Sorry this is off topic so I apologise to the other posters. 

Vicr3000 can I send you a PM, we seem to have had a similar career in the past and I want to ask you a question without having to start a new thread.  It is nothing personal its just that I might have some information you might be interested in. 

 Join the Israelis

Probably bite the bullet and move.

 I'm not saying they are right or wrong but if you don't want to get bitten, stop poking the dog LOL (as in Israel).

---

@mainecoon1 wrote:

 

Sorry this is off topic so I apologise to the other posters. 

 

Vicr3000 can I send you a PM, we seem to have had a similar career in the past and I want to ask you a question without having to start a new thread.  It is nothing personal its just that I might have some information you might be interested in. 

 

---

YES, Go ahead.

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

 

It's interesting that Debra posted the same article as I did above but in the Gov't thread and the ONLY comment she could

make on it was that Abbott should have kept his mouth shut being a legal case.

 

Not ONE comment on what the perp wanted to do.

 

If that isn't tacit approval of what they want to do and terrorism, terrorists, god knows what is.

 

More concern for the perps rights than everything else, exactly what Abbott was saying

the focus is all wrong.

 

 

 

 

---

Is it your opinion that, because of the nature of the accusations against him the "perp" should be deemed guilty and imprisoned without a trial.

Is it not important, in your opinion, that justice should not only be done it should be seen to be done?

This man has been accused of a hideous crime. If he is proved guilty, then I would be very happy for him to spend the rest of his life in prison; but once we allow the due processes of law, and  the requirement of a fair trial to be swept aside on an outpouring of emotional rage then we potentially put every  citizen of this country at risk of false imprisonment.

Our legal system is based on the assumtion of innocent until proven guilty and for that reason it is not permitted to comment on matters which are sub judice. If the case against this "perp" should fail because the courts determine that Abbotts remarks have made it impossible for him to get a fair tria, what would be your reaction then?

And you still haven't told us how you would react if at some future time the government of the day decides, as part of a tightening of anti terror laws, to prohibit  all private gun ownership. 

1. Answer not suitable for publication on a public forum.

2, Move to NZ

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

 

 

1. Answer not suitable for publication on a public forum.

 

2, Move to NZ

 

 

 

 

---

I think you need to do a bit of soul searching Vic.

Would you be prepared to resort to terrorism yourself in order to protect your right to carry a gun?

Would you consider it terrorism to shoot the official who came to take your gun off you?

Is it possible that you consider draconian laws OK - just so as they don't encroach on your own liberties?

Have you ever considered how easy it is to surrender one's personal freedoms in the name of security and how difficult it is ever to reclaim them once they have been surrendered. 

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

 

It's interesting that Debra posted the same article as I did above but in the Gov't thread and the ONLY comment she could

make on it was that Abbott should have kept his mouth shut being a legal case.

 

Not ONE comment on what the perp wanted to do.

 

If that isn't tacit approval of what they want to do and terrorism, terrorists, god knows what is.

 

More concern for the perps rights than everything else, exactly what Abbott was saying

the focus is all wrong.

 

 

 

 

---

Is it your opinion that, because of the nature of the accusations against him the "perp" should be deemed guilty and imprisoned without a trial.

Is it not important, in your opinion, that justice should not only be done it should be seen to be done?

 

This man has been accused of a hideous crime. If he is proved guilty, then I would be very happy for him to spend the rest of his life in prison; but once we allow the due processes of law, and  the requirement of a fair trial to be swept aside on an outpouring of emotional rage then we potentially put every  citizen of this country at risk of false imprisonment.

 

Our legal system is based on the assumtion of innocent until proven guilty and for that reason it is not permitted to comment on matters which are sub judice. If the case against this "perp" should fail because the courts determine that Abbotts remarks have made it impossible for him to get a fair tria, what would be your reaction then?

---

Exactly!