You stole something. It doesn't matter whether you were prosecuted or not.
You say that illegal immigrants are criminals too, but they aren't
prosecuted either. They are just deported, to try again later. They must
not be doing anything wrong then.

If you want to have a discussion, you should try using logical arguments,
rather than shooting from the hip every time. It is so easy to get you to
contradict yourself, and then you make up some argument, to prove that you
really didn't do so. You are ridiculous, Nathan.

Earle

"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:3uqdnWjS-f1BAdHZRVn-vA@comcast.com...
>
>
> "Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:5vY2g.128$KO6.21658@news.uswest.net...
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:lu2dnfFHec2S2dHZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> >> Trademark disputes are based on trademark law.
> >
> > we arent discussing trademak law. we are discussing CRIMINAL law.
there
> > is a distinct difference. earle labelled me a "criminal" which requires
a
> > violation of CRIMINAL law.
> >
>
> Yes, but you said you do not break written law, you didn't qualify which
> law. Law is law, is it not?
>
> >>Yes it was a civil matter but that's how trademark cases are handled.
You
> >>use someone else's trademark, that's a violation of the law.
> >>
> >> How about your admitted theft of intellectual property?
> >
> > show me any case anywhere that a person was prosecuted for downloading
> > music. otherwise youre blowing hot air. hell yes ive downloaded music
> > off the internet. show me where that is CRIMINAL, or admit to your
> > mistake.
> >
>
> Illegally downloading music:
> http://mp3.about.com/od/isitlegal/a/riaalawsuits.htm " ...downloading
> copyrighted material without expressed permission is illegal. Such music
> must be purchased in order to be legal."
>
> Interesting how you pick and choose which laws you think are OK to break,
> after saying you don't break written law. Reminds me of Bill Clinton
arguing
> about the definition of the word "is."
>
>

 

You stole something. It doesn't matter whether you were prosecuted or not.
You say that illegal immigrants are criminals too, but they aren't
prosecuted either. They are just deported, to try again later. They must
not be doing anything wrong then.

If you want to have a discussion, you should try using logical arguments,
rather than shooting from the hip every time. It is so easy to get you to
contradict yourself, and then you make up some argument, to prove that you
really didn't do so. You are ridiculous, Nathan.

Earle

"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:3uqdnWjS-f1BAdHZRVn-vA@comcast.com...
>
>
> "Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:5vY2g.128$KO6.21658@news.uswest.net...
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:lu2dnfFHec2S2dHZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> >> Trademark disputes are based on trademark law.
> >
> > we arent discussing trademak law. we are discussing CRIMINAL law.
there
> > is a distinct difference. earle labelled me a "criminal" which requires
a
> > violation of CRIMINAL law.
> >
>
> Yes, but you said you do not break written law, you didn't qualify which
> law. Law is law, is it not?
>
> >>Yes it was a civil matter but that's how trademark cases are handled.
You
> >>use someone else's trademark, that's a violation of the law.
> >>
> >> How about your admitted theft of intellectual property?
> >
> > show me any case anywhere that a person was prosecuted for downloading
> > music. otherwise youre blowing hot air. hell yes ive downloaded music
> > off the internet. show me where that is CRIMINAL, or admit to your
> > mistake.
> >
>
> Illegally downloading music:
> http://mp3.about.com/od/isitlegal/a/riaalawsuits.htm " ...downloading
> copyrighted material without expressed permission is illegal. Such music
> must be purchased in order to be legal."
>
> Interesting how you pick and choose which laws you think are OK to break,
> after saying you don't break written law. Reminds me of Bill Clinton
arguing
> about the definition of the word "is."
>
>

 

I saw hounds gutting deer around the north boundary to Bon Echo Park,
north of Kingston the first week of January this year. It 'sure' looked
like the hounds brought him down.

Mike

FrankW wrote:
>
> Hi Mike.
> You can only use hounds to hunt deer and bear.
> They can never outrun or catch up to a deer or bear.
> Now wild dogs like a shepard...etc
> They can do alot of damage to the deer herd.
> FYI. Wolf hunting season is all year long in Ontario.
> In some counties/townships they even have a bounty on them.
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > It was legal where I grew up... Not where I live now, they train dogs
> > to run deer here.....
> >
> > Mike
> > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> > Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> > (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

I saw hounds gutting deer around the north boundary to Bon Echo Park,
north of Kingston the first week of January this year. It 'sure' looked
like the hounds brought him down.

Mike

FrankW wrote:
>
> Hi Mike.
> You can only use hounds to hunt deer and bear.
> They can never outrun or catch up to a deer or bear.
> Now wild dogs like a shepard...etc
> They can do alot of damage to the deer herd.
> FYI. Wolf hunting season is all year long in Ontario.
> In some counties/townships they even have a bounty on them.
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > It was legal where I grew up... Not where I live now, they train dogs
> > to run deer here.....
> >
> > Mike
> > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> > Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> > (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

I saw hounds gutting deer around the north boundary to Bon Echo Park,
north of Kingston the first week of January this year. It 'sure' looked
like the hounds brought him down.

Mike

FrankW wrote:
>
> Hi Mike.
> You can only use hounds to hunt deer and bear.
> They can never outrun or catch up to a deer or bear.
> Now wild dogs like a shepard...etc
> They can do alot of damage to the deer herd.
> FYI. Wolf hunting season is all year long in Ontario.
> In some counties/townships they even have a bounty on them.
>
> Mike Romain wrote:
>
> > It was legal where I grew up... Not where I live now, they train dogs
> > to run deer here.....
> >
> > Mike
> > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> > Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
> > Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
> > (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> "Seahag" <Seahag@toadymail.net> wrote:
>> My Grandparents went to extraordinary lengths to kill
>> rattlers, if they couldn't run over them with a vehicle
>> they'd stop and grab whatever was handy, generally
>> construction tools. I saw Joe pound the crap outta one,
>> on a dirt shoulder, with a sledge hammer.
>
> first time i killed a rattler by chopping his head off,
> the severed head continued to try to bite the shovel. i
> scooped it up and put it on the road where eventually a
> car smashed it good.

One time some teenagers found the body and were using it to
skeer their girlfriends! Grampa used to throw the heads off
into the scrub where people weren't able to get to it.

Seahag

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> "Seahag" <Seahag@toadymail.net> wrote:
>> My Grandparents went to extraordinary lengths to kill
>> rattlers, if they couldn't run over them with a vehicle
>> they'd stop and grab whatever was handy, generally
>> construction tools. I saw Joe pound the crap outta one,
>> on a dirt shoulder, with a sledge hammer.
>
> first time i killed a rattler by chopping his head off,
> the severed head continued to try to bite the shovel. i
> scooped it up and put it on the road where eventually a
> car smashed it good.

One time some teenagers found the body and were using it to
skeer their girlfriends! Grampa used to throw the heads off
into the scrub where people weren't able to get to it.

Seahag

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathan@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> "Seahag" <Seahag@toadymail.net> wrote:
>> My Grandparents went to extraordinary lengths to kill
>> rattlers, if they couldn't run over them with a vehicle
>> they'd stop and grab whatever was handy, generally
>> construction tools. I saw Joe pound the crap outta one,
>> on a dirt shoulder, with a sledge hammer.
>
> first time i killed a rattler by chopping his head off,
> the severed head continued to try to bite the shovel. i
> scooped it up and put it on the road where eventually a
> car smashed it good.

One time some teenagers found the body and were using it to
skeer their girlfriends! Grampa used to throw the heads off
into the scrub where people weren't able to get to it.

Seahag

 

"Earle Horton" wrote in message
> He doesn't have strong convictions though! He goes with whatever way the
> wind blows, wherever he happens to be. This is not a bad way to be, if
> you
> want to go through life without the bother of moral convictions, but it
> amuses me that he invokes "right" and "wrong" every time. All he cares
> about, is convenience and his own temporary interest. I wish he would
> just
> admit it. He's not really any more righteous, nor does he have any right
> to
> be, than the rest of us.
>
> I find his condemnation of illegal immigrants to be hypocritical too. How
> many HVAC contracts does he lose, every year, to illegal immigrants from
> Saskatchawan?
>
> Earle

Earle,

A few of my own opinions / observations on the preceding arguments:

I'd never presume to tell Nathan that I knew better than he how things
are in his part of the country, any more than I would anyone else. What
gives you or anyone else the right to do that?

At some point, you have to say to yourself; "I don't actually live
there, or, I've never actually done or experienced that myself, so I may not
be the best person to judge or offer up advice on that subject.

I think you can disagree with a persons opinion or point of view without
making a personal attack of everything about them, that includes taking past
statements he may or may not have said about different subjects out of
context.

Bottom line: I think you are attacking him because his opinion differs from
yours.

On the other hand:

I think some folks in here would rather argue a point they have no proof
of, rather than to admit "they don't know", just for the sake of argument,
or the need to always be right, I don't know which.

Example: If I posted my experiences while in Bosnia in 1992-93, I'm
sure of at least three in here (no names) who would dispute what I
experienced first hand, because they read about it in some book somewhere. I
was told it says in books that the US wasn't even over there in 1992-93, so,
my scars on my knee, and the death of two of my closest buddies must not
have happened.

Some books are just someone else's opinion, or biased research, published.

These, as previously stated, are just my opinions.

Spdloader

 

"Earle Horton" wrote in message
> He doesn't have strong convictions though! He goes with whatever way the
> wind blows, wherever he happens to be. This is not a bad way to be, if
> you
> want to go through life without the bother of moral convictions, but it
> amuses me that he invokes "right" and "wrong" every time. All he cares
> about, is convenience and his own temporary interest. I wish he would
> just
> admit it. He's not really any more righteous, nor does he have any right
> to
> be, than the rest of us.
>
> I find his condemnation of illegal immigrants to be hypocritical too. How
> many HVAC contracts does he lose, every year, to illegal immigrants from
> Saskatchawan?
>
> Earle

Earle,

A few of my own opinions / observations on the preceding arguments:

I'd never presume to tell Nathan that I knew better than he how things
are in his part of the country, any more than I would anyone else. What
gives you or anyone else the right to do that?

At some point, you have to say to yourself; "I don't actually live
there, or, I've never actually done or experienced that myself, so I may not
be the best person to judge or offer up advice on that subject.

I think you can disagree with a persons opinion or point of view without
making a personal attack of everything about them, that includes taking past
statements he may or may not have said about different subjects out of
context.

Bottom line: I think you are attacking him because his opinion differs from
yours.

On the other hand:

I think some folks in here would rather argue a point they have no proof
of, rather than to admit "they don't know", just for the sake of argument,
or the need to always be right, I don't know which.

Example: If I posted my experiences while in Bosnia in 1992-93, I'm
sure of at least three in here (no names) who would dispute what I
experienced first hand, because they read about it in some book somewhere. I
was told it says in books that the US wasn't even over there in 1992-93, so,
my scars on my knee, and the death of two of my closest buddies must not
have happened.

Some books are just someone else's opinion, or biased research, published.

These, as previously stated, are just my opinions.

Spdloader