly pedestrians.
>>Apparently their beliefs preclude driving to their religious services. The
>>uniformed police providing the service are armed. Further, I guarantee
>>that
>>there are plain clothes policemen that are armed while attending.
>>
>>Is it really different there?
>>
>>Lee.
>
> Yeah, it certainly is. I've never heard of that.

The fact that you have not heard of it does not mean it's not happening.

Don't be too vocal about the fact that your places of worship are not
secure. You do know that both Christian and Jewish places of worship have,
on numerous occasions, mentioned as targets of terrorist groups, right?

> You folks really do live in an armed camp.

An armed camp looks pretty much like an unarmed one until the stuff hits the
fan. That's when you find out what's really there. Greg's survived several
trips in the presence of people that were armed from the time he met them
until the time he left for home. As I understand it, he may have asked
Grumman if he was armed. He never asked me and, as a result, has no idea if
or when I was armed or not.

Lee

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:32:56 -0600, Grumman-581
<grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> wrote:

>Mike from Ottawa wrote:
>
>> BTW, Molson sucks. As does Labatts.
>
>Caribou piss...
>
>http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Beer

That's some pretty nasty anti-Canadian stuff on that site -- at least
they gave Merkan beer a roughly equal bashing.
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/American_beer

BTW, you simply cannot play hockey while plastered. I tried once.

I had taken a girl out & ordered a pitcher of beer. She didn't want
much, so I drank most of it (waste is ungodly). I dropped her off at
a subway stop and went and played hockey. Whle warming up, I ran into
a goal post.

I've never since had a drink before a game. Afterwards is a different
story...

On Dec 11, 7:57 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> An armed camp looks pretty much like an unarmed one until the stuff hits the
> fan. That's when you find out what's really there. Greg's survived several
> trips in the presence of people that were armed from the time he met them
> until the time he left for home. As I understand it, he may have asked
> Grumman if he was armed. He never asked me and, as a result, has no idea if
> or when I was armed or not.

I successfully disarmed Grumman, at least one of his arms. That's
better than Curtis's record as he never got a single one of mine.

I can't remember whether I disarmed Popeye or not. I think he slipped
me a roofie.

As for you, I've seen you in Speedos, a traumatic experience to be
sure so whether I "survived" or not is debatable. I'm mentally
scarred. But you were armed then, I really don't want to know where
you were hiding it.

Mike from Ottawa wrote

>>> "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . .

>>The right to defense does not stop with the victim. It extends to those
>>that
>>might, if allowed, have protected them too. Nobody suggested arming
>>elementary, middle or high school students so they could protect
>>themselves,
>>but it was suggested that just one responsibly and legally armed teacher
>>might have put a quick stop to the serial killings that occasionally
>>happen
>>in our schools and have happened in schools around the world. In my
>>country,
>>we value the lives of all citizens, even junkies and prostitutes.
>>Apparently
>>they don't count in yours.

> So you would arm the junkies?

You read that somewhere in what I said, did you? Feel free to point it out.
I can't find it.

> Every adult, no matter how whacked-out, should be armed?

You read that somewhere in what I said, did you? Feel free top oint it out.
I can't find it.

> Do you arm psychos, too?

The laws of the United States prohibit posession of a firearm by a convicted
felon, anyone with a history of domistic violence, anyone with a history of
drug or alcohol abuse and anyone judged mentally incompetent. All of those
you are worried about have been addressed.

> In your country much more so than in mine. We chose a different
> route, as did most civilised countries.

It's my countries rights that John got in trouble attacking. It's your
countries safety that we've warned you is deteriorating. You can heed the
warning and do something about it or you can ignore it until the problem is
so bad that you have to do something about it.

By civilized you much mean the USSR, Nazi Germany, Cuba, South Africa . . .
..

The UK chose your way. They're having some very, very serious problems as a
reault. You're on the path.

>>No pleasure at all. We Mercans take no pleasure in tragedies anywhere. We
>>warned you that the problem was escalating. We warned you that it would
>>only
>>get worse. We warned you that your blind insistance that there is no risk
>>was not right and that, sooner or later, it would catch up with you. We
>>advised you then, that, when the stuff hit the fan, it would be your fault
>>for ignoring all the warnings, all the evidence and all the history that
>>proves that only those that are willing and prepared to defend their
>>lives,
>>property and rights, could expect to retain them.
>>
>>Don't blame us when we point out that we were right and you were wrong.
>
> You live in a fantasy world. As long as it turns your crank...

The people in Canada that prompted this thread are dead. That's reality, not
fantasy.

> You do that by advocating that everyone has a gun.

You have never, ever read those words written by me. Feel free to show that
I'm wrong.

> I don't give a damn if you carry around a bazooka and have shoot-outs
> every day. Go for it. It's your right.

Tell John.

Lee

"Grumman-581" <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> wrote in message
news:EqGdnW8gOq1DzsLanZ2dnUVZ_t2inZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> dechucka wrote:
>
>> nearly but not quite as bad, actually I always thought of you as a KB man
>
> That one is a bit difficult to find around here... I've probably tried it
> over the years, but it's been too long ago, so I don't remember much about
> it... I'll have to make an effort to see if I can find it around here...

don't bother

>
>> not sure why anybody in the States would drink "mass produced beer" when
>> you have so many boutique breweries producing such great "style" beers.
>
> Depends upon the definition of "mass produced"...
>
> One of my more favorite local brews is one I discovered over in New
> Orleans a couple of years ago -- Abita TurboDog...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abita_Brewing_Company
>
> 75,000 barrels of beer produced per year among all their various brews, so
> it's not exactly at the level of Budweiser which has sales of over 100
> *million* barrels per year...

I'll give it ago next time I'm over, can't say I've seen it around here

"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g7hul3p2v7s716ptt4nln7arojun9tlii9@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:30:48 +1100, "dechucka"
> <dechucka@vomithotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:l1eul3l0iv5j5dhkt1sj2sa0nqvgmoihpm@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:26:41 +1100, "dechucka"
>>> <dechucka@vomithotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I'll have a think about that as I throw another shrimp on the barbie and
>>>>crack a few tubes of fosters from the esky and recite out oath iof
>>>>allegience. "Under the Southern Cross I stand a can of fosters in my
>>>>hand,
>>>>a
>>>>symbol of my native land. Australia you bloody beauty"
>>>>
>>>>Actually thinking about that we don't have shrimps ( well only in adds
>>>>for
>>>>the septics) we have prawns and nobody in their right mind drinks
>>>>fosters
>>>
>>> Jeez. You sound like a cheesy travel ad for Qantas.
>>
>>Blood oath mate ( cracks a tinny ), me and the sheila always travel on the
>>flying kangaroo when we go home to the motherland, only way you can get a
>>decent supply of Fosters.
>>
>>Shit I'm starting to sound like Bazza McKenzies
>
> Please don't try to tell us yer nickname is Crocodile, and if you
> start singing about jumbucks I'll puke.

I'll puke is much closer to what people call me.

dechucka


>
> JF

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:57:58 -0500, "Lee Bell"
<pleebell@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>Mike from Ottawa wrote
>
>>>> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed
>>>> security
>>>> guards?
>>>
>>>Interesting question. Obviously I don't know the answer as stated.
>>>
>>>Here, the answer is yes. Many churches down here, and even more
>>>synagogues,
>>>hire police to help with both pedestrian and vehicular traffic control.
>>>For
>>>the visibly Jewish people in my area, it seems to be mostly pedestrians.
>>>Apparently their beliefs preclude driving to their religious services. The
>>>uniformed police providing the service are armed. Further, I guarantee
>>>that
>>>there are plain clothes policemen that are armed while attending.
>>>
>>>Is it really different there?
>>>
>>>Lee.
>>
>> Yeah, it certainly is. I've never heard of that.
>
>The fact that you have not heard of it does not mean it's not happening.
>
>Don't be too vocal about the fact that your places of worship are not
>secure. You do know that both Christian and Jewish places of worship have,
>on numerous occasions, mentioned as targets of terrorist groups, right?

Get real. I've never heard, read or seen anything about churches here
being "attacked" or "not secure." What bizarre language. You would
be such an alien here with your bizarre notions, and people would
laugh you right back across the border.

>> You folks really do live in an armed camp.
>
>An armed camp looks pretty much like an unarmed one until the stuff hits the
>fan. That's when you find out what's really there. Greg's survived several
>trips in the presence of people that were armed from the time he met them
>until the time he left for home. As I understand it, he may have asked
>Grumman if he was armed. He never asked me and, as a result, has no idea if
>or when I was armed or not.

Well, you seem to feel the need to be armed all the time. Must be
something like Beirut or Iraq, I guess. Damn boogeymen everwhere.

George Cathcart wrote:

> On Dec 11, 11:37 am, "Chris Guynn" <chris.gu...@gamil.com> wrote:
>
>>"JOF" <jofran...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>>news:3f4d778b-3809-4636-bef4-e8d897dd45ef@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Dec 11, 8:06 am, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Mike from Ottawa wrote
>>
>>>>>"Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . .
>>
>>>>The right to defense does not stop with the victim. It extends to those
>>
>>that
>>
>>>>might, if allowed, have protected them too. Nobody suggested arming
>>>>elementary, middle or high school students so they could protect
>>
>>themselves,
>>
>>>>but it was suggested that just one responsibly and legally armed teacher
>>>>might have put a quick stop to the serial killings that occasionally
>>
>>happen
>>
>>>>in our schools and have happened in schools around the world. In my
>>
>>country,
>>
>>>>we value the lives of all citizens, even junkies and prostitutes.
>>
>>Apparently
>>
>>>>they don't count in yours.
>>
>>>>The point, however, one that you very obviously chose to ignore, is that
>>
>>the
>>
>>>>basis for promoting a disarmed public, according to John, is that there
>>
>>is
>>
>>>>no need for personal defense. He doesn't live in a world where the
>>
>>threat of
>>
>>>>death or serious injury is a problem. He's clearly and demonstrably
>>
>>wrong.
>>
>>
>>>>>Anyway, I find it very odd that some of you Merkans take pleasure in
>>>>>some really terrible tragedies here.
>>
>>>>No pleasure at all. We Mercans take no pleasure in tragedies anywhere.
>>
>>We
>>
>>>>warned you that the problem was escalating. We warned you that it would
>>
>>only
>>
>>>>get worse. We warned you that your blind insistance that there is no
>>
>>risk
>>
>>>>was not right and that, sooner or later, it would catch up with you. We
>>>>advised you then, that, when the stuff hit the fan, it would be your
>>
>>fault
>>
>>>>for ignoring all the warnings, all the evidence and all the history that
>>>>proves that only those that are willing and prepared to defend their
>>
>>lives,
>>
>>>>property and rights, could expect to retain them.
>>
>>>>Don't blame us when we point out that we were right and you were wrong.
>>
>>>>>These women were mothers and daughters, and they are missed by their
>>>>>families.
>>
>>>>Yes they were. The next ones, and the next ones will be too. It's about
>>
>>time
>>
>>>>you guys got your heads out of the sand and recognized what we've been
>>>>saying from the start. You are at risk. Your families, mothers,
>>>>grandmothers, fathers, grandfathers, children, junkies and prostitutes
>>
>>or
>>
>>>>businessmen and housewives are all at risk. Not only can the police not
>>>>protect you, it's not even their job to protect you. It's each citizen's
>>
>>job
>>
>>>>to protect themselves, their way of life, and those around them. It's a
>>>>really good idea to ensure you retain the means to do so when it's your
>>
>>turn
>>
>>>>to do your part.
>>
>>>>It's even more important to quit trying to deny my right to do the same
>>
>>and
>>
>>>>that's what John has been doing for years..
>>
>>>>Lee
>>
>>>So 'splain this one Lucy. I am continually told that no one is trying
>>>to force guns on us non-gun types throats, but how else is one to
>>>interpret this latest post of yours. Certainly it's couched in concern
>>>for my safety, but isn't it a sales pitch for more guns?
>>
>>>JF
>>
>>I don't presume to speak for Lee, but my interpretation is that he wants you
>>to have the opportunity to carry firearms, not the directive to.
>
>
> If, as some here claim, JOF has no right to tell Americans what to do,
> what gives Lee or any other American the right to tell Canadians what
> they should do? If John's government, which is democratically elected,
> as far as I know, has decided to restrict his opportunity to carry
> firearms, and John is okay with that, what business is it of Lee's, a
> resident of Florida who pays no taxes in Canada and has no say and no
> vote there?
>
> gc

Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included?

--
“TANSTAAFL”
__________________________________________________ __________________________

America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3

Mike from Ottawa wrote:

> That's some pretty nasty anti-Canadian stuff on that site -- at least
> they gave Merkan beer a roughly equal bashing.
> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/American_beer

Total BS... American beer has different origins... Budweiser is horse
piss (specifically Clydesdale's)... Coors is Rocky Mountain sheep
piss... Lone Star is longhorn (cattle) piss... Dixie beer is gator
piss... Miller is dog piss -- especially the "Red Dog" brand...

> BTW, you simply cannot play hockey while plastered. I tried once.
>
> I had taken a girl out & ordered a pitcher of beer. She didn't want
> much, so I drank most of it (waste is ungodly). I dropped her off at
> a subway stop and went and played hockey. Whle warming up, I ran into
> a goal post.

So, even though you were drunk, she wouldn't take advantage of you?

The only advantage that I see in living up north is that your beer
doesn't get warm if you are too slow of a drinker... Not that I've ever
had that problem even in the heat of Texas... I guess up there you have
to worry about your beer freezing if you drink too slow...