skypuppy

Yes, because there is no legal argument for Z to be aggressor. Not that the state has given, anyways. And the shenanigans they've pulled by not having a grand jury and by only having 6 jurors, because they think they can't prove it to 12, the state deserves to lose... 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 would have thought the ground there would have been soggy enuf he would have just planed across the surface... 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

No, not going to the nationals. Did make it to burnaby to say hello to Vic Borghese (and a few others, incidentally, like Floyd Martineau and Betty) and talk about old times Saturday. He will be going to Nationals. 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 now it seems these homes were searched, not once, but 3 times each. from sun news: Wildrose leader Danielle Smith, MLA for the High River area and a High River resident, says the police “aggravated an already tense and stressful situation.” “These sorts of actions damage the trust residents have for their leaders and will make future disaster situations more difficult to manage effectively.” Smith says the Mounties “have a lot to answer for.” She is gathering her own information from her High River constituents and she wants to know how many guns were secured at the request of gun owners and how many were not. It is her understanding houses were entered to look for people and then for building inspections and then a third time “just to get the guns.” 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

No, an arrest, trial and life sentance would have sufficed. Now that'll have to happen to the mob* instead of the ref. * Some of whom I would hope are already being plagued with crippling remorse, nightmares, and thoughts of "Oh dear god, what have we done?" that will last for the rest of their lives. (Huh, that was a bit of a downer this early in the day. So... Boobies!

You want to clarify that before I tell you what it sounds like? If its a joke it isn't funny. If its not, it's worse. Yet it's generally accepted for cops to have this very attitude towards others. It's not acceptable for a cop or anyone else to be a racist. Being happy that someone has been killed by criminals is also generally considered a fucked up perspective regardless of employment. AH. Until I read "By Criminals" I was feeling pretty sorry for the guy working for the state doing executions . . . he could NEVER have pride in job performance. There is a line there. If the guy killed is a criminal, I usually don't feel that bad. On the other hand, there is a point where one has to distinguish between if he is really a criminal because of his actions, or if he is just 'perceived' to be a criminal because of the color of his skin, or something. And then there's the whole thing about 'circumstances' ... For instance, we in western society seem to think that anyone who causes pain and kills other people easily is a 'psycho-path' and abnormal - and yet from reading about some cultures - it seems that is not so abnormal to treat other people that way. 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

Which one did he break? Try to pay attention, Jakee. It's right there in the original post. No, it really wasn't. Would his comment have been acceptable from someone that wasn't a mod? If yes, what rule prevents a mod from saying it, if no, what rule prevents normal poster's from saying it? In reality, no, his comment would not have been acceptable from someone else. but again, if you're a mod, there;s not much anyone else can do. Seems they always get the last word. 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 going to have to agree to disagree. As bad as the seizures were, probably the worst thing about this is the unwarranted searches. It's my understanding that cdn law defines buildings differently from dwellings. A building is usually a workplace where people have no real expectation of privacy, while a DWELLING is classified as a residence where the inhabitant has a reasonable expectation of privacy. My understanding is that even under the Emergency Management Act, police can only enter a DWELLING without a warrant or permission under the 'hot pursuit' clause. That means if they're following a law breaker and see him enter the home - or if they know someone is inside the home breaking the law - or if, for example they KNOW there IS SOMEONE INSIDE in need of medical attention, etc. UNLESS MY UNDERSTANDING IS WRONG POLICE HAD NO CAUSE TO ENTER THOSE DWELLINGS, LET ALONE SEARCH AND SEIZE GUNS. There was one homeowner on the news whose house wasn't even flooded. When he returned THE ONLY DAMAGE TO HIS HOUSE had been caused by police breaking in. In fact, he was alerted to his front door being broken by a pet rescue company that went to his house looking for (and finding) his cat (8 days after evacuation), who fed him and tried to fix the door. So the police entering these DWELLINGS (to look for people or PETS left behind, according to their much-vaunted pressers) had not bothered with the cat. They had however, broken into a locked closet, locating the gun safe. They didn't take those guns, however they left the broken closet door open and the front door open, so anyone walking in would immediately have seen the safe and taken the whole thing if they wanted. They left mucky footprints all over the carpet leading straight to the gun closet. So the home wasn't flooded but police wrecked the door, didn't help his cat, wrecked the closet door and left his gun safe exposed, all without permission. In fact, many many homes had their doors left unlockable after police entered, and many guns were taken from closets, not from the 'open'. It is the unwarranted searches as well as the seizures that are the problem. And again, cops are requiring things to get the guns back. Nothing should be required. If people got those guns before requirements for PAL, they should have been grand-fathered. Maybe they don't use the guns, they keep them for sentimental value? It's still their property. They rcmp should be disciplined for these 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

Yeah, they're called normal people. I am not joking. As for the police - they shot the dude's dog. If true, fuck 'em six ways from sunday. Wrong story. No dogs in this one. Try reading it, I've heard that helps. actually I had read it. On the other hand since they were using peppershots and he didn't die like the one in california, and that was the first part of the story, I had forgotten about the dog. But thanks for pointing that out. Nice of you. 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, they're called normal people. I am not joking. As for the police - they shot the dude's dog. If true, fuck 'em six ways from sunday. Wrong story. No dogs in this one. 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

what seems fair is they each get a million dollars and the cops go to jail for abuse and assault. 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

Oh I do apologise. You only said I had less right to an opinion than someone who has more money. Obviously that's totally hunky-dory. I didn't say that at all. I said Trump has the right to pull out his money if they don't listen to him. You also have the right to move if they don't listen to you. I guess we'll watch and see. 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

True. Guess TM shouldn't have doubled back and attacked Z without provocation. He wouldn't have gotten shot then... 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

A simple "can I help you" would have led to a very different outcome than "these assholes, they always get away" did. Don If Z said that to TM, that probably would have be rude, but he never said that to TM, so your statement is irrelevant. 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 am all for most people having guns on them, no matter the law. My right to life is not up for discussion. However when you have a gun (was it conceal carry?) you’re supposed to let things go as much as possible. When I am armed I am the biggest pussy you will ever meet. Because I know what I have and I know if I escalate the issue what might happen. So we the people who are armed should at all times avoid escalating the situation. Following a young man when you know you are armed is a huge no no. Let’s say he was going to steal some shit that’s not an action punishable by death. I think it was a bad move by Z man by my opinion. Z didn't go out that night planning to find someone he thought might be in commission of a crime. He wasn't on duty. Should he ignore it just because he happened to have his gun on him when he saw someone he thought suspicious? Or should he figure 'I can at least keep an eye on the guy to tell the cops where he went...' 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 think linebacker is a witness at the trial, and I really think you know better than that. What you said here is just dumb. 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 believe by definition a 'stalker' has to be persistently following and interfering in a person's normal activities. Following a person one time, in a place where that person normally wouldn't be (he was visiting) does not constitute stalking. 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

True. Do you have kids? A spouse? If your kid (or spouse) called you, after dark, and told you they were walking home and were being followed by a strange man, can you honestly say you would not be concerned? That you would tell your kid "there's no law against someone following you?" Or would you be alarmed, and go out to meet your kid and protect them from the threat? The argument that "just following someone" cannot reasonably be perceived as threatening is demonstrably bogus, IMHO. Again, as I said, following someone is not illegal. And while you are correct that sometimes the manner in which one follows someone can be threatening - as in your example where the guy obviously carried a weapon, or perhaps someone with knife in hand running after you - it does not necessarily make sense that ANY TIME SOMEONE IS FOLLOWED, it could be conceived of as threatening. And while you may be correct that Z could have de-escalated the situation, it is also quite possible that TM could have de-excalated the situation by not confronting Z or by saying he was staying at a certain person's home, etc. etc. As far as I know Z may have told TM the police were on their way, if he had the chance before TM hit him... And protecting your kids from a threat likely does not mean attacking a person they 'think' is following them. I do not necessarily think a neighbor watching out for the people on his street is wrong, expecially if there is a history of break-ins in the area. 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

It's not against the law to follow someone. It is against the law to threaten or to attack someone. We don't actually know that Z ever threatened or attacked TM - therefore he cannot be proven guilty unless there is someone else as a witness that can tell us. 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 never said Jakee didn't get to have an opinion on windmills. But so does Trump. And so do you. And so do I. If I'm not involved in britain, obviously the politicians there will probably not pay much attention to me, however, if I'm willing to invest a large amount of money there, they may. If I'm willing to invest and they don't consider my opinion, it is my right to withdraw my investment, subject to whatever penalty or escape clauses which may have been in the contract. I repeat, I never said Jakee didn't have a right to an opinion. But his is one of many. 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

That's not how it works here. Given your logic, since you haven't invested here, don't live here and haven't learned anything about it... where does your right to have an opinion come from? In actual fact, that's how it works everywhere. Look at the rock stars that moved their offices to the continent over taxes. Look at the economies in Spain and elsewhere. Look at the industries setting up in China and India. As for the opinion thing. That's the whole thing with you lefties - NOBODY has a right to an opinion except you - or maybe if someone else agrees with you, they can have one... 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 investing millions of pounds - but then, if you don't need the economic activity, feel free to buy him out... I probably have an awful lot more invested in the US than most people here. Does that make my opinion more relevant? ETA - quoting functionality seems broken. That would depend on what your investment is, what you disagree with here, and whether you're willing to do anything about it. Ultimately you (and Trump in the original post) have the ability to walk away and take whatever money you can get for your investments out. And that is perfectly justified. 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 investing millions of pounds - but then, if you don't need the economic activity, feel free to buy him out... And that gives him more right to make him opinions heard than someone who doesn't have millions of pounds*? And what about the economic activity involved in the wind farm? The investment in Scottish energy companies isn't important? * In reality, yes. Money does buys influence. But the right, democratically and morally? investment in wind power actually costs jobs to the economy, since the number of jobs created are very small, heavily toward the 3 year construction phase, and the increased costs of power cause businesses to close or move to cheaper power jurisdictions. Trumps resort would increase jobs in construction, maintenance and tourism for a much longer period than the supposed wind farm would. So the economic investment in wind farms is not really that meaningful. 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? It's my country, he's just visiting to play a game. And investing millions of pounds - but then, if you don't need the economic activity, feel free to buy him out... 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

It is deeply, deeply sad that you would assume material wealth is the only thing that an intellect should be used to gain. I hope that's not how you really think, and that your view of the world is not that shallow. I don't think he said it's the only thing. But I'll bet donald trump would laugh at you and others, just as much as you and they seem to despise him, and he would be at least just as justified in that. as far as I'm concerned he has as much if not more right to fight these wind turbines as anyone else has to support 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