skypuppy

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/rcmp-gun-grab/3267564142001 Overnight the rcmp has decided to change the classification of a popular high-end rifle from NON-RESTRICTED to PROHIBITED, forcing owners to turn in the weapons or be subject to a jail-term of up to 3 years for possession of a weapon which has been legal for over a decade here in Canada. This decision was made by the rcmp without any legislative agreement or oversight. Fortunately the Minister of Public Safety also seems disturbed by this action and will hopefully reverse it. Another interesting note is that the rcmp still seem to have access to a long-gun registry that was ordered destroyed by federal government over a year ago. It will be interesting to see if they can get away with this. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

He may not look like the type, but he didn't mind giving a few guns to mexican cartels to shoot up US border agents with, did he? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I don't know, but since it was my response to being called "Obtuse, sleazy, lacking half a clue, pennnis [sic], jackwagon (what is that?), ass hat, ass hat, ass hat, pest, dense and troll" and told to piss off by the guy you're defending from my comment then y'know what, I think I've been pretty controlled. Of course, two wrongs don't make a right but it's pretty telling which wrong you decide to call and which list of wrongs you let slide. Hope that clears things up for you

Thanks, but I'm fine. No one pays attention to Trolls... yeah, but it's not about you, really. it's about the mods. Here we have a mod posting in a thread right under a personal attack, and yet taking no action. Meanwhile other people are shit all over if they step out of line. I thought it was supposed to be a rule. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

why is jakee allowed to call someone a freakin' idiot in the above post? I thought pa's were not allowed? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I'm sure many if not most of the people in the Ukraine thought that way last year as well. And Syria. And Egypt. How about LA during the riots? Wouldn't take much at all... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

About the only way I know is to comb through the old local newspapers from the time to find if it's mentioned. You have to be pretty persistent. Sometimes, especially if it's a weekly paper, they talk about upcoming jumps as if they happened and then if you persist you may find out that they were cancelled or someone else had to do it when the first participant didn't show up, or didn't get offered enuf money when the collection hat went around... Hopefully the local library has them on microfiche. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

and in deed are safer you missed this part... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

The main problem I have with this is the word 'suspect'. If you are a suspect then you haven't been found guilty of anything. Extra judicial killings are wrong. Also its stupid to lump everyone fighting overseas into a big homogenous AQ grouping. There are Americans fighting in Syria, some will have AQ aspirations and others just want to go and fight against a dictator who's killing his own people and have no aim of bringing home what they learnt to use on US soil. These British 'Jihadists' are a point in case. http://news.sky.com/story/1183820/syria-sky-news-gains-access-to-uk-jihadists Better to keep them under observation and gather more information on their intent than jump to conclusions. Sort of like they kept the Tsarnaev brothers under surveillance in Boston, eh>? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Tom's my homeboy - I grew up 5 miles from him. We lived through those riots. Not something we'll forget easily. Not saying the riots were forgettable. But the point is, the officers were subjected to a second trial after being acquitted, just because some people made a stink... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

can you say 'rodney king trial'? The riots started on April 29 after a trial jury acquitted four Los Angeles Police Department officers of assault and use of excessive force. The mostly white officers were videotaped beating an African-American man named Rodney King following a high-speed police pursuit. Thousands of people throughout the metropolitan area in Los Angeles rioted over six days following the announcement of the verdict.[1] After the riots subsided significant actions were undertaken in the Los Angeles Police Department including the retrial of the police officers involved, increasing minority officers in the police department, analyzing excessive force, resignation of the police chief, loss of support for the Mayor of Los Angeles, and analyzing the general political and economic atmosphere that contributed to the riots. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Yes and no. It was what, at the time, separated the creation of the US from the entire rest of the planet. This was part of the basis for the original concept of American "exceptionalism." America is no longer an exception. Some parts of the planet have now caught up. The English had a Bill of Rights in 1689. I think the catching up was the other way around. The UK still had a King and subjects. And the US still had slavery when all those in the Empire were emancipated. Your move. And who, precisely, was responsible for introducing the slave trade in America to begin with? actually, several of the various indian tribes were warring with their neighbors and taking the women and children as slaves long before the white man arrived in North America. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I think if you re-read your post you'll see that it comes across as you pointing out that the Republicans are not willing to compromise, period. Nothing about Democrats not compromising.. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

We love our trucks in Canada. Oh, yes we do. Sales of large pickups are up 11.5 per cent so far this year. The best-selling vehicle in Canada is the Ford F-Series pickup, and with sales of 84,557 through the end of August, it is more than twice as popular as the best-selling passenger car, the Honda Civic (41,836). Meanwhile, compact SUVs are up 10.2 per cent on the year, with luxury compact SUVs up even more, at 12.2 per cent. Five of the 10 best-selling light trucks in Canada are compact SUVs. Cars? Subcompact sales are off 8.3 per cent this year, even though fuel prices are high and creeping higher still. We are not in love with sports cars, either – sales off 6.2 per cent. Mid-size cars? Down 1.3 per cent, though the continued strength of the Ford Fusion (up 25.8 per cent) and Honda Accord (up a stunning 138.9 per cent) goes against the overall grain of the marketplace. And, of course, even as middle class take-home pay declines, luxury car sales are up 6.8 per cent. So much for Canada being a country of thrifty drivers who embrace fuel-efficient small economy cars. As the numbers supplied by DesRosiers Automotive Consultants show, Canadians are moving to bigger vehicles. Sales of light trucks are up 5.6 per cent on the year, while car sales are up a paltry 0.7 per cent – that in a market up overall by 3.4 per cent year-on-year. Our pickup love affair has been growing stronger over the years, too, notes DesRosiers. “Back in the 1980s, they (large pickups) accounted for about 10 per cent of the overall market year in and year out. With the boom in the West, pickups grew in importance and for most of the last 20 years they accounted for roughly 13 per cent of total vehicle sales in Canada, with volumes consistently at about 200,000 units. However, over the last three years they have averaged closer to 260,000 units and this year they are tracking at about 300,000 units - a full 100,000 units above long-term tracking levels and closer to a 16/17 per cent share of the total market,” says DesRosiers in a note to clients. Sure, sure some of that full-size growth can be attributed to the end of Ford Ranger sales in Canada. It was a popular compact rig and accounted for sales of about 20,000 a year. Those buyers have now migrated to big pickups or something else entirely. Meanwhile, General Motors’ small pickups, the GMC Canyon and Chevrolet Colorado have not been a part of the marketplace as GM prepares to launch all-new versions next year. DesRosiers believes that some of the growth in big pickup sales is for personal use as everyday rides. This trend looks particularly strong in the West. And as long as economies in the West stay strong, so, too, should full-size pickup sales. What’s certain is this, says DesRosiers: “Ford’s F-Series will easily be the top-selling truck this year. Ford broke the 100,000 unit mark for the first time with the F-Series last year and is tracking 14 per cent higher this year.” If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

here's my 'page' on just about EVERYTHING (item 1 better be reflected in all my posts, political, social and otherwise) 1 - I trust adults to make their own decisions and to take responsibility for their own decisions. 2 - Parents should raise children to be good adults. 3 - Adult decisions should wait until the child becomes an adult. follow the logic for this specific scenario a - marriage is an adult decision b - therefore, the person getting married makes that decision c - therefore, minors do not get married d - therefore, the responsibility of the parent in this regard is to NOT LET A CHILD MARRY. Rather, raise them to choose wisely once they are an adult, and hopefully, the parent does a good enough job such that the, finally, adult offspring, respects the advice of the parent (advice does not equal control). individual freedom and self determination and responsibility for adults is not negotiable - it's the absolute moral keystoneso it's ok for 18-year-olds to go to war, but it's not ok to get married? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

learn something every day. I never knew that. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

according to a sun news poll, 50% believe it to be very likely Ford will win another term, and 34% believe it to be likely. Only 7 % write him off. Humanity has a long history of people supporting thugs as leaders as long as they deliver. To the Canadians here: objectively viewed, how well has Rob Ford delivered? Interestingly enuf, the ice storm Toronto is still recovering from was viewed by many as a disaster (not by me). It was Ford putting his face up front doing daily updates on the hydro response, and holding barbecues etc. in some of the areas effected despite the coup that took place with many of his powers and budget being removed by council, while most others of council weren't to be seen. The deputy mayor, who council gave most of the mayor's powers to, decided to go to florida during the recovery for Christmas dinner, and was hardly visible at all on local media. Now recovery is well on its way and the disaster finished, Karen Stintz (who has already confirmed she is running for mayor) is on the news saying there was a vacuum at the top, that Toronto had needed a mayor to lead it through the storm recovery. NEWS FLASH - she voted to take away the democratically elected mayor's powers and budget along with the rest of the council, despite laws which say that unless the mayor is convicted of a crime he cannot be forced from office. Complain about a vacuum at the top that you created, Karen? Fact is, even strung out on crack rob ford is a better mayor than the few that preceded him. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

according to a sun news poll, 50% believe it to be very likely Ford will win another term, and 34% believe it to be likely. Only 7 % write him off. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Yes he was. He was singling them out as the starting point. Well, yes, my understanding was he was specifically asked during the interview for his views on homosexuality. Even if he was asked what was a sin, and started with homosexuality, it would still be an entirely legitimate starting point in the context of the interview. As I said, he went on to also list other actions which he considered sins. It is interesting that he made no mention of homosexuals, he simply mentioned the ACT of homosexuality being sins (I don't think, I'd have to reread the interview to be sure). Just as he mentioned the ACT of drunkenness, and the ACT of promiscuity... so again, he was not judging people, he was condemning the ACTIONS he named. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

So? You said I said he said that gay people were crimals. I didn't. you certainly compared him to someone saying all (fill in the blank here) are criminals. which is not anything like what he said. He said they were sinners. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Yeah, whatever. Only saying it's the root of all sin but hey, no biggie. What the fuck are you talking about? Quote me in post 254 you said this, And he clearly stated all the ugly stuff you've conveniently left out too. As an example, if someone says that "All those damn blacks are criminals and drug addict scum! But I'm not judging them I love everyone" he's still a racist. Except Phil did not say 'all those homosexuals are criminals and drug addict scum', or anything approximating that, which would be accusing them of criminals offences. He merely stated that in his belief system what they were doing was a sin. And did not suggest to anyone to take up pitchforks and rakes and attack them. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I'm sorry you feel that way. I really am. In my opinion, a person doesn't get a free pass at being a bigot simply because he paraphrased words out of an ancient book of folklore. If we let that happen, we have to excuse the truly horrible behavior of quite a few people, like, for instance, the Taliban and the KKK. To me, it's one of the worst kinds of excuses; using "religion" to promote an agenda of hate. There is a BIG fundamental difference here. The Taliban and KKK ACT on their beliefs by harming and/or discriminating against others. Phil only stated his beliefs and did not pass judgement, nor act against. That is indeed the difference. Words (and not promoting hatred or violence) are different than violent actions. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

The opposite side of the issue would be the claim that heterosexuality is evil. Since that claim is pretty much non-existant then the need for tolerance of it is moot. Edit: Hang on a minute, that's not even right. The other side of asking for tolerance of gay people is tolerance of heterosexual people. Everyone tolerates heterosexual people. So much so that we're commonly referred to as 'people' and the rest is just assumed. (And hypothetically, getting pissed at people who swear isn't the same as bigotry.) actually, PR himself in the same interview you got your panties in a wad over, made the claim that heterosexual promiscuity was also a sin. So he actually wasn't singling out homosexuals any more than he did tramps and drunkards... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I think you're being tripped up by the overall false equivalency implied by the question. In any societal relationship, one party (group) will hold power over another party (group). This could be; man/woman, boss/employee, owner/dog, master/slave, majority/minority. Doesn't really matter. In NO case will both sides be equal. One will dominate and the other will subjugate. When the dominating party uses their intolerance to further control the other party, it is by definition an unfair situation. Pointing that out and voicing opposition to it is not the same thing. The attempt of the dominating party to use this false equivalency is shameless. It's pretty much the same reason why sexual harassment suits generally stick between boss/employee, but rarely are even possible the other way 'round. unless you're bill clinton getting a bj in the hall outside your office... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone