XPost: alt.politics, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.art-bell   
   From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net   
      
   leg@sea wrote:   
   > Scout wrote:   
   >> RD (The Sandman) wrote:   
   >>> "leg@sea"  wrote in   
   >>> news:hchrio$c9t$10@news.eternal-september.org:   
   >>>   
   >>>> Matt wrote:   
   >>>>> On Oct 30, 2:34 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" >>>> @comcast.net> wrote:   
   >>>>>> "leg@sea"  wrote innews:hcfe6s$aeg$1@news.eternal-   
   >>>>>> september.org:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Matt wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Oct 29, 8:29 pm, "leg@sea"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> Matt wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 28, 7:09 pm, "leg@sea"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Matt Telles felches spaniels in the break room.   
   >>>>>>>>>> Blah blah blah, Spammy is the 12 year old that rapes little   
   >>>>>>>>>> boys. Point proven.   
   >>>>>>>>>> Matt   
   >>>>>>>>> How's life by the reservoir, shall we up the ante?   
   >>>>>>>> Wow, you mean you are going to reveal my (*gasp*) name and   
   >>>>>>>> address, Spammy? Gee, anyone with a PHONE BOOK can do that.   
   >>>>>>> I _sure hope_ none of those 'crazed' gun owners you're always   
   >>>>>>> trying to disenfranchise finds there was over to Lakewood,   
   >>>>>>> Colorado, Matty...   
   >>>>>> They probably won't pay any attention to his address.....after   
   >>>>>> all, the vast majority of them are adult enough to realize that   
   >>>>>> differences of opinion exist....and always will.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Done raping the 12 year old boys, Spammy?   
   >>>>>>> Done trying to take away peoples' rights to own guns Matty?   
   >>>>>> He hasn't tried to take mine away.....or yours if you have one. He   
   >>>>>> simply has different ideas on gun control.   
   >>>>> Eh, Spammy and I go way back to his Uncle Sam days on co.general.   
   >>>>> Allegedly, he lives here. He doesn't like being shown up.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> As for gun control, I do have different ideas. I think that what   
   >>>>> works in   
   >>>>> one place won't work in another. In other words, I like the   
   >>>>> concept of local control over matters. Does anyone truly disagree?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Matt   
   >>>> Why yes, the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION does.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You fucking piece of shit fascist gun-grabber.   
   >>> We can hold the discussion without the name calling....it simply   
   >>> makes you look like Lee Harrison or TMT or Lookout.   
   >>   
   >> True, you need to keep things civil and respectful for as long as   
   >> you can, and should rarely be the one to start the name calling and   
   >> then only when it can be justified. Such as informing a person who   
   >> knowingly posts lies that they are a liar. In this case, legs needs   
   >> to take a breath, sit back, calm down, and try it again from the   
   >> top. Maybe refering the 14th Amendment and asking him why he thinks   
   >> the 2nd shouldn't be applied as a restraint upon the power of the   
   >> state/local governments to infringe upon our right to keep and bear   
   >> arms. Possibly even pointing out examples of why they also shouldn't   
   >> be allowed to violate our freedom of speech, press, religon,   
   >> unreasonable search, ect. And even then even if he agrees the 2nd via the   
   >> 14th would disallow   
   >> this, he may still feel they should be able to do so. At which point   
   >> you need to ask him to explain why he feels they should be able to.   
   >> If he comes back with anything other than "because", then you have   
   >> more to work with. Typically the worst thing you can do for an   
   >> anti-gunner is to allow him to talk. They will typically end up   
   >> sinking themselves and showing they lack any objective logical   
   >> reason for their opinion. In short, keep handing him rope until he hangs   
   >> himself.   
   >   
   > Been there done that, played the game with Matty so many times it   
   > frankly bores me to tears.   
      
   Then may I offer a suggestion. If you no longer wish to deal with him. Then   
   don't. Either ignore his messages, or simply kill file him outright.   
      
      
   > Now if you've the energy and derive satisfaction from the exercise,   
   > why have at.   
      
   Typically, I end up ignoring those that are IMO empty trolls who are simply   
   trying to stir the pot and their only objective is to see how much they can   
   lower the level of the debate, if they can get it to the point of childish   
   insults and so on, then they are happy as pigs in mud.   
      
   I very rarely respond to Lee Harrison anymore, though some still use him to   
   present their arugments.   
      
   > For my part a simple 'taking out the trash' with him will suffice.   
      
   I wouldn't disagree if you chose to ignore him.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)