No, she isn't. She's right.
Two Children Killed In School Shooting
- Thread starter oldman
- Start date
KSav
Senior Member
- Location
- North Dakota
I wanted to quickly follow up with this: My son did indeed get pulled over within a week, and he told me he'd been respectful to the officer and even stammered. I'd clearly overdone it. I tried not to laugh, but I told him he didn't need to get anxious and stammer, just be respectful. I told him about how, more than once, a law enforcement officer has walked up to the car only to be ambushed and shot. A local officer in our small city was killed just a few years ago that way.
I clarified what I'd meant, and all was OK after that.
Your sense of freedom in Canada is subjective and not universally shared by all Canadians. Ezra Levant, for example, was dragged through Canada’s Orwellian "human rights" system for publishing the Danish cartoons. Jordan Peterson pushed back hard against compelled speech under Bill C-16. And Mark Steyn was hauled before tribunals for things he wrote.
These are Canadian voices saying that freedom in Canada has very real limits. So while you may feel freer, others in your own country have experienced the opposite. That contrast proves my point that, unlike Canada, the U.S. has a Bill of Rights that places free expression and self-defense beyond the reach of shifting government preferences.
Thank you, Sunny, for your detailed and well-supported contribution to the debate. It's truly enlightening.
How about some dates?
BTW I know what I have read about western men in Thailand.
Last edited:
Yes, we’re really hot, but I don’t think my family would approve of me dating you. But thanks for asking!
Babs2u
Senior Member
Free expression for some but not all where retaliation is rampant.
Retaliation happens everywhere, sometimes from governments, sometimes from mobs. The difference is that in the U.S.A. retaliation can’t be codified into law the same way it is in Europe, Canada, or China. A writer in Germany or France can be fined or jailed because the government decides their words are "unacceptable". In Canada, a bureaucratic tribunal can drag someone through years of hearings simply for publishing cartoons. In China, you vanish if you criticize the Party.
In the Unite States, by contrast, the First Amendment forbids the government from punishing speech. Yes, individuals or groups may react harshly, but that’s social retaliation, not state power. The key point is that the Constitution prevents government retaliation. That’s the real guarantee of freedom, even if it doesn’t shield anyone from public criticism or private backlash.
We need to quit giving these people their 15 minutes of fame. It just encourages the next crazy one.
All the news coverage just feeds their need for attention. And eggs on the next crazy who craves the spotlight.
JMO. I think it should be a crime to show their face or print their name or any identifying info.
We need to make them totally anonymous.
All the news coverage just feeds their need for attention. And eggs on the next crazy who craves the spotlight.
JMO. I think it should be a crime to show their face or print their name or any identifying info.
We need to make them totally anonymous.
So you don't know the dates, OK. BTW Did you buy yourself a 12 year old in Thailand?
GOOD GRIEF! I’m really not interested in your fantasies about being my little slave girl. I suggest you share those with a trained professional.
I think the opposite. Call them what they are. A killer or murderer. In this case Robin Westman is a child killer or Robin Westman is a cowardly pos child killer.
Using the term 'shooter' is only partially accurate and puts an aura or mystic around the heinous act along with making it seem like a game to these cowardly p'sos.
Yes that was one thing the shooter of Australia's worst mass shooting said - he wanted to be famous as the biggest one in Australia.
The site where it occurred at Port Arthur has been made into a memorial garden and the plaque lists the victims by name but the shooter only as ' a crazed shooter' with no name.
to that end, i am deliberately not mentioning his name either.
Gun reforms were brought in after that, ( in 1996) and no such event has occurred here since
There was one a few years ago in New Zealand, in 2019. shooter was Australian but couldn't get the gun to do it here so he did so in NZ.
Within a month the NZ parliament voted 119 to 1 to implement gun reforms similar to Australia's
You think way too highly of yourself!
You seem to have illusions of grandeur!
Better to have illusions of grandeur than your delusions of relevance.
You are a very nasty person so like another poster here I will say goodbye to you.
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
The latest threat to Australians is coming from 3D printed firearms. They are not covered by existing legislation.
You went down into the gutter with your "12-year-old" smear, and when I slapped it back, you switched to the old "you’re nasty, I’m leaving" routine to save face. Bottom-line, any objective reader can see who the nasty one is here...........and it’s not me.
You say the latest threat to Australians is from 3D-printed firearms, but here’s the irony, law-abiding citizens remain disarmed while criminals will ignore whatever laws you pass. And with China throwing its weight around in the region, wouldn’t it make more sense to have an armed citizenry skilled in the use of firearms, instead of a population forced to rely entirely on the government to protect them? As an American, I can’t help but notice that this leaves Australians not pulling their weight as allies. In fact, it’s outright irresponsible to depend on the U.S. to carry the full burden of defense while your own population is deliberately kept unarmed.
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
Now you've done it. I cannot ignore this post.
#1. Law abiding citizens are not disarmed, as you put it. We are within the law to buy firearms provided we have a good reason to have them. Farmers, for example, need firearms and they have guns. What they do not have are military style weapons.
Another reason for wanting a gun is membership of a gun club. Allowed.
As far as I am concerned, the last thing we need is an armed citizenry. What we need is good strategic planning and intelligent diplomacy, and that is what we rely on. It is not like we haven't been at war before.
We have our own militias, referred to as the CMF (Citizens Military Forces) and they train to defend the country at short notice should the regular army need more soldiers.
#2. You insult Australians when you suggest that we are not pulling our weight as allies. Australia has joined with US forces in just about every war since the Korean war. We have aligned our military equipment with the US to be more effective in joint operations. We engage in joint training exercises at sea with the US navy. We have contracted to buy new nuclear powered subs and are paying for them now even though there is some chance that they will not be delivered to us. The money we have sent is to be used to build them in US by expanding production.
I await your sincere apology.
George1959
Senior Member
Thank you for the link to the article.
The statements of the shooter (some prefer 'killer') are such contradictory that I think there is an underlying mental insanity, not to mention the smoking of weed, which may have led to a psychosis.
It is true, that some people regret transitioning later. But they don't kill people.
For instance in Germany it was necessary to live in the role of the other gender for one year (full-time real-life experience) with permanent supervision by a experienced psychologist in the field of gender transitioning. Then the person could begin hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and later (sexual reassignment) surgery.
I doubt that Robin had a psychologist to talk about problems and doubts.
I hope that such cases don't do harm to how people look upon the TG community in general.
All good advice.
Well since you brought up what names we call them, I always wonder why you and many others always call them "cowards." Murderous, heartless, evil, vile and many other negative adjectives would come to my mind before "cowardly," which isn't even that bad a thing. Shooter is a correct term and I certainly don't see anything mystical about it. He is the perpetrator of a crime and he was the person shooting the gun.
Although this mass-murderer is dead and isn't enjoying his fame, I agree with you. Several of the most recent school shooters have been fans of the previous ones. Robin Westman was obsessed with them.
No apology is due, disagreement is not an insult. You took offense where none was intended. My point is simply this: laws that restrict firearms ownership disarm ordinary citizens far more effectively than they disarm criminals or hostile powers. Farmers with a few rifles, or hobbyists at gun clubs, are not the same as a citizenry broadly skilled in the use of arms. That distinction matters.
As for alliances, yes, Australia has fought alongside the U.S., no one denies that. But my criticism isn’t about the valor of Australian soldiers, it’s about policy. If your entire defense posture is, "leave it to the government and hope for the best", then when a major threat arises, America shoulders the ultimate burden. That is the imbalance I’m pointing out.
And regarding militias, the CMF you mention has been folded into the regular reserves for decades. It’s not the same thing as an armed citizenry. My argument remains: strategic planning and diplomacy are good, but they fail quickly without the deterrent of an empowered, armed population.