Thread: New Updated Arms Code 2017

Not those words. But surreptitious, subversive, harmful, wrong, bad, ... cover it pretty nicely. Can you not read Sidney? They are all terms other than illegal that are very good matches.

I can read fine Gadget, can u not understand...?

Words can be used anywhere, and the meaning might even pass the standard of the ill-informed, but that doesn't make it correct or even appropriate.

Its a discussion involving legality, using the word in that context implies a legal meaning, so the use of the word needs to be considered in that light. The logic of that seems to escape you.

However, even your softer and less rigorous meanings all require illegality, being wrong, doing evil, being subvertive (which is illegal) being bad whatever that means....... none of which has actually happened that you can establish. If you are going to define bad or wrong with just your opinion that don't count, I am guessing that most the wider community won't have a problem with more restrictive gun laws.

Not only has that not happened, a conspiracy requires an agreement to be all or some of the above, and to form an agreement intentionally.... and you haven't established that either.

So it just doesn't apply, whether you are capable of understanding it or not.... the outcomes do not fit the standard that even your definitions specify and there is no agreement and no intention that you can establish.

The only thing I am learning out of this is that clearly my communication skills are letting me down.... I obviously have to work on that..

Its more polite to assume that than the other...

Originally Posted by Sidney

I can read fine Gadget, can u not understand...?

Words can be used anywhere, and the meaning might even pass the standard of the ill-informed, but that doesn't make it correct or even appropriate.

Its a discussion involving legality, using the word in that context implies a legal meaning, so the use of the word needs to be considered in that light. The logic of that seems to escape you.

However, even your softer and less rigorous meanings all require illegality, being wrong, doing evil, being subvertive (which is illegal) being bad whatever that means....... none of which has actually happened that you can establish. If you are going to define bad or wrong with just your opinion that don't count, I am guessing that most the wider community won't have a problem with more restrictive gun laws.

Not only has that not happened, a conspiracy requires an agreement to be all or some of the above, and to form an agreement intentionally.... and you haven't established that either.

So it just doesn't apply, whether you are capable of understanding it or not.... the outcomes do not fit the standard that even your definitions specify and there is no agreement and no intention that you can establish.

The only thing I am learning out of this is that clearly my communication skills are letting me down.... I obviously have to work on that..

Its more polite to assume that than the other...

Again, no legal implication was implied, nor need it be. Once you grasp that simple concept it all fits. That's what all those other words next to illegal mean in the dictionary quotes. I never stated a conspiracy to commit X crime, which would imply illegality. I simply said that they met in a close session to implement other groups which does constitute conspiracy. If you cannot grasp that simple fact there is no point arguing until you can.