theloniusfleabag

Dear Charles Anthony, Very well, meet me behind the school at 3:00 pm, you bring the pen and I'll bring the sword. Ahhh, but I do believe in it, or at least in it's neccesity, so are my actions not more in line with 'voluntary communism' than 'voluntary cooperative anarchy'? I believe that this should read 'bear some responsibility'...note to self, pencil in-Charles Anthony, one heavy sack beating

Dear Leafless, Indeed it does, and it works for public transit...you can bring your dog on the bus if you buy an extra ticket. The problem is that your view of 'admit one' means 'admit one white Christian heterosexual' and that homosexuals are not 'one' that you are willing to admit. That is the crux of the SSM debate...the state is issuing tickest saying 'admit one' [to get married] and you are saying "Whoa, the 'admit one' shouldn't include homosexuals!"

Dear Charles Anthony, Not exactly, for we are the exceptions...out of Calgary's population of one million, there are now 6 people in training. Further, we all firmly believe in 'state law', and that it needs to be upheld. It is just that I feel that the police are stretched too thin to be able to be everywhere, and the courts aren't helping matters with a revolving door policy. Without 'state law', the Guardian Angels, or any other group, would be de facto 'vigilantes', (and anarchists!) for there would only be their own laws to uphold, at their discretion (like a private police force). Beating someone with a sack of doorknobs for poor grammatical skills, like ending a sentence with a preposition or using a double negative could then be commonplace. The only way to stop them would be with a bigger, or more overwhelming force. They would also become the de facto 'dispensers of rights' in the land.

Dear Charles Anthony, Do you mean 'a line over which we cross that will cause us all to be dead'? Yes. However, given our limited scientific capabilities at this time, it is impossible to say exactly where it is. There cannot be empirical knowledge of it, yet some will deny logic in favour of empiricism, if it is in their favour to do so. Some say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but I say it more resembles a ladder laid down, with the rungs representing lines in the sand that we shouldn't (or said we wouldn't) have crossed.

Dear Charles Anthony, Yes, but sadly there is a snowball's chance in hell for that mighty big 'if'. We are undergoing self-defence training now, and along side that will be training in the rule of law pertaining to the rights of citizen's arrest. Yes, calling the police is also an option, really the best one, but if a crime is in progress, a citizen has the right to intervene. I believe that they are a supplement to 'state policing', not a replacement. Further, it is the leniency and bureaucracy of the courts, and not the police themselves, that are the biggest problem. (apart from the crimials, of course)

Dear Black Dog, I see crack dealing and use everyday in front of my business. I also see all the crime associated with the business. I have given up calling the police, I got tired of them not coming, and hearing the dispatcher ask "What do you want us to do, move them to another neighbourhood?" The police have told me on several occasions, that even if they bust dealers, they are usually back on the street before they finish their paperwork. So they have simply decided to put their efforts elsewhere. So have I, and my wife, myself and a couple of friends have all signed up for training in the Guardian Angels. It may not even make a difference, but for what we see, it seems that taking action ourselves is our only hope. (on a side note, the Guardian Angels are not a 'vigilante group', but rather a group of 'concerned citizens' that are willing to spend their own time to 'dare to care', about their community and their city.)

Dear Charles Anthony, It would be a daily occurence if anarchy reigned. Partly, partly the dealer's fault, and mostly the kid's fault.Don't forget, crack dealers are basically predators, they know that if they can get someone to try it, they can get them hooked, and ensure more sales.

Dear Leafless, What about 'non-perverted homosexuality'? If it isn't a legal issue, then you should have no problem with it being made legal. I sure as hell don't want 'morals' to become the basis of law, least of all 'religious morals', especially since they can change with the wind (or population). Think of it Leafless, the majority deciding that the morals that they hold become law. What if the majority becomes Muslim (or Jewish) and they decide to outlaw Christianity?

Dear Charles Anthony, Several things would happen. Money wears out (paper bills much faster than coin), so currency would become 'scarce'. In this age, more electronic transfers occur, so it would not be a cataclysmic event, unless you mean that the gov't stopped 'giving value' to a national currency. In that case, I suspect all of the previous minting capabilities would be geared towards making firearms and ammunition, and transactions and disputes of 'ownership' would be settled by the Law Offices of 'Gimme, Gimme and Blam'.

Dear bk59, The problem lies with the fact that the combatants in this case are not part of a 'regular army'. Not that anyone expects combatants nowadays do dress up in the old Britsh Red Tunics and stand in formation to fire volleys of grapeshot at one another, but they don't belong to a specific group, other than a 'mental' one. Partisans in WWII were much the same. One of the solutions the SS had for partisan activity was to shoot every male over the age of 15 in troublesome regions, and partisan activity always went down in that region. Attacks by civilians against military targets are a little more palatable than attacks on civilians, but both cases should be the concern of the local gov't, as they are really internal legal issues. The problem with Afghanistan and Iraq is that no formal declaration of war was issued, so no real gov't could be held accountable for capitulation and then laws of occupation.

Dear Charles Anthony, Your first friend was obviously Muslim, the second a Jew trying to keep dietary law, or 'kashrut' (or something like that). Powerful, yes, but to me they represent that which is wrong with religious devotion. The observance of millenia-old trivialities while missing the 'big picture'.

The point kimmy makes earlier is that he did not use his wits, they went out the window and instead he hurled racial slurs.

Dear RB, Thanks for your input... You are right, I never really thought about it. Perhaps this plays to the male ego, where sex is 'conquest'... Not many that I know of, at least not since we were 17. The point of porn is to sexually arouse, so while some couples may watch it together, I suspect very few groups of men watch it together. Most probably watch it, and have it lead to sex, solo. A 'menage-et-moi', or 'with the fistress'...

Dear ft.niagara, Not exactly. Had Mr. Richards used the term in a sentence such as "Me and my niggaz were chillin' in my crib the other day, when..." It has a different connotation than when used disparagingly. As he actually did use it. So, the problem lies with Richards using the term 'nigger', a racial slur, in the most derogatory and hurtful way that he knew how. It isn't about which word he used as the racial slur, he could have said 'Darkies, Blacks, (or even the once accepted racial classification, Negroid) etc...So, he hurled profanity laced racial slurs against people in a public place. That is the real problem, though some may feel it isn't an actual 'problem'. WTF???

Dear Leafless, Sounds like commie...er, socialist talk... Again, a very socialist notion...but given your previous rants against communism, that only leaves Facism as the evident source of your position.

Not exactly, for I would still find this comment and segregation itself extremely offensive.

Dear Melanie, Indeed, Leafless had denied being a 'white supremacist' in the past after he posted some information related to it. Now, I would openly declare him a 'white supremacist', though not of the cheesy 'skinhead' variety, more like the 'god-fearin Klan' types.There was a song by "Johnny Rebel" called "Move them Niggers North" (or something very similar), circa 1960....(I have a downloaded copy). Some of the lyrics... Sadly, Johnny Rebel managed to put out several songs like this, and even worse, many people believe what he says. Just to note, evidently Alberta has a large number of KKK and their ilk, complete with para-military training facilities. It was in the news a number of years ago, but we shouldn't forget that they are in our midst.

Dear kimmy, from... http://www.hollywood.com/news/detail/id/3589420 They are really trying to bury him on this one. Well, I stand corrected with regards to their pedigree, but that doesn't mean that they had any talent. Look at what the StoneCutters did for Steve Guttenberg! (Yes, I have seen the Simpsons )

Dear Leafless, What's all this then?? [in my best British Bobby voice] What leads you to this absurd belief?

Good lord, what a terrible question. "No matter what?" Including being invaded by Mongol hordes or brain-sucking, anal-probing aliens? There actually might be one or two per 100 million that would still say no, I suppose.

Here is a bit of info... http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/insurance/ or... http://www.autonet.ca/Insurance/story.cfm?...493226-sun.html

Here is an interesting bit about the 'two-tiered system... http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/National/2006/...560619-sun.html

Dear Charles Anthony, It seems that the real problem is that less people want to become doctors than in the past. (Once upon a time, when I was a kid, the main 'glorified careers' were: "doctor, astronaut, or policeman". Nowadays, it is: "rap artist, WWE wrestler, or movie star.") Improved working conditions seems to be as irrelevant as more money. An anesthetist cannot do open-heart surgery, and your family doctor cannot be expected to do the same job as a neurologist. Perhaps in a time of dire emergency, such as war, where someone cannot be sued for undertaking a task for which they are not fully trained, but in general the risk of a malpractice suit is way too high.

Dear Charles Anthony, My sincere apologies, the lack of clarification is mine. What I should have said was "No doctors are going elsewhere for more money". I suspect that there may be one or two that have, but nothing like the mass exodus portayed by the media. You must be joking.

Dear Charles Anthony, Called him on what? That his personal experience must be wrong, and my contrary opinion must be correct? Or that the notion that someone may value something else above more money is illogical and therefore can't be true? Yes, but specialized. Your point?