Legalising heroin...

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Please explain how feral's social behaviour makes dogs attack? This isn't the first time I have asked you.

All though the facts are that most don't, some do. And we can't deny these people, or the whole lot of them the opportunity to reform.



1. I'm not saying euthenase all these dogs. I'm saying ban them.
2. Dogs and humans are different things. it's ok by me to euthenase a dog who has attacked but not a human. Just an opinion.
3. You can retrain a dog that has attacked. Once they taste blood, that's it, they are unstable. Fact.
4. A human can be retrained because we are more intelligent than dogs.


How do you explain the many times that these dogs that have attacked have come from good families?

But they are still responsible for innocent lives. You accuse me of having my cake?

I never said this. I said junkies who commit violent crime. get it right.

You have a point, but only that drug addiction is no excuse for actions. Often, criminals get a lighter sentence if they are junkies (which I don't agree with), but to suggest they always get a slap on the wrist is absurd.

Because they are. They are putting other lives at risk. Very selfish. But by your logic, these people should be euthenased.


True, but you haven't explained how this makes these dogs attack innocent victims. This is the third time I have asked.

1. Ferals' social behaviour - Ferals have an attitude against society in general, F@#$ authority, f@#$ the law etc etc.. they choose to live ' on the edge' and go about life intimidating people to make themselves feel big and important. The use of a pit bull, or rottweiler, for example, emphasises this ' tough' image. I have actually had a young couple live next door to me who had a Rottweiler when I was about 11... it was as soft as mud. Don't give me this crap about instinct. It's training. Get out in the suburbs and see for yourself, you ignorant fool.

2. Name on junkie who has reformed? As is common knowledge here , I used to live in an area of Melbourne well known for heroin addicts. Most, the vast majority, attended clinics and ' dry out' centres, but were back on it within weeks, as soon as they get in with their old crowd. Once a junkie, always a junkie.

3. Having grown up with dogs from being a very young child, I can authoritively say your comments on dogs are absolute rubbish. Some breeds of dog are far and away more intelligent than any human, let alone some low life who sticks needles in his or her arm. Again, I reiterate, ANY breed of dog can be trained to be a loving and gentle companion, and ANY breed of dog can be trained to be a vicious killer. Allow me to contend that if humans are more intelligent beings then why should we euthanase dogs and not humans? Wouldn't it be logical that humans being more intelligent should know better? More solid a reason for reintroduction of capital punishment in my view. And finally, you can't retrain a human that has violent tendencies. Once they have a pattern of violence, it's there for life. Fact. If it's not why are there so many recidivist criminals?

4. Very few dog attacks are by dogs from good families. Very few.

5. The odds of a drink driver killing innocent people are low. Its more likely they will write themselves off. Same goes for speeders. Just another example of brainwashing the sheep by softkok politicians desperate for revenue so they can balance the books and go to elections with a big surplus and fool the sheep into voting them back in again ( as in the Vic state election in 02 )

6. Don't get light sentences? Again, i think you need to come into the real world. Community based orders are the usual sentence given out.The view is that oppotunities for reform are minimised in jail. So the rest of society has to suffer. Community based ordesr in my view = a slap on the wrist. At the very least, they should be made to face the people they wrong, and have equivalent done to them, in cases of violence.

I'll wait for you to counter with another "Fullarton Hitler ' jibe.Oh and to suggest again I have no friends, don't get out much, am a very bitter man and a serial killer waiting to happen. Seems to be your answer to everything.

 

[TheGreatCoranzo]

Do you enjoy getting spanked repeatedly Fully Sour?

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by TheGreatCoranzo
Do you enjoy getting spanked repeatedly Fully Sour?

By intellectual short people such as you whose sole source or contribution is personal attack and insult with no valid contribution? I don't think so.

 

[TheGreatCoranzo]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
By intellectual short people such as you whose sole source or contribution is personal attack and insult with no valid contribution? I don't think so.

I'm glad you managed to contort one sentence into something befitting your own siege mentality mindset. Your combatants have you well and truly under the kosh.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by TheGreatCoranzo
I'm glad you managed to contort one sentence into something befitting your own siege mentality mindset. Your combatants have you well and truly under the kosh.

Whatever. Now contribute something relevant to the thread, or bugger off.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
You are really a lost cause. It's people like you who are the reason pensioners are barricaded in their own homes in fear, young single women fear social activities because of sexual harassment and drink spiking, etc, and society is in a general state of disarray. Your posts in this thread suggest you are quite happy to allow one of the most dangerous groups in society to continue unabated with their ILLEGAL activity and wreak havoc on society all because you ,like our politicians and the number of the population they have brainwashed with their mamby pamby milksop attitude, are too cowardly to face up to the reality and act.

This is all well and good, but why would we changed to system that doesn't work. Can you give any examples of where capital punishment and zero tolerance has worked?

Then, in direct contradiction, you espouse tough action against drink drivers ( minor offence )

The current punishment for drink drivers is quite apt.

You accuse others of trying to have it both ways, but you want to euthenase drug addicts because they might commit violent crime, but let drink drivers go free when there's no shortage of drink drivers causing death of innocents.

I note you live in Sydney, I'm guessing ( and if I'm wrong, I'll accept correction ) you are in Potts Point or Bondi or one of the other upmarket trendy suburbs where you are sheltered from bogans and ferals and life's harsh realities ,like me here in Fullarton in Adelaide. However, unlike you, I don't pretend what happens in the Elizabeths or Lonsdales of this world doesn't happen. You need a wake up call mate, and fast. Perhaps a visit to Cabramatta or Blacktown ( Again apologies if these are bad examples, my Sydney geography is abysmal ) might snap you out of your misguided huggy feely Utopian ideology.

If you'd read the post you gain an indication that I've been around a bit. Been to Cabra and Blacktown on many occasions. have known several junkies and the crimes they commit. There's no utopian ideolgy here mate, it's just that I'm nor going to rant and rave about a solution that has been tried many times before with little success.

 

[TheGreatCoranzo]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
Whatever. Now contribute something relevant to the thread, or bugger off.

No.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
This is all well and good, but why would we changed to system that doesn't work. Can you give any examples of where capital punishment and zero tolerance has worked?

The current punishment for drink drivers is quite apt.

You accuse others of trying to have it both ways, but you want to euthenase drug addicts because they might commit violent crime, but let drink drivers go free when there's no shortage of drink drivers causing death of innocents.

If you'd read the post you gain an indication that I've been around a bit. Been to Cabra and Blacktown on many occasions. have known several junkies and the crimes they commit. There's no utopian ideolgy here mate, it's just that I'm nor going to rant and rave about a solution that has been tried many times before with little success.

Okay, so we have an impasse. The softcok social conscience and glass jaw sensitivity anti discrimination policies in force over the last thirty or forty years have been a dismal failure also. All they have achieved is rampant crime rates, ubiquitous violence, fear for personal safety in the community and a legion of people who turn a blind eye because they've been brainwashed to accept it as the norm and that nothing can be done to stop it.
So what's the answer? How do you know the former policies don't work? Have you lived through them? Take a look at the older generations, they live their lives based around respect, decency, and consideration for others. This is proof enough for me to suggest their way was and would be better than the modern ' anything goes', no respect for anything or anyone mentality.

As for drink driving, well, I'm afraid we have another impasse. I don't see this as a major issue. Same with speeding. Perhaps if there were legitimate use of these laws, i.e, the idiots who get behind the wheel totally plastered get put off the road for life, or extended periods, whilst borderline offences such as .06 or thereabouts are disregarded or given caution, then I could accept it. The way the law and the penalties are structured, you can cop the same punishment for a legitimate mistake as for a flagrant abuse of the law. That is not fair. And before you argue the same applies to junkies, forget it. Heroin use is a CHOICE. They know they are doing wrong. A man taking his girlfriend for dinner and having a couple of wines has no way of accurately knowing his BAC. And why should he abstain from the wine? Wine, unlike heroin, is legal.
I will agree wholeheartedly with you on the drink driving issue when the laws are restructured so as the idiots who DO place other people in danger.. - the ones who drive when legless, or who drive 30kmh or so over the speed limit, are the ones who get the punishment, and the borderline offenders who get caught up in the current 'blanket over everyone' system are treated with common sense and at worse cautioned. But whilever Governments reap in huge sums of revenue from these petty offences, it's not going to happen that way, is it?

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
1. Ferals' social behaviour - Ferals have an attitude against society in general, F@#$ authority, f@#$ the law etc etc.. they choose to live ' on the edge' and go about life intimidating people to make themselves feel big and important. The use of a pit bull, or rottweiler, for example, emphasises this ' tough' image. I have actually had a young couple live next door to me who had a Rottweiler when I was about 11... it was as soft as mud. Don't give me this crap about instinct. It's training. Get out in the suburbs and see for yourself,

Are you saying that these dogs pick up this tough guy image from their owners? You saying training? What training? Specific training?, or do the dogs just pick it up from their masters? If there is specific training, please give us some examples.

you ignorant fool.

Champagne comedy.

2. Name on junkie who has reformed? As is common knowledge here , I used to live in an area of Melbourne well known for heroin addicts. Most, the vast majority, attended clinics and ' dry out' centres, but were back on it within weeks, as soon as they get in with their old crowd. Once a junkie, always a junkie.

I know of a few (personally).

Also:

Christiane F
Eric Clapton
Jimmy Page
Charlie Watts

Most don't get off it, but some do. You can't not offer them the chance at rehab and you certainly can't euthenase them.

3. Having grown up with dogs from being a very young child, I can authoritively say your comments on dogs are absolute rubbish. Some breeds of dog are far and away more intelligent than any human,

Do you write your own material because it's hilarious.

Again, I reiterate, ANY breed of dog can be trained to be a loving and gentle companion

But some of these dog breeds have a killer instinct. It's a part of their make up. Some of these dogs will go through a lifetime without attacking and unfortunately some will snap out of the blue when least expected.

Allow me to contend that if humans are more intelligent beings then why should we euthanase dogs and not humans?

Is that you Mantis? Have you and mantis hooked up already?

Wouldn't it be logical that humans being more intelligent should know better?

But you're saying humans are dumb for euthenasing dogs, but you want humans to euthenase humans.

Once again you contradivt your own logic.

And finally, you can't retrain a human that has violent tendencies. Once they have a pattern of violence, it's there for life. Fact.

No fact.

Is Chopper Read still violent?

If it's not why are there so many recidivist criminals?

Just because most criminals reoffend, doesn't mean they all do. because they don't.

4. Very few dog attacks are by dogs from good families. Very few.

But enough to make it worth while for these dog breeds to be banned from suburbia.

5. The odds of a drink driver killing innocent people are low. Its more likely they will write themselves off. Same goes for speeders. Just another example of brainwashing the sheep by softkok politicians desperate for revenue so they can balance the books and go to elections with a big surplus and fool the sheep into voting them back in again ( as in the Vic state election in 02 )

The odds on a junkie killing people are low too.

6. Don't get light sentences? Again, i think you need to come into the real world. Community based orders are the usual sentence given out.

This is a huge generalisation. Junkies who commit violent crime might get a slight discount because many judges view heroin addiction as a mitigating circumstance (which I heavily disagree with), but to suggest they always get communities orders is ridiculous.

Seems you read the papers and only take note of the anomallies in our system (because that's what papers and ACA etc like to print to cause max outrage) and interpret it as the norm. You couldn't be any more wrong.

The view is that oppotunities for reform are minimised in jail.

And that's society's problem as most think jail is only about punishment rather than a balance of punishment and rehab.

I'll wait for you to counter with another "Fullarton Hitler ' jibe.Oh and to suggest again I have no friends, don't get out much, am a very bitter man and a serial killer waiting to happen. Seems to be your answer to everything.

I actually answer everything that you propose, and add a few jibes in for the sake of it. If the jibes upset you so much that it ends up all you can focus on, then that's your problem softty-boy.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Are you saying that these dogs pick up this tough guy image from their owners? You saying training? What training? Specific training?, or do the dogs just pick it up from their masters? If there is specific training, please give us some examples.

Champagne comedy.

I know of a few (personally).

Also:

Christiane F
Eric Clapton
Jimmy Page
Charlie Watts

Most don't get off it, but some do. You can't not offer them the chance at rehab and you certainly can't euthenase them.

Do you write your own material because it's hilarious.

But some of these dog breeds have a killer instinct. It's a part of their make up. Some of these dogs will go through a lifetime without attacking and unfortunately some will snap out of the blue when least expected.

Is that you Mantis? Have you and mantis hooked up already?

But you're saying humans are dumb for euthenasing dogs, but you want humans to euthenase humans.

Once again you contradivt your own logic.

No fact.

Is Chopper Read still violent?

Just because most criminals reoffend, doesn't mean they all do. because they don't.

The odds on a junkie killing people are low too.

This is a huge generalisation. Junkies who commit violent crime might get a slight discount because many judges view heroin addiction as a mitigating circumstance (which I heavily disagree with), but to suggest they always get communities orders is ridiculous.

Seems you read the papers and only take note of the anomallies in our system (because that's what papers and ACA etc like to print to cause max outrage) and interpret it as the norm. You couldn't be any more wrong.

And that's society's problem as most think jail is only about punishment rather than a balance of punishment and rehab.

I actually answer everything that you propose, and add a few jibes in for the sake of it. If the jibes upset you so much that it ends up all you can focus on, then that's your problem softty-boy.

You calling me softy boy is a real hoot. A real hoot.The jibes actually just show how low you will stoop when your argument is lost. PS Re: Chooper Read - let's let out Ivan Milat, Julian Knight and Martin Bryant then.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
Okay, so we have an impasse. The softcok social conscience and glass jaw sensitivity anti discrimination policies in force over the last thirty or forty years have been a dismal failure also.

But we haven't had to go and murder thousands of humans.

So what's the answer? How do you know the former policies don't work? Have you lived through them?

No, but I have given you examples of places where they have tried it without results.

Take a look at the older generations, they live their lives based around respect, decency, and consideration for others. This is proof enough for me to suggest their way was and would be better than the modern ' anything goes', no respect for anything or anyone mentality.

- Older generations lived in much smaller communities
- Older generations were much more simple so to get accross this respect thing was much easier
- Older generations were less educated and could use things such as religion as a scare factor
- Older society never had issues such as addictive drugs
- Older generation ideals do not necessarily work in modern society.

And that's assuming that the older generation was any better. After all, there has always been crime and violence. You forget that we are a penal colony.

I don't see this as a major issue (drink driving).

So you admit to contradicting yourself?

Junkies sometimes kill people, drink drivers sometimes kill people, but you want junkies (regardless whether they have committed crime) euthenased, but not drink drivers?

The way the law and the penalties are structured, you can cop the same punishment for a legitimate mistake as for a flagrant abuse of the law. That is not fair.

The line has to be drawn somewhere - a black line, not a grey one.

BTW - a person with no prior conction with a reading of .06 will get a lesser punishment than a person with no prior conviction with a reading of .13.

And before you argue the same applies to junkies, forget it. Heroin use is a CHOICE.

Drink driving is a choice.

They know they are doing wrong. A man taking his girlfriend for dinner and having a couple of wines has no way of accurately knowing his BAC. And why should he abstain from the wine? Wine, unlike heroin, is legal.

Wine is legal, but drink driving is ILLEGAL. If you've taken a girl out to dinner and had a few and are not sure - take a cab, but don't put other people's lives at risk.

In saying that, this is hardly going to happen to you though as you have a problem with women and sworn off them for life.

I will agree wholeheartedly with you on the drink driving issue when the laws are restructured so as the idiots who DO place other people in danger.. - the ones who drive when legless, or who drive 30kmh or so over the speed limit, are the ones who get the punishment, and the borderline offenders who get caught up in the current 'blanket over everyone' system are treated with common sense and at worse cautioned.

Like I said, a distinct black line has to be drawn - you cross it, you are guilty. People with higher blodd alcohol levels and people with prior dd convictions will be penalised heavier than people without. Seems fair to me.

Let me guess - you have been caught for drink driving and can't handle the fact that you are a convicted criminal when many junkies are much worse than you and are still breathing. Boo hoo life is so unfair.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
You calling me softy boy is a real hoot. A real hoot.The jibes actually just show how low you will stoop when your argument is lost.

Well it's not the first time I've seen this happen. You know you're in a spot of bother so you the 'you're playing the man' excuse as a get out clause.

You seem to forgot you have called me a softkok and other things on numerous occasions. How bout you address the issues I proposed to you. Or do you admit you have been whipped?

PS Re: Chooper Read - let's let out Ivan Milat, Julian Knight and Martin Bryant then.

But you said humans can't be rehabilitated and I gave you an example of one that had. The fact that most aren't holds no weight. If some people have been rehabilitated, then it proves that humans do have the ability.

You seem to make generalisations (which although some are correct) and then go the step further and a pply this generalisation as a blanket.

And you have the nerve to accuse others of lacking intelligence?

 

[Diego]

Go Bunsen Go!

 

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Frosties_Flank
Go Bunsen Go!

President of the Bunsen Fan Club?

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Thrawn
President of the Bunsen Fan Club?

So do you agree that heroin addicts should be euthenased, or would agreeing with me hurt your ego too much?

 

[skipper kelly]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
So do you agree that heroin addicts should be euthenased

Why would you even argue this point. It is utter stupidity.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by skipper kelly
Why would you even argue this point. It is utter stupidity.

Becasue it brings fullertonPower's comic talents to the fore.

 

[skipper kelly]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Becasue it brings fullertonPower's comic talents to the fore.

If they bring in the stupidity rule, FP gets 4 weeks for this thread.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
But we haven't had to go and murder thousands of humans.

No, but I have given you examples of places where they have tried it without results.


- Older generations lived in much smaller communities
- Older generations were much more simple so to get accross this respect thing was much easier
- Older generations were less educated and could use things such as religion as a scare factor
- Older society never had issues such as addictive drugs
- Older generation ideals do not necessarily work in modern society.

And that's assuming that the older generation was any better. After all, there has always been crime and violence. You forget that we are a penal colony.

So you admit to contradicting yourself?

Junkies sometimes kill people, drink drivers sometimes kill people, but you want junkies (regardless whether they have committed crime) euthenased, but not drink drivers?

The line has to be drawn somewhere - a black line, not a grey one.

BTW - a person with no prior conction with a reading of .06 will get a lesser punishment than a person with no prior conviction with a reading of .13.

Drink driving is a choice.

Wine is legal, but drink driving is ILLEGAL. If you've taken a girl out to dinner and had a few and are not sure - take a cab, but don't put other people's lives at risk.

In saying that, this is hardly going to happen to you though as you have a problem with women and sworn off them for life.

Like I said, a distinct black line has to be drawn - you cross it, you are guilty. People with higher blodd alcohol levels and people with prior dd convictions will be penalised heavier than people without. Seems fair to me.

Let me guess - you have been caught for drink driving and can't handle the fact that you are a convicted criminal when many junkies are much worse than you and are still breathing. Boo hoo life is so unfair.

What an absolute pile of bollocks.

1. But we haven't had to go and murder thousands of humans.

Not murdered, but endangered entire communities with a soft, kid glove approach to violence.

.2. No, but I have given you examples of places where they have tried it without results.

tried what? A slightly less kid glove approach?

3. Older generations lived in much smaller communities
- Older generations were much more simple so to get accross this respect thing was much easier
- Older generations were less educated and could use things such as religion as a scare factor
- Older society never had issues such as addictive drugs
- Older generation ideals do not necessarily work in modern society.

And that's assuming that the older generation was any better. After all, there has always been crime and violence. You forget that we are a penal colony.

Ignoring the issue. Avoiding the facts. And South Australia wasn't a penal colony.

4.
Junkies sometimes kill people, drink drivers sometimes kill people, but you want junkies (regardless whether they have committed crime) euthenased, but not drink drivers?

Not worthy of response. Avoiding the issue ( again )

5.The line has to be drawn somewhere - a black line, not a grey one.

BTW - a person with no prior conction with a reading of .06 will get a lesser punishment than a person with no prior conviction with a reading of .13.

Big deal. he still gets branded the same. And you are in fact wrong, he still loses his licence immediately.

6. Wine is legal, but drink driving is ILLEGAL. If you've taken a girl out to dinner and had a few and are not sure - take a cab, but don't put other people's lives at risk.

In saying that, this is hardly going to happen to you though as you have a problem with women and sworn off them for life

Again you resort to personal insult and a completely inaccurate assumption , one you made yourself for reasons known only to you.
And again you avoid the issue.

7. Like I said, a distinct black line has to be drawn - you cross it, you are guilty. People with higher blodd alcohol levels and people with prior dd convictions will be penalised heavier than people without. Seems fair to me.

Wrong. Please research the facts.

8. Let me guess - you have been caught for drink driving and can't handle the fact that you are a convicted criminal when many junkies are much worse than you and are still breathing. Boo hoo life is so unfair.

Wrong. Typical of a narrow minded fool to make such an assumption, like the one above.Does it escape you I might just consider things on a scale of priorities , or is that too logical for you?.

 

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
So do you agree that heroin addicts should be euthenased, or would agreeing with me hurt your ego too much?

Please don't involve me in your discussion, as I have no interest in it. I'm just sitting back and watching you and Fullatron go at each other.

My ego is none of your concern. I just had to point out that Frosties here seems to be enjoying your work, hence the fan club remark. And why not? It's fair enough.

Keep up the good work. Don't overheat.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Well it's not the first time I've seen this happen. You know you're in a spot of bother so you the 'you're playing the man' excuse as a get out clause.

You seem to forgot you have called me a softkok and other things on numerous occasions. How bout you address the issues I proposed to you. Or do you admit you have been whipped?

But you said humans can't be rehabilitated and I gave you an example of one that had. The fact that most aren't holds no weight. If some people have been rehabilitated, then it proves that humans do have the ability.

You seem to make generalisations (which although some are correct) and then go the step further and a pply this generalisation as a blanket.

And you have the nerve to accuse others of lacking intelligence?

1. Readily admit to referring to you in that manner, because you are one. You might also note I have never stepped across the line you have in your previous post and do quite regiularly.
Your posts in this thread indicate you are just another brainwashed sheep, another automaton in the cowardly politicians' new world order of no dicrimination, no tough decisions and sweeping the facts under the carpet.The fact you do not agree with my proposed fixes does not entitile you to suggest a/ that I do not address your issues and b/ I have been whipped. You have a difference of opinion, that's all. But not the maturity to respect another's.

2. Read is not reformed. Read is a thug. And Read is insulting the intelligence of ordinary Australians by making money out of his crimes with his literary works.
I don't make generalisations, i face facts and speak as is without the rose coloured glasses. Try it sometime.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Fullarton Power
You might also note I have never stepped across the line you have in your previous post and do quite regiularly.

Who said your line is the correct line and mine isn't? Oh that's right, you think that your morals are be all-end all and the govt should force your morals down everybody's throat.

Your posts in this thread indicate you are just another brainwashed sheep, another automaton in the cowardly politicians' new world order of no dicrimination, no tough decisions and sweeping the facts under the carpet.

I've had this accusations from a few people. It couldn't be further from the truth.

The fact you do not agree with my proposed fixes does not entitile you to suggest a/ that I do not address your issues and b/ I have been whipped. You have a difference of opinion, that's all.

Well why can't you answer how these dogs attack if they are from yobbo households rather than respectible households. All you have said so far is that yobbos have a bad attituade and only have a dog to intimidate people and uphold their image. This doesn't explain how this 'attitude' is transfered to the dog. I've asked you about 4 times.

But not the maturity to respect another's.

Let's be realistic here. If you think someone's opinion is so far fetched and beyond the scope of logical reason, then off course you aren't going to respect. I do in fact respect menay others' opinions, but when they are as ridiculous as yours, no.

And let's also remember you don't respect my opinion either. You call me a softkok and a brainwashed sheep. I don't think you have any right to accuse me of getting personal. If you dish it out then you have to accept it back. If you think i've been worse, you'd be correct, but just remember your 'line' isn't necessarily the correct one.

2. Read is not reformed.

Care to name is last conviction? Or proof of crime that he got away with?

I don't make generalisations, i face facts and speak as is without the rose coloured glasses. Try it sometime.

There's nothing wrong with generalisations as long as you are aware that they are just that - generalisations. The problem is that you interpret these generalisations as fact.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Who said your line is the correct line and mine isn't? Oh that's right, you think that your morals are be all-end all and the govt should force your morals down everybody's throat.

The line to which I refer is the one you constantly trot about about my supposed problem with the opposite gender. That, as far as I'm concerned, is stepping over the line. I might refer to you as a softus or a sheep, but I don't stoop that low.

I've had this accusations from a few people. It couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm sorry mate but your posts indicate otherwise. You come across to me as someone who does not have the ability to think for himself, someone who swallows whatever rhetorical garbage the social conscience lobby and bleeding hearts collective spew out without looking at the other side of it and seeing the merits of an alternative view.

Well why can't you answer how these dogs attack if they are from yobbo households rather than respectible households. All you have said so far is that yobbos have a bad attituade and only have a dog to intimidate people and uphold their image. This doesn't explain how this 'attitude' is transfered to the dog. I've asked you about 4 times.


There's nothing to answer. These types train their dogs to be ' rough and tough ' to fit their image. I assume you are an intelligent person; you debate well on the whole, but you do seem somewhat ignorant to the obvious at times.


Let's be realistic here. If you think someone's opinion is so far fetched and beyond the scope of logical reason, then off course you aren't going to respect. I do in fact respect menay others' opinions, but when they are as ridiculous as yours, no.
And let's also remember you don't respect my opinion either. You call me a softkok and a brainwashed sheep. I don't think you have any right to accuse me of getting personal. If you dish it out then you have to accept it back. If you think i've been worse, you'd be correct, but just remember your 'line' isn't necessarily the correct one.

Seriously mate, when someone wages a war against you for the type of music you like to listen to, it is pretty hard to respect their views, and take them seriously, and not regard them simply as a muck raker.
I don't think my opinions are far fetched or ridiculous. I have a strong attitude towards violence. I think violence, random violence especially, is far too prevalent in society today and not enough is being done to curb it. People's enjoyment of life is compromised as a result.


Care to name is last conviction? Or proof of crime that he got away with?

See above. A proven violent person; has no respect from me and I solemnly believe that a person who has violent tendencies cannot be reformed.


There's nothing wrong with generalisations as long as you are aware that they are just that - generalisations. The problem is that you interpret these generalisations as fact.

Not at all. I'm just , unlike the majority of people these days, not scared to say as I see it, not blinded or intimidated by political correctness.

 

[demon_dave]

The ignorance on this post is laughable, people screaming for addicts to be locked up or left on desert islands is fascism at its worst. I work as an Drug & Alcohol Clinician in a detox in Melbourne and I can assure you most of these people don't do it for the winning lifestyle. If you really looked into it and didn't get your information from redneck shock jocks or from a current government that just doesn't care, you might be able to see this for yourself. I suggest 'fullertonpower' and the rest of the nazi's actually go out and see for yourself the degradation addicts go through in their lives.
These people don't choose to be addicts but usually have some mental illness or are recovering from some kind of abuse as children, or are children of addicts who know no better. The ignorance is laughable , the arrogance is sickening.

 

[Fullarton Power]

Originally posted by demon_dave
The ignorance on this post is laughable, people screaming for addicts to be locked up or left on desert islands is fascism at its worst. I work as an Drug & Alcohol Clinician in a detox in Melbourne and I can assure you most of these people don't do it for the winning lifestyle. If you really looked into it and didn't get your information from redneck shock jocks or from a current government that just doesn't care, you might be able to see this for yourself. I suggest 'fullertonpower' and the rest of the nazi's actually go out and see for yourself the degradation addicts go through in their lives.
These people don't choose to be addicts but usually have some mental illness or are recovering from some kind of abuse as children, or are children of addicts who know no better. The ignorance is laughable , the arrogance is sickening.

And the softcokery in this post is disgusting. Read the thread, I lived in one of Melbourne's worst heroin afflicted suburbs for years and saw first hand the facts. Stop making limp wristed excuses for a lack of self discipline.