J
John-Melb
Guest
On Oct 31, 9:53 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
I'm glad you agree
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Oct 31, 9:54 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
> Given your prefessed paranoia, nuff said.
On 31/10/12 18:45, John-Melb wrote:
On Oct 31, 6:29 pm, keithr<u...@domain.invalid> wrote:
You obviously have never heard of Hanlon's razor. If you had, maybe it
would reduce your paranoia level.
I've never applied Hanlon's Razor to your posts because contrary to
what you may believe, I don't think you stupid.
Here's one for you
Once is an accident,
Twice in a coincidence
Three times is hostile action.
For that to be logical, you would have to "own" aus.politics.guns.
How did you work that out?
> Given your prefessed paranoia, nuff said.
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Oct 31, 10:02 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Discussion and Debate
It appears that Tewwy is a graduate of the Trevor Tosspot School ofOn 31/10/12 08:32, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:12:07 +1100, terryc
newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
On 30/10/12 09:14, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 01:24:41 +1100, terryc
newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
On 29/10/12 14:12, ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:
. Aus laws restrict the availability of guns to those
who need them
Does a 100 pound woman need a gun to defend herself from a 250 pound
attacker?
no.
Why not?
Sad, sad, how very sad that all you can think of is phallic replacement
symbols. Try exercising your brain and working it out.
LOL Try exercising your brain and displaying moral courage and answer
the question.
I did answer the question. It is complete. You might like to take your
own advice and consider it yourself.
Discussion and Debate
J
Jasen Betts
Guest
On 2012-10-31, John-Melb <mcnamara_john@hotmail.com> wrote:
--
ââ 100% natural
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
On 2012-10-31, John-Melb <mcnamara_john@hotmail.com> wrote:It appears that Tewwy is a graduate of the Trevor Tosspot School of
Discussion and Debate
your childish name calling on occasion does look a little like reason.yep, you lot often confuse childish name-calling with "reason"
--
ââ 100% natural
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 1, 8:00Â pm, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
You still here? does mummy know you're playing on the computer?On 2012-10-31, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It appears that Tewwy is a graduate of the Trevor Tosspot School of
Discussion and Debate
On 2012-10-31, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:
yep, you lot often confuse childish  name-calling with "reason"
your childish name calling on occasion does look a little like reason.
--
ââ 100% natural
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 2, 12:31 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
"allowed" to post to a particular forum, but I am not, I don't accept
that, period.
Here's something I found elsewhere
"We all respect your right to have an opinion.
We all respect your right to have feelings.
Our rights don't end where your feelings begin. They never have, they
never will.
Go find the X in the top right hand corner of this window, and click
it."
for you, "quiet" gun owners are seen as "compliant" gun owners, and
they're the first ones the anti's go after. Back when I was on the
state executive committee of a major shooting sports organisation, I
used to take great delight at meetings telling politicians how many
votes they held their seats by, and how many gun licence holders lived
in their electorate.
I give a flying fuck about it, what you're saying is Tosspot isNo ones gives a flying fsck about it. Ignore it. Any "community" is free
to have any discussion they like. It doesn't have to be balanced.
"allowed" to post to a particular forum, but I am not, I don't accept
that, period.
Here's something I found elsewhere
"We all respect your right to have an opinion.
We all respect your right to have feelings.
Our rights don't end where your feelings begin. They never have, they
never will.
Go find the X in the top right hand corner of this window, and click
it."
Yes, you want me to be a good quiet little boy and go away, I got newsThe smart gun owners/users realise that your tactics are back firing.
Being "in your face" does not convinve people that you are righ or even
tat you have a point. All they think is "if this guy is a gun onwer,
then he is dangerous and thus all gun onwers are dangerous"
for you, "quiet" gun owners are seen as "compliant" gun owners, and
they're the first ones the anti's go after. Back when I was on the
state executive committee of a major shooting sports organisation, I
used to take great delight at meetings telling politicians how many
votes they held their seats by, and how many gun licence holders lived
in their electorate.
You got a cite for that.Hint try reading soe of the shooters forums and quite a few people are
quietly making this point.
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
aus.politics.guns and not aus.gettingbiggerdoorsandwindowbars
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding thatSigh, target shooting.
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
You're right, except that you've posted opinion this toPersonally, it is better to improve your home structure so the type of
firearm doesn't matter and you have adequate time for someone to contact
plod before the shooting starts.
aus.politics.guns and not aus.gettingbiggerdoorsandwindowbars
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 4, 9:10 am, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:
attitudes of those on aus.electronics to guns or gun ownership, they
allowed Trevor Tosspot to repeatedly post his anti-gun and anti-gun
owner diatribes there without comment or censure, as soon as
alternative viewpoint appeared they went feral.
Their minds were well and truly made up well before the first time I
ever posted there.
Further to that, nothing I say, nothing I do, is going to change theOn Nov 2, 12:31 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
No ones gives a flying fsck about it. Ignore it. Any "community" is free
to have any discussion they like. It doesn't have to be balanced.
I give a flying fuck about it, what you're saying is Tosspot is
"allowed" to post to a particular forum, but I am not, I don't accept
that, period.
Here's something I found elsewhere
"We all respect your right to have an opinion.
We all respect your right to have feelings.
Our rights don't end where your feelings begin. They never have, they
never will.
Go find the X in the top right hand corner of this window, and click
it."
The smart gun owners/users realise that your tactics are back firing.
Being "in your face" does not convinve people that you are righ or even
tat you have a point. All they think is "if this guy is a gun onwer,
then he is dangerous and thus all gun onwers are dangerous"
Yes, you want me to be a good quiet little boy and go away, I got news
for you, "quiet" gun owners are seen as "compliant" gun owners, and
they're the first ones the anti's go after. Back when I was on the
state executive committee of a major shooting sports organisation, I
used to take great delight at meetings telling politicians how many
votes they held their seats by, and how many gun licence holders lived
in their electorate.
attitudes of those on aus.electronics to guns or gun ownership, they
allowed Trevor Tosspot to repeatedly post his anti-gun and anti-gun
owner diatribes there without comment or censure, as soon as
alternative viewpoint appeared they went feral.
Their minds were well and truly made up well before the first time I
ever posted there.
Hint try reading soe of the shooters forums and quite a few people are
quietly making this point.
You got a cite for that.
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 4, 10:59 am, F Murtz <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
idiot in the debate over "gun control"
He claims that gun owners demanding the same freedom of speech as anti-
gun zealots are showing gun ownership in a poor light, but is prepared
to advocate making false declarations on an application for a gun
licence?
Tewwy is rapidly working to replace Trevor Tosspot as the villageterryc wrote:
On 03/11/12 09:15, F Murtz wrote:
It is dead easy to get a firearm "for defence", you just have to not say
that and express a desire to kill defenceless animals.
Rot. not pistols, and any firearm you get for killing animals as the
laws prohibit you from easy access which is needed for that purpose.
Sigh, target shooting.
Personally, it is better to improve your home structure so the type of
firearm doesn't matter and you have adequate time for someone to contact
plod before the shooting starts.
Sigh, And how do you get to have your pistol any where where you may
need protection, only by breaking the law and if you were going to do
that you may as well get one illegally.
idiot in the debate over "gun control"
He claims that gun owners demanding the same freedom of speech as anti-
gun zealots are showing gun ownership in a poor light, but is prepared
to advocate making false declarations on an application for a gun
licence?
T
terryc
Guest
On 04/11/12 09:17, John-Melb wrote:
The law must work differently in your state to mine.
Did I say that?On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Sigh, target shooting.
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding that
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
The law must work differently in your state to mine.
T
terryc
Guest
On 04/11/12 11:07, John-Melb wrote:
The only one advocating that is you.He claims that gun owners demanding the same freedom of speech as anti-
gun zealots are showing gun ownership in a poor light, but is prepared
to advocate making false declarations on an application for a gun
licence?
Guest
On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 01:06:27 +1100, terryc
<newsninespam-spam@woa.com.au> wrote:
What about honest Australians?
<newsninespam-spam@woa.com.au> wrote:
Still waiting for your nswer.On 04/11/12 09:17, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Sigh, target shooting.
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding that
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
Did I say that?
The law must work differently in your state to mine.
I see. You have to lie to do so.It is dead easy to get a firearm "for defence", you just have to not say
that and express a desire to kill defenceless animals.
What about honest Australians?
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 5, 1:06 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
===================On Nov 3, 12:50 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
illegal in every state!
Yes, you didOn 04/11/12 09:17, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Sigh, target shooting.
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding that
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
Did I say that?
===================On Nov 3, 12:50 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Bullshit! a false declaration on a firearms licence application isIt is dead easy to get a firearm "for defence", you just have to not say
that and express a desire to kill defenceless animals.
==================> The law must work differently in your state to mine.
illegal in every state!
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 5, 1:07 am, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
is having an adverse effect on gun ownership, whilst you are
advocating making false declarations on an application for a gun
licence
Read what you've posted again, you're a dickhead, you claim my postingOn 04/11/12 11:07, John-Melb wrote:
He claims that gun owners demanding the same freedom of speech as anti-
gun zealots are showing gun ownership in a poor light, but is prepared
to advocate making false declarations on an application for a gun
licence?
The only one advocating that is you.
is having an adverse effect on gun ownership, whilst you are
advocating making false declarations on an application for a gun
licence
T
terryc
Guest
On 05/11/12 06:08, John-Melb wrote:
Desire to kill animals = valid reason.
Desire to shoot targets = valid reason.
Shrug. I'm not in the business of helping fruit cakes obtain firearms.
Actually, i'm happy that a couple of fruit cakes are now behindbars
because they "misused firearms".
I take it reading comprehension is not your strong suite. Nuff said.On Nov 5, 1:06 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
On 04/11/12 09:17, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Sigh, target shooting.
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding that
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
Did I say that?
Yes, you did
====================
On Nov 3, 12:50 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
It is dead easy to get a firearm "for defence", you just have to not say
that and express a desire to kill defenceless animals.
===================
The law must work differently in your state to mine.
Bullshit! a false declaration on a firearms licence application is
illegal in every state!
Desire to kill animals = valid reason.
Desire to shoot targets = valid reason.
Shrug. I'm not in the business of helping fruit cakes obtain firearms.
Actually, i'm happy that a couple of fruit cakes are now behindbars
because they "misused firearms".
D
dechucka
Guest
"John-Melb" <mcnamara_john@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a5be6a46-6126-470b-b1bd-280c481affdb@sh1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 5, 2:22 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Claiming you want a firearm for hunting or target shooting when in
fact you want it for self defence = false declaration on licence
application = illegal.
======================================
good thing too. A properly stored gun is useless for self defense, perfectly
good for offence of course
news:a5be6a46-6126-470b-b1bd-280c481affdb@sh1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 5, 2:22 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
I note squirming is your strong suite.On 05/11/12 06:08, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 5, 1:06 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
On 04/11/12 09:17, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Sigh, target shooting.
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding that
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
Did I say that?
Yes, you did
====================
On Nov 3, 12:50 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
It is dead easy to get a firearm "for defence", you just have to not
say
that and express a desire to kill defenceless animals.
===================
The law must work differently in your state to mine.
Bullshit! a false declaration on a firearms licence application is
illegal in every state!
I take it reading comprehension is not your strong suite. Nuff said.
Desire to kill animals = valid reason.
Desire to shoot targets = valid reason.
Shrug. I'm not in the business of helping fruit cakes obtain firearms.
Actually, i'm happy that a couple of fruit cakes are now behindbars
because they "misused firearms".
Claiming you want a firearm for hunting or target shooting when in
fact you want it for self defence = false declaration on licence
application = illegal.
======================================
good thing too. A properly stored gun is useless for self defense, perfectly
good for offence of course
J
John-Melb
Guest
On Nov 5, 2:22 pm, terryc <newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Claiming you want a firearm for hunting or target shooting when in
fact you want it for self defence = false declaration on licence
application = illegal.
I note squirming is your strong suite.On 05/11/12 06:08, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 5, 1:06 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
On 04/11/12 09:17, John-Melb wrote:
On Nov 3, 3:26 pm, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
Sigh, target shooting.
So, I'm the one showing gun owners in a poor light by demanding that
gun owners have exactly the same freedom of speech as anti-gun
zealots, whilst you are advocating making a false declaration on a
firearms licence application.
Did I say that?
Yes, you did
===================> > On Nov 3, 12:50 am, terryc<newsninespam-s...@woa.com.au> wrote:
It is dead easy to get a firearm "for defence", you just have to not say
that and express a desire to kill defenceless animals.
==================> >> The law must work differently in your state to mine.
Bullshit! a false declaration on a firearms licence application is
illegal in every state!
I take it reading comprehension is not your strong suite. Nuff said.
Desire to kill animals = valid reason.
Desire to shoot targets = valid reason.
Shrug. I'm not in the business of helping fruit cakes obtain firearms.
Actually, i'm happy that a couple of fruit cakes are now behindbars
because they "misused firearms".
Claiming you want a firearm for hunting or target shooting when in
fact you want it for self defence = false declaration on licence
application = illegal.
N
No One You Know
Guest
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 19:09:15 -0800 (PST), Graham Cooper
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh the irony.....From CLOCKY's adolescence in usenet *Spawned* No One You Know..
2 BIG BULLY BOYS and their perpetual verbal diarrhoea
Time to alert the Big Needle Men methinks.....Then SHILL and his hired USA KOOK GOON BDK joined the Shit bandwagon..
Then Midnight dawned on BruceS and he turned into a shit yank too..
and USA Holiday maker Brad joined in the Yanky shit abuse of Aussies
here in Aus.Tv
Now I have a gang of pet trolls with perpetual shit spewing all day
out of them..
2 Derelict Aussies made it look OK to crap on fellow Aussies all day
and now every YANK with a foul mouth joins in..
350 MILLION of these shit-for-brains egotistical Yanks... and just 2
of them overtook AUS.TV..
Herc
G
Graham Cooper
Guest
On Feb 11, 12:38 pm, No One You Know <no-...@gmail.com> wrote:
2 BIG BULLY BOYS and their perpetual verbal diarrhoea
Then SHILL and his hired USA KOOK GOON BDK joined the Shit bandwagon..
Then Midnight dawned on BruceS and he turned into a shit yank too..
and USA Holiday maker Brad joined in the Yanky shit abuse of Aussies
here in Aus.Tv
Now I have a gang of pet trolls with perpetual shit spewing all day
out of them..
2 Derelict Aussies made it look OK to crap on fellow Aussies all day
and now every YANK with a foul mouth joins in..
350 MILLION of these shit-for-brains egotistical Yanks... and just 2
of them overtook AUS.TV..
Herc
--
LOOK! THE INVISIBLE SKY PIXIE!
http://www.chatzombie.com/Dragon.jpg
From CLOCKY's adolescence in usenet *Spawned* No One You Know..On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:29:12 -0800 (PST), "Government Shill #2"
gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for pointing out the obvious.
You're more than welcome.....
2 BIG BULLY BOYS and their perpetual verbal diarrhoea
Then SHILL and his hired USA KOOK GOON BDK joined the Shit bandwagon..
Then Midnight dawned on BruceS and he turned into a shit yank too..
and USA Holiday maker Brad joined in the Yanky shit abuse of Aussies
here in Aus.Tv
Now I have a gang of pet trolls with perpetual shit spewing all day
out of them..
2 Derelict Aussies made it look OK to crap on fellow Aussies all day
and now every YANK with a foul mouth joins in..
350 MILLION of these shit-for-brains egotistical Yanks... and just 2
of them overtook AUS.TV..
Herc
--
LOOK! THE INVISIBLE SKY PIXIE!
http://www.chatzombie.com/Dragon.jpg
N
No One You Know
Guest
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 23:56:38 -0800 (PST), Graham Cooper
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
<grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
So there!My little room of pet Trolls you bred here are not universal in any
way you BIG LIAR YOU!