miked10270

...... To leave more space for the NOT WORK SAFE Boobie posts? Opinions & contributions please. Mike. PS: Somebody do a poll? Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

You're serious, aren't you? Reimind me where your explanation of the huge disparity between gun deaths in our countries is................. ...Rummages in litter for casually discarded newspaper records, dating back 250 years...... Go to bed, you're getting fractious again. Think of all those lovely dreams where you're standing over the baddie. Night night. Eh!??? Why am I being sent to bed??? Anyway... Who made YOU Daddy!!!?? And I wouldn't be dreaming of bad guys... Bad Girls, REALLY BAD GIRLS maybe. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Jawohl!!! Mike Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Nige is doing just fine. He's still wearing the padded bras 'cos he can't get hormone therapy on socialised medicine. He's also complaining about the ludicrous price of size 11 stillettos. Mind you, he did get a nice long blonde wig last week. Oh... Sorry... Thought you were talking about Nige the Politician. Whoops! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Amen. In fairness, The article does state "Britain" and carries a quote from a senior government minister, who could be assumed to speak for HM Government. Isn't it more mature to respond to the content of the post and not the style? Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHH....!!!!!!!!! Don't you just love the current crop of British Politicians. No incident is so terrible that they're unable to try and grab a bit of soundbite attention from the media. The Dunblane Massacre was terrible. But I believe that the politicians, realising that something had to BE SEEN to be done to prevent a repeat, took the illogical course on the basis that it gave maximum publicity for them!! The police officer who last renewed Thomas Hamilton's firearms licence objected to it's renewal and recommended it be rescinded as he believed Hamilton was no longer a fit and proper person to hold firearms. This from an admittedly junior officer, but the officer who HAD PERSONAL CONTACT with Hamilton! He was overrruled by his supervisors. If you look at Lord Cullen's recommendations from the public enquiry; http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/scottish/dunblane/dun12.htm He DID NOT recommend banning handguns!!! This was a decision taken by POLITICIANS for POLITICAL REASONS. IMHO, the current UK Firearms Legislation is too restrictive, while the US standpoint is too relaxed. I do believe in registration and licensing of firearms holders PURELY as a record of who owns what firearms, and to restrict the open sale of firearms and ammunition to unsuitable persons. Beyond that, a person who is not found to be "Unsuitable" (such as the recently released armed robber, etc...) will be entitled to hold a firearms certificate without further restriction except that he will notify the firearms licensing dept of details of any firearms he acquires or disposes of, and he can only dispose of firearms to another certificate holder or registered dealer. The idea is to positively vet people who hold guns. If they pass the vetting, then they should be able to hold what they want. Makes sense to me!? Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Incidentally, the "Arnie Amendment" probably wouldn't work all that well for Arnie: http://www.chortler.com/1512poll.html For a more relevant poll! and the current results (if you can't be bothered to vote... http://vote.sparklit.com/poll.spark?pollID=874753 As you can clearly see, Pamela Anderson is in a strong position... Perhaps because of her policies on inflation? Also, Jim Carrey would be an excellent choice - he casn already impersonate most of the past Presidents anyway. Still... Let the "election" commence. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

No gun? Do your superiors not like you or something?? You know damn fine it's no gun! One nice thing about a virtually unarmed society is that it can use a virtually unarmed police service! But we're not going to get into that debate again, are we? ....Other than for me to say that somewhere between the firearms laws of the US and the firearms laws of the UK there HAS to be a reasonable compromise - somewhere around Bermuda probably. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Naah... This is getting grossly unfair!! I'M A COP!!!!!!!! It's my job to piss dudes off! I'm supposed to look menacing!! I'm paid to go about in the middle of the night!!! My uniform is almost all black!!!! Notebook! Cellphone! Radio! Baton! CS spray! Handcuffs! This is enough to give a man of my advancing years high blood pressure & stress!!!!! Then again... Perhaps I should then be grateful to PJ for shooting me if only to fix my high blood pressure caused by the stress of him going to shoot me... Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

What PJ said. Anyway, who's talking about "Efficient" usage. Surely it's "Safe and Responsible" usage we're talking about here. Are the overwhelming majority of legal gun owners responsible and competent? Sane and safe? HELL YES!!!! Mike. Edited to add an example: Me & PJ have disagreed very violently on a number of issues... But I KNOW that if I stood in front of him he wouldn't shoot me. (Err... You wouldn't? Would you? PJ? Mate?). Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Just a couple of political cartoons for amusement... Enjoy, Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Hi Prof, The State (unfortunately?) must fulfil the requirements of the people as a whole. This encompasses everyone from the ultra-libertarian / nihilist, who wishes for absolutely no state involvement, and in fact, no state, all the way through to the Marxist / Trotskyite who seeks full centralisation for the benefit of the state and therefore it's people. So, somewhere between the "Mountain Man" and "Cuba" there must be a compromise which serves the percieved greatest interests of the greatest numbers of people. The politicians who most closely straddle this compromise position will become dominant. Thus we see the emergence of bi-partisan politics and the cynicism towards them. After all, in order to be acceptable to the greatest number of people, those political parties will perforce be very similar in outlook. Unfortunately, there then emerges a voter apathy where many voters will only vote for the large party which is slightly closer to their desires rather than waste their vote!! on the "marginal" candidate who DOES reflect their views. In effect, how many people voted "Bush" rather than "Badnarik" because they didn't want the right wing vote to be split and perhaps allow the left wing candidate to win? Similarly, how many people voted "Kerry" instead of "Nader"? In effect, the STATE as it currently exists is the one demanded by the majority over time through the free(?) election of their representatives. "The People" have voted for representatives who have built up the state as it is. As such, it reflects the wishes of the voters, and if the people wish change, then their recourse is to vote for those offering change, and, if they are dissatisfied with their representative's performance and actions, then their recourse is to dismiss him by voting against him at election to replace him with a candidate who reflects their views. That is Democracy. And "The State" continues to be "The will of the people, collectively expressed". Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

I suspect that YOU are significantly more guilty of that than JuaneSky. Most, almost all of us here are brave enough and sufficiently secure not only in our convictions but also in the fundamental reasonableness of our peers to identify ourselves. Even to form friendships regardless of differences in opinion on specific issues. Regarding "The Enemy is the State"! IMHO you view the state like a disturbed adolescent views his parents. You accept the protection and the support the state gives as a right, but object to contributing, and further demanding that the state, having given you this protection and support, should then allow you to behave as you wish. Like an unruly adolescent, you demand anarchy & nihilism from a warm house and a full belly. Surely this is a singularly immature position? Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

My perception of Americans DOES arise in part from the posters on this forum. I believe that we have proof here that throughout the world People are People. Simply by posting their opinions for discussion & dissection in such an open and broad forum, even the most opinionated poster is showing a degree of tolerance and a willingness to listen to the opinions of others. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

OK. I voted to amend, BUT NOT FOR ARNIE!!!!! My argument would be that ANY person who is naturalised as a US citizen, AND has lived in the US for the majority (over 50%) of his life and not less than 18 years, SHOULD be eligible to hold ANY political office in what has bocome his country. Thus, eligibility for the office of President would no longer be restricted to an accident of birth. I believe that this is in the spirit of the original Constitution which in the early years of the United States did in fact provide for "Americans by Choice" to become President. This loss of eligibility has only disappeared due to passage of time and I believe that this was not the intentions of the original draftees of the constitution. So yeah... Amend. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[B]"I do not prescribe to your collectivist ideals, and they are truly not what America is founded upon."[/B] "We the peopleof the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America..." ??????????????? "I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." ??????????????????????? So... America was founded upon........... Therefore, are you right? Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Hi Free Man, You stated you wanted discussion about your post and I offered it. I have proved that within the philosophy of your original post your claim that I know I'm right." is patently fallacious and fundamentally flawed. QED. While your original statement can be viewed as acceptable within a completely libertarian attitude and society, within the broader and existent society, "The State" is accepted as "The common will of the lieges thus expressed". What does this have to do with Roman Law in particular, when it also holds true for Common Law, Statute Law, & Civil Law? I should apologise, but these patently fallacious arguments frankly bore me. Bye. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

I understand that the manufacturers of the voting machines have categorically ststed that tampering would be completely impossible.

Och no, it wisnae ever the frozen haggis toss that'd hae yon sassenachs a rinnin' awa' wi the rinnin doon the legs... it wis the threat o' ane o' Mither McKelvie's haggis bustin near them. Mike. PS: Hi Jeffrey, "WTF?!?!! What the hell has been newly invented that makes toy guns look any more like real guns than they have for decades?" Dare I say.... The Media? It's not a technological advance per se. But we HAVE moved from the time when "entertainment" was in the style of a John Ford Western, or an Ealing Film, Where the general morality was that evil does not prevail to things like Pulp Fiction and Reservoir dogs, etc... Where violence is in some way cool. So, perversely, those very people who'd tell us that "Bush is Bad", seem to lose their principles when it comes to playing a part that glorifies evil allowing it to triumph or at least survive. More realistic, but less moral. The news media has also moved from print and limited outside broadcast, to the ability to flash the uncut and grisly scenes around the world in seconds. So yeah, guns ARE more realistic at least in part because everyone is far more aware of what various guns look like! Personally, the only media I've seen recently where guns were prominent but the morality was good was a TV Series called "Firefly".... Which was axed!! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Hmmm... Why is Kennedy readint through The Scotsman? It won't be because he's looking for the pics of the big muscley men in the Kilt adverts. No. That's not the reason. It wouldn't be, would it? Naaah. That couldn't be the reason. But yeah, it's right. Little boys do love to play with toy guns, so let them. Older boys will play with airguns. so let them (under supervision). Even older boys will hopefully join cadet organisations and shoot .22" and later full bore under supervision (and this is good). Thus the emerging adult doesn't see guns as some sort of "forbidden fruit", and is prepared should he need to use a gun as a tool in his adult life. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

OK. I'll poke the pointy stick at the troll... This post is completely unassailable proof that the war against Iraq is legitimate! Paragraph 8 (War & Peace) clearly states that: "It is always wrong to initiate force. Just because you have more money and resources, that does not mean you are right. You should never be able to coerce others just because you have bigger bombs. What gives one sovereign entity the right to enforce its views on another sovereign entity? It is nothing more than arrogance to think that because you are a superpower, others should have to follow your rules." In effect no-one should attack no-one. OK so far? But Paragraph 7 (Legality) categorically states: "The State can never be a victim since the State is not a person. It is impossible to commit a crime against something which does not exist, so there could never be any crimes suggesting that the State has been harmed as in, “The State vs. ________.” " As such, in the Iraq war the United States (defined as No-one) has attacked, invaded and conquered the Iraqi State (also defined as No-One). Therefore, No-One has made war on No-one. Therefore the war has not taken place. This holds true against all modern international wars. As such, Hitler was unjustly vilified because "No-One" attempted to subjurgate Eurpoe and kill 6 million Jews! Incidentally, The American War of Independence was a vicious act of American Terrorism... Because "No-One" was suppressing them. I don't just think your declaration is idiotic and confused... I know it is Mike. PS: Plenty more of the same in this piece of narcissistic drivel. Please THINK, then write. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

We believe you. No, we do. Really. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

"How many people do you know that have been mugged/robbed/etc?" Professionally, quite a few in Scotland over the years, and in none of those cases would they have been "saved" by having a knife. Personally, none. "There are some that will not meekly submit to violence, and there are some that will. Sheepdogs and sheep, so to speak." None of the 7 Border Collies (sheepdogs) I've owned over the years have ever carried a knife. I did ask the 3 I've got at the moment if they wanted a knife to carry, but they didn't seem all that interested. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

Err... Why not? "Trial by Jury of Your Peers" dates back to the days of small villages and poor transportation. The "Jury" was made up of people who KNEW you (and I doubt that many of the verdicts had much to do with the evidence). Today, the "Jury" consists of people who are eitther too stupid to get out of Jury Service, or people who are motivated by their sense of civic duty. Either way, "experts" are NOT WANTED. It seems that the whole system is geared to making sure the jury are the most stupid people in the court! They frequently can't tell the difference between evidence and "showboating" by the prosecution or the defence. Would YOU trust your future to a group of people specially selected for their lack of knowledge? Me neither. So yeah... Tribunal (or septunal) of judges does make a lot more sense than a jury. People who KNOW the rules of evidence, and have the mental discipline to assess the evidence and disregard the histrionics. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

That's a common misconception. Everyone knows it's the Belgians. Precisely. EVERYONE knows that the Belgians effectively control France. All the Belgians have to do nowadays is threaten to switch their traffic lights to GREEN for South-West travel through the Ardennes and France just does whatever they want! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.