There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their guns
voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot those
people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their own, so we
have to take this matter into our own hands.

Guns are like a virus or disease in our society. Guns are the biggest
cause of deaths in our modern world. Guns cause more fatalities than
all the diseases in this world combined.

Modern people are obcessed with health matters, they quit smoking, quit
drinking, watch their calories and nutrition, go to doctors for all
kinds of tests, and more..... Yet many of these same people own guns.
One has to ask what is wrong with the minds of these people. Maybe
their minds are so brainwashed by organizations such as the NRA that
they dont even realize they are handling a very deadly weapon, with only
one use, which is toi kill.

What's most amazing is that these same people go to doctors and
pharmacies every year to get their annual flu shot, to prevent them from
getting the flu. How come none of them go to these doctors and
pharmacies to get gun shots, to prevent them from owning guns. Only a
few people die each year from the flu, yet hundreds of thosands of
people die from guns. Once again, we have backward thinking. Why not
avoid the flu shot and get a gun shot instead. Just think of all the
lives that would be saved.

We must begin immediately shooting people who have guns, and continue
this until each and every gun owning person on Earth is shot and killed.
We only ask that the last person on Earth who owns a gun, please shoot
themselves.

It's 2013, guns are obsolete, and have been replaced by Facebook. We
must eliminate all guns from our world immediuately. If you know any
gun owners, do your part making this a better world, and shoot that
person or persons. Make sure they die, and you will be rewarded with a
much safer and better gun-free world.

wrote:
There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their
guns voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot
those people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their
own, so we have to take this matter into our own hands.

Guns are like a virus or disease in our society. Guns are the biggest
cause of deaths in our modern world. Guns cause more fatalities than
all the diseases in this world combined.

Modern people are obcessed with health matters, they quit smoking,
quit drinking, watch their calories and nutrition, go to doctors for
all kinds of tests, and more..... Yet many of these same people own
guns. One has to ask what is wrong with the minds of these people.
Maybe their minds are so brainwashed by organizations such as the NRA
that they dont even realize they are handling a very deadly weapon,
with only one use, which is toi kill.

What's most amazing is that these same people go to doctors and
pharmacies every year to get their annual flu shot, to prevent them
from getting the flu. How come none of them go to these doctors and
pharmacies to get gun shots, to prevent them from owning guns. Only a
few people die each year from the flu, yet hundreds of thosands of
people die from guns. Once again, we have backward thinking. Why not
avoid the flu shot and get a gun shot instead. Just think of all the
lives that would be saved.

We must begin immediately shooting people who have guns, and continue
this until each and every gun owning person on Earth is shot and
killed. We only ask that the last person on Earth who owns a gun,
please shoot themselves.

It's 2013, guns are obsolete, and have been replaced by Facebook. We
must eliminate all guns from our world immediuately. If you know any
gun owners, do your part making this a better world, and shoot that
person or persons. Make sure they die, and you will be rewarded with
a much safer and better gun-free world.

You're evidently working from the false premise that all gun homicides are
bad.

Actually, most gun homicides have a positive effect on society.

Sure, some gun homicides involve innocent bystanders, just like some flu
vaccinations cause inadvertent deaths. We could prevent the adverse effects
of flu shots by eliminating the vaccinations, but the results from
eliminating influenza vaccinations would be worse.

No, the solution to much of society's ills is MORE gun homicides, not fewer.

On 2/9/2013 7:58 AM, HeyBub wrote:
wrote:
There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their
guns voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot
those people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their
own, so we have to take this matter into our own hands.

Guns are like a virus or disease in our society. Guns are the biggest
cause of deaths in our modern world. Guns cause more fatalities than
all the diseases in this world combined.

Modern people are obcessed with health matters, they quit smoking,
quit drinking, watch their calories and nutrition, go to doctors for
all kinds of tests, and more..... Yet many of these same people own
guns. One has to ask what is wrong with the minds of these people.
Maybe their minds are so brainwashed by organizations such as the NRA
that they dont even realize they are handling a very deadly weapon,
with only one use, which is toi kill.

What's most amazing is that these same people go to doctors and
pharmacies every year to get their annual flu shot, to prevent them
from getting the flu. How come none of them go to these doctors and
pharmacies to get gun shots, to prevent them from owning guns. Only a
few people die each year from the flu, yet hundreds of thosands of
people die from guns. Once again, we have backward thinking. Why not
avoid the flu shot and get a gun shot instead. Just think of all the
lives that would be saved.

We must begin immediately shooting people who have guns, and continue
this until each and every gun owning person on Earth is shot and
killed. We only ask that the last person on Earth who owns a gun,
please shoot themselves.

It's 2013, guns are obsolete, and have been replaced by Facebook. We
must eliminate all guns from our world immediuately. If you know any
gun owners, do your part making this a better world, and shoot that
person or persons. Make sure they die, and you will be rewarded with
a much safer and better gun-free world.

You're evidently working from the false premise that all gun homicides are
bad.

Actually, most gun homicides have a positive effect on society.

Sure, some gun homicides involve innocent bystanders, just like some flu
vaccinations cause inadvertent deaths. We could prevent the adverse effects
of flu shots by eliminating the vaccinations, but the results from
eliminating influenza vaccinations would be worse.

No, the solution to much of society's ills is MORE gun homicides, not fewer.


One of his lies is that gun deaths are larger than flu deaths.
Take out suicides and chance of dying from the flu probably 4X.

wrote in message
...

There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their guns
voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot those
people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their own, so we
have to take this matter into our own hands.


LOgic is not your strong suit ?
Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns
2) Best solution - shoot them
3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns
4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?


Rest of silly trollish drivel ignored..

wrote in message
...

There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

Don't feed trolls.

wrote:

There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their guns
voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot those
people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their own, so we
have to take this matter into our own hands.

Guns are like a virus or disease in our society. Guns are the biggest
cause of deaths in our modern world. Guns cause more fatalities than
all the diseases in this world combined.

Modern people are obcessed with health matters, they quit smoking, quit
drinking, watch their calories and nutrition, go to doctors for all
kinds of tests, and more..... Yet many of these same people own guns.
One has to ask what is wrong with the minds of these people. Maybe
their minds are so brainwashed by organizations such as the NRA that
they dont even realize they are handling a very deadly weapon, with only
one use, which is toi kill.

What's most amazing is that these same people go to doctors and
pharmacies every year to get their annual flu shot, to prevent them from
getting the flu. How come none of them go to these doctors and
pharmacies to get gun shots, to prevent them from owning guns. Only a
few people die each year from the flu, yet hundreds of thosands of
people die from guns. Once again, we have backward thinking. Why not
avoid the flu shot and get a gun shot instead. Just think of all the
lives that would be saved.

We must begin immediately shooting people who have guns, and continue
this until each and every gun owning person on Earth is shot and killed.
We only ask that the last person on Earth who owns a gun, please shoot
themselves.

It's 2013, guns are obsolete, and have been replaced by Facebook. We
must eliminate all guns from our world immediuately. If you know any
gun owners, do your part making this a better world, and shoot that
person or persons. Make sure they die, and you will be rewarded with a
much safer and better gun-free world.

To shoot them, you would need a gun. If you have a gun, you could lead
the way by shooting yourself.

Oren wrote:

This killer owns a home in Las Vegas not far from me. Police have
searched it and added patrols in the area. LVMPD is on high alert.

In his rants he complained about a local gun shop called Lock N Load,
(two miles from my house) for selling him Class III weapons -
silencers. He claimed he made a Trust using Quicken and had a $10
notary. Claimed he was not a resident of the state (true). He would
visit the gun shop every few months or so.

He can / could own Class III without this "trust", but my
understanding is the background checks take much longer than say
buying a pistol or rifle.


An individual buying a Class III has to jump through a LOT of hoops,
including a sign-off by the local chief law enforcement officer.

I didn't know about trusts (thank you), but a corporation buying a Class III
is almost trivial: no background check, no fingerprints, no photo, no
vetting by the local LEO's office, etc.

I'm not sure whether a Subchapter S corp will work - my corporation is an
"C" corp, so the issue never comes up. Still have to pay the transfer tax,
though.

On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:04:17 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Oren wrote:

This killer owns a home in Las Vegas not far from me. Police have
searched it and added patrols in the area. LVMPD is on high alert.

In his rants he complained about a local gun shop called Lock N Load,
(two miles from my house) for selling him Class III weapons -
silencers. He claimed he made a Trust using Quicken and had a $10
notary. Claimed he was not a resident of the state (true). He would
visit the gun shop every few months or so.

He can / could own Class III without this "trust", but my
understanding is the background checks take much longer than say
buying a pistol or rifle.


An individual buying a Class III has to jump through a LOT of hoops,
including a sign-off by the local chief law enforcement officer.

I didn't know about trusts (thank you), but a corporation buying a Class III
is almost trivial: no background check, no fingerprints, no photo, no
vetting by the local LEO's office, etc.

I'm not sure whether a Subchapter S corp will work - my corporation is an
"C" corp, so the issue never comes up. Still have to pay the transfer tax,
though.


Here is the local story from yesterday.

http://www.lvrj.com/news/gun-store-owner-shocked-by-manhunt-for-customer-a-former-los-angeles-police-officer-190283551.html

Oren wrote:

He can / could own Class III without this "trust", but my
understanding is the background checks take much longer than say
buying a pistol or rifle.


An individual buying a Class III has to jump through a LOT of hoops,
including a sign-off by the local chief law enforcement officer.

I didn't know about trusts (thank you), but a corporation buying a
Class III is almost trivial: no background check, no fingerprints,
no photo, no vetting by the local LEO's office, etc.

I'm not sure whether a Subchapter S corp will work - my corporation
is an "C" corp, so the issue never comes up. Still have to pay the
transfer tax, though.


Here is the local story from yesterday.

http://www.lvrj.com/news/gun-store-o...190283551.html

Here's a bit on NFA weapons and corporations:
"NFA items may also be transferred to corporations (or other legal entities
such as a trust). When the paperwork to request transfer of an NFA item is
initiated by an officer of a corporation, a signature from local law
enforcement is not required, and fingerprint cards and photographs do not
need to be submitted with the transfer request. Therefore, an individual who
lives in a location where the chief law enforcement officer will not sign a
transfer form can still own an NFA item if he or she owns a corporation.
This method has downsides, since it is the corporation (and not the
principal) that owns the firearm. Thus, if the corporation ever dissolves,
it must transfer its NFA firearms to the owners. This event would be
considered a new transfer and would be subject to a new transfer tax."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act

wrote in message
...

There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

I agree with you, except only the people who illegally possess them.

The intent of the framers of the Constitution was to arm the populace in
case a tyrannical government came along, as it is. They would have defense
against the government.

At the time the Constitution was written, it was SOP to shoot any burglar,
prowler, or bad guy, with minimal questions asked. It helped keep all the
others in line, knowing that if you act like an idiot, someone will trip a
frizzen on you. I think there was less crime.

I do not think the founders ever thought of in their wildest dreams that
firearms would be classified and thought of as they are today. In that era,
they were tools to get food, and protection from animals and men who acted
like animals.

I say loosen up the laws regarding castle law, defense of life and property,
concealed carry, licensing, and all other manner related to legally owning
guns.

And declare hunting season on the bad guys, and even bounties for crimes
stopped with the use of deadly force.

It's like that on my land. Come roaming around after dark, and you'll get
what you get.

Steve

"Notat Home" wrote in message
...
wrote:

There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their guns
voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot those
people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their own, so we
have to take this matter into our own hands.

Guns are like a virus or disease in our society. Guns are the biggest
cause of deaths in our modern world. Guns cause more fatalities than
all the diseases in this world combined.

Modern people are obcessed with health matters, they quit smoking, quit
drinking, watch their calories and nutrition, go to doctors for all
kinds of tests, and more..... Yet many of these same people own guns.
One has to ask what is wrong with the minds of these people. Maybe
their minds are so brainwashed by organizations such as the NRA that
they dont even realize they are handling a very deadly weapon, with only
one use, which is toi kill.

What's most amazing is that these same people go to doctors and
pharmacies every year to get their annual flu shot, to prevent them from
getting the flu. How come none of them go to these doctors and
pharmacies to get gun shots, to prevent them from owning guns. Only a
few people die each year from the flu, yet hundreds of thosands of
people die from guns. Once again, we have backward thinking. Why not
avoid the flu shot and get a gun shot instead. Just think of all the
lives that would be saved.

We must begin immediately shooting people who have guns, and continue
this until each and every gun owning person on Earth is shot and killed.
We only ask that the last person on Earth who owns a gun, please shoot
themselves.

It's 2013, guns are obsolete, and have been replaced by Facebook. We
must eliminate all guns from our world immediuately. If you know any
gun owners, do your part making this a better world, and shoot that
person or persons. Make sure they die, and you will be rewarded with a
much safer and better gun-free world.

To shoot them, you would need a gun. If you have a gun, you could lead
the way by shooting yourself.

Your name suits you well. Doesn't that echo and hollow sound on the inside
of your head bug you?

Steve

On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?

On Feb 9, 3:34*am, wrote:


It's 2013, guns are obsolete, and have been replaced by Facebook. We
must eliminate all guns from our world immediuately. *If you know any
gun owners, do your part making this a better world, and shoot that
person or persons. *Make sure they die, and you will be rewarded with a
much safer and better gun-free world.

Here is an event that happened back in 1946, mostly unknown, that
shows why the 2nd amendment is necessary for citizens to have guns for
protection from some of our government organizations. Would unarmed
people make this a better place to live?

It's a 4 minute video so be prepared.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.co...of-Athens.html

On Feb 9, 1:34*am, wrote:

SNIP

Guns are the biggest cause of deaths in our modern world.
Guns cause more fatalities than all the diseases in this world
combined.
Modern people are obcessed (sic) with health matters, they quit
smoking, quit
drinking, watch their calories and nutrition, go to doctors for all
kinds of tests, and more..... Yet many of these same people own guns.


The data would seem to indicate otherwise.

On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:31:11 -0800 (PST), Red
wrote:

Here is an event that happened back in 1946, mostly unknown, that
shows why the 2nd amendment is necessary for citizens to have guns for
protection from some of our government organizations. Would unarmed
people make this a better place to live?

It's a 4 minute video so be prepared.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.co...of-Athens.html


Good one. Veterans cleaned the guns and returned them to the Armory
before sunrise... I love it.

Youtube says 13:32.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Red" wrote in message
...

Here is an event that happened back in 1946, mostly unknown, that
shows why the 2nd amendment is necessary for citizens to have guns for
protection from some of our government organizations. Would unarmed
people make this a better place to live?

It's a 4 minute video so be prepared.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.co...of-Athens.html

"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!

"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post

On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post



HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar

-- begin quote

Path:
eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Attila Iskander"
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair
Subject: How to get rid of people with guns
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 28
Message-ID:
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 14:52:28 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="89158a0aad7864f2b9fbfdc845f0fab5";
logging-data="32156";
";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18xV0JhE6wgDXwGnYtAxfAGvh8tjD2IF 1I="
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16669
In-Reply-To:
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480
Cancel-Lock: sha1:sOHJ/jgAmdyZkg2FdQj90dJ1DYs=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal


wrote in message
...

There is only one way to get rid of people with guns.
SHOOT THEM!

If we want to get guns out if our modern world, we must get rid of the
people who own them. These people are not going to surrender their guns
voluntarily, so the only way to solve this problem is to shoot those
people who own guns. These people wont give up guns on their own, so we
have to take this matter into our own hands.


LOgic is not your strong suit ?
Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns
2) Best solution - shoot them
3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns
4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?


Rest of silly trollish drivel ignored..

-- end quote

"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
m...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post



HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar



So You cut the context to make it sound like my paraphrase were what I
intended to post
You are the one who created the lie by removing the context

Look in your mirror bub
The liar is you/

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:24:50 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
om...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post



HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar



So You cut the context to make it sound like my paraphrase were what I
intended to post
You are the one who created the lie by removing the context

Look in your mirror bub
The liar is you/



I didn't make anything "sound" like anything.You cut what I just said.
You did post what you said you didn't. I simply replied in the first
thread. The information you posted.

Yet are you are denying you never posted what I replied too.

harry needs a playmate, argue with him..

"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:24:50 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news:hbadh8p8l45qk8ssff0s7grlrd48pq2m62@4ax. com...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people
simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post



HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar



So You cut the context to make it sound like my paraphrase were what
I
intended to post
You are the one who created the lie by removing the context

Look in your mirror bub
The liar is you/



I didn't make anything "sound" like anything.You cut what I just said.


See how cutting context can change things
Since YOU have no problem doing it to me, STOP WHINING when it's doene
to you.

You did post what you said you didn't.

I PARAPHRASE the OP's post YOU ****ING MORON !
And YOU CUT the part which CLEARLY SHOWS that it was a PARAPHRASE of what
the OP wrote, and thus ascribed the content to me..

Are you really this ****ing stupid ?


I simply replied in the first thread.
The information you posted.

YOU CUT the IMPORTANT PART that showed I was PARAPHRASING, you ****head



Yet are you are denying you never posted what I replied too.

harry needs a playmate, argue with him..

You're far closer to his level, you do it

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:21:02 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:24:50 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news:hbadh8p8l45qk8ssff0s7grlrd48pq2m62@4ax .com...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people
simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post



HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar



So You cut the context to make it sound like my paraphrase were what
I
intended to post
You are the one who created the lie by removing the context

Look in your mirror bub
The liar is you/



I didn't make anything "sound" like anything.You cut what I just said.


See how cutting context can change things
Since YOU have no problem doing it to me, STOP WHINING when it's doene
to you.

You did post what you said you didn't.

I PARAPHRASE the OP's post YOU ****ING MORON !
And YOU CUT the part which CLEARLY SHOWS that it was a PARAPHRASE of what
the OP wrote, and thus ascribed the content to me..

Are you really this ****ing stupid ?


I simply replied in the first thread.
The information you posted.

YOU CUT the IMPORTANT PART that showed I was PARAPHRASING, you ****head



Yet are you are denying you never posted what I replied too.

harry needs a playmate, argue with him..

You're far closer to his level, you do it


Everybody here is suppose to know you were "paragraphing".

You denied you said what you said, after you attacked me. You got
caught, saying you did not say what you did SAY. Said I gave the wrong
the attribution in the thread.

Should I give the header and message again? They do not lie!

For the record you are not ****ing around with harry here. I called
you on your lie and bull****.

Best now you shut up. Adults were talking before you made an attack on
me. I never attacked you with a SIMPLE reply to what you stated and
then denied you said.

Go swap spit with harry. He needs your attention.

You get the last word, even lying about what you said, good day.

****in' immigrant!! Poor child doesn't know what side you are on.

"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:21:02 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:24:50 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
newsolfh8th23654nfs20tpeutt08c7d45v51@4ax. com...
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Oren" wrote in message
news:hbadh8p8l45qk8ssff0s7grlrd48pq2m62@4a x.com...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) So it follows that they should be shot first.
And along with them, those who propose shooting people
simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?


Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more
sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!


YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post



HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar



So You cut the context to make it sound like my paraphrase were
what
I
intended to post
You are the one who created the lie by removing the context

Look in your mirror bub
The liar is you/



I didn't make anything "sound" like anything.You cut what I just said.


See how cutting context can change things
Since YOU have no problem doing it to me, STOP WHINING when it's doene
to you.

You did post what you said you didn't.

I PARAPHRASE the OP's post YOU ****ING MORON !
And YOU CUT the part which CLEARLY SHOWS that it was a PARAPHRASE of what
the OP wrote, and thus ascribed the content to me..

Are you really this ****ing stupid ?


I simply replied in the first thread.
The information you posted.

YOU CUT the IMPORTANT PART that showed I was PARAPHRASING, you ****head



Yet are you are denying you never posted what I replied too.

harry needs a playmate, argue with him..

You're far closer to his level, you do it


Everybody here is suppose to know you were "paragraphing".


If unlike you, they actually READ what was posted, it would have been
obvious to them
In your case, since you didn't READ what was there before cutting it,
then no it's no surprise that you remain clueless


You denied you said what you said, after you attacked me. You got
caught, saying you did not say what you did SAY. Said I gave the wrong
the attribution in the thread.


I denied YOUR quote of me, BECAUSE you cut the important part which clearly
showed that I was PARAPHRASING the previous poster

I realize that you're a stupid ****** and can't read for ****
So I'll stop here with your stupid spin and stop you from lying some more to
cover your skanky ass


Should I give the header and message again? They do not lie!


You're right, they don't
But YOU did by cutting the context and removing the part which showed that I
paraphrased to other poster

And no matter how much you try to spin it, IF you actually READ my post that
would be evident to even a moron like you.


For the record you are not ****ing around with harry here. I called
you on your lie and bull****.


Apparently you're just as stupid and dishonest as harry is.
And instead of looking at what was posted, you try to justify yoursefl with
the header
So clearly you are unable to admit that you ****ED UP !


Best now you shut up.

Better yet, why don't you shut the **** up and stop trying to spin that you
lied by cutting the context and quoted me OUT OF CONTEXT...


Adults were talking before you made an attack on me.

Too bad, your still acting like a child trying to cover up the fact that you
SCREWED UP
Just like a child caught with his hand in the cookie jar..


I never attacked you with a SIMPLE reply to what you stated and
then denied you said.


What you did, you moron, is cut the part that CLEARLY SHOWED I paraphrased
the previous poster
And then attributed to me that which was a paraphrase of the PREVIOUS POSTER



Go swap spit with harry. He needs your attention.


I'll leave that you to that, ****head


You get the last word, even lying about what you said, good day.


And you're still a lying moron trying to cover your ass for cutting the
context that CLEARLY showed I was paraphrasing the other poster
Apparently such a technique is beyond your low level of composition skills.
I'll know in the future that you are still operating on a line-by-line basis
Too bad (for you) that even harry can do better..

So get back to us when you finish 4th grade English so that we can see if
you learned how to read better



****in' immigrant!! Poor child doesn't know what side you are on.

Here you go dummy
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paraphrase

1: a restatement of a text, passage, or work giving the meaning in another
form
2: the use or process of paraphrasing in studying or teaching composition

Which makes it NOT a statement of my view or position as you implied with
your selective cutting from my post

Next time make the attribution correctly, or pay the price.

On Feb 11, 9:12*pm, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:21:02 -0600, "Attila Iskander"





wrote:

"Oren" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:24:50 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:

"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:48:20 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:

"Oren" wrote in message
news On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 06:41:34 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:

"Oren" wrote in message
news:hbadh8p8l45qk8ssff0s7grlrd48pq2m62@4ax .com...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:45:31 -0600, "Attila Iskander"
*did NOT write any of the **** below

Let's see
1) * *We need to get rid of people with guns

That would be about 88.8 persons per 100 in America

2) * *Best solution - shoot them

The housing market would collapse

3) * *But that means that the shooters are people with guns

Dipshiate left that part out

4) * *So it follows that they should be shot first.
* * * *And along with them, those who propose shooting people
simply
because they own guns

When would be a good time to shoot you ?

Yesterday?

Next time learn how to post.

There is nothing wrong with the above posting style. "In the
interleaved reply style (also called "inline reply", "point-by-point
rebuttal"..."the original message is broken into two or more sections,
each followed by a specific reply or comment."

You are the first to ever complain.

Have a nice day!

YOU MORON !
It's NOT the ****ing style, you screwed up
* *It's the attribution
You put my name to something I didn't post

HEY ASSHOLE, you are lying or a complete idiot. You replied to the
troll and I snipped and replied to you with my comments "in-line".

Here is the HEADER and the *entire* message - so **** off! It is plain
for others to see, *look in your outbox.

Oh, you can put me in your killfile. Liar

So You cut the context to make it sound like my paraphrase were what
I
intended to post
* *You are the one who created the lie by removing the context

Look in your mirror bub
* *The liar is you/

I didn't make anything "sound" like anything.You cut what I just said.

See how cutting context can change things
* *Since YOU have no problem doing it to me, STOP WHINING when it's doene
to you.

You did post what you said you didn't.

I PARAPHRASE the OP's post YOU ****ING MORON !
And YOU CUT the part which CLEARLY SHOWS that it was a PARAPHRASE of what
the OP wrote, and thus ascribed the content to me..

Are you really this ****ing stupid ?

I simply replied in the first *thread.
The information you posted.

YOU CUT the IMPORTANT PART that showed I was PARAPHRASING, you ****head

Yet are you are denying you never posted what I replied too.

harry needs a playmate, argue with him..

You're far closer to his level, you do it

Everybody here is suppose to know you were "paragraphing".

You denied you said what you said, after you attacked me. You got
caught, saying you did not say what you did SAY. Said I gave the wrong
the attribution in the thread.

Should I give the header and message again? They do not lie!

For the record you are not ****ing around with harry here. I called
you on your lie and bull****.

Best now you shut up. Adults were talking before you made an attack on
me. I never attacked you with a SIMPLE reply to what you stated and
then denied you said.

Go swap spit with harry. He needs your attention.

You get the last word, even lying about what you said, good day.

****in' immigrant!! Poor child doesn't know what side you are on.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I see Attila has made another new friend with his amazing social
skills. He has an amazing knack for quickly alienating even those
who would agree with a lot of what he posts with his hostile attacks.

handguns are the "in" thing with Kids

that,
and those pesky drones concern me

marc

On 2/12/2013 10:46 AM, wrote:
handguns are the "in" thing with Kids

that,
and those pesky drones concern me

marc


I wonder if those wacky P.L.L.C.F. educators will expel a six year old
from school if he draws a picture of a military drone? O_o

TDD

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 8:53:48 AM UTC-8, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 2/12/2013 10:46 AM, wrote:

handguns are the "in" thing with Kids



that,

and those pesky drones concern me



marc





I wonder if those wacky P.L.L.C.F. educators will expel a six year old

from school if he draws a picture of a military drone? O_o



TDD

over-reacting is a very common[human] thing isn't it?

you can see it in many things, can't you?

those emotions, i guess

marc

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
On 2/12/2013 10:46 AM, wrote:
handguns are the "in" thing with Kids

that,
and those pesky drones concern me

marc


I wonder if those wacky P.L.L.C.F. educators will expel a six year old
from school if he draws a picture of a military drone? O_o

Or runs around the schoolyard with his arms out as wings, buzzing the other
kids..

I remember we used hockey sticks are rifles to shoot each other across the
ice of the skating ring..
Ironically, shooting each other with hockey sticks was OK.
Using them as swords or clubs was not..

Ah well.

Freedom bad.
Drones good.
Gold star, and candy for her.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...

I wonder if those wacky P.L.L.C.F. educators will expel a six year old
from school if he draws a picture of a military drone? O_o

TDD