In article , Josepi
wrote:

Many of these killings are the gun owners own children sneaking in late at
night.

Citation, please.

Here is one on the millions.

http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/...S/GUNSTAT.html

It is too late for gun controls in the USA for the next 100 years. Look to
Brazil for an example of controls that will take 100 years to become
effective. It's a long process once a culture gets the "shoot somebody"
mentality. The only answer is to get gun ownership levels down and it takes
centuries of kicking hard.



"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message
news:140220112216079295%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderst one.ca...
Citation, please.


In article , Josepi
wrote:

Many of these killings are the gun owners own children sneaking in late at
night.

In article , Josepi
wrote:

Here is one on the millions.

http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/...S/GUNSTAT.html

It is too late for gun controls in the USA for the next 100 years. Look to
Brazil for an example of controls that will take 100 years to become
effective. It's a long process once a culture gets the "shoot somebody"
mentality. The only answer is to get gun ownership levels down and it takes
centuries of kicking hard.



"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message
news:140220112216079295%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderst one.ca...
Citation, please.


In article , Josepi
wrote:

Many of these killings are the gun owners own children sneaking in late at
night.


There is nothing that I can find on that page about children sneaking
in late at night.

....and you will not find anything to convince you that gun carrying is not a
good thing either.

In Canada we don't need to protect ourselves against a perceived enemy. We
control the gun crowd fairly well and will tighten the laws as the
statistics continually prove it working, and each time we get more out of
the hands of the general public. What would we need to have a gun at home
for anyway? If I used it on a thief stealing form my house I would guilty of
murder. Once the thief steals something the crime is done. Only revenge is
left.

Some swear it is a God given right to bear arms and yet declare war on other
countries because they might have bigger weapon (WMD). I guess the morality
doesn't apply to everybody.

In the end only the lunatics will have illegal guns.



"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message
news:140220112253253574%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderst one.ca...
There is nothing that I can find on that page about children sneaking
in late at night.

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:24:08 -0500, Josepi wrote:

...and you will not find anything to convince you that gun carrying is
not a good thing either.

"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message
news:140220112253253574%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderst one.ca... There is
nothing that I can find on that page about children sneaking in late at
night.

IOW, you made it up with no facts to back you up.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
guns are very good at stopping. I (later) grew up in a small town
where pretty much EVERYONE had guns (I had semiauto pistols as a teen).
That kind of extreme violence was almost unheard of.

BULL****! You must be pretty damned old then, were living in an extremely
remote northern location or are a native American. I'm 57 now and I bought
my first gun, a Browning Challenger when I was 18. I had to belong to a
registered gun club (Sharron Gun Club in this case) where I was a charter
member when they were looking to properly fund the club's activities. In
addition, I had to go through a training course and had to be fully licensed
with a transport permit as well as registered with the Police.

I don't believe your crap for one second. I've caught you in lies previously
and now you've been caught again.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
You've never remotely "caught me in a lie". You've merely assumed things
that we not true (as here), invented a strawman case, and the foamed
mightily.
Your manners still need considerable work BTW...

You are a liar and a experienced one too. When we first started our
tet-a-tet several year ago, you accused me personally of being a thief for
accepting publicly funded medical support. It was only after I called you on
it that you modified your position by saying that you were against the
entire public medical system as stealing.

Among all my faults, short or incomplete memory is not one of them. Right
from the beginning, you've been a liar and continue to do so.

"Josepi" wrote in message ...


In Canada we don't need to protect ourselves against a perceived enemy.

Say, that's right, and one of your Ministers of Justice even explained that
in Canada there is no such thing as a right of self-defense, Allan Rock was
his name. And if rates of burglary and rape are higher in Canada than in
the U.S., well, that's too bad, but at least those burglars and rapists
aren't getting shot, that's the important thing.

http://www.sfu.ca/~mauser/papers/sel...JFP-8-3-99.pdf

"A few crime rates are higher in Canada than in the United States. In 1993,
the burglary rate in
Canada, at 1,414 per 100,000, was almost 50 percent higher than the US rate
of 1,099 per 100,000. Even
more striking is the comparison between the two countries in sexual assault.
The Canadian €˜forcible
rape rate, at 121 per 100,000, is much higher than the rate in the United
States, forty-one per 100,000."

We control the gun crowd fairly well and will tighten the laws as the
statistics continually prove it working,

Or not working, you'll proceed whether it's working or not.

and each time we get more out of the hands of the general public. What
would we need to have a gun at home for anyway? If I used it on a thief
stealing form my house I would guilty of murder. Once the thief steals
something the crime is done. Only revenge is left.

What if he's interested in more than theft? What if he wants a little fun
at your expense, or your wife's?

Some swear it is a God given right to bear arms and yet declare war on
other countries because they might have bigger weapon (WMD). I guess the
morality doesn't apply to everybody.

Good grief.

In the end only the lunatics will have illegal guns.

Well, there will be you, you won't be armed.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
Your manners still need considerable work BTW...

I have my own friends and acquaintences with whom I'm perfectly polite and
congenial. With flaky assholes like you, I have no compunctions about being
as crude and insulting as possible because you deserve no less. You use your
assumed mastery of the English language as a weapon to twist and distort
reality to your view of things. And, you do it here, in rec.woodworking
where in all your years of presence, you have yet to contribute one shred of
woodworking knowledge or experience. Basically, you're a troll of the worst
sort masquerading under the guise of some sort of distorted, selfish and
twisted logic. It's your only purpose here, so I take pleasure in shutting
you down at my discression.

On 2/15/2011 3:30 PM, Upscale wrote:
"Tim wrote in message
You've never remotely "caught me in a lie". You've merely assumed things
that we not true (as here), invented a strawman case, and the foamed
mightily.
Your manners still need considerable work BTW...

You are a liar and a experienced one too. When we first started our
tet-a-tet several year ago, you accused me personally of being a thief for
accepting publicly funded medical support. It was only after I called you on
it that you modified your position by saying that you were against the
entire public medical system as stealing.

Among all my faults, short or incomplete memory is not one of them. Right
from the beginning, you've been a liar and continue to do so.




You certainly defend theft by force which makes you the moral equivalent
of the thief doing the work. In fact, as I recall, you claim it is a
moral good for the government to take from some and give to others - presumably
because you're usually on the receiving end of that deal.

I don't think you're a thief and I never have: You don't have the skills and/or
courage to do your own stealing - you outsource it like so many other people.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
You certainly defend theft by force which makes you the moral equivalent
of the thief doing the work. In fact, as I recall, you claim it is a
moral good for the government to take from some and give to others -
presumably
because you're usually on the receiving end of that deal.

Amazing. For someone who thinks he's so bright, you're remarkably stupid.
Take your medicaid as an example. Where exactly do you think the money comes
from to support people on medicaid? It comes from taxes, taxes paid by
people. Yet for some inane reason, you consider that as 'taking' in the US
version of healthcare, but you do in the Canadian version.

To receive medicaid as I understand it, people have to be indigent and can't
earn a living salary while receiving it. Is that correct? So there they are,
receiving publicly paid for benefits. In the end however you slice it, it's
paid for by other people. Those indigent people receive and they give
nothing back.

In my Canadian system, my health care needs are met sufficiently enough for
me to work and pay taxes. I contribute the best way I'm able back to the
system that supports me. Yet, you seem to find some kind of flaw in that and
call me a thief for it. Seems to me that your way is more costly than my
way.

Oh, and by the way Daneliuk, sending your comments to my inbox *and* posting
those same comments here will only have one effect. It just means that I'll
redouble my comments and attacks to show everybody what kind of deceitful
little money grubbing asshole asshole you truly are. I hope you like it,
because it's only going to get worse.

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 13:52:20 -0500, Upscale wrote:

I (later) grew up in a small town where
pretty much EVERYONE had guns (I had semiauto pistols as a teen). That
kind of extreme violence was almost unheard of.

BULL****! You must be pretty damned old then, were living in an
extremely remote northern location or are a native American.

Much as I hate to defend Tim (I wouldn't even see his posts if you guys
would quit responding), he didn't need a remote location. All he had to
do was grow up in the South. I did. And I walked into a store and
bought a .38 revolver when I was 13 or 14. Nobody thought there was
anything wrong with that. Luckily I never had to use it.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
would quit responding), he didn't need a remote location. All he had to
do was grow up in the South. I did. And I walked into a store and
bought a .38 revolver when I was 13 or 14. Nobody thought there was
anything wrong with that. Luckily I never had to use it.

Read daneliuk's thread a little closer Larry. When he first said it, he
suggested that he was living in Canada when he had all this easy access to
firearms. That's what I called bull**** on. After I did, he corrected the
statement to say he was actually living in the US when he had the firearms.
You see, Tim**** likes to play these little word games and when called on
it, he always comes up with a 'correction'. It's his way of lying and then
trying to pull his butt out of the line of fire.

On 02/15/2011 05:35 PM, Upscale wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
would quit responding), he didn't need a remote location. All he had to
do was grow up in the South. I did. And I walked into a store and
bought a .38 revolver when I was 13 or 14. Nobody thought there was
anything wrong with that. Luckily I never had to use it.

Read daneliuk's thread a little closer Larry. When he first said it, he
suggested that he was living in Canada when he had all this easy access to
firearms. That's what I called bull**** on. After I did, he corrected the
statement to say he was actually living in the US when he had the firearms.
You see, Tim**** likes to play these little word games and when called on
it, he always comes up with a 'correction'. It's his way of lying and then
trying to pull his butt out of the line of fire.


You must have mis-understood - I didn't get the idea he was talking
about Canada or the US as he has stated in the past that he came from
across the pond somewhere? He certainly didn't imply that Canada was
what he was talking about.

On 2/15/2011 5:55 PM, Upscale wrote:
"Tim wrote in message
You certainly defend theft by force which makes you the moral equivalent
of the thief doing the work. In fact, as I recall, you claim it is a
moral good for the government to take from some and give to others -
presumably
because you're usually on the receiving end of that deal.

Amazing. For someone who thinks he's so bright, you're remarkably stupid.
Take your medicaid as an example. Where exactly do you think the money comes
from to support people on medicaid? It comes from taxes, taxes paid by
people. Yet for some inane reason, you consider that as 'taking' in the US
version of healthcare, but you do in the Canadian version.


Wrong. I think Medicare and Medicaid are both Unconstitutional and morally wrong.
As I've said before, since you are forced to pay into your system, I see
no foul in collecting when the time comes. But to support and promote
such a system is wrong.

To receive medicaid as I understand it, people have to be indigent and can't
earn a living salary while receiving it. Is that correct? So there they are,
receiving publicly paid for benefits. In the end however you slice it, it's
paid for by other people. Those indigent people receive and they give
nothing back.

Thus it is morally wrong - it is based on involuntary wealth transfer.


In my Canadian system, my health care needs are met sufficiently enough for
me to work and pay taxes. I contribute the best way I'm able back to the
system that supports me. Yet, you seem to find some kind of flaw in that and
call me a thief for it. Seems to me that your way is more costly than my
way.

There are voluntary systems like that with which I have no problem. Two
such systems are called "insurance" and "charity". It is the "forcing people
to contribute at a point of the government's gun" part I have a problem
with.


Oh, and by the way Daneliuk, sending your comments to my inbox *and* posting
those same comments here will only have one effect. It just means that I'll
redouble my comments and attacks to show everybody what kind of deceitful
little money grubbing asshole asshole you truly are. I hope you like it,
because it's only going to get worse.

You are a very angry person - you continue to have my sympathy and best
wishes.

On 2/15/2011 6:51 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:
On 02/15/2011 05:35 PM, Upscale wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
would quit responding), he didn't need a remote location. All he had to
do was grow up in the South. I did. And I walked into a store and
bought a .38 revolver when I was 13 or 14. Nobody thought there was
anything wrong with that. Luckily I never had to use it.

Read daneliuk's thread a little closer Larry. When he first said it, he
suggested that he was living in Canada when he had all this easy access to
firearms. That's what I called bull**** on. After I did, he corrected the
statement to say he was actually living in the US when he had the firearms.
You see, Tim**** likes to play these little word games and when called on
it, he always comes up with a 'correction'. It's his way of lying and then
trying to pull his butt out of the line of fire.


You must have mis-understood - I didn't get the idea he was talking about Canada or the US as he has stated in the past that he came from across the pond somewhere? He certainly didn't imply that Canada was what he was talking about.

Um... just to make this clear (especially for our angry little friend), at various
times, I have lived in Canada, Western Europe, and various places in the US.
I have lived in very large cities, and the smallest of villages, and some places
in between. I've liked every place I've ever lived for different reasons,
but above them all, in retrospect, Alaska was far and away the best of the
bunch. Aside from somewhat dodgy weather, it is breathtakingly beautiful,
clean (except when it gets Californicated in the summer months), and people,
while helpful, mostly have a live and let live attitude about things. It's
the only place I have every been able to legally stand at the end of a
very large runway (upon which I had just landed a Cessna) an fire .44 Mag
rounds for fun. Try that at LAX or ORD .... (well, probably not)...

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
There are voluntary systems like that with which I have no problem. Two
such systems are called "insurance" and "charity". It is the "forcing
people
to contribute at a point of the government's gun" part I have a problem
with.

Then for Christ's sake, go and live somewhere that doesn't affect your
delicate sensibilities. Here all you do is whine and complain how your money
is being stolen from you. Society includes rich and poor, young and old, the
healthy and the sick. It isn't as you choose to believe, just the rich and
powerful. Truth is they wouldn't be able to build **** without all members
of socety. As far as you're concerned, deserving society is whoever can take
the most. For a little wimp like you, that should be galling considering
you're one of the many, not wealthy members of society. You seem to take
exception to people wanting the right to be healthy and only support it if
they pay for it.

I once stated that the most important right is to be healthy if at all
possible. Someone (who for the moment will remain unamed) told me that
freedom is the most important right. I beg to differ, because illness is a
prison with it's own set of conditions, worse in many, many areas than just
a simple lack of freedom. That's my experience and my viewpoint. Deal with
it.

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:11:38 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 2/15/2011 12:52 PM, Upscale said this:
--snip--

PDFTFT

You have to love Usenet and how some of these troll types just love to sit
waiting for an argument to break out and then offer their insecurity to the
world via "Just put him in your killfilters. I did years ago. He's a troll
etc...". It's the old

Line in the sand thing "All you guys are with ME, right?...right?" Thing.



I have been to the USA many times and I find the people very compatible and
similar to Canadians. The main difference I do notice is the propaganda
constantly bombarding the people of USA regarding defending yourself and the
other side of the world all beats their wives, kills their children or cuts
off their ears and tortures their dogs. There is a constant hero worship of
men with guns portrayed in the movies and TV shows. They keep the people so
pumped with hate and anger to distract from any real political issues with
the "Right to bear arms" obsession. This gets worse as one travels deeper
south into the States.

You don't see this happening in Canada, in my area. The newspaper doesn't
have an article about how other cultures are destroying the world
***everyday***. The attempt to keep the populace angry and at war and
anxious is missing.

The Americans will always have the right to bear arms against an imaginary
enemy that the government and news media has propagandized them with for
some political gain. The government dictates what to think for it's own
control.



"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message ...
Um... just to make this clear (especially for our angry little friend), at
various
times, I have lived in Canada, Western Europe, and various places in the US.
I have lived in very large cities, and the smallest of villages, and some
places
in between. I've liked every place I've ever lived for different reasons,
but above them all, in retrospect, Alaska was far and away the best of the
bunch. Aside from somewhat dodgy weather, it is breathtakingly beautiful,
clean (except when it gets Californicated in the summer months), and people,
while helpful, mostly have a live and let live attitude about things. It's
the only place I have every been able to legally stand at the end of a
very large runway (upon which I had just landed a Cessna) an fire .44 Mag
rounds for fun. Try that at LAX or ORD .... (well, probably not)...

On 2/15/2011 7:39 PM, Upscale wrote:
"Tim wrote in message
There are voluntary systems like that with which I have no problem. Two
such systems are called "insurance" and "charity". It is the "forcing
people
to contribute at a point of the government's gun" part I have a problem
with.

Then for Christ's sake, go and live somewhere that doesn't affect your
delicate sensibilities. Here all you do is whine and complain how your money
is being stolen from you. Society includes rich and poor, young and old, the
healthy and the sick. It isn't as you choose to believe, just the rich and
powerful. Truth is they wouldn't be able to build **** without all members
of socety. As far as you're concerned, deserving society is whoever can take
the most. For a little wimp like you, that should be galling considering
you're one of the many, not wealthy members of society. You seem to take
exception to people wanting the right to be healthy and only support it if
they pay for it.

I once stated that the most important right is to be healthy if at all
possible. Someone (who for the moment will remain unamed) told me that
freedom is the most important right. I beg to differ, because illness is a
prison with it's own set of conditions, worse in many, many areas than just
a simple lack of freedom. That's my experience and my viewpoint. Deal with
it.



This may shock you, but I completely agree that health in some sense, at
least, is the foundation of freedom. But making other people pay for
it by force is unseemly.

On 2/15/2011 9:12 PM, Josepi wrote:
You have to love Usenet and how some of these troll types just love to sit waiting for an argument to break out and then offer their insecurity to the world via "Just put him in your killfilters. I did years ago. He's a troll etc...". It's the old

Line in the sand thing "All you guys are with ME, right?...right?" Thing.



I have been to the USA many times and I find the people very compatible and similar to Canadians. The main difference I do notice is the propaganda constantly bombarding the people of USA regarding defending yourself and the other side of the world all beats their wives, kills their children or cuts off their ears and tortures their dogs. There is a constant hero worship of men with guns portrayed in the movies and TV shows. They keep the people so pumped with hate and anger to distract from any real political issues with the "Right to bear arms" obsession. This gets worse as one travels deeper south into the States.

You don't see this happening in Canada, in my area. The newspaper doesn't have an article about how other cultures are destroying the world ***everyday***. The attempt to keep the populace angry and at war and anxious is missing.

The Americans will always have the right to bear arms against an imaginary enemy that the government and news media has propagandized them with for some political gain. The government dictates what to think for it's own control.


A fascinating view. The only violence (and grief that comes with it) my
family ever experiences was in ... Canada.

Guns stop crime. The lack of them encourages it.

You have obviously developed a firm belief, as most have, one way the other
depending (not always) on the surrounding propaganda.

One case does not make a statistical trend. Large samples of cases do.

Above all, look at the money I have saved by not paying for guns, permits,
renewals and secure lock-up facilities.

I have, however spend thousands of dollars for martial arts training over
decades but you have to do something to keep in shape. Woodworking isn`t
going to do it. Now back to my ibuprofen taking to equalize laying too many
ceramic tiles this week...LOL

The only experience I have ever had with weapons was from American people
threatening me with them. I have never seen one in an unfriendly manner, in
Canada. I like it that way.

All the best. Did we fix anything yet...LOL



"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message ...

A fascinating view. The only violence (and grief that comes with it) my
family ever experiences was in ... Canada.

Guns stop crime. The lack of them encourages it.