Attachment 70571Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibo
Printable View
Attachment 70571Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibo
:thumbsup:
Sorry for the language but shit man
Gibo, will you be happier when I can walk again and not be stuck behind the keyboard? I know I will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibo
Yes :D
Paula has done reasonably well?
So well, Maca, I can't really believe she is a politician.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maca49
Damn that sounds like an ad, "You know you're socking in it, right?"
I think she had some pretty good help. The independent group she sought out was a political master stroke, allowed her time and appropriateness of the issues (and evaluate backlash) before coming up with the ministerial guidance.
For us it allowed the different factions in police assn and HQ to show there true colours. And gave us a opportunity to find our voice.
Well done- but let's all keep a weather eye. People on the other side haven't been crowbarred out of their positions of pseudo power yet...
Just need to be aware that this episode is not quite completed yet. To quote from the message sent out to SSANZ members -
"Remember before any of the recommendations become law there will be a further round of consultation as any new Bill proceeds through the Select Committee stage".
So emails to MPs on the topic should still continue especially with September looming.
So, guys, what kind of "conspiracy" are "we" all planing to make things better??? So far everything "i" read is everyone against everyone, everyone is right on their views but nowhere to see "anyone" to combine "forces"(experiences) to come up with some kind of "agreement" that will make things "better"… what our "society class" need is union not disagreements…
Lets put the "ego" aside and work together, lets don't "worry" about the "secret meetings" they have but lets make our views me seen and or heard!
Cheers.
Mac
oh sorry, I must have missed the bit in the dictionary that said I should give all due consideration to what you think....Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibo
so just below this text is a picture of me giving all due consideration.... can u see the look on my face?
If you want to have any sort of impact, how about not using language that is inflammatory or ruins our credibility...Quote:
Originally Posted by PERRISCICABA
You want to talk to people that make laws? quit the emotional exageration and learn what is meant by the words you use, because you see, they understand what conspiracy means and they know what is implied when you use words like that. Their next assumption is that they are talking to a bunch of hicks.
Choose the words that are appropriate to the subject matter and secondly apropriate to your audience....
Learn what you don't know... thats always a good start.. I don't know much about electronics, but then again I never claimed to...
You people need all the friends you can get in this area, its only going to get worse... but hey what do I know?... perhaps you could consult an engineer?
It's all a big conspiracy after all :D
Like I said in the other thread, this result shows the power of social media.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maca49
It certainly does. Puts voters in a more visible spot and allows points of view to be expressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
great job actually....
she's impressive, shows an ability to cut throught the BS and willingness to accept the scruitiny that comes with...
might pay to try and keep her in the job....
Thats a reasonable outcome, maybe, especially as its pre election. And to Paula Bennett, thank you for at least listening to what we had to say. NOW as for that other BS in the NZPA Press release, I aint got the time to go through it cos as far as I'm concerned its been written by a blatant liar, but how much of those statistics that hes rolled out are actually true? Or is it just another bunch of porkies fed to Joe public by a consumate liar?
Sidney - I agree with what you point out here, it makes sense and is reasonable; but it must get awfully cold and lonely up there in your ivory tower...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
Your opinion is the same as ours until it is tested in court (albeit there is some precedent yadayadayada about interpretation and all that crap).
People are upset about the current approach, I'm sure you get this - but acting like Systolic dishing out your thoughts discounts your opinion (it may be right - but as you have acknowledged - your communication needs work if people are to avoid discounting it as pedantic "wankery").
Back on topic - and climbing down from my own ivory tower - don't be a dick; thanks for the free legal advice (I'm assuming your qualified and not a student pushing the boundaries...):cool:
We've been compared to the NRA thanks to being an active community and thanks to social media.Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetman
For anyone who missed Cahill on the radio today:
Police: Rejection of firearms advice will mean 'more people being shot'
Being compared to the NRA isn't a bad thing. They are very effective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
Very true, he also claimed that we're not willing to give an inch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy
He's probably right, doing that has only got us in the shitfest we're in today.
I wonder if they finally figured out that when backed up against the wall you've immediately removed one of the flight or fight response options.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
haven't given any legal advice fella.. just basic communication skills...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickoli
you can discount my opinion as much as you want, provided of course you can provide a real argument to do so. Thats the system fella..
in so far as pedantic wankery is concerned, you could assume that smarter people might know when to not engage with experts in it.....
Imagine if the police association tried that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
he conveniently doesnt state that this is a result of UNLAWFUL police actions and extreme demands by them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
Oh Sidney. Did you really? Did you stoop to cheap inuendo, along with petty attempts to name call/put down? Along with total failure at mind reading! That is indeed a measure of the man that completely runs out of valid argument. Very poor loosing form chap.
For the last time, there need not be any illegality, so your threshold does not apply. I have put so much straight in front of you that you choose to ignore but everyone else can see.
You will make a great lawyer.
Hope this reads Ok, I'm laughing so much my eyes are watering and I can barely see.
lemme see... you can't rebutt any of my argument, people you talk to is your "resource" to form opinion, you clearly can't work out that words used in dictionary definitions are not singular, perscripitive and limiting, but are contextual, descriptive and compound in application and I don't have any valid argument?
Wee new flash... saying that I don't have an argument doesn't make it so. Endless repetition of that doesn't either.. it don't help you..
why do you think that u won something... ? U have no chance of winning this argument, cause you don't get it, by your own admission....
and by the way......
I only use my "loosing form" for getting my shoes off at night...
Innuendo is just a mexican suposititory, and because you seem pretty good at self administration, I'll leave that for you. kinda fitting, trophy for the "winner".....
:D
by the way calling you an engineer isn't an insult is it?
No matter how hard you try to hammer the large square peg is will not fit in the small round hole. I have provided you with ample references to show that in fact the word conspiracy simple means 'a plan' in the big wide world outside of your narrow area of study. It does not have to have be hammered into your very narrow world, where in the context it was presented it stands quite happily. If you do not wish to accept that then you have admitted defeat. The choice of whether you accept it is entirely up to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
And innuendo like this is the adult form of snivelling. It is not becoming of you. Please pick yourself up, blow your nose, open the curtains and look at the big wide world out there. Put your books down more often and get out there and enjoy it.Quote:
in so far as pedantic wankery is concerned, you could assume that smarter people might know when to not engage with experts in it.....
By the way you only think that it requires an expert in the legal field because that is where you are trying to shift it. But that is not where it belongs. Accept it.
You two should get a room:fighting::fighting:
More people being shot he reckons because of the rejected recommendations... I don't know about that, unless they're planning to shoot us FAL holders for not being bullied in to this!
As for Chris Cahills other comments on the radio interview, who are all these "hunters & duck hunters" he keeps referring too?? And to add he dreams up that a "majority" of us law abiding licence owners would of accepted at least half of the recommendations from the report.
no, not if you get it right... you quite entitled to get it right, if you keep getting it right eventually you become an expert, if you don't you should probably learn to rely on one more often. Arguing that a meaning of a word, that use isn't appropriate in the context that it is being can be used or that doesn't meet the expections of those reading it in that context, is simply misapplication. Nobody said it couldn't be used in different ways in more applicable contexts.Quote:
By the way you only think that it requires an expert in the legal field because that is where you are trying to shift it. But that is not where it belongs. Accept it.
But you are not off to a good start so far. what lawyers are trained to do is to interpret and apply, words, words in context and the intention of where and how they are used. Its a general level of competance that has application in business, education, politics and in all other areas of society . Short of specific study of language, lawyers are one of the few groups that are trained in this area. Narrow area of study, what in the opinion of an engineer?? youre fricken hilarious...
:D
this sort of illustrates your comphrehension problems...
let me spell this one out for you...Quote:
in so far as pedantic wankery is concerned, you could assume that smarter people might know when to not engage with experts in it.....
And innuendo like this is the adult form of snivelling. It is not becoming of you. Please pick yourself up, blow your nose, open the curtains and look at the big wide world out there. Put your books down more often and get out there and enjoy it.
I am a pedantic wanker, I consider myself an expert in it. If you were smart you would avoid tangling with the pedantic wanker.....
its called self deprecation fella... and its clear to me why you don't get this argument, you can't work stuff out...
by the way, you are still tangling with me...:D
The fulcrum of your entire argument it that the word 'conspiracy' which means the noun 'plan' must be only used in a legal context. It was proved that it stood alone outside that context, and I'd already checked before first posting it. Your fulcrum to leverage it out of the wider usage into your little corner of expertise failed. It's over.
10+ pages of this and still counting... :sick:
Its just cahill lying again. He did state that he reads some of these forums and i suspect Kiwi gun blog. Accuses us of NRA style lobbying and refusing to budge. Well cahill you lying prick YOU created this situation. YOU lied and deceived, YOU publicly advocated for unaccepted and ineffective (and sometimes changes to what we already have you idiot) changes toward firearms. And then when we, the law abiding, publicly reject your changes and the associated breach of our rights, such as privacy and property rights, You attempt to deamonize us. YOU created this monster cahill. We have had enough, and we are resisting the unjustified proposals by you, and unlawful actions by nz police.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
YOU have attempted to portray us as extremists and unfit for society, when ironically, it is YOUR lack of integrity that is displaying this. We will resist your absurd demands, and continue to show you up for the liar that you are.
The funny thing is next time Cahill says something I can't see Paula Bennett listening very hard. He has done himself (or the Police) no favours by his criticism.
Nope - I always said it required that in this application, I have always said that the context determines the interpretation.....Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetman
provide the quote where I said that it must only be used in a legal context for all applications...
you're an arbitary wee chap aren't you... "I've won, its over, must only."... :D
Especially regarding the "gun lobby"... as opposed to what, the police lobby?Quote:
Originally Posted by stug
Ryan, we are meant to be meek and humble. Make sure that you always have a cap with you so that you can wring if in Cahill's presence, just as a show of sub-servitude.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan
well it would be good practice for some of us ...:D
I believe he may very well have been referring to KGB when he spoke about "blogs" however, when he referred to the "gun lobby" I am confident he was talking about FOUNZ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danger Mouse
He went on to say that "the gun lobby" represents less than 10,000 of the 240,000 firearm owners, this lines up with the amount of "Likes" FOUNZ has at almost 8000.
The most absurd thing about it is that FOUNZ hasn't lobbied anyone. FOUNZ makes no political donations, FOUNZ collects zero dollars from anyone to even do so.
All FOUNZ has done is use the power of social media to mobilize thousands of law abiding firearm owners to take part in the democratic process that has been used against them over and over again to further restrict their rights and freedoms.
This is a win because of everyone that took the time and effort to mail the minister and other MP's, plain a simple. We all did this together.
Yip all FOUNZ did was unite license holders. Cahill lied again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
