SkyDekker

And he said those that were in the boat with him. What is it you said to somebody else? Oh yeah, re-read for comprehension....

Ahh okay, so you more or less made it up so you would think others would perceive you to be better. That makes a lot of sense.

And he was there because of the outrage over a blowjob. The whole country was in an uproar over a blowjob. It was quite funny to the rest of the world though.

Are you trying to imply that you have said something usefull up to this point? I guess it has been usefull to show true character

When is your girlfriend coming online again to tell all of us you have such a big dick? Every time I read posts from you I think to myself: No wonder Nortel stocks cratered.....

I font it very interesting that an avatar with a butt in a thongs gets that reponse, while the avatar of a 300 lb man sitting naked in front of his computer gets no response. I think I can speak for the majority of people on dz.com and state that the naked fat guy is a lot more offensive.

Actually, I like Bush too. He is making my trip to Vegas in May cheaper and cheaper.

That video clearly shows that american kids would be much better off if theyw ere allowed to carry guns to school. That way they could defend themselves against a trained individual.

And Bush is a convicted criminal, convicted in a court of law. That doesn't seem to stop any adoration for him from you. Personally I think driving drunk is a bit more serious than lieing about a blowjob. But hey, we all have our priorities....you like to fight against blowjobs, I like to fight against drunk driving....

I sent the CNN article to my uncle since he has massive diving experience in south-east asia as the owner of http://www.fantasea.net/ This is the answer he gave me:

Why? Cause you are somehow better or more important than he is?

we are down to semantics, a true sign that the real argument has already been lost.

I don't understand at all why the Hamilton police does not just hand the weapons to a museum. But then if the original owner was too stupid to realize he could make some money with hem..... Funny enough the new conservative government is vowing to stop the canadian gun registry, but the association of police chiefs is opposing it, saying the registry is very usefull in their day to day work.

Yeah but all politicians lie, that is a given and nobody really cares. Well unless the lie is about a blowjob, then it becomes really serious.

I don't have any problem with the money going to the victim. Int his case it wouldn't be stolen money so you can give it back to anybody. It would in all likelihood be money obtained in the drug trade. i.e. if we pay the victim a hefty sum we get 10 years less. If you don't agree to this we will not pay the money and take our chances in court. The part I have a problem with is money from criminal activity indirectly being used to lower sentences through a plea bargain.

A couple of years ago there was what seemed a botched assassination attempt via (I think a drive by) shooting at a cafe. In innocent woman gets hit in the back and ends up living, but completely paralized. Fast forward a couple of years. Several people have been arrested in this case, at least one has strong ties to organized crime (in this case Hells Angels, but it really isn't pertinent). Court proceedings start. Now, news is coming out that a plea deal might be in the works. As part of this plea deal, which includes reduced sentences for the perpetrators, the victim will get $2.5 million. Nobody involved is willing to say where that money is coming from. In my mind this is getting very close to using criminally obtained money to pay for a lighter sentence. Eventhough I think it is great that the victim is getting money under a clause in canadian law that allows a judge to order payments to victims (though rarely used, cause usually the criminals don't have any money), i do have some objections specially when it is relatively clear that the money is the proceeds of criminal activity and it is part of a plea bargain. I am wondering what other people's opinion is on this.

This is an interesting point, and I agree with you. The question becomes, why did the officer not arrest her?

I don't pity people, but I think an exception might be in order.

More attention, more money for testing in countries in which it otherwise would not be done?

Well, that is quite easy really. When it comes to violence kids know what they are doing, when it comes to sex, they obviously have no clue. Just look at american entertainment. Violence is abundent, but god forbid a boobie makes it on tv.

Great, please define "adult crime"

Funny how you justify to yourself the beef is fine. Wouldn't want to come across as a pansy vegetarian now would you. I would give your statement some validity if you were forthe banning of all animal killings for fur and meat and other products. However, you pick and chose those you dislike, which really is the epitomy of hypocracy.

There was lots of chest beating going on in these forums when clips were shown of "insurgents" getting blown to pieces from a helicopter. See, showing video of killing and of dead bodies are only cool if you are the one doing the killing. If it is the other side, well then it is immoral and really should not be tolerated.

***Still it puzzles my mind how somebody could look at a defenseless animal, shoot it and get pleasure out of it. In that sense, I will hold firm that people who hunt by choice and not by necessity are assholes. *** So because you don't understand it, they are assholes? If I don't understand you, by your logic, what would that make you?

This just shows you really have no clue what you are talking about. No wonder Nortel tanked. You wouldn't happen to work in the finance or accounting department would you?