This arsehole should be locked up for life!

[rmcgrice]

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,15468469%
255E1702,00.html

'Fatal' driver caused second smash
By David Dixon
31may05

AN unlicensed driver who killed three friends in a high-speed smash on
his 21st birthday caused another serious accident while on bail, a New
South Wales court has been told.

Matthew Allen Cameron, now 23, has pleaded guilty in the NSW District
Court, sitting in Orange, to three counts of manslaughter.

The charges followed the deaths of Daniel John Tuxford, 20, Joshua Kevin
Klower, 20, and Jennifer Maree Rae, 18, all of Parkes, on March 21, 2004
at Parkes, in Central West NSW.

He also pleaded guilty to a charge of dangerous driving causing grievous
bodily harm to Cassandra Maree Gibson, who suffered a broken arm in the
accident, and to a charge of being an unlicensed driver.

As he faced a pre-sentencing hearing today, Cameron vowed never to drive
again.

The hearing before Judge Colin Charteris was told that Cameron, while on
bail over the accident, drove through a give way sign and collided with
another vehicle, injuring the occupants, last August 13.

Again he was unlicensed and under the influence of alcohol, the court was
told.

Judge Charteris heard that Cameron had alcohol, amphetamines and
marijuana in his blood at the time of the fatal accident.

The offences required a "substantial period of imprisonment", the judge
said.

"This is an enormous tragedy for the family members of these victims, and
also for this community ... an absolute tragedy," Judge Charteris said.

The court was told the high-powered car driven by Cameron and owned by Mr
Tuxford, was travelling at speeds between 106km/h and 116km/h when it
struck a pole on the outskirts of Parkes.

The car split in two, the front section carrying Cameron and Gibson for a
further 80m.

"I am still unable to understand how our society allows young men to
drive around in V8 cars," Judge Charteris said.

Cameron told the court that drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder and anti-depressants prescribed to him as a child had led to
amphetamine, marijuana and alcohol abuse by his late teens.

He had been drinking with his family at a hotel on the night of the
tragedy, he said.

He said his first recollection of the accident was waking up in hospital
with fractured ribs, a punctured lung, broken hip, and concussion.

Cameron said he had become suicidal between the first and second
accidents.

"I didn't know how to handle the situation," he told the court.

"It's just something I can't get over, I can't forgive myself for.

"If I could go back and take my life for theirs, I would, I think it
every day.

"I can't change what happened, but I'll never drive a car again."

Crown Prosecutor David Brack, reading from a psychologist's report,
suggested to Cameron that he had exaggerated his amphetamine abuse.

Judge Charteris will sentence Cameron tomorrow.

[Scotty]

Why bother spend $120k a year to house this animal? Id supply the .22 round
to eliminate the problem at its sourse, the DNA chain.


"rmcgrice" <mcgrice@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9667C65F5261Dnofuse@129.250.170.88...
> http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,15468469%
> 255E1702,00.html
>
> 'Fatal' driver caused second smash
> By David Dixon
> 31may05
>
> AN unlicensed driver who killed three friends in a high-speed smash on
> his 21st birthday caused another serious accident while on bail, a New
> South Wales court has been told.
>
> Matthew Allen Cameron, now 23, has pleaded guilty in the NSW District
> Court, sitting in Orange, to three counts of manslaughter.
>
> The charges followed the deaths of Daniel John Tuxford, 20, Joshua Kevin
> Klower, 20, and Jennifer Maree Rae, 18, all of Parkes, on March 21, 2004
> at Parkes, in Central West NSW.
>
> He also pleaded guilty to a charge of dangerous driving causing grievous
> bodily harm to Cassandra Maree Gibson, who suffered a broken arm in the
> accident, and to a charge of being an unlicensed driver.
>
> As he faced a pre-sentencing hearing today, Cameron vowed never to drive
> again.
>
> The hearing before Judge Colin Charteris was told that Cameron, while on
> bail over the accident, drove through a give way sign and collided with
> another vehicle, injuring the occupants, last August 13.
>
> Again he was unlicensed and under the influence of alcohol, the court was
> told.
>
> Judge Charteris heard that Cameron had alcohol, amphetamines and
> marijuana in his blood at the time of the fatal accident.
>
> The offences required a "substantial period of imprisonment", the judge
> said.
>
> "This is an enormous tragedy for the family members of these victims, and
> also for this community ... an absolute tragedy," Judge Charteris said.
>
> The court was told the high-powered car driven by Cameron and owned by Mr
> Tuxford, was travelling at speeds between 106km/h and 116km/h when it
> struck a pole on the outskirts of Parkes.
>
> The car split in two, the front section carrying Cameron and Gibson for a
> further 80m.
>
> "I am still unable to understand how our society allows young men to
> drive around in V8 cars," Judge Charteris said.
>
> Cameron told the court that drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity
> disorder and anti-depressants prescribed to him as a child had led to
> amphetamine, marijuana and alcohol abuse by his late teens.
>
> He had been drinking with his family at a hotel on the night of the
> tragedy, he said.
>
> He said his first recollection of the accident was waking up in hospital
> with fractured ribs, a punctured lung, broken hip, and concussion.
>
> Cameron said he had become suicidal between the first and second
> accidents.
>
> "I didn't know how to handle the situation," he told the court.
>
> "It's just something I can't get over, I can't forgive myself for.
>
> "If I could go back and take my life for theirs, I would, I think it
> every day.
>
> "I can't change what happened, but I'll never drive a car again."
>
> Crown Prosecutor David Brack, reading from a psychologist's report,
> suggested to Cameron that he had exaggerated his amphetamine abuse.
>
> Judge Charteris will sentence Cameron tomorrow.

[girl-sat]

Its a Government baby,Born and bread by the government to do just
that,Some people are just not ment to be educated and regulated by a
clause.
He is a product of the Australian government and its the governments
job to keep him under control now,its all about insurance for those
that beleive he could not be helped in any circumstance,and want the
country just the way it is,or live for the machine
world(electricity,phones,water,doctors,etc.)
Psychologically he should have been made to fight for a living and
life,but obviously grewup under government institutions and in cities
with public facilities,chuck him were he belongs were governments don't
exist,he would have never tried any of what he did,He never had a
chance to look after himself as the Australian Government has done so
all his life and now is going to continue doing so.

[jackbadger]

"girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> May 31 wrote

>He never had a
>chance to look after himself as the Australian >Government has done so
>all his life and now is going to continue doing so.

Easy to forget this side. Don't know anything about this specific case,
but the system can really screw with the under-privaleaged, and Joe Public
is then sickeningly quick to say something like 'he has no-one to blame but
himself'.

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 08:05:23 -0400, jackbadger wrote:

> "girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> May 31 wrote
>
>>He never had a
>>chance to look after himself as the Australian >Government has done so
>>all his life and now is going to continue doing so.
>
> Easy to forget this side. Don't know anything about this specific case,
> but the system can really screw with the under-privaleaged, and Joe Public
> is then sickeningly quick to say something like 'he has no-one to blame but
> himself'.

GovCo policies and connivance with those with some - any control of
that characters life landed the community with the problem.
GovCo gets to live with it.
At community expense, of course.

The ADHD line (AND FFS antidepressants) is an inspired gag - but
simply proves GovCo attempts to control behaviour with Drug Company
connivance (read corruption) is a bad joke. Natch, the money
difference between running institutions and life-skills programs for
the (hopefully) temporarily deranged and the cost to the community of
the drugs that have been stuffed into the villain of the little piece
is what?


I also note that Charteris J. is undoubtedly a half-wit, with the V8
Car rave.
What part of under the influence of "...." is so hard to understand?
The car is not material to the offence, just a means to an end, is
all.
At least half the wit was called into play to *not* 'call for' a
curfew - must have seen enough cases like this one to convince that
getting pissed and driving isn't all that much different to the type
that isn't afraid of the forces of Law and Order to disobeying a
curfew and getting pissed and driving.

Fuck the pubs, the courts, the quacks, the drug companies and all who
sail in them.

--
Toby.
More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One
path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
The other, to total extinction.
Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly. - Woody Allen
(1935- )

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 08:05:23 -0400, jackbadger wrote:

> "girl-sat" <jjbruce@gmail.com> May 31 wrote
>
>>He never had a
>>chance to look after himself as the Australian >Government has done so
>>all his life and now is going to continue doing so.
>
> Easy to forget this side. Don't know anything about this specific case,
> but the system can really screw with the under-privaleaged, and Joe Public
> is then sickeningly quick to say something like 'he has no-one to blame but
> himself'.

GovCo policies and connivance with those with some - any control of
that characters life landed the community with the problem.
GovCo gets to live with it.
At community expense, of course.

The ADHD line (AND FFS antidepressants) is an inspired gag - but
simply proves GovCo attempts to control behaviour with Drug Company
connivance (read corruption) is a bad joke. Natch, the money
difference between running institutions and life-skills programs for
the (hopefully) temporarily deranged and the cost to the community of
the drugs that have been stuffed into the villain of the little piece
is what?


I also note that Charteris J. is undoubtedly a half-wit, given the V8
Car rave.
What part of under the influence of "...." is so hard to understand?
The car is not material to the offence, just a means to an end, is
all.
At least that half the wit was called into play to *not* 'call for' a
curfew - must have seen enough cases like this one to convince that
getting pissed and driving isn't all that much different to the type
that isn't afraid of the forces of Law and Order to disobeying a
curfew and getting pissed and driving.

Fuck the pubs, the courts, the quack factories, the drug companies and
all who sail in them.

--
Toby.
More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One
path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
The other, to total extinction.
Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly. - Woody Allen
(1935- )

[Michael C]

"jackbadger" <castle56@keepitcar.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c433f9672fb370d76c0bea5ccf31fb63@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
> Easy to forget this side. Don't know anything about this specific case,
> but the system can really screw with the under-privaleaged, and Joe Public
> is then sickeningly quick to say something like 'he has no-one to blame
> but
> himself'.

I at least partly agree with this. I often wonder what would have happened
to me if I was brought up under adverse conditions. It's very easy for
someone with a reasonable upbringing to sit back and criticise.

Michael

[John McKenzie]

rmcgrice wrote:
>
> As he faced a pre-sentencing hearing today, Cameron vowed never to drive
> again.

I like how our legal system has got him to the point that he thinks he
should still have a say in whether he drives!

I read this article online (yesterday I think) and was disgusted.

--
John McKenzie

tosspam@aol.com abuse@aol.com abuse@yahoo.com abuse@hotmail.com
abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com abuse@earthlink.com fraudinfo@psinet.com
sweep.day@accc.gov.au uce@ftc.gov admin@loopback $LOGIN@localhost
$LOGNAME@localhost $USER@localhost $USER@$HOST -h1024@localhost
root@mailloop.com president@whitehouse.gov vice.president@whitehouse.gov
abuse@iprimus.com.au abuse@cia.gov abuse@fbi.gov abuse@asio.gov.au
abuse@federalpolice.gov.au

[John McKenzie]

Michael C wrote:
>
> "jackbadger" <castle56@keepitcar.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c433f9672fb370d76c0bea5ccf31fb63@localhost.ta lkaboutautos.com...
> > Easy to forget this side. Don't know anything about this specific case,
> > but the system can really screw with the under-privaleaged, and Joe Public
> > is then sickeningly quick to say something like 'he has no-one to blame
> > but
> > himself'.
>
> I at least partly agree with this. I often wonder what would have happened
> to me if I was brought up under adverse conditions.

Allow me to answer. It's bullshit. I'll put my upbringing (or lack
thereof) and the violence I was subjected to up against anyones, and I
don't go around taking it out on anyone else, or making a complete cunt
of myself.

If you really want I'll detail some of it in email. I should point out
too that the main person responsible for it was buried as a hero by the
pieces of shit around them that would rather let someone never have the
truth come out than admit they facilitated and even covered up some of
it. As such it's a thorn in my side every fucking day.

And I don't go out doing anything remotely like this.

>It's very easy for
> someone with a reasonable upbringing to sit back and criticise.

And it's too easy to fall victim to the scamming of sociopaths who milk
the compassion of others for their own selfish gain.


--
John McKenzie

tosspam@aol.com abuse@aol.com abuse@yahoo.com abuse@hotmail.com
abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com abuse@earthlink.com fraudinfo@psinet.com
sweep.day@accc.gov.au uce@ftc.gov admin@loopback $LOGIN@localhost
$LOGNAME@localhost $USER@localhost $USER@$HOST -h1024@localhost
root@mailloop.com president@whitehouse.gov vice.president@whitehouse.gov
abuse@iprimus.com.au abuse@cia.gov abuse@fbi.gov abuse@asio.gov.au
abuse@federalpolice.gov.au

[rmcgrice]

John McKenzie <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in news:429D4067.3086
@alphalink.com.au:

> rmcgrice wrote:
>>
>> As he faced a pre-sentencing hearing today, Cameron vowed never to drive
>> again.
>
> I like how our legal system has got him to the point that he thinks he
> should still have a say in whether he drives!
>
> I read this article online (yesterday I think) and was disgusted.
>

It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for anyone
else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(

Regards,
Ron

[John McKenzie]

rmcgrice wrote:
>
> John McKenzie <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in news:429D4067.3086
> @alphalink.com.au:
>
> > rmcgrice wrote:
> >>
> >> As he faced a pre-sentencing hearing today, Cameron vowed never to drive
> >> again.
> >
> > I like how our legal system has got him to the point that he thinks he
> > should still have a say in whether he drives!
> >
> > I read this article online (yesterday I think) and was disgusted.
> >
>
> It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for anyone
> else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
> era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(

I wouldn't bet on it Ron. I don't think (believe it or not) we are
changing as much as we are changing the _way we express ourselves_.

Allow me to explain (as otherwise it looks like John has been on the
crack pipe). I've long held a theory that humans aren't for the most
part driven by a sense of right and wrong (some are for sure, and I
arrogantly put myself in that place) . I believe were are motivated by a
few things.

First there's the basic choice between doing what is 'right' (i.e.
benefits humanity I guess) vs doing what will benefit ourselves the
most.

Work out where someone sits in that priority spread and you can predict
their behaviour fairly well. The worst of the lot are those who realise
they can most benefit from 'appearing' to be doing what is for the
common good or right. And as much as I am left wing when it comes to
public education, health care and aged car (and I make marx look like he
was the uncredited brother of the more famous group than a serious
political innovator) I readily concede that a great deal of left wing
proponents are nothing more than failed (or temporarily racked with
guilt to the point of embarking on a wank mock crusade) capitalists.

Then of course there is my more 'baser' view of humanity. We never do
what we think is right by choice. By choice we do anything and
everything that benefits us that we think we can get away with.

In the last few decades we haven't had a depression or a war (at least
war in the sense that the whole country is behind it, a very major
difference as anyone would concede) and people have got slacker in
slacker, in what they object to. As such arseholes can get away with
more. 45 yrs ago, if a bunch of people from any subculture went out and
commited gang rapes, there would have been a damn good chance none of
them would have survived to face a trial (someone could joke that they
wouldn't be here in the first place due to racist immigration policy of
the day, but that's not my words). People wouldn't do other sorts of
shit, as too many would be all too reminded of what happens when a
society is out of control, and would have (half motivated by a sense of
justice, and half self preservation as to what happens if you let it go
unchecked) put a stop to it earlier.

I also think that the progression of Australian population (there's
always the 'country' but more and more white collar work is the norm) so
that there's less tangible rural roots means that not many grow up in a
farm environment. The sense of life and death there, it's natural part
in it is far more maturely and less neurotically handled. In the city
people are far more (like 5-10x more) likely to want a relative to be
kept alive on life support in a near vegetative state whereas country
people have a more realistic approach. As such we have tended to move
toward a different perspective on the taking of life, both as self
defence and as punitive action.

Here's another thing - crime is going up as gun ownership falls.

Want to hear something? I'll change only 4 words, but it'll sound like
the thing that was said when our gun laws were tightened. The 4 words I
changed don't change the context or meaning of the statement whatsoever,
they merely make it local.

"Australians who wish to use firearms should join the army or the police
force. Ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't
serve society."

Want to know who said that?

Heinrich Himmler "Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or
the SA, ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't
serve the state."

One of the first things they set about doing was disarming the populace
so they could also deal with insurgency. Admittedly it was used as much
as a measure against bolzheviks as it was the Jews, but it makes one
wonder"

The softer we get on criminals, and the more we prohibit normal
citizens, the more we approach that model.

Not that I am pro Iraqi, but the fact that every household had a
Kalishnikov (afaik) is probably why they are still standing up against a
large occupying force.

People might like to think about that when we eventually get invaded by
an Asia pacific neighbour.

Why did I go off on the tangent?

1. It might make Ron chuckle (I did)
2. I actually think it's the long term result of going easy on assholes
but holding the rest of us to account for things we haven't done.

I dare say if the offender in the original post had a parent or teacher
smash his head in with a cricket bat (I'm almost sincere in the extent
of the punishment) when he fucked up, he'd not be so bla-ze about
putting other peoples lives at risk, then actually causing their deaths,
but then being such a cunt as to drive ever again.

One of my dogs died when he was hit by a car. I won't go into details,
suffice to say I did everthing I could to prevent it, and to save him
when it did happen, and he still died. I've never ever stopped at the
place (it was near a servo) since, even though it takes an extra 10
minutes one way to the next nearest servo. It's sentimental, to be
sure, but I do it for him, even to the point everyone else knows not to
take me near the place for fear I'll jump out of the car rather than go
there. Sentimental? Yes. Am I embarassed to talk about it? No. But when
I hear what this piece of shit does, then get's in a car and drives
again, in similar condition.... gimme a break.

--
John McKenzie

tosspam@aol.com abuse@aol.com abuse@yahoo.com abuse@hotmail.com
abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com abuse@earthlink.com fraudinfo@psinet.com
sweep.day@accc.gov.au uce@ftc.gov admin@loopback $LOGIN@localhost
$LOGNAME@localhost $USER@localhost $USER@$HOST -h1024@localhost
root@mailloop.com president@whitehouse.gov vice.president@whitehouse.gov
abuse@iprimus.com.au abuse@cia.gov abuse@fbi.gov abuse@asio.gov.au
abuse@federalpolice.gov.au

[dvk]

"John McKenzie" <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:429D57C7.2EB6@alphalink.com.au...

> > It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for
anyone
> > else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
> > era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(

<snip long post>

I enjoyed much of your post, mainly because it's quite aligned with my own
views and it mostly makes good sense. A couple of points I'd like to make:

- The analysis of human nature is very accurate, and I concur. With both
versions to a fair degree.

- I'm not sure you're serious with the pro-gun thing, because unlike the
rest of your post, it doesn't make much sense. I think it's incredibly naive
to believe insugency can drive out an occupying force. It just adds to to
the enemy's determination and increases bloodshed. Look at iraq. It's making
things harder, strengthening the US's resolve.
I admit it appears to be weakening the resolve of ordinary Australians, but
the reason for that is we aren't the invading force who wants[needs] the
oil. We aren't the enemy, we're just tagging along for diplomatic reasons
blah blah blah.

- The notion of an increasing proportion of citizens growing up in a sterile
environment, removed from many tangible realities of existence. Ie, where
does food come from, where does life start and end, etc, is an interesting
one which I will think about further.

- I don't believe the fact that crime is going up [if it is going up] is
directly, or even remotely related to a reduction of [official] gun
ownership. In the rural district in which I reside, I personly feel far
safer not hearing rifle cracks all around the hills and valleys every
afternoon. The gun laws haven't taken away all our guns. They have reduced
the sheer ridiculous amount of guns lying around for kiddies to take to
school, and generally made the population far less gun-happy, a trait
displayed by most americans, which I find disgusting and illogical.

- RE the asian invasion thing. Chaos theory dictates that eventually
everything is evnentually going to "rearrange itself" to put it very mildly.
My point? Joe Bloggs with his trusty rifle isn't going to stop them if they
really wanted to invade. Just like our army wont, and the assistance of the
US mightnt. It's time people admitted that to themselves.

- I could go on about the anti gun thing but I'm still not sure you're fully
serious.

[rmcgrice]

John McKenzie <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in
news:429D57C7.2EB6@alphalink.com.au:


> Why did I go off on the tangent?
>
> 1. It might make Ron chuckle (I did)
> 2. I actually think it's the long term result of going easy on
> assholes but holding the rest of us to account for things we haven't
> done.

John,

I think this guy needs to listen to your wisdom, on a tape, 24hrs a day
whilst he is locked up :-)

You never know, he may become a Preacher when he is released :-)

Regards,
Ron

[atec]

John McKenzie wrote:
> rmcgrice wrote:
>
>>John McKenzie <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in news:429D4067.3086
>>@alphalink.com.au:
>>
>>
>>>rmcgrice wrote:
>>>
>>>>As he faced a pre-sentencing hearing today, Cameron vowed never to drive
>>>>again.
>>>
>>>I like how our legal system has got him to the point that he thinks he
>>>should still have a say in whether he drives!
He doesn't think , if he did it would be plainly apparent he will
suffer , amazed no charges of culpable vehicular manslaughter
>>>
>>>I read this article online (yesterday I think) and was disgusted.
>>>
>>
>>It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for anyone
>>else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
>>era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(
>
>
> I wouldn't bet on it Ron. I don't think (believe it or not) we are
> changing as much as we are changing the _way we express ourselves_.
Simply put we are more informed and see things in a differing light to
50 years ago .
>
> Allow me to explain (as otherwise it looks like John has been on the
> crack pipe). I've long held a theory that humans aren't for the most
> part driven by a sense of right and wrong (some are for sure, and I
> arrogantly put myself in that place) . I believe were are motivated by a
> few things.
>
> First there's the basic choice between doing what is 'right' (i.e.
> benefits humanity I guess) vs doing what will benefit ourselves the
> most.
>
> Work out where someone sits in that priority spread and you can predict
> their behaviour fairly well. The worst of the lot are those who realise
> they can most benefit from 'appearing' to be doing what is for the
> common good or right. And as much as I am left wing when it comes to
> public education, health care and aged car (and I make marx look like he
> was the uncredited brother of the more famous group than a serious
> political innovator) I readily concede that a great deal of left wing
> proponents are nothing more than failed (or temporarily racked with
> guilt to the point of embarking on a wank mock crusade) capitalists.
>
> Then of course there is my more 'baser' view of humanity. We never do
> what we think is right by choice. By choice we do anything and
> everything that benefits us that we think we can get away with.

cant agree with this , I try to do the right thing unless prevented
but chance or circumstance - and I am certain most do .
>
> In the last few decades we haven't had a depression or a war (at least
> war in the sense that the whole country is behind it, a very major
> difference as anyone would concede) and people have got slacker in
> slacker, in what they object to. As such arseholes can get away with
> more.

Just look about yourself when walking through mall tomorrow , std of
language and behaviour are leant from parents to some degree , when I
was a child no one swore in our house , I swear some today but some
works I cant bring myself to use.

45 yrs ago, if a bunch of people from any subculture went out and
> commited gang rapes, there would have been a damn good chance none of
> them would have survived to face a trial (someone could joke that they
> wouldn't be here in the first place due to racist immigration policy of
> the day, but that's not my words). People wouldn't do other sorts of
> shit, as too many would be all too reminded of what happens when a
> society is out of control, and would have (half motivated by a sense of
> justice, and half self preservation as to what happens if you let it go
> unchecked) put a stop to it earlier.
Snag is bad.. and its been this way throughout history , when the
Greeks softened approaches to certain behavous they got to busy screwing
anything and society failed to continue working.. ( simplified for some
simple folk)
>
> I also think that the progression of Australian population (there's
> always the 'country' but more and more white collar work is the norm)
shouldnt be so but thats why apprectises are scarce and tradesmen are
paid thier dues .
so
> that there's less tangible rural roots means that not many grow up in a
> farm environment. The sense of life and death there, it's natural part
> in it is far more maturely and less neurotically handled. In the city
> people are far more (like 5-10x more) likely to want a relative to be
> kept alive on life support in a near vegetative state whereas country
> people have a more realistic approach.
bit like trying to save a mortaly wounded pet , sometimes you have to
be realistic and provide a humain approach which may >
mean lots of tubes...
As such we have tended to move
> toward a different perspective on the taking of life, both as self
> defence and as punitive action.
>
> Here's another thing - crime is going up as gun ownership falls.
>
> Want to hear something? I'll change only 4 words, but it'll sound like
> the thing that was said when our gun laws were tightened. The 4 words I
> changed don't change the context or meaning of the statement whatsoever,
> they merely make it local.
>
> "Australians who wish to use firearms should join the army or the police
> force. Ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't
> serve society."
>
> Want to know who said that?
>
> Heinrich Himmler "Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or
> the SA, ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't
> serve the state."
>
> One of the first things they set about doing was disarming the populace
> so they could also deal with insurgency. Admittedly it was used as much
> as a measure against bolzheviks as it was the Jews, but it makes one
> wonder"
WHen reading a couple of books it became ( yes I can read) that only
certain parts of the Jewish comunity where targeted , some were allowed
to escape with no oposition at all.
>
> The softer we get on criminals, and the more we prohibit normal
> citizens, the more we approach that model.
Yup , I expect one day opinions will change in response to economic
conditions or war time and some older values will become fashionable again
>
> Not that I am pro Iraqi, but the fact that every household had a
> Kalishnikov (afaik) is probably why they are still standing up against a
> large occupying force.
there were over 500k of sks and skk imported into this country , less
than 1/2 were bought back , must be a lot of back yards with special
plants ?
>
> People might like to think about that when we eventually get invaded by
> an Asia pacific neighbour.
>
> Why did I go off on the tangent?
>
> 1. It might make Ron chuckle (I did)
> 2. I actually think it's the long term result of going easy on assholes
> but holding the rest of us to account for things we haven't done.
normal bullshite "protecting us" from ourselves... first thing I would
piss off in tough times.
>
> I dare say if the offender in the original post had a parent or teacher
> smash his head in with a cricket bat (I'm almost sincere in the extent
> of the punishment) when he fucked up, he'd not be so bla-ze about
> putting other peoples lives at risk, then actually causing their deaths,
> but then being such a cunt as to drive ever again.
See it everyday , I have right Im bullit roof Im a minor.. the trial
on the boys from toowoomba will bring this to a point I think , there is
no justifcation for murder .
>
> One of my dogs died when he was hit by a car. I won't go into details,
> suffice to say I did everthing I could to prevent it, and to save him
> when it did happen, and he still died. I've never ever stopped at the
> place (it was near a servo) since, even though it takes an extra 10
> minutes one way to the next nearest servo. It's sentimental, to be
> sure, but I do it for him, even to the point everyone else knows not to
> take me near the place for fear I'll jump out of the car rather than go
> there. Sentimental? Yes. Am I embarassed to talk about it? No. But when
> I hear what this piece of shit does, then get's in a car and drives
> again, in similar condition.... gimme a break.
Id suggest he needs several , mainly about the face and body .
>

[atec]

dvk wrote:
> "John McKenzie" <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
> news:429D57C7.2EB6@alphalink.com.au...
>
>
>>>It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for
>
> anyone
>
>>>else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
>>>era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(
>
>
> <snip long post>
>
> I enjoyed much of your post, mainly because it's quite aligned with my own
> views and it mostly makes good sense. A couple of points I'd like to make:
>
> - The analysis of human nature is very accurate, and I concur. With both
> versions to a fair degree.
>
> - I'm not sure you're serious with the pro-gun thing, because unlike the
> rest of your post, it doesn't make much sense. I think it's incredibly naive
> to believe insugency can drive out an occupying force. It just adds to to
> the enemy's determination and increases bloodshed. Look at iraq. It's making
> things harder, strengthening the US's resolve.
> I admit it appears to be weakening the resolve of ordinary Australians, but
> the reason for that is we aren't the invading force who wants[needs] the
> oil. We aren't the enemy, we're just tagging along for diplomatic reasons
> blah blah blah.
>
> - The notion of an increasing proportion of citizens growing up in a sterile
> environment, removed from many tangible realities of existence. Ie, where
> does food come from, where does life start and end, etc, is an interesting
> one which I will think about further.
>
> - I don't believe the fact that crime is going up [if it is going up] is
> directly, or even remotely related to a reduction of [official] gun
> ownership. In the rural district in which I reside, I personly feel far
> safer not hearing rifle cracks all around the hills and valleys every
> afternoon. The gun laws haven't taken away all our guns. They have reduced
> the sheer ridiculous amount of guns lying around for kiddies to take to
> school, and generally made the population far less gun-happy, a trait
> displayed by most americans, which I find disgusting and illogical.
>
> - RE the asian invasion thing. Chaos theory dictates that eventually
> everything is evnentually going to "rearrange itself" to put it very mildly.
> My point? Joe Bloggs with his trusty rifle isn't going to stop them if they
> really wanted to invade. Just like our army wont, and the assistance of the
> US mightnt. It's time people admitted that to themselves.
>
> - I could go on about the anti gun thing but I'm still not sure you're fully
> serious.
>
>
Ill say this so its easy to follow , historically gorilla and militia
have been strongly instrumental in defeating or at worst causing major
setbacks to invading parties in the majority of conflagration in society
in the last 100 years.. goggle if you don't believe me .
People who fight for their country and are willing to give and fight
offer great concern for an invading army so I have always be sure that
an armed populace has lower crime as an offshoot and certainly less
chance of being beaten into submission ( think the Swiss method)

[Michael C]

"John McKenzie" <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:429D41BE.1BF@alphalink.com.au...
> Allow me to answer. It's bullshit. I'll put my upbringing (or lack
> thereof) and the violence I was subjected to up against anyones, and I
> don't go around taking it out on anyone else, or making a complete cunt
> of myself.

But maybe you would have been Prime Minister if you hadn't had such a shit
upbringing. Maybe this guy would have been a decent hardworking person
without his upbringing.

Michael

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:04:02 +1000, atec wrote:

> dvk wrote:
>> "John McKenzie" <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:429D57C7.2EB6@alphalink.com.au...
>>
>>
>>>>It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for
>>
>> anyone
>>
>>>>else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
>>>>era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(
>>
>>
>> <snip long post>
>>
>> I enjoyed much of your post, mainly because it's quite aligned with my own
>> views and it mostly makes good sense. A couple of points I'd like to make:
>>
>> - The analysis of human nature is very accurate, and I concur. With both
>> versions to a fair degree.
>>
>> - I'm not sure you're serious with the pro-gun thing, because unlike the
>> rest of your post, it doesn't make much sense. I think it's incredibly naive
>> to believe insugency can drive out an occupying force. It just adds to to
>> the enemy's determination and increases bloodshed. Look at iraq. It's making
>> things harder, strengthening the US's resolve.
>> I admit it appears to be weakening the resolve of ordinary Australians, but
>> the reason for that is we aren't the invading force who wants[needs] the
>> oil. We aren't the enemy, we're just tagging along for diplomatic reasons
>> blah blah blah.
>>
>> - The notion of an increasing proportion of citizens growing up in a sterile
>> environment, removed from many tangible realities of existence. Ie, where
>> does food come from, where does life start and end, etc, is an interesting
>> one which I will think about further.
>>
>> - I don't believe the fact that crime is going up [if it is going up] is
>> directly, or even remotely related to a reduction of [official] gun
>> ownership. In the rural district in which I reside, I personly feel far
>> safer not hearing rifle cracks all around the hills and valleys every
>> afternoon. The gun laws haven't taken away all our guns. They have reduced
>> the sheer ridiculous amount of guns lying around for kiddies to take to
>> school, and generally made the population far less gun-happy, a trait
>> displayed by most americans, which I find disgusting and illogical.
>>
>> - RE the asian invasion thing. Chaos theory dictates that eventually
>> everything is evnentually going to "rearrange itself" to put it very mildly.
>> My point? Joe Bloggs with his trusty rifle isn't going to stop them if they
>> really wanted to invade. Just like our army wont, and the assistance of the
>> US mightnt. It's time people admitted that to themselves.
>>
>> - I could go on about the anti gun thing but I'm still not sure you're fully
>> serious.
>>
>>
> Ill say this so its easy to follow , historically gorilla and militia
> have been strongly instrumental in defeating or at worst causing major
> setbacks to invading parties in the majority of conflagration in society
> in the last 100 years.. goggle if you don't believe me .
> People who fight for their country and are willing to give and fight
> offer great concern for an invading army so I have always be sure that
> an armed populace has lower crime as an offshoot and certainly less
> chance of being beaten into submission ( think the Swiss method)

Do the Swiss have speed cameras?

--
Toby.
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur

[atec]

Toby Ponsenby wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:04:02 +1000, atec wrote:
>
>
>>dvk wrote:
>>
>>>"John McKenzie" <jmac@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
>>>news:429D57C7.2EB6@alphalink.com.au...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>It really pisses me off that idiots like that, have no regards for
>>>
>>>anyone
>>>
>>>
>>>>>else. Young people today appear to be more selfish than they were in my
>>>>>era. Human behavior is changing John, and not for the better :-(
>>>
>>>
>>><snip long post>
>>>
>>>I enjoyed much of your post, mainly because it's quite aligned with my own
>>>views and it mostly makes good sense. A couple of points I'd like to make:
>>>
>>>- The analysis of human nature is very accurate, and I concur. With both
>>>versions to a fair degree.
>>>
>>>- I'm not sure you're serious with the pro-gun thing, because unlike the
>>>rest of your post, it doesn't make much sense. I think it's incredibly naive
>>>to believe insugency can drive out an occupying force. It just adds to to
>>>the enemy's determination and increases bloodshed. Look at iraq. It's making
>>>things harder, strengthening the US's resolve.
>>>I admit it appears to be weakening the resolve of ordinary Australians, but
>>>the reason for that is we aren't the invading force who wants[needs] the
>>>oil. We aren't the enemy, we're just tagging along for diplomatic reasons
>>>blah blah blah.
>>>
>>>- The notion of an increasing proportion of citizens growing up in a sterile
>>>environment, removed from many tangible realities of existence. Ie, where
>>>does food come from, where does life start and end, etc, is an interesting
>>>one which I will think about further.
>>>
>>>- I don't believe the fact that crime is going up [if it is going up] is
>>>directly, or even remotely related to a reduction of [official] gun
>>>ownership. In the rural district in which I reside, I personly feel far
>>>safer not hearing rifle cracks all around the hills and valleys every
>>>afternoon. The gun laws haven't taken away all our guns. They have reduced
>>>the sheer ridiculous amount of guns lying around for kiddies to take to
>>>school, and generally made the population far less gun-happy, a trait
>>>displayed by most americans, which I find disgusting and illogical.
>>>
>>>- RE the asian invasion thing. Chaos theory dictates that eventually
>>>everything is evnentually going to "rearrange itself" to put it very mildly.
>>>My point? Joe Bloggs with his trusty rifle isn't going to stop them if they
>>>really wanted to invade. Just like our army wont, and the assistance of the
>>>US mightnt. It's time people admitted that to themselves.
>>>
>>>- I could go on about the anti gun thing but I'm still not sure you're fully
>>>serious.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Ill say this so its easy to follow , historically gorilla and militia
>>have been strongly instrumental in defeating or at worst causing major
>>setbacks to invading parties in the majority of conflagration in society
>>in the last 100 years.. goggle if you don't believe me .
>>People who fight for their country and are willing to give and fight
>>offer great concern for an invading army so I have always be sure that
>>an armed populace has lower crime as an offshoot and certainly less
>>chance of being beaten into submission ( think the Swiss method)
>
>
> Do the Swiss have speed cameras?
>
I don't believe so but will stand correction , I know the Canadian
rejected them recently .

[John McKenzie]

Toby Ponsenby wrote:
>
> Do the Swiss have speed cameras?

Mounted to their high powered rifles. You speed over there, it's
automatically triggered.

(and you could see this coming into the harbour to dock)

over there speed kills too.


--
John McKenzie

tosspam@aol.com abuse@aol.com abuse@yahoo.com abuse@hotmail.com
abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com abuse@earthlink.com fraudinfo@psinet.com
sweep.day@accc.gov.au uce@ftc.gov admin@loopback $LOGIN@localhost
$LOGNAME@localhost $USER@localhost $USER@$HOST -h1024@localhost
root@mailloop.com president@whitehouse.gov vice.president@whitehouse.gov
abuse@iprimus.com.au abuse@cia.gov abuse@fbi.gov abuse@asio.gov.au
abuse@federalpolice.gov.au

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 22:31:01 +1000, John McKenzie wrote:

> over there speed kills too.
And 'ice', too;-)
--
Toby.
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur