General Chat

Hi Janey, I don't believe I quoted out of context as I did see Kitty's original posts and was aware of them when I used your quote hence my references to "too" and "also" in some of my posts. Also, I think Kitty's original posts were still there when I started to type out my reply that included your remarks.

As I think i inferred earlier, I only used your replies and not Kitty's original post because originally I wasn't going to single any posts out, it was only your assertion that you did not think you had been personal that prompted me to display the wording which I believed had also been a bit too personal.

However, i can understand with the posts gone that people who may not have seen them, may not be aware of the whole picture. However, Kitty explained why she deleted and made her apologies for any offence she may have caused.

I'm not going to say anymore on this subject this evening as I'm far too tired to put my views across coherently as it is.

I wish everyone a lovely evening whilst I wonder what Injera tastes like :)

Cant either be bothered to read this all the way through , but i know Kitty as never bean nasty or rood and she has said a sorry ) for what i dont know but she has )so Janey keep ya long posts to yaself and post em where someone cares .. your soo roood

Janey, Kitty is neither nasty nor underhanded. You don't like her opinion on lengthy threads, tough.

I'm sorry but there you go. But going on about it in post after post after post, despite any apology, is out of order and downright rude. Enough now, let it drop.

I didn't "personally attack" anyone Janey......I stated how I felt that was all.

I have apologised for any offence to anyone and that includes yourself.

What more can I do?

Hear, hear and well said Red Squirrel.

Sometimes people start to attack the person, not what they have said and I was always taught that that is aggression and will not bring about an agreeable response. How and the manner in which things are worded can bring about a very different outcome and some should consider this before they tap any keys. What is gained by trying to score points all the time? An opinion can be put in an agreeable way, even if it differs from other posters and it is not respectful of others to be insulting.

It is noticable and interesting that some people seem to bring the battleground nature of their past working lives onto these threads as if they cannot adapt to a different scenario.

Yes really JC, otherwise I wouldn't have written it :)

I refer you to the part of my post that says "too". i wasn't going to refer to individual posts but it was your assertion that it couldn't refer to yourself that prompted my last response because in my opinion you also added personal remarks.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't/couldn't respond to something that you thought was aimed at yourself but I thought that your replies also got a bit personal.

There's something that's been niggling at me for a while but I didn't want to patronise you as you're far more articulate than me (that is a compliment by the way and not meant to be an insult) However, I'll say it anyway and hope you won't be offended as that's not my intention.

It's not what people say sometimes but how people say it. I really don't think you do yourself any favours sometimes. For someone who is so obviously very in control and careful of the wording that is used, I honestly think you could be more persuasive in your posts and win more people over. I look in awe at the logic that you use sometimes in your posts but it is sometimes lost by the "bluntness" of the wording sometimes.

Not your problem but ours you may argue, however, with a little more subtlety people will focus on your argument/debate more than how you say it if that makes sense? And to my mind it's the arguments/debate that is far more interesting and you do make the debate interesting :)

I'm sorry if this is a bit blunt (unfortunately although I do try subtlety I often fail) and please believe me that I'm honestly not trying to have a go at you. Just something for you to think about and dismiss if you disagree. :)))

ok cool.

who ??? me

yes i know its only speculation at the moment.but if you read i said IF.and on that note i,ll leave you all to bite each others arses..PRESS THE BUTTON ....nite

Joy, I know all about the gun laws, really.

The question is whether there is some way to prevent incidents like this, and others.

The fact is that they are commonplace in the US -- it's a rare week when there isn't a mass shooting somewhere, a workplace, a school, a street.

They are rare but not unknown in Canada. They are virtually unknown in the UK.

What's the common thread?

Anybody over the age of 5 can get hold of a gun in the US without breaking a sweat. In Canada, I could go through the process of getting a firearms licence and a firearm, but anyone who couldn't would have a more difficult time getting a gun -- much more effort and much more money than in the US, for example. In the UK, it would be more difficult still, I expect.

One common thread is the gun laws. There may as well not be any in the US, it is so easy to ignore them. And there is precious little in the way of laws about storage of guns -- so you get cases like teenagers taking their parents' guns and committing mayhem. In Canada and the UK, where the laws are stricter, there is less mayhem.

Obviously, there is a connection.

Would different laws make the situation even better? That is always the question. Plainly, in the US, laws requiring licensing, registration and safe storage -- if they were enforced to at least some degree -- would likely make a large difference. The UK has those laws. Are there other laws that could make a difference? Possibly.

Nobody can even begin to consider that question without knowing a lot more about the recent event -- where the gun came from, how the man got it, etc. etc. Nobody really thinks that "more laws" will do something. It's a question of what laws, and how they are enforced.

As for the taxes business: what else is a government supposed to say but pay up or else? Unless it was a real case of undue hardship or unfair treatment, and there are ways of dealing with that. Even if there aren't, and you lose your case completely, you really just don't go murdering people. Not if you're normal and decent.

If there are gun laws that could reduce the risk of an abnormal, immoral person murdering people, what would be the problem with that?

kitty you pay your subs and are allowed an opinion as well as the rest of us, and shouldnt feel the nee to delte hun xxxx

Joyous, the government have not started with anything. All they have said is that there shoudl be NO kneejerk reaction regarding gun laws at least until we know as much as we can about it. It's the do-gooders and the anti-gun lobby that have jumped on this particular bandwagon in the main.

Kitty no need to delete, you are as entitled to your view as much as anyone else is hun.

Joyous, like Kay said, it must go deeper than tax problems, and its still all speculation at the moment, the police have not confirmed or denied any of the rumours circulating at the moment. The only thing they are sure of is that his brother, his solicitor and the taxi drivers were not random killings, but the rest were.

We don't know what tipped him over the edge. The tax investigation does seem the most plausible at the moment, but that doesn't explain why he shot his twin brother.

i think your right kay.my gripe is how straight away the government start with the gun laws.i cant see how they can make them tighter.

In my opinion JC, I think your post was quite personal too. Obviously you don't see it that way:

Oh well, Kitty. To each her own, eh?

I can't be bothered with passive-aggressive whining, myself. Or absence of the courage of someone's convictions.

If you don't have anything to say, don't say it!

If you do have something to say, have the guts to say it.

Mottos to live by.

Howzat for short and sweet?

People who choose to engage in a discussion of a serious and complex issue in public and then whine about how many words someone uses, and whine about being presented with actual information about the subject, and whine about being challenged to back up their own words with something resembling facts, reaaaally bore me.

I am deleting my previous 2 posts TW.

If I have offended anyone. I sincerely apologise, my opinions are clearly not wanted, so I will keep them to myself in future.

Joyous ~~ I think it goes much deeper than his Taxes,but all in good time.

janie we dont give access to just anyone .you are vetted and checked ,[and rightly so.]my point was if this guy had problems with tax issues its about time the government were more helpfull on this issue ...its pay up or else.maybe this guy got scared i dont know .not that it gives him the right to do what he did.but as soon as this happened hubby said you watch gun laws here we go again.

Well, SRS, I guess you weren't talking to me, since I did not get personal and I stuck completely to the subject.

Until somebody came along and started getting personal (in the usually cowardly way) about me and whining about something totally unrelated to the subject and completely about me ...

Amazingly, I really have no interest in being a topic of conversation.

Oh, well .......


Why not sort out the tax stuff? C'mon. I'd rather not pay taxes myself. (Of course, I realize that wold leave me without roads and sewers and schools ...)

We can't sort out every grievance that every loon might have. Marc Lépine was aggrieved that he couldn't get into engineering school, which he believed he deserved to do, for which he blamed women, so he shot 14 women engineering students dead. A guy a few months ago in the States was aggrieved that attractive women wouldn't date him, which he believed he deserved, so he went to a gym and shot a few women dead.

We also can't keep guns out of the hands of every loon with a grievance.

But we can be realistic and say that it is unwise to allow everyone, including loons with grievances, easy access to firearms, and do what is likely to be effective to at least make it more difficult for that to happen, so it happens less.