dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5086
share rss forum feed


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to NCRGuy

Re: Kayla Bourque - Killer in the waiting

said by NCRGuy:

just plain ignorant.

Been a lot of that going around here, unfortunately.


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable

said by Gone:

said by NCRGuy:

just plain ignorant.

Been a lot of that going around here, unfortunately.

Well as everyone's admitted, there's a lot of stubborness involved and no one seems willing or wanting to discuss alternatives so I vote for 'case closed'.


Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico

1 recommendation

reply to vue666

said by vue666:

Status quo will always hold back any progress in societal change... It's easier to criticize then be proactive...

To argue constitutions and charters can not be changed is ludicrous. They were conceived by mankind and can be change or modified by the same mankind... All it takes intestinal courage and a want for what is best...

They only "arguments for status quo" have the the words put in the mouths of others -- I've yet to see ANYONE state that the way things are now is perfect. I've seen it accused, but not said. Big difference. Furthermore, not liking a bad idea doesn't make me want to stay where things are now, it means I don't like a bad idea. There's nothing more to it than that.

Tell you what: since 1982, how many changes have been proposed for the Constitution? How many have been popular and broad support? How many were much bigger deals than what has been proposed in this forum (eg/ distinct society for Quebec, Senate reform, etc)? How many have passed?

Huffing and puffing about "constitutions can change" is a true statement but only a minute possibility, so perhaps looking at another angle for change would be more productive than continuing to insist that what you want can happen when faced with the FACTS that it would be a wide-ranging change to civil rights that would be needed to make it a reality. Not liking the truth doesn't make it suddenly disappear or alter to your preference.

I'm always willing to look at an idea, but don't expect me to agree with it just because it's been proposed. That's not a debate, that's fawning obsequiousness.
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable

said by Kardinal:

Huffing and puffing about "constitutions can change" is a true statement but only a minute possibility

And at the same time, huffing and puffing about sections of charters and the rights of criminals won't quiet public discontent, especially now that the North American media is amplifying a new-found focus on the topic, so it looks like a stalemate - we have rules that enable people to continue killing, people like yourself that support those rules and we have people that aren't happy with those rules.

I suspect with so much media attention on both the effects of mental health issues tied to murder and American gun control, that something will change within our lifetime.

I found it ironic that earlier today, while listening to an NPR radio program covering gun control, that some of the people on the left were echoing my sentiments concerning post-release followups of convicts. I was also surprised to hear how high the post-release murder rates were of previously convicted felons.


vue666
Small block Chevys never die
Premium
join:2007-12-07
Halifax, NS
kudos:1

said by urbanriot:

And at the same time, huffing and puffing about sections of charters and the rights of criminals won't quiet public discontent, especially now that the North American media is amplifying a new-found focus on the topic, so it looks like a stalemate - we have rules that enable people to continue killing, people like yourself that support those rules and we have people that aren't happy with those rules.

I suspect with so much media attention on both the effects of mental health issues tied to murder and American gun control, that something will change within our lifetime.

I found it ironic that earlier today, while listening to an NPR radio program covering gun control, that some of the people on the left were echoing my sentiments concerning post-release followups of convicts. I was also surprised to hear how high the post-release murder rates were of previously convicted felons.

Urban I've heard similar media coverage as well... I hear there is some consideration for maintaining a database of persons with mental health. This would possibly tie in as part of a background check when someone purchases a gun...

Personally not sure if I like the idea of this database but I can understand why some are asking about the viability....

And you are quite right some put more value on the rights of criminals then the safety of our children who are our responsibility to protect...


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable

I don't like the idea of a database on people with mental health issues, in general. Quite frankly, I'm against government databases on people in general. But when it comes to convicted criminals and/or people deemed to be a threat to the rest of society, I do support additional government involvement in the therapeutic sense (which would also ensure a person is 'safe').



Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico

1 recommendation

reply to urbanriot

said by urbanriot:

we have rules that enable people to continue killing, people like yourself that support those rules and we have people that aren't happy with those rules.

Ha ha ha.....more projection thinking that "people like me who support the rules to enable people to continue killing" because I won't acquiesce to the farcical thought of a constitutional change being easy and sensible way to "fix" the situation. Pathetic really, to stoop to that level of 'name calling' repeatedly in the same thread, but if that's all you've got......

Here's a thought that it seems hasn't occurred to some: a change in the Constitution applies to everyone, all the time, for all circumstances because that's what the highest order of rules do. It's not a little tweak to "fix the problem", it's a fundamental change in the workings of living in this country. I won't apologize for thinking that that it's farcical to think that the fundamental document defining life in this country would be changed to suit one particular situation because it would thereby affect a multitude of other ones.

Please, supporters of this idea, tell me: if distinct society didn't pass, how do you propose to position this change so that it will? Don't hide behind a Vic Toews "you can stand with us or with the child pornographers"-like quip.....explain the proposed change to the Charter and what strategy you think would get it to pass. There are lots of accusations of "naysayers aren't helpful", but there's been nothing beyond vague ideas and insistence that it'll work. Bring it!
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


vue666
Small block Chevys never die
Premium
join:2007-12-07
Halifax, NS
kudos:1

Sorry Kardinal but you are starting to sound like someone who owns several AK47s in the USA and claiming any change in the 2nd amendment is attack on every Americans rights...

Are you on parole for torturing animals or murdering someone?
Sorry what we are discussing does not pertain to everyone....

NOR are we discussing shoplifters, people who leave their dog in a car on a hot summer day or Quebec as a distinct society...

Talk about red herrings...

Sorry you are so resentful to change and much prefer the status quo...



Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico

1 recommendation

said by vue666:

Sorry what we are discussing does not pertain to everyone....

NOR are we discussing shoplifters, people who leave their dog in a car on a hot summer day or Quebec as a distinct society...

Talk about red herrings...

Are you saying that the Constitution doesn't apply to everyone? Really? Here it is, yet again, hopefully this time in pablum form for those who obviously need it in an easily digestable format:

1) the Constitution is the foundation upon which all laws and rules of life in this country are based.

2) if you change the Constitution, you change the base upon which all laws and rules are based.

3) The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the Constitution.

4) Section 7 of the Charter deals with personal rights and freedoms.

Are we okay with that so far?

Now, if you change the basic rights and freedoms that all Canadians share equally, you affect all Canadians. (here is a summary of what Section 7 is about; read it, don't just brush it off because I disagree with your take) Are you honestly disputing that a change to the Charter would affect everyone? Changes to laws affect those under those laws; changes to the Charter affect everyone under the Charter. It's black-and-white. If you want to change the Charter/Constitution, we know the rules involved in doing so and how hard it is. Dispute that if you want, but show your work in how you think it'll work as I've shown attempts to change the Constitution that haven't gone anywhere because of how hard it is to do. If you disagree then you'd better be prepared to show how you think this will be different or your idea is nothing more than ether.

It seems like nobody wants to define or defend their take beyond a vague "we should change the Constitution", but instead take the Sun News / Ezra Levant / John Baird / Vic Toews tact of insult/defame/attack the person who is disagreeing rather than counter logic and sensible thought with logic and sensible thought, presumably in the hope that the attacks will be louder and last post in the thread. Absolutely pathetic, but expected when it has been shown that the current stance they have doesn't have a leg to stand on but they refuse to admit it because pride and volume are more important than common sense, logic, and reality.

I'm really fascinated by the name calling going on, like the following:

"you are starting to sound like someone who owns several AK47s in the USA"
"Are you on parole for torturing animals or murdering someone?"
"we have rules that enable people to continue killing, people like yourself that support those rules"
"you're willing to accept the loss of human life in trade for criminal freedoms."
"Tis people with that mindset that thought women shouldnt vote or gays and lesbians should not be permitted to marry etc"


Pathetic and weak, but expected. Keep shouting accusations and putting words in people's mouths if it makes you feel better about a stance that isn't logical or workable. I've not lowered myself to calling people names because I don't need to do that to puff myself up and feel strong because I know my stance is solid and has been well defended based on logic and common sense.
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


vue666
Small block Chevys never die
Premium
join:2007-12-07
Halifax, NS
kudos:1

1 edit

This topic NEVER started as a discussion on the constitution.

However as Urbanriot and others have pointed out it has been dragged in by others to obfuscate and derail a discussion we are having. If you wish to further discuss the charter of freedoms and rights please start a thread in Canpol as myself and others would like to move this topic forward and not have it constantly side tracked by repeating the same old stuff over & over...

I get it. You do not like change. I understand that.... You are comfortable with the way things are and do not think any effort should be put into making changes...

However I would like to make things better. Reduce crime by using crime prevention and healthcare... Not use the prison system as a poor substitute for an healthcare facility...

Why wait for something to happen, let's fix the problem before it happens...

I stop my car when I get the low oil light and do not continue to drive, waiting to see what happens....



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

1 recommendation

said by vue666:

This topic NEVER started as a discussion on the constitution.

Whether you like it or not, the moment people started suggestion indeterminate detention is exactly when this discussion became about exactly that.


Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico

2 recommendations

reply to vue666

said by vue666:

I get it. You do not like change. I understand that.... You are comfortable with the way things are and do not think any effort should be put into make changes...

Bahahahaha....more name calling / thought projection. Expected, but disappointing.

The discussion pointed out that fundamental rights, enshrined in the constitution, prevent the perpetual detention that was proposed by some upthread (that was here). It was then proposed, by you and others, that the constitution be changed to accommodate this idea (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and more). It's been back and forth since then about if this would work, how it would be difficult, etc. If you are now admitting that a change to the Constitution isn't a good idea, that's great, move on and work out how you think you'll be able to design indefinite detention and not violate Charter rights that are afforded to all Canadians. When you do, I'll read it and consider it.

Try to stay away from name calling though; it's unbecoming, adds nothing to the discussion, and causes a loss of credibility of actual takes. And it's pathetic.
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


vue666
Small block Chevys never die
Premium
join:2007-12-07
Halifax, NS
kudos:1

1 edit

I apologize if you really believe my remark was intended as an insult. It was not meant as such....

I'm at that age in my life where I'm lukewarm to change so again no slur intended...



urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
reply to Kardinal

said by Kardinal:

Pathetic really, to stoop to that level of 'name calling' repeatedly in the same thread, but if that's all you've got......



Pathetic indeed. I don't know how else to respond other than giving you a ridiculous look because you're simply being ridiculous. At no point did I call anyone any names in this thread and if making shit up is all you've got then I guess we're not moving forward.

I haven't at all projected, I'm relaying where you seem to stand since you won't come right out and say where you stand, all you do is criticize everyone else on where they stand.

Again, if the blanks we've had to fill in are inaccurate to where you stand on the issue then please advise. I've made direct requests to contribute, rather than negatively criticize, yet you haven't responded.

said by Kardinal:

So, again, does our system work well for you and you're satisfied with it... or not?

I could compile an entire page of your evasions, where you don't respond to the posts of people and rather criticize their post.

Why don't you directly respond? It's not a "trap" or a "straw man" or whatever evasive words you want to use, and rather than respond to questions with your own questions or criticisms, just tell us straight up where you stand.

Do you not stand up for your ideals?


Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico

It's never ceases to amaze me that people will quote a reply to someone else, focus it on themselves, and then spin a half-quote into something else. Is it because their position on the given discussion isn't something they want to focus on, so they'll "attack on a tangent" to try to regain the appearance of strength? I don't know. but it's pathetic when you scratch the surface and see it for what it is.

said by urbanriot:

said by Kardinal:

So, again, does our system work well for you and you're satisfied with it... or not?

Yeeeeaaaaahhhh......I'm going to need you to go ahead and not put my name on your words, mm'kay? Thaaaaaanks.

said by urbanriot:

Why don't you directly respond? It's not a "trap" or a "straw man" or whatever evasive words you want to use, and rather than respond to questions with your own questions or criticisms, just tell us straight up where you stand.

My contributions to this thread have been to criticize what I see as a nonsensical take, and I've explained them in depth. I'm not a trained monkey who can be made to do what others want for their own entertainment, and I'll not apologize for that. I'm not tangenting into all sorts of other directions to satisfy the desire of some to deflect attention away from the main topic of conversation, namely the proposal of indefinite detention and the subsequent discussion of how it would be unconstitutional. If that can't be handled by others who are used to getting their own way, the monkey is on their back, not mine.

Now....back to a discussion about indefinite detention.......
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


neochu

join:2008-12-12
Windsor, ON
reply to vue666

Need I remind people that anti-social, psychopathic and sociopathic personality issues have no effective mental health treatment in current science?

OT doesn't work for these people to change the behaviours society doesn't agree with (because the therapy assumes the person has societal morals in them). Milieu (ashley smith/prison behavioural systems) drives people to kill themselves who already have permanent dysfunctional definitions of self (Darwinism) and tracking/monitoring remotely has been disproved already. Medication is only marginally effective for such people as well unless your willing to spend the money on sufficient nursing care. (at 400 dollars an hour).

Essentially like in Minority report these people are put to sleep in some form of a stasis environment and their consciousness is totally destroyed.

There is little or no rehabilitation possible under current models for anything diagnosed in AXIS 2. For a society that feels segregation until rehabilitation (until the symptoms are no longer a threat) is necessary it pretty much means PERMANANT detention in either a mental health facility (ST Thomas for SW Ontario) or prison (like in Hamilton or Kingston) until said person dies. "Quality of life" is not possible in any way.

We already know what that can mean thanks to people like Ashley Smith due to the cost of putting 400 dollar an hour psychiatric professional care into these facilities. That makes it severely unsustainable to do unless you just ignore patients who wont respond to the "standard model" as it is right now. (medicate until symptoms stop, damn be if it kills the patient). Part of that leads to staff apathy and that then leads to potential abuses which shut the system down completely...

Lets cut the thread back down to these types of conditions and pretty much define that first.

Axis 2 can also be very easy to misdiagnose and cause severe exacerbation of symptoms--or death due to the wrong treatments being used (as personality and motivation is incredibly subjective. (Im a personal example of this.)

Forcing someone into the wrong treatment due to societal stigma IS a charter and human rights violation and before we do anything of the sort we have to decide which is better, to lock people up where apathy causes abuse. Or to wait and imprison once an act is committed.

(Freedom is nothing else but the chance to do better. LOL)



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

said by neochu:

There is little or no rehabilitation possible under current models for anything diagnosed in AXIS 2.

This right there discredits anything you have otherwise said and demotes your post from what might be a rant to nothing short of drivel.


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
reply to Kardinal

said by Kardinal:

It's never ceases to amaze me that people will quote a reply to someone else, focus it on themselves, and then spin a half-quote into something else.

Your audience of one, me, would appreciate it if you'd specify whatever it is you're referring to, rather than refer to vague asides with no substance.

said by urbanriot:

said by Kardinal:

So, again, does our system work well for you and you're satisfied with it... or not?

Yeeeeaaaaahhhh......I'm going to need you to go ahead and not put my name on your words, mm'kay? Thaaaaaanks.

So can you put your name on your own words rather than dance around the topic? Or you have no words of your own and all you're willing to do is criticize everyone else?

said by Kardinal:

I'm not tangenting into all sorts of other directions

You've done that plenty in this thread when it suits you; however I'm asking you to directly respond on the topic we've been discussing with your stance and you refuse to. I can only guess that you're afraid of being criticized yourself or maybe you're ashamed of it? Not sure, can only guess... At least some folks here have the balls to stand up for their views rather than snipe everyone else.


neochu

join:2008-12-12
Windsor, ON

2 edits
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

said by neochu:

There is little or no rehabilitation possible under current models for anything diagnosed in AXIS 2.

This right there discredits anything you have otherwise said and demotes your post from what might be a rant to nothing short of drivel.

Prove me otherwise? I personally (as in knew) 35 cases where such methods have failed (most of them started in youth systems). The justice system just waits for sufficient enough criminal activity to imprison, or until they succumb to their illnesses.

(like I have said to even get a reasonable/credible diagnosis requires up to 400 dollar an hour expertise. That's too expensive for the system and most Psychiatrists have very little training on it--so they often misdiagnose).

All of the cases discussed so far pertain to issues with traits attached to AXIS 2 disorders and peer reviewed literature points to only marginal improvements, even with 400 dollar an hour expertise.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder

NCRGuy

join:2008-03-03
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

1 recommendation

reply to urbanriot

said by urbanriot:

You've done that plenty in this thread when it suits you; however I'm asking you to directly respond on the topic we've been discussing with your stance and you refuse to. I can only guess that you're afraid of being criticized yourself or maybe you're ashamed of it? Not sure, can only guess... At least some folks here have the balls to stand up for their views rather than snipe everyone else.

He's been pretty clear about his stance: you're wrong. In debating your position, he is only discussing that position and its merits (or rather, lack thereof). There is no onus on him to propose an alternative model in order to demonstrate that yours is flawed and unrealistic.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to neochu

There are plenty of methods available to improve the quality of life and outcome of those with various personality disorders. They are not the death sentence that you make them out to be. To say as much demonstrates is the pathetic apathy that exists when it comes to care for the mentally ill in the industrialized world.

If you have "38 or 39 case where they have failed" then you either aren't trying hard enough, or you're lying by omission. Take your pick.



neochu

join:2008-12-12
Windsor, ON

They were social contacts who succumbed to the lack of access to the needed expertise and assistance beyond 'medicate into stasis and damn the side effects.' Its a long story and I'm not going to write an autobiography on it (and expose myself to further stigma).

It is a 'symptom of the pathetic way mental health care has been industrialized and automated like an assembly line'. Like you have said

You seem to be keenly aware of some of the techniques and alternate treatments for PD--outside from what I have listed in my prior post.

You'll also know how difficult (and expensive) such treatment and expertise can be.

Do you really expect the justice/mental health system to pay for that on every person who enters it? Especially when the province BARELY pays for basic talk therapy for non PD cases?

Just look at what happens in the Ontario Mental Health Courts... Though it certainly the work they do is a start.



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Yes, I know all too well. It is a very sensitive subject as someone very close to me suffers from one of those Axis II disorders, among other things. I do not buy into the "they can't be helped" mantra as they can be, and my own experiences with the subject show that.

Treatment is available. Finding it is a whole other story.



urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
reply to NCRGuy

said by NCRGuy:

He's been pretty clear about his stance: you're wrong.

And you're wrong too. Boy that was easy, see how much credibility you both have on the topic.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Considering that NCRGuy has a demonstrated breadth of knowledge on federal law, constitution rights and other associated issues to which I safely assume is part of his career, he's certainly in a better position to critique the knowledge of someone on this subject than you are.

If you don't believe Kardinal, NCRGuy or I on anything we've said, talk to a lawyer who deals in constitutional law and Charter challenges. There are several of them in St. Catharines. They'll set you straight right and quick.



Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico
reply to NCRGuy

said by NCRGuy:

said by urbanriot:

You've done that plenty in this thread when it suits you; however I'm asking you to directly respond on the topic we've been discussing with your stance and you refuse to. I can only guess that you're afraid of being criticized yourself or maybe you're ashamed of it? Not sure, can only guess... At least some folks here have the balls to stand up for their views rather than snipe everyone else.

He's been pretty clear about his stance: you're wrong. In debating your position, he is only discussing that position and its merits (or rather, lack thereof). There is no onus on him to propose an alternative model in order to demonstrate that yours is flawed and unrealistic.

Thanks - I thought I was pretty clear in what I was doing, so it's nice to see that it's been clear to others too. It's obvious that clarity and debate isn't what's being sought, but merely trolling and hoping for a reaction.
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars

- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

said by Kardinal:

Thanks - I thought I was pretty clear in what I was doing, so it's nice to see that it's been clear to others too. It's obvious that clarity and debate isn't what's being sought, but merely trolling and hoping for a reaction.

This was never a debate. It was merely a rant by those who don't understand the legal system they live under and anger and contempt toward those who reminded them of that.


vue666
Small block Chevys never die
Premium
join:2007-12-07
Halifax, NS
kudos:1

1 edit
reply to vue666

I wonder if Americans who are demanding gun law changes go through the same anger and contempt when they are reminded of the second amendment argument...

When trapped knee deep in horse shit an optimist will keep on digging adamant there is a pony underneath.... LOL



Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
kudos:4
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

said by Kardinal:

Thanks - I thought I was pretty clear in what I was doing, so it's nice to see that it's been clear to others too. It's obvious that clarity and debate isn't what's being sought, but merely trolling and hoping for a reaction.

This was never a debate. It was merely a rant by those who don't understand the legal system they live under and anger and contempt toward those who reminded them of that.

The legal system is not quite as bad as the catholic church but its behind the times. Its a slow moving morass which probably does prevent radical mistakes that us hot headed whackos desire. No question what I propose would be extremely difficult but there is a need and in due course it may prove to be widespread enough to elicit movement in the quagmire of our system. However I am not interested in dicussing the mechanics of how our legal system or charter would need to change. That is fodder for another thread. Conveniently the ostriches in this forum are firmly entrenched to link the topic to the a. illegality of what we are proposing and b. the impossibility of changing the legal system, and thus c. as pointed out by urban your participation in the thread is mule like in nature and selfish.
I continue to acknowledge the points you have made but the naysayers are adamently blind to discussing the topic well to be fair Kardinal has a better balanced approach although listing heavily in the wrong direction (and by wrong I mean opposite of mine as opposed to right and wrong). Cheerio!!
--
Ain't nuthin but the blues! "Albert Collins".
Leave your troubles at the door! "Pepe Peregil" De Sevilla. Just Don't Wifi without WPA, "Yul Brenner"

LlamaWorks Equipment


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Kardinal and I share the exact same vie on this issue and both are just as balanced and as such we are in complete agreement in our views. If you think Kardinal's "better balanced approach" of calling you all out for not knowing what you're talking about is something more agreeable, mine is just as much so.

If you don't believe me, ask Kardinal.