Trevor Tosspot's Porky List get yet another entry

[John-Melb]

On Jun 22, 8:32 am, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Trevor Tosspot'sPorkyList

*I have a friend who can STOP his heart

*Their is ample evidence to support the fact that possession of an
inanimate object is capable of altering a cognitive persons intent

*The FBI-UCR for the years 1976-86 are available on the FBI web-site

*My local library has Lott's work in the fiction section

*20% of Australian homes possess firearms

*I only deal in facts

*The firearms related murder rate in the US is 10,000,000 PA.

*gun licences back in the 1920s led to a drop in the murder rate,

*How the British 1903 Pistol Act was enacted and enforced in
Australia prior to Federation.

*How an audit of Government owned arms at Sydney Cove in 1796 was a
gun control law

**Yes. Easily. Across the US, each year, there are hundreds of 'gun
shows'. At these 'gun shows' dealers, posing as private citizens sell
thousands of guns to criminals. They can do so, because there are
virtually zero restrictions on the sale of 'second hand' guns. Even if
that gun has only been 'second hand' for a couple of minutes and > > has never been fired.

And the latest entry is.
"People who feel the need to carry a gun are paranoid."

Like every other entry on the list, Trevor was given ample opportunity
to explain his assertion, qualify or withdraw it, and he failed to do
so.

The really funny thing is those wnakers over at aus.electronics who
think the rantings of this lying zealot are just fine on "their"
group, but squeal like stuck piggies when and alternative viewpoint is
posted.

 

[Scout]

editor@netpath.net wrote:

On Aug 30, 12:31 am, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:
And the latest entry is.
"People who feel the need to carry a gun are paranoid."

He must mean people such as POLICE OFFICERS - and presidents who
insist on living only if heavily-guarded by a small army carrying far
more than handguns.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/ is
the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."

http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!

Isn't it interesting though how the only paranoia he exposed was his own???

 

[editor@netpath.net]

On Aug 30, 12:31 am, John-Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:

And the latest entry is.
"People who feel the need to carry a gun are paranoid."

He must mean people such as POLICE OFFICERS - and presidents who
insist on living only if heavily-guarded by a small army carrying far
more than handguns.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/ is
the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."

http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!

 

[Dyna Soar]

John - Melb wrote:

Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed,

I'm ambivalent on the matter of guns, but can't help noticing the irony in
your comment.
There are just as many of the pro gun lobby who are "outright liars, and
hate their lies being exposed" as on the other side of the fence.
You appear to be so biased on the matter, it's made you paranoid.
Surely paranoia and guns are a dangerous mix.


--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

 

[John - Melb]

On Aug 30, 11:56 pm, keithr <ke...@nowhere.com.au> wrote:

Another day another whine from a world champion whinger. Are you a pom
john? You certainly whinge like one.

What makes you so scared of poor old trevor, john? He just another
internet crackpot same as a whole lot of others with opposing views to
his. You would be doing yourself and your cause a whole lot more good if
you just ignored him. Is that such a hard concept to grasp?-

Scared of Trevor, no, Trevor is just an entertaining idiot.

By doing myself and my cause a whole lot more good, you mean ignoring
it when he tells absolute porkies about guns and gun owners on non-gun
groups believing he'll not be challenged?

Or do you perhaps mean ignoring it when a group of people don't raise
an eyebrow when his anti-gun dribble appears on "their" non-gun
related group, but squeal like stuck pigs whe an alternative viewpoint
is posted?

They're fine with anti-gun dribble, like refering to posters on gun
related groups as psychos gets posted, but squeal when an alternative
viewpoint goes up, and I can do my cause a whole lot more good by
ignoring it. Perhaps by ignoring it I might be able to convince them
that Australian recreational gun owners aren't sick psychos.

Sorry, Keith, gun owners have been down that path, it got us nowhere.
I was involved in the management of a large shooting sports and
firearms owners association for a number of years, a number of
journalists regularly used to write misleading articles about guns and
gun owners in their newspapers, while we done nothing, the lies and
defamation continued. Once we started taking them on, it stopped. I
dragged one "journalist" before either the ethics committee of the
Journalists Association or the Australian Press Council four times in
about six months.

Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed, has Treovr posted anymore of his anti-gun venom on
aus.electronics recently?

 

[SaPeIsMa]

"Dyna Soar" <dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com> wrote in message
news:7g0j5dF2m212dU1@mid.individual.net...

John - Melb wrote:

Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed,

I'm ambivalent on the matter of guns, but can't help noticing the irony in
your comment.
There are just as many of the pro gun lobby who are "outright liars, and
hate their lies being exposed" as on the other side of the fence.

Really ?
Feel free to name them and their alleged lies
And if you can't do that, then you've made yourself the liar

Take as many screens as you need.

You appear to be so biased on the matter, it's made you paranoid.

And you are competent to diagnose paranoia ?
Or is it just stupid and ignorant libel on your part ?
Maybe it's just a lie, in actual fact

Surely paranoia and guns are a dangerous mix.

In my experience, stupidity and intellectual dishonesty is far more
dangerous.

 

[John - Melb]

On Aug 31, 10:17 am, "Dyna Soar"
<dynasoar..REMOVE..THI...@ozdebate.com> wrote:

John - Melb wrote:
Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed,

I'm ambivalent on the matter of guns, but can't help noticing the irony in
your comment.
There are just as many of the pro gun lobby who are "outright liars, and
hate their lies being exposed" as on the other side of the fence.
You appear to be so biased on the matter, it's made you paranoid.
Surely paranoia and guns are a dangerous mix.

--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

Yet another personal attack, I'm "paranoid".

So, you're ambivalent on the matter of guns, are you yet another one
from aus.elecronics or some other non-gun related group who didn't see
a problem with anti messages going up on "your" group, but got upset
when an alternative viewpoint was posted?

Haven't you heard, everybody who disagrees with the anti's who post
here have some mental impairment. We're told that every day.

And your qualificactions to make such a diagnoses is exactly what?

 

[Dyna Soar]

John - Melb wrote:

"Dyna Soar" wrote:
John - Melb wrote:

Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed,

I'm ambivalent on the matter of guns, but can't help noticing the
irony in your comment.
There are just as many of the pro gun lobby who are "outright liars,
and hate their lies being exposed" as on the other side of the fence.
You appear to be so biased on the matter, it's made you paranoid.
Surely paranoia and guns are a dangerous mix.

Yet another personal attack, I'm "paranoid".

Oh, you can make attacks on others rightly or wrongly, but let anyone make
an "attack" on someone from your side? You have actually demonstrated your
paranoia as much as Trevor does. The two of you, as far as this goes, are
identical to one another

So, you're ambivalent on the matter of guns, are you yet another one
from aus.electronics or some other non-gun related group who didn't see
a problem with anti messages going up on "your" group, but got upset
when an alternative viewpoint was posted?

My group? I don't have a group. As far as aus.electronics is concerned, I
can't remember the last time I posted there if ever (except perhaps when it
was a cross-post when I was replying to another group). As far as Trevor is
concerned, he posts mostly rubbish on many aus.* groups.

Haven't you heard, everybody who disagrees with the anti's who post
here have some mental impairment. We're told that every day.

Just as your mob disagrees with anything the pro-gun lobby says. labelling
them with similar labels to which you object. One example is yourself
writing, "rantings of this lying zealot " and "squeal like stuck piggies".

And your qualificactions to make such a diagnoses is exactly what?

Many years of observing paranoid people like you and Trevor.


--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

 

[John - Melb]

On Aug 31, 12:59 pm, "Dyna Soar"
<dynasoar..REMOVE..THI...@ozdebate.com> wrote:

John - Melb wrote:
 "Dyna  Soar" wrote:
John - Melb wrote:
Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed,
I'm ambivalent on the matter of guns, but can't help noticing the
irony in your comment.
There are just as many of the pro gun lobby who are "outright liars,
and hate their lies being exposed" as on the other side of the fence.
You appear to be so biased on the matter, it's made you paranoid.
Surely paranoia and guns are a dangerous mix.
Yet another personal attack, I'm "paranoid".

Oh, you can make attacks on others rightly or wrongly, but let anyone make
an "attack" on someone from your side?  You have actually demonstrated your
paranoia as much as Trevor does.  The two of you, as far as this goes, are
identical to one another

Comparing me to Trevor, that's getting nasty.

So, you're ambivalent on the matter of guns, are you yet another one
from aus.electronics or some other non-gun related group who didn't see
a problem with anti messages going up on "your" group, but got upset
when an alternative viewpoint was posted?

My group?  I don't have a group.  As far as aus.electronics is concerned, I
can't remember the last time I posted there if ever (except perhaps when it
was a cross-post when I was replying to another group).  As far as Trevor is
concerned, he posts mostly rubbish on many aus.* groups.

Then who ratled your waterbucket?

Haven't you heard, everybody who disagrees with the anti's who post
here have some mental impairment. We're told that every day.

Just as your mob disagrees with anything the pro-gun lobby says. labelling
them with similar labels to which you object.  One example is yourself
writing, "rantings of this lying zealot " and "squeal like stuck piggies"..

I'm sure what you're trying to say will be made clear to me, one day.

And your qualificactions to make such a diagnoses is exactly what?

Many years of observing paranoid people like you and Trevor.

So I have been diagnosed, yet again by someone with no medical
qualifications whatsoever, instead of pretending to be a doctor, why
don't you pretend to be a human being?

God, but I loooooooove this job!

--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

 

[John - Melb]

On Aug 31, 2:16 pm, keithr <kei...@nowhere.com.au> wrote:

No he hasn't so why are you still cross posting there? By doing so, you
aren't going nowhere, you are going backward, you are just reinforcing
the (mis)conception that the pro gun lobby are just a bunch of oafs who
will step over anybody to put their views across.

You lot make no comment when anti-gun vitriol goes up on your group,
but squeal when alternative viewpoint is posted. Because I have this
strange belief that people who support the lawful private ownership of
firearms should have the same right to have their opinions and
viewpoints heard as those who hate guns and gun owners, I'm labelled
as paranoid, and refered to as "poor little fragile Johnny baby".

I've got news for you Keith, under those circumstances yes, I am an
oaf and will step over anybody to put my point across.

If recent history has shown this country's gun owners anything, it's
that to shut up and be good, quiet little boys and girls get's us
nothing but more kicks in the teeth.

 

[John - Melb]

On Aug 31, 4:30 pm, John - Melb <mcnamara_j...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Aug 31, 2:45 pm, keithr <kei...@nowhere.com.au> wrote:



On 31/08/2009 8:32 AM, John - Melb wrote:

On Aug 30, 11:56 pm, keithr<ke...@nowhere.com.au>  wrote:

Another day another whine from a world champion whinger. Are you a pom
john? You certainly whinge like one.

What makes you so scared of poor old trevor, john? He just another
internet crackpot same as a whole lot of others with opposing views to
his. You would be doing yourself and your cause a whole lot more good if
you just ignored him. Is that such a hard concept to grasp?-

Scared of Trevor, no, Trevor is just an entertaining idiot.

In that case why do you persue him all over usenet? If he is an
entertaining idiot why not just ignore him as do 99% of the groups that
he posts in.

Pursue him? only when he posts his O/T rants about guns and gun
owners.





By doing myself and my cause a whole lot more good, you mean ignoring
it when he tells absolute porkies about guns and gun owners on non-gun
groups believing he'll not be challenged?

See above, challenging him simply gets what he says a wider audience

Or do you perhaps mean ignoring it when a group of people don't raise
an eyebrow when his anti-gun dribble appears on "their" non-gun
related group, but squeal like stuck pigs whe an alternative viewpoint
is posted?

Why should they, they don't give a flying fuck whether you are allowed
to own a gun or not, so why should they check any claims he might make.
They simply ignore him which is what you should do also. After all if
someone posted blatant lies about some piece of electronic equipment on
aus.politics.guns, would you feel obliged to check out the claims and
refute them if they were wrong?

Apples and oranges, have people with an interest in amateur
electronics ever been publicly vilified for their choice of hobby?
Have you ever had the Prime Minister show up at a public meeting
wearing a bullet-proof vest to demonstrate what a dangerous pack of
whackoos you are? Have you ever been denied membership of a major
political party because of your interest in amateur electronics?
Because of your interest in amateur electronics, are your personal
details placed on "Crimtrak" along with career criminals and
kiddyfiddlers?

One thing's for sure, if a discussion about electronics started up on
aus.politics.guns, I wouldn't be telling one side of the discussion to
boot off.

They're fine with anti-gun dribble, like refering to posters on gun
related groups as psychos gets posted, but squeal when an alternative
viewpoint goes up, and I can do my cause a whole lot more good by
ignoring it. Perhaps by ignoring it I might be able to convince them
that Australian recreational gun owners aren't sick psychos.

Well you aren't doing anything to refute the notion that Australian
recreational gun owners are sick psychos by posting unwanted crap in
their group. If anybody there is interested enough to debate the matter
then they will come to the proper forum to do so.

Are you inplying that Trevor's remarks were in the proper forum?





Sorry, Keith, gun owners have been down that path, it got us nowhere.
I was involved in the management of a large shooting sports and
firearms owners association for a number of years, a number of
journalists regularly used to write misleading articles about guns and
gun owners in their newspapers, while we done nothing, the lies and
defamation continued. Once we started taking them on, it stopped. I
dragged one "journalist" before either the ethics committee of the
Journalists Association or the Australian Press Council four times in
about six months.

Good for you, that was the proper course of action, provided you could
make a case. It is simply a case of putting your views in the proper
place and in the proper way, and aus.electronics is not the proper
place. Before you witter on about trevor posting anti gun venom over
there, had you not stepped in with your great big hobnailed boots, the
whole thing would have died with one post that nobody would have taken
any notice of. As it is you have done nothing except generate ill will
for gun owners generally and thus helped trevor's views.

I've generated ill will among a group of people who saw no issue with
Trevors remarks, but went feral when an alternative viewpoint
appeared?

I think the ill-will was already well and truely there.



Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
exposed, has Treovr posted anymore of his anti-gun venom on
aus.electronics recently?

Many "Pros" are raving loonies who's views are what get gun owners in
general a bad name. Just look through a days worth of posts on
talk.politics.guns, you can't fail to find some excellent examples.

Yeah, they're psychos, Trevor said so, on aus.electronics.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

 

[John - Melb]

On Aug 31, 3:22 pm, keithr <kei...@nowhere.com.au> wrote:

On 31/08/2009 2:37 PM, John - Melb wrote:

On Aug 31, 2:16 pm, keithr<kei...@nowhere.com.au>  wrote:

No he hasn't so why are you still cross posting there? By doing so, you
aren't going nowhere, you are going backward, you are just reinforcing
the (mis)conception that the pro gun lobby are just a bunch of oafs who
will step over anybody to put their views across.

You lot make no comment when anti-gun vitriol goes up on your group,
but squeal when alternative viewpoint is posted.

A single post by a single person that would have passed totally
unnoticed had you not gone out and made a huge deal about it.

I wasn't once

-------------------------------------------
On Jun 16, 3:21 pm, "Trevor Wilson"
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au>
wrote:

**Despite the fact that VASTLY more Americans carry guns around the streets,
legally, the US remains the most dangerous, deadly Western, developed
Democratic nations. Carrying guns achieves, at best, nothing. At worst, it
leads to more violence and death. In fact, the US homicide rate is presently
3 times the Australian one.

------------------------------------------------------------

On Jun 18, 12:54 pm, "Trevor Wilson"

<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

**Yes. Easily. Across the US, each year, there are hundreds of 'gun shows'.
At these 'gun shows' dealers, posing as private citizens sell thousands of
guns to criminals. They can do so, because there are virtually zero
restrictions on the sale of 'second hand' guns. Even if that gun has only
been 'second hand' for a couple of minutes and has never been fired. Here in
Australia (and pretty much the rest of the developed world) ALL gun sales
must be recorded and tracked. Even secondary sales. Such an action ensures
that fewer guns end up in the hands of criminals.

----------------------------------------------------
On Jun 18, 3:40 pm, "Trevor Wilson"
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au>
wrote:

**Oh yeah: Two more things:
* If I was to crosspost (which I never do) I would never involve those
psychopaths in the talk.politics.guns group with normal humans.

-------------------------------------------------
On Jun 17, 9:40 am, "Trevor Wilson"
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au>
wrote:

**The figures for people legitemately shooting alleged criminals (I say
alleged, because in places like Texas, it would seem that the authorites are
now prepared to accept the word of the 'last man standing', as to the
legitemacy of the shooting) are miniscule in the extreme. FBI figures show
that, in the US, something like 400-odd people are shot and killed by police
in so-called 'justifiable homicide' acts each year. This figure needs to be
examined in the same light as the number killed by civilians in similar
circumstances. The figure for civilians is approximately 230 PA. That figure
needs to be tempered by the inadequacies of the laws in places like Texas,
where lip service is paid by LEOs under many circumstances. Additionally,
one must bear in mind that the number of civilians killed by gunshot each
year in the US is approximately 10,000. Clearly, carrying guns for self
defence purposes is a failed experiment. It is an experiment that many of
the nutters in the pro-gun lobby, here in Australia, wish to duplicate.
These are the same individuals who seem to feel that shooting native ducks
and other indigenous critters is, somehow, sporting. They seem to consider
that the indiscriminate spraying of lead shot into pristine environments,
whilst causing the needless suffering of wild animals is all in a good
cause.

Because I have this
strange belief that people who support the lawful private ownership of
firearms should have the same right to have their opinions and
viewpoints heard as those who hate guns and gun owners, I'm labelled
as paranoid, and refered to as "poor little fragile Johnny baby".

Strangely enough john, I support the lawful private ownership of
firearms (in the right circumstances), I don't think that you are
paranoid, although I do think that some posters are. I do think that you
are fragile, and somewhat hypocritical, in that you are prepared to call
others names (just look at the title of this thread) but complain when
it is done to you, in fact that is why I do it to you to expose your
hypocracy.

Unlike you, I believe you're entitled to post your viewpoint, and,
entitled to hold same.

You have a perfect right to put your views across, but not everywhere.
If you came into my house and started ranting about gun ownership, you
won't touch the ground until your arse hit the roadway. You wouldn't be
welcome, neither are you welcome in usenet groups that couldn't care
less about gun ownership

But as demonstrated on aus.electronics, you wouldn't treat an "anti"

the same way.

I've got news for you Keith, under those circumstances yes, I am an
oaf and will step over anybody to put my point across.

Then you are displaying stupidity, the old wives' tale that there is no
such thing as bad publicity is just that, an old wives' tale.

I'll leave the old wives tales to you and Trevor.

If recent history has shown this country's gun owners anything, it's
that to shut up and be good, quiet little boys and girls get's us
nothing but more kicks in the teeth.

The problem is that all gun owners didn't shut up like good boys and
girls, the lunatic fringe of gun owners were and are loud, and allow
those that oppose you to say that all gun owners are like that. It is
your own lunatic fringe that is your problem not people like trevor and
especially not the posters of aus.electronics that you seem to insist on
annoying.

Next time I'm down the shops, I'll look for a T shirt which say "I'm a
member of the lunatic fringe" would that make you happy.

 

[Jeßus]

In article <7g0j5dF2m212dU1@mid.individual.net>,
dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..@ozdebate.com said...
<snip>

Have your ears been burning lately Dyna?
Someone was asking about you in ozdebate recently.

 

[Jeßus]

In article <b958cf94-90a3-41ce-a712-
0356fed9670e@u20g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, mcnamara_john@hotmail.com
said...
:On Aug 31, 10:17 am, "Dyna Soar"
:<dynasoar..REMOVE..THI...@ozdebate.com> wrote:
:> John - Melb wrote:
:> > Many "anti's" are outright liars, and they hate they're lies being
:> > exposed,
:>
:> I'm ambivalent on the matter of guns, but can't help noticing the irony in
:> your comment.
:> There are just as many of the pro gun lobby who are "outright liars, and
:> hate their lies being exposed" as on the other side of the fence.
:> You appear to be so biased on the matter, it's made you paranoid.
:> Surely paranoia and guns are a dangerous mix.
:>
:>
:> All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.
:
:Yet another personal attack, I'm "paranoid".

Well seek help, pay for a root, or have a cone. Whatever it takes to
snap out of your stupidity would be of benefit to everyone.

:So, you're ambivalent on the matter of guns, are you yet another one
:from aus.elecronics or some other non-gun related group who didn't see
:a problem with anti messages going up on "your" group, but got upset
:when an alternative viewpoint was posted?

I have firearms, which I use several times a week.
I read this group, which isn't "mine", as you bizarrely put it.
And if I didn't know better, I'd say you're really an anti-gun zealot
yourself, trying to discredit firearm owners - be they responsible
owners or your quintessential redneck Pauline Hansen voting type of
meathead with the 'fuck off we're full' sticker on the back of the VN
Commodore.

Either way, you're a discredit to responsible firearm owners.

:Haven't you heard, everybody who disagrees with the anti's who post
:here have some mental impairment. We're told that every day.
:
:And your qualificactions to make such a diagnoses is exactly what?

":Yet another personal attack, I'm "paranoid"".
LOL.

 

[Jeßus]

In article <803d3e00-3a00-44b6-b7e7-
7ada0d421eab@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, mcnamara_john@hotmail.com
said...
<snip>
:
:God, but I loooooooove this job!

I was just wondering about you and your 'job'.
Explains a lot.

 

[Jeßus]

In article <73213ca4-3140-4cd1-b8ce-
388779b703bd@l35g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, mcnamara_john@hotmail.com
said...
<snip>
:
:If recent history has shown this country's gun owners anything, it's
:that to shut up and be good, quiet little boys and girls get's us
:nothing but more kicks in the teeth.

Is that right? You sure as fuck DON'T speak for me... and many others as
well, I'd expect.