So when are the lefties going to be calling for Banning Police as a result of this lunatics actions? After All cop kills people... therefore we need to ban cops... like their recent foaming at the mouth fever to ban guns because some lunatic shot some kids.

...

Transcript
RAY SUAREZ: Thousands of police across Southern California, Arizona, Nevada, even in Mexico are conducting a manhunt tonight for a one-time police officer wanted in a shooting rampage.

The suspect is Christopher Dorner, a 33-year-old former Los Angeles police officer fired in 2009. Dorner allegedly shot an officer in Corona, Calif. overnight; 20 minutes later, police said, he pulled up to a police car in nearby Riverside and opened fire on two other officers, killing one.



Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said today that Dorner's experience makes him much more dangerous.

CHARLIE BECK, Los Angeles Police Chief: Of course he knows what he's doing. We trained him. He was also a member of the armed forces. It is extremely worrisome and scary, especially to the police officers involved. The Riverside officers were cowardly ambushed. They had no opportunity to fight back, no pre-warning. Imagine, imagine going about your workday having to worry about that threat.

some lunatic shot some kidsIt happens with some regularity.

Here is his manifesto in it's entirety (not the redacted version the compliant press released ) .
Christopher Dorner's Manifesto, In Full [Content Graphic and Disturbing] [UPDATED]: LAist (http://laist.com/2013/02/07/christopher_dorners_manifesto_in_fu.php)

Cops going Rogue... we got to keep the guns out of the hands of cops... or are the left just being hypocrites again.

THey really don't NEED guns anyway... England doesn't have all their cops running around armed like they are invading a foreign country.

As the old saying goes, "Guns don't kill people....people do".
There is no amount of laws that will stop a crazy/insane person from killing someone or many... either using knives, bows, guns, or whatever.
Politics will hinder anything, anytime, anywhere, given enough time. It's insane. I do wish both Senate and House would have to re-elect everyone at least every 6 years!
The American people (at least over half) will buy anything, as long as Obama stands in front of a crowd and lies about it...

Now that the Obama rant has been said, let's get back to guns.

Chilling news story, even more chilling because his employment (from what I read) ended 5 years ago, and he's been plotting/planning ever since.

I have no idea what the solution is, no idea at all.

Would I want to be in law enforcement today? No.

And I feel the same about this news story as I do about all the others - nobody saw this coming? No family member, no friend? No one thought this guy was, at best, off to the left?

There is no amount of laws that will stop a crazy/insane person from killing someone or many....either using knives, bows, guns, or whatever.
So what would you have used -- for this one and for the next one?

Hello smoothy:


therefore we need to ban cops.. Okee doakee.

http://tinyurl.com/b48mq4w

I rest my case.

Excon

No the same about this news story as I do about all the others - nobody saw this coming? No family member, no friend? No one thought this guy was, at best, off to the left?

Now why do you thing he should be off to the left maybe he is off to the right, whatever, he is definitely off

Hello smoothy:

Okee doakee.

Miami-Dade Police Kendall Squad Caught Ignoring Emergency Calls, Shopping On Camera (VIDEO) (http://tinyurl.com/b48mq4w)

I rest my case.

excon

Oh so you agree, this is no different... because it's a cop with mental problems rather than a Autistic kid with mental problems.

Since most cops have access to fully automatic weapons at their armory that Joe Civilian doesn't. Cops pose a much greater danger to the public.

What about the 71 year old woman they cops shot in the back, because the trk looked like Dormer's. They are going to shot first and ask question later.

Hello again, smoothy:


Oh THIS is different... Nahh, this is no different. I think ALL gangs should be destroyed.

Excon

Paraclete, I meant left of center, not left politically - but that's a good point. Whichever way he's off - he's off!

What about the 71 year old woman they cops shot in the back, because the trk looked like Dommer's. They are going to shot first and ask question later.

There was a Cop recently in Cullpepper VA that got sentences for shooting an unarmed woman to death because he was upset with her... then lied about it...

And the SOB gets only 3 years in jail for it...

Daniel Harmon-Wright should serve 3 years, jury recommends | WJLA.com (http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/02/daniel-harmon-wright-mistrial-denied-after-jury-misconduct-84732.html)

If anyone else did that they would get 5 years EXTRA for using a gun in a crime... they slapped this SOB on the wrist... she is still dead... if Karma exists he will get gang raped in prison for most of those 3 years..

What can I say kill the mad dog

now why do you thing he should be off to the left maybe he is off to the right, whatever, he is definately off

Read the manifesto... yeah he was off to the left big time.

And yet the gun control crowd says the sheeple should rely on the police force for their safety .

Hello again,

According to Hannity, (http://www.newshounds.us/hannity_uses_ex_lapd_cop_killer_to_dishonestly_sme ar_liberals_02072013) the guy is a committed liberal, and THAT'S why he's a killer.
It turns out that the gunman, Christopher Jordan Dorner, is a vocal supporter of President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein and other top Democrats. Oddly enough, he vehemently opposes the NRA and viciously attacked that organization's CEO in his letter.Oddly enough, Hannity left out Dorner's support for Republican Chris Christie (“You're America's no s*** taking uncle. … Your leadership is greatly needed.”), how Dorner said that the only presidential candidate he supported in 2012 was Republican Jon Huntsman, and how George H.W. Bush was “always one of my favorite presidents.”

Or, maybe it's not so odd.

Excon

I'm not one who is enamored with Christe .But he's about as conservative as we get here in the North East. Bottom line on him is that he is a big government Republic .

Dorner's manifesto is rambling at best and poor justification for his murders .

Here we go arguing politics instead of actions. Who cares who a loony bird mad dog voted for, or who he worked for? I don't!

Hunt him and put him down like the dog he is. Then we can get back to the politics nonsense. Hell at the rate we are going with the fools coming out of the woodwork, maybe we should test newborns and keep a close eye on everybody at birth.

Just sayin'

Dorner's manifesto is rambling at best and poor justification for his murders .
I'm with him, though, on Dave Brubeck's "Take Five"!!

Oh so you agree, this is no different...because its a cop with mental problems rather than a Autistic kid with mental problems.

Since most cops have access to fully automatic weapons at their armory that Joe Civilian doesn't. Cops pose a much greater danger to the public.

Police Shoot Newspaper Delivery Women Mistaken For Christopher Dorner During Manhunt [UPDATED]: LAist (http://laist.com/2013/02/07/police_shoot_motorists_mistaken_for_dorner.php)

Police Shoot Newspaper Delivery Women Mistaken For Christopher Dorner During Manhunt [UPDATED]: LAist (http://laist.com/2013/02/07/police_shoot_motorists_mistaken_for_dorner.php)

Exactly... the cops wouldn't go after someone where killed mere average citizens with the gusto they go after someone who kill one of their private club.

Yes... I know the kind of crooked behavior so many cops are guilty of (and yes there are good ones but one bad one can make up for 10 good ones).

Over 90 Washington DC police have been arrested for criminal behavior in recent years... I was a target of some of some crooked cops myself when I was in Maryland... and it helps that I actually had a few cops over the years I could call a personal friend.. one was an ex California State Cop from LA... heard about the raids they pulled without announcing they were police before kicking the doors down... and then charging people for pulling legal weapons out for what they believed was a home invasion. Yeah... that was common... that's why he quit and moved to the east coast. But three are lots of crooked cops here too... I grew up just up the street from one that was notorious in the area... and I lived near another... who apparently screwed with the wrong person who put a brick through his car window one afternoon... (nope, I thought about it but I was 30 miles away at work when it happened).

Seems they got the guy, and apparently not only are the police are the bad guys but this liberal wacko that killed 4 people is a hero. I won't go into his Twitter admiration, just one commentator, Marc Lamont HIll on CNN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-uuGdxLZtE&feature=player_embedded)...


“There’s no waste here, though. I mean, this has been an important public conversation that we’ve had about police brutality, about police corruption, about state violence. I mean, there were even talks about making him the first domestic drone target. I mean, this is serious business here. I don’t think it’s been a waste of time at all.

And, as far as Dorner himself goes, he’s been like a real-life superhero to many people. Now, don’t get me wrong, what he did was awful, killing innocent people is bad. But when you read his manifesto, you read the message that he left, he wasn’t entirely crazy. He had a plan and a mission, here. And, many people aren’t rooting for him to kill innocent people; they’re rooting for someone who was wronged to get a kind of revenge against the system. It’s almost like watching ‘Django Unchained’ in real life. It’s kind of exciting.”

Apparently not only do libs celebrate their perverts they still celebrate their domestic terrorists. I can't help but think if Dorner lived he would someday be a college professor.

Stop listening to our loonies, and taking them seriously, we don't.

I can't help but think if Dorner lived he would someday be a college professor.

Or the next Mumia .

Stop listening to our loonies, and taking them seriously, we don't.

Oh no? It's been all over Huffpo, Daily Beast and now CNN... someone is clearly listening and it ain't us.

And his manifesto was prasing the most liberal of the left winger loons in the drive by media...

Yep, this guy Dorner is another Lefty that went off the reservation.

More on the Dorner fan club...

Will Anonymous Retaliate for Christopher Dorner's Probable Death? (http://www.vice.com/read/will-anonymous-retaliate-for-christopher-dorners-death)


Alternet: How Do We Interpret Christopher Dorner?
(http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/chaunceydevega/how-do-we-interpret-christopher-dorner?page=0%2C1)
Christopher Dorner was a "bad man" in the literal sense: he killed, and was the target of a massive manhunt, and one who went out, quite literally, in a blaze of gunfire and violence.

In the literary sense, Dorner is not a badman... yet. But, that is the power of cultural memory.

Perhaps, Christopher Dorner will be transformed through popular culture and storytelling into a figure talked about for decades and centuries to come, with multiple versions of his tales and exploits, shaped by the griots and bards for their respective audiences?

While Dorner has many attributes that locate him firmly within Black (American) folklore, popular culture, and memory, I would argue that he is most accurately described as an Age of Obama version of The Spook Who Sat By the Door.

Penned by Sam Greenlee, The Spook Who Sat by the Door is an underground book (and then film) classic. The story focused on the exploits of Dan Freeman an African-American CIA agent who in an epiphanic moment came to realize that he was working for a corrupt and racist government. The main character then goes rogue, just as Dorner has done, and organizes a cadre of Black Nationalist freedom fighters to "take down the man." The Spook Who Sat by the Door was later remade as a film during the blaxploitation film cycle of the 1970s.

In my book murdering innocent people disqualifies you from folk hero status, literary or otherwise.

If Barrak Obama had a son... he'd look like Christopher Dorner... Trayvon Martin was a two bit thug...

Man, if only liberals were eliminated there would be no crime.

Most of this killings ARE committed by liberals... the records prove it.

Ok, let's see the records.

Ok, let's see the records.

Google them up yourself.. they are easily accessible. Then you can't accuse me of cherry picking.

man, if only liberals were eliminated there would be no crime.

As usual the point goes right over your head and leads straight to ridiculousness.

Well ridiculousness is the point of these threads, no?

I'm still chewing on what smoothy's definition of liberal could be.

I'm still chewing on what smoothy's definition of liberal could be.google it!!!!!!!! :)

I don't know, but if he means most domestic terrorist incidents are committed by left-wingers that would be correct.

google it!!!!!!!! :)
Is smoothy's definition Googleable?

I don't know, but if he means most domestic terrorist incidents are committed by left-wingers that would be correct.
Right wing is God, Mom, and apple pie?

Is smoothy's definition Googleable?

Mine is... which is more than can be said about most of NK's socialist dogma. Even Lenin would have rejected their definitions of things. Though I'm sure they have a dog-eared copy of Sol Alinsky's Rules for Radicals in a prominent location on a bookshelf.

NK's socialist dogmaI'm a socialist now? LOL!

I'm a socialist now? LOL!
Jesus was too, so you're in good company.

I'm a socialist now? LOL!
Read your posts... it really is that obvious.

I'm just like Jesus. :-)

Right wing is God, Mom, and apple pie?

I implied nothing, I stated a fact.

Jesus was too, so you're in good company.

He refused to create an earthly kingdom.. How can he be socialist ?

Show me anywhere where he requires a government to take care of the poor and the needy ? There are plenty of passages that require families ,individuals and the church to take on the responsibility . And of course there are passages requiring individuals to take care of themselves.

“Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth.”
"All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty.”
“The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

He refused to create an earthly kingdom.. How can he be socialist ?
What's your definition of socialist?

Jesus espoused a socialist society.

“Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth.”
"All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty.”
“The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”
Jesus didn't say any of that.

What's your definition of socialist?

Jesus espoused a socialist society.

Jesus didn't say any of that.

By all means, please show us where Jesus espoused a "socialist society."

Jesus didn't say any of that.
That's because you've just witnessed Cafeteria Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cafeteria_Christianity)

The Lord helps those who help themselves doesn't sound too socialist to me...



Or give a man a fish and you feed him for a day... teach him how to fish and you feed him for life.


Socialists demand everything be handed to them... its immoral to have to break a sweat and work for anything.

That's because you've just witnessed Cafeteria Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Um, no. Tom gave legit bible passages and whether Jesus said them or not is irrelevant, He never contradicted them.

Next thing the left will claim Jesus loved Stalin and Mao.

That's because you've just witnessed Cafeteria Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cafeteria_Christianity)

The related term "cafeteria Catholicism" is a pejorative term applied to Catholics who dissent from Roman Catholic moral teaching on issues such as abortion, birth control, premarital sex, masturbation or homosexuality.

No that wouldn't be me.

For, indeed, although the socialists, stealing the very Gospel itself with a view to deceive more easily the unwary, have been accustomed to distort it so as to suit their own purposes, nevertheless so great is the difference between their depraved teachings and the most pure doctrine of Christ that none greater could exist:
(QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS (On Socialism)
Pope Leo XIII 28 December 1878.)

1878??

1878?? That's the world they live in.

Next thing the left will claim Jesus loved Stalin and Mao.

Why not smoothy they have already claimed he was a socialist, he fed people for free and took the kid's lunch to do it, he healed the sick and didn't ask a fee for it, he advocated paying taxes, his people held property in common and had social welfare programs.

The right wing want to claim him but they won't implement his programs

1878????????????????
A Papal encyclical is timeless.

A Papal encyclical is timeless.
To whom?

Why not smoothy they have already claimed he was a socialist, he fed people for free and took the kid's lunch to do it, he healed the sick and didn't ask a fee for it, he advocated paying taxes, his people held property in common and had social welfare programs.

The right wing want to claim him but they won't implement his programs

Because there is a huge difference between helping someone in a particular single instance... and giving them a free ride for life for everything.

Why not smoothy they have already claimed he was a socialist, he fed people for free and took the kid's lunch to do it, he healed the sick and didn't ask a fee for it, he advocated paying taxes, his people held property in common and had social welfare programs.

The right wing want to claim him but they won't implement his programs
Acts 5 : 1-4... did not Ananias and Sapphira own the land they sold... and the money from the sale “at [his] disposal.” ?

That's the world they live in.

So truth is no longer truth because of a date?

Right to bear arms was written for single shot muscats, now you guys claim it means semi automatic rifles with 30 round clips.

Right to bear arms was written for single shot muscats, now you guys claim it means semi automatic rifles with 30 round clips.

The second amendment was written for a purpose, not a weapon.

Acts 5 : 1-4 ....did not Ananias and Sapphira own the land they sold ...and the money from the sale “at [his] disposal.” ?
And what happened to those two? And why?

The second amendment was written for a purpose, not a weapon.
The men who wrote that had no clue what the next decade years would bring, much less what this millennium would be like.

And what happened to those two? and why?

They died because they lied to the Holy Spirit... not because they lied to men about the sale. As the passage clearly points out... the land and the money was theirs to do as they pleased... ie private property ownership.

they died because they lied to the Holy Spirit
And the lie was about what?

The men who wrote that had no clue what the next decade years would bring, much less what this millennium would be like.

Irrelevant, it was written for a purpose and that purpose has not changed.

Irrelevant, it was written for a purpose and that purpose has not changed.
We are governed by a foreign nation with hired soldiers we must fight?

We are governed by a foreign nation with hired soldiers we must fight?

It was adopted in 1791, roughly 8 years after the Revolutionary War ended.

It was adopted in 1791, roughly 8 years after the Revolutionary War ended.
But they might have recaptured us.

But they might have recaptured us.

Precisely, self defense against enemies foreign or domestic.

The second amendment was written for a purpose, not a weapon.

It also could have easily said MUSKET... but it didn't , it said arms... for a very good reason as you said. It meant a variety of weapons... unlike the average liberal... these guys were able to actually think.

Well, they did sack Washington indicating that as a policy, it was a failure, but the diehards never admit their mistake and two hundred years later they still cling to the idea of vigilantism as the answer to societies crises

It also could have easily said MUSKET ...but it didn't , it said arms....for a very good reason as you said. It meant a variety of weapons...unlike the average liberal....these guys were able to actually think.
Who will be fighting? About what? And using what against drones, various gases, bazookas, tanks, and nuclear bombs?

Who will be fighting?

Police say that just before midnight Wednesday, two armed men burst into Harris's home in the 4300 block of NW 16th Avenue, demanding cash.

Stewart and her 11-year-old daughter were asleep at the time.

Harris's mother-in-law, Annie Streeter, said, “When the mother came into the room, someone put a gun to her head and made the father get down on the floor.”

Harris's cousin, Arnica Perez, said “When one of the gunmen tried to go to the daughter's room, that's when they wrestled and they struggled and he shot him.”

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/02/13/miami-dad-killed-protecting-daughter-during-home-invasion/
Maurice Harris deserved the chance to defend himself ,his family ,the home from invaders who would obtain a weapon regardless of the law prohibiting it . That's who the law abiding citizen is fighting against. The police as usual are there to do the post incident report.

That's who the law abiding citizen is fighting against.
I thought the arming is for a militia against the government.

Harris is lucky his daughter didn't get her hands on the gun.

Harris is dead... his luck ran out . Militias are one clause of the 2nd . The other one ;quite explicit is the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

You keep selectively quoting the clause without putting it in context. It is as if by saying it enough you make your point of veiw absolute truth. The point of the clause is to maintain a militia, back in the days when they couldn't afford a standing army or police force, and in any case, there was the tyranny of distance to consider. As I have said before Tom, ad nausium, these are different days

You keep selectively quoting the clause without putting it in context. It is as if by saying it enough you make your point of veiw absolute truth. The point of the clause is to maintain a militia, back in the days when they couldn't afford a standing army or police force, and in any case, there was the tyranny of distance to consider. As I have said before Tom, ad nausium, these are different days
They HAD an army back in the day... the Militia were private citizens... more like the national guard.

And it specified BOTH the right to have a Militia AND the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.

By that argument.. were does it grant the people the freedom of speech? You can't define the first one way and the second under different criteria.

Not if you expect to have any credibility.

the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.
And their reason to say that was?

And their reason to say that was?

To prevent a Tyrannical government from returning like the one they fought a war to get away from in England.

An armed populace would never allow it... or at least before the moral decay of certain groups that are too lazy to move to a country that has such a government that they rather have an oppressive government here.

Gorilla warfare was important in the Revolutionary war... it wasn't just the Regular army fighting it.

To prevent a Tyrannical government from returning like the one they fought a war to get away from in England.
(I was writing more and accidentally kicked myself offline.)

And who will lead this effort? (Seems like the Republicans in the House are doing a great job of stymieing things minus the guns. Our system of government works quite well.)

(I was writing more and accidentally kicked myself offline.)

And who will lead this effort? (Seems like the Republicans in the House are doing a great job of stymieing things minus the guns. Our system of government works quite well.)

Don't NEED a leader to be effective... the need might never arise.. but the way things are heading the last few years.. there likely will be.

Don't NEED a leader to be effective...the need might never arise..but the way things are heading the last few years..there likely will be.
If the right would get their act together and do it right (ha ha, that's funny), they could clean up the place. Unfortunately, I'm not in politics to tell them how to do this and be their leader. (Yes, they desperately need a leader.)

Well... the sad thing is so few people understand the old saying "...those who forget history, are doomed to repeat it."

Gun control and confiscations preceded the worst atrocities in the last several hundred years. Yes the British tried it here before the beginning of the revolutionary war too... for the same reason as all the others... an unarmed populace is a populace that can be oppressed.

an unarmed populace is a populace that can be oppressed.
Well, the US sure has that covered!

Well, the US sure has that covered!

For now they do... The Obama worshipers want to impose gun confiscation.. (they have actually said that much) Barbara Fienstein is on record for just one. So Obama can declare himself emperor and throw out the constitution.

There is no other justification for disarming the people.

No I don't implicitly trust any politician.

For now they do....The Obama worshipers want to impose gun confiscation..(they have actually said that much) Barbara Fienstein is on record for just one. So Obama can declare himself emperor and throw out the constitution.
That is simply not true. No one is going to disarm anyone or confiscate guns. There is no way anyone could recall 300+M guns and get away with it.

That is simply not true. No one is going to disarm anyone or confiscate guns. There is no way anyone could recall 300+M guns and get away with it.
They are dumb enough to try to do it... many of them will do anything their Messiah Lord Obama tells them to do... they already believe everything he tells them to believe. Reminds me of the Followers of Pol Pot. And Mao. Look at how many people revered Stalin... even after killing over 20 million of his own people.

I didn't say they could get away with it without serious bloodshed... but they aren't smart enough to understand how seriously most of us take our second amendment rights.

I know very few people that would hand over anything, OR even register anything (the only reason for that is to know who has what so they can go after them)... and quite a few that if they went door to door trying... a lot of them won't be going home again.

They are dumb enough to try to do it........many of them will do anything their Messiah Lord Obama tells them to do
He won't be telling anyone to do that, now or ever. And he won't allow anyone else to do it in his stead.

You've got lots of "them"s and "they"s in your post, Not sure who this paranoia is leveled at.

He won't be telling anyone to do that, now or ever. And he won't allow anyone else to do it in his stead.

You've got lots of "them"s and "they"s in your post,. Not sure who this paranoia is leveled at.

The sheeple that believed the propaganda that expect their free Obama money now...

You didn't listen to any of his recent anti-gun rants, have you? He very much IS calling for taking away our guns... he and his minions have been very explicit about that.

You didn't listen to any of his recent anti-gun rants, have you? He very much IS calling for taking away our guns...he and his minions have been very explicit about that.
I've listened to every word he has said. Do not be afraid.

And I am not a sheeple.

For now they do....The Obama worshipers want to impose gun confiscation..(they have actually said that much) Barbara Fienstein is on record for just one. So Obama can declare himself emperor and throw out the constitution.

There is no other justification for disarming the people.

No I don't implicitly trust any politician.

Have you stopped to think that the motivation is to protect the people, to protect those who cannot protect themselves. Obama doesn't want to declare himself Emperor and even if he did, an armed population will help him, not hinder him. As soon as there is an armed insurrection, he has the mandate to declare martial law. Twice in your history an armed population has led to a civil war, with devastating consequences. On one occasion the rebels won, on the other they did not. Get out of the romance and into reality

have you stopped to think that the motivation is to protect the people, to protect those who cannot protect themselves. Obama doesn't want to declare himself Emperor and even if he did, an armed population will help him, not hinder him. As soon as there is an armed insurrection, he has the mandate to declare martial law. Twice in your history an armed population has led to a civil war, with devistating consequences. On one occasion the rebels won, on the other they did not. get out of the romance and into reality

There is NO legitimate motive to circumvent the Bill of Rights or the Constitution.

Any such action is nothing short of Treason.

But then... you've never lived in a nation with a real Constitution, one that wasn't written in pencil.

Is that right, well it happens that the Constitution of this nation was written having due reference to what had transpired on the other side of the Pacific. We took the good parts of your Constitution and left the rest, and we don't suffer from lead poisoning here. Strange that?
Our pencil constitution, as you put it, has allowed us to throw out a bad government on its ear, mid term, something your constitution would never allow you to accomplish. We don't spend our time debating our rights, we don't spend our time stumbling from one election to the next, We get on with what is important not batting a depression caused by, guess who? The people with all the rights

Right... a constitution written in pencil... one that any group of nuts that get enough people elected can change on a whim...

Meaning anything written on it.. isn't worth the paper its written on if it can be changed so easily...

Wait until the next bunch decides to do away with elections because the people can't be trusted to vote... you know... like the people can't be trusted to have guns.

You don't battle about rights because you have none... except what they decide to let you have at any given moment.

Stop talking out of your hat, if there is one thing that is extremely difficult to change it is our constitution, it has only been changed on rare occasions. We have rights, the same rights you had when you defeated King George. What will be swept away is anyone who gets above themselves and sometimes we don't have to wait for an election for that to happen, in fact, I think I see it happening now, another night of the long knives approaches

Stop talking out of your hat, if there is one thing that is extremely difficult to change it is our constitution, it has only been changed on rare occasions. We have rights, the same rights you had when you defeated King George. What will be swept away is anyone who gets above themselves and sometimes we don't have to wait for an election for that to happen, in fact, I think I see it happening now, another night of the long knives approaches

Yeah... time for another revision of the week... how much is left of what you had 10 years ago... much less since your independence? Apparently nothing is sacrosanct in your constitution. Based on your own statements.

That's were we differ greatly... most of ours IS sacrosanct. Or at least so difficult to change... it takes a long time AND a huge effort along with massive support among the voters.

What part of difficult to alter don't you understand, that makes all of it's clauses sacrosanct. You are off in la la land, revision of the week?

The only Constitutional debate at the moment is whether to include recognition of first peoples or original inhabitants who aren't recognised as a separate people in the constitution. Some time in the future we may revisit the republic debate

The only changes to our rights in recent times are the same sort of changes you suffered after 9/11 and they weren't constitutional changes because our parliament has the power to make laws pertaining to criminal acts

The constitution was not written to be worshiped, it a guide to building a more perfect. Like our nation its an ongoing works in process despite right wing disbelief that it gets better, or the lack of willingness to move forward, not back.

Thank god their numbers are dwindling so the collective noise they make is and will be less deafening. Leave 'em alone and they will eat their own.

I have to disagree that your Constitution is like old wine, it gets better with age or that it is improving. What I find amazing is after this long you have to constantly refer to it. We have learn't the rules and we rarely refer to it. That won't always be so here but there has been no serious attempt to alter it in ten, maybe, twenty years.You see we have to get a majority of voters and a majority of states, something like your electoral college, it is very difficult to do

That's what happens when a bunch of immigrants from many cultures are thrown together Clete, there are frictions and conflicts to be resolved. The once dominant immigrants are no longer at the top of the food chain assimilating the lesser ones. The constitution is all they have to hold onto besides their guns and the rich.

But the constitutions says that slave and master are equals but master still doesn't want to share. Because then he must submit to assimilation himself. That will take a while.

Do you really think that is the problem, we have as many cultures and peoples and no reason to retreat into our constitutional fortress, in another hundred years it may be different