Re: NOTICE TO THE Supreme Court

[Max Isn't Well]

In article <pan.2008.06.08.14.02.43.820278
@meower.flonker.kookologist.sf-fan.callahanian>, TransWench says...

> I was busily flonking away in talk.politics.guns,
> alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights, rec.crafts.metalworking,
> misc.survivalism, and alt.usenet.kooks, when The Goddess Eris Herself
> suddenly made me reply to ZeD:
> > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:44:09 -0700, Max Isn't Well wrote:
> >>Aratzio says...
> >>> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:03:51 -0500, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
> >>> "RD (The Sandman)" got double secret probation for writing:
> >>> >Aratzio wrote:
> <biggus snippus>
> >>> >> I don't think there is a right to own an assault weapon.
> >>> >
> >>> >I don't think you know what an assault weapon is. It is a media term
> >>> >used to describe *semi* auto military look alikes. They fire a
> >>> >medium powered round one shot at a time just like a revolver. Now,
> >>> >if you wish to use the term "assault rifle" that is an actual term
> >>> >that describes *full* auto capable weaponry like what is actually
> >>> >used by the military. Full auto weaponry has been controlled by
> >>> >federal law since 1934. Ownership of full auto is banned in some
> >>> >states. The media also uses this term incorrectly in describing what
> >>> >are assault "weapons".
> >>> >
> >>> >Specific
> >>> >> types of military grade weapons should be tightly controlled.
> >>> >
> >>> >They are.....like since 1934.
> >>>
> >>> And demonstrates that controlling specific types of weapons is legal.
> >>
> >>'Legal' but unconstitutional. The second amendment does NOT specify
> >>semi-automatic arms or even small arms.
> >>
> >>The purpose of the second amendment being to provide the citizenry with
> >>protection from the government, I an entitled to any weapon they have.
> >
> > That's a fact. The anti gun nuts must think they have nothing to fear
> > from their government.
>
> I'm still waiting for you gun nuts to actually *do something* about the
> foaming-at-the-mouth government you now have...At the rate you're
> "mobilising", I figure you should be ready to move a week or two after
> Way Too ****ing Late.

Why in the world would they do that? The way the situation sits at the
moment, they get to look downright moderate by comparison.

--

"Tis an ill wind that blows no minds"

[Synthetic Networked Android Responsible for Killing and Yardwork]

Hail Eris! On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:58:42 -0700, Eris Kallisti Discordia was
laughing at the antics of Max Isn't Well, when they suddenly burst out in
tears:
> TransWench says...
>> I was busily flonking away in talk.politics.guns,
>> alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights, rec.crafts.metalworking,
>> misc.survivalism, and alt.usenet.kooks, when The Goddess Eris Herself
>> suddenly made me reply to ZeD:
>> > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:44:09 -0700, Max Isn't Well wrote:
>> >>Aratzio says...
>> >>> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:03:51 -0500, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >>> "RD (The Sandman)" got double secret probation for writing:
>> >>> >Aratzio wrote:
>> <biggus snippus>
>> >>> >> I don't think there is a right to own an assault weapon.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >I don't think you know what an assault weapon is. It is a media
>> >>> >term used to describe *semi* auto military look alikes. They fire
>> >>> >a medium powered round one shot at a time just like a revolver.
>> >>> >Now, if you wish to use the term "assault rifle" that is an actual
>> >>> >term that describes *full* auto capable weaponry like what is
>> >>> >actually used by the military. Full auto weaponry has been
>> >>> >controlled by federal law since 1934. Ownership of full auto is
>> >>> >banned in some states. The media also uses this term incorrectly
>> >>> >in describing what are assault "weapons".
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Specific
>> >>> >> types of military grade weapons should be tightly controlled.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >They are.....like since 1934.
>> >>>
>> >>> And demonstrates that controlling specific types of weapons is
>> >>> legal.
>> >>
>> >>'Legal' but unconstitutional. The second amendment does NOT specify
>> >>semi-automatic arms or even small arms.
>> >>
>> >>The purpose of the second amendment being to provide the citizenry
>> >>with protection from the government, I an entitled to any weapon they
>> >>have.
>> >
>> > That's a fact. The anti gun nuts must think they have nothing to fear
>> > from their government.
>>
>> I'm still waiting for you gun nuts to actually *do something* about the
>> foaming-at-the-mouth government you now have...At the rate you're
>> "mobilising", I figure you should be ready to move a week or two after
>> Way Too ****ing Late.
>
> Why in the world would they do that? The way the situation sits at the
> moment, they get to look downright moderate by comparison.

Well, the ones who're still totally co-opted by BushCo, I wouldn't see
getting in on that action, no, but not all of them _are_, going by what
some of them have said. But it appears even the moderate pro-gun
advocates would rather play politics with those they see as opposing
them, rather than making so much as an attempt to go after the ones
who're turning the US into one big corporation.

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
PorscheMonkey4Life COOSN-029-06-71069; Lits Slut #16
Butcher Knife Natalia; Gutter Chix0r #17; AUK Psycho & Felon #21
BowTie's Spuriously Accused Pedo Photographer #4; Parrot & Zombie #2
Usenet Ruiner #5; Top Asshole #3; Official Chung Demon
Official Chung Demon; Most Hated Usenetizen of All Time #13
Anonymous Psycho Criminal #18
No holy posting of any kind, to email.
"It can't rain all the time"

"Not supporting me is equivalent to forfeiting your own rights." --
John D. Wentzky: Warrior For Your Freedumb! Message-ID:
>

http://www.runescape.com/
Join my RuneScape clan!
http://z11.invisionfree.com/Holy_Pretzel_Cabal/index.php
Full name of clan: Cabal of the Holy International Discordian Internet
And Usenet Terrorist Pretzel

Xander: "I still don't get why we had to come here to get info about a
killer snot monster."
Giles: "Because it's a killer snot monster from outer space. (pause) I
did not say that." -- "Listening to Fear" (87/509), Buffy the Vampire
Slayer
"Actually, I quit. Nobody takes my frock." -- Captain Jack, "The Doctor
Dances" (27.10), Doctor Who

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of PorchMonkey4Life
http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/
The MonkeyLJ: http://porchmonkey.livejournal.com/ -- nuked!

8. OK, so who's this "Dev McKinHole", then?

I dunno, some guy named Devon McKinnon of Dawson Creek, allegedly, and
according to the Monkey, a pedophile. However, I wouldn't take that too
seriously. The Monkey keeps changing his mind about who I am, so there's
no reason to think he won't change it about Mr. McKinnon, too.

"I am mentally stable, fool...I am going to be a bishop's wife." -- Sure
you are, Olympiada. MID: >

"yes you are definitely retarded. See a neurologist immediate. And if
you don't have monet, blow a neurologist immediately." -- Farky the
Monkey-man to peachy ashie passion. No, no trace of irony in his post.
MID: <4h6xh.802$hH2.233@trnddc02>

"I was told there would be cookies."
Cross-Poasters For Goddess!
Remember: Straight people can't help it!
A petition to make the Five-Fingered Hand of Eris
the official symbol for the planet Eris:
http://www.petitiononline.com/ffhoeris/

"If you don't have pedicures AT LEAST every two weeks, don't talk to me.
If you don't floss every night and morning and brush at least twice a
day, don't talk to me. If you don't spend money on you hair and get
great cuts and color, don't talk to me. If you are heavy, don't talk to
me. If you don't shower every morning and take a nice bubble bath every
night, don't talk to me. If you don't have a loved one in your arms,
don't talk to me. If you don't keep an immaculate house, don't talk to
me. If you don't work, don't talk to me." -- Clearly, Martha Vandella
never wants to talk to me, which is for the best, really.
MID: om>

"You're fighting a Furry Giant

"He delivers a long speech about how you shouldn't judge him just because
he's an animal deep down inside and you're all intolerant and dressing up
like an animal in easy-access furry pants doesn't make you a pervert...
you fall asleep halfway through." -- The Kingdom of Loathing

To Whom It May Concern: Michael J. Cranston attorney kook is a stalker.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

In article <pan.2008.06.09.10.24.54.422714
@hail.eris.flonk.meow.all.hail.discordia.meow.flon k.mockery.demon.flonk
..meow.killer.snot-monsters.from.outer.space>, Synthetic Networked
Android Responsible for Killing and Yardwork says...

> Hail Eris! On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:58:42 -0700, Eris Kallisti Discordia was
> laughing at the antics of Max Isn't Well, when they suddenly burst out in
> tears:
> > TransWench says...
> >> I was busily flonking away in talk.politics.guns,
> >> alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights, rec.crafts.metalworking,
> >> misc.survivalism, and alt.usenet.kooks, when The Goddess Eris Herself
> >> suddenly made me reply to ZeD:
> >> > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:44:09 -0700, Max Isn't Well wrote:
> >> >>Aratzio says...
> >> >>> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:03:51 -0500, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
> >> >>> "RD (The Sandman)" got double secret probation for writing:
> >> >>> >Aratzio wrote:
> >> <biggus snippus>
> >> >>> >> I don't think there is a right to own an assault weapon.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >I don't think you know what an assault weapon is. It is a media
> >> >>> >term used to describe *semi* auto military look alikes. They fire
> >> >>> >a medium powered round one shot at a time just like a revolver.
> >> >>> >Now, if you wish to use the term "assault rifle" that is an actual
> >> >>> >term that describes *full* auto capable weaponry like what is
> >> >>> >actually used by the military. Full auto weaponry has been
> >> >>> >controlled by federal law since 1934. Ownership of full auto is
> >> >>> >banned in some states. The media also uses this term incorrectly
> >> >>> >in describing what are assault "weapons".
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >Specific
> >> >>> >> types of military grade weapons should be tightly controlled.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >They are.....like since 1934.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> And demonstrates that controlling specific types of weapons is
> >> >>> legal.
> >> >>
> >> >>'Legal' but unconstitutional. The second amendment does NOT specify
> >> >>semi-automatic arms or even small arms.
> >> >>
> >> >>The purpose of the second amendment being to provide the citizenry
> >> >>with protection from the government, I an entitled to any weapon they
> >> >>have.
> >> >
> >> > That's a fact. The anti gun nuts must think they have nothing to fear
> >> > from their government.
> >>
> >> I'm still waiting for you gun nuts to actually *do something* about the
> >> foaming-at-the-mouth government you now have...At the rate you're
> >> "mobilising", I figure you should be ready to move a week or two after
> >> Way Too ****ing Late.
> >
> > Why in the world would they do that? The way the situation sits at the
> > moment, they get to look downright moderate by comparison.
>
> Well, the ones who're still totally co-opted by BushCo, I wouldn't see
> getting in on that action, no, but not all of them _are_, going by what
> some of them have said. But it appears even the moderate pro-gun
> advocates would rather play politics with those they see as opposing
> them, rather than making so much as an attempt to go after the ones
> who're turning the US into one big corporation.

Engulf & Devour, Inc?

I worked for them back in the 70's


--

"Tis an ill wind that blows no minds"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Maxwell <luv2^fly99@live.^com> wrote in
:

> In article <pan.2008.06.09.10.24.54.422714
> @hail.eris.flonk.meow.all.hail.discordia.meow.flon k.mockery.demon.flon
k
> .meow.killer.snot-monsters.from.outer.space>, Synthetic Networked
> Android Responsible for Killing and Yardwork says...
>
>> Hail Eris! On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:58:42 -0700, Eris Kallisti
>> Discordia was laughing at the antics of Max Isn't Well, when they
>> suddenly burst out in tears:
>> > TransWench says...
>> >> I was busily flonking away in talk.politics.guns,
>> >> alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights, rec.crafts.metalworking,
>> >> misc.survivalism, and alt.usenet.kooks, when The Goddess Eris
>> >> Herself suddenly made me reply to ZeD:
>> >> > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:44:09 -0700, Max Isn't Well wrote:
>> >> >>Aratzio says...
>> >> >>> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:03:51 -0500, in the land of
>> >> >>> alt.usenet.kooks, "RD (The Sandman)" got double secret
>> >> >>> probation for writing:
>> >> >>> >Aratzio wrote:
>> >> <biggus snippus>
>> >> >>> >> I don't think there is a right to own an assault weapon.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >I don't think you know what an assault weapon is. It is a
>> >> >>> >media term used to describe *semi* auto military look alikes.
>> >> >>> > They fire a medium powered round one shot at a time just
>> >> >>> >like a revolver. Now, if you wish to use the term "assault
>> >> >>> >rifle" that is an actual term that describes *full* auto
>> >> >>> >capable weaponry like what is actually used by the military.
>> >> >>> >Full auto weaponry has been controlled by federal law since
>> >> >>> >1934. Ownership of full auto is banned in some states. The
>> >> >>> >media also uses this term incorrectly in describing what are
>> >> >>> >assault "weapons".
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >Specific
>> >> >>> >> types of military grade weapons should be tightly
>> >> >>> >> controlled.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >They are.....like since 1934.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> And demonstrates that controlling specific types of weapons is
>> >> >>> legal.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>'Legal' but unconstitutional. The second amendment does NOT
>> >> >>specify semi-automatic arms or even small arms.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The purpose of the second amendment being to provide the
>> >> >>citizenry with protection from the government, I an entitled to
>> >> >>any weapon they have.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's a fact. The anti gun nuts must think they have nothing to
>> >> > fear from their government.
>> >>
>> >> I'm still waiting for you gun nuts to actually *do something*
>> >> about the foaming-at-the-mouth government you now have...At the
>> >> rate you're "mobilising", I figure you should be ready to move a
>> >> week or two after Way Too ****ing Late.
>> >
>> > Why in the world would they do that? The way the situation sits at
>> > the moment, they get to look downright moderate by comparison.
>>
>> Well, the ones who're still totally co-opted by BushCo, I wouldn't
>> see getting in on that action, no, but not all of them _are_, going
>> by what some of them have said. But it appears even the moderate
>> pro-gun advocates would rather play politics with those they see as
>> opposing them, rather than making so much as an attempt to go after
>> the ones who're turning the US into one big corporation.
>
> Engulf & Devour, Inc?
>
> I worked for them back in the 70's
>
>

We know.

Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@live.^com> wrote in message
...
> In article <pan.2008.06.09.10.24.54.422714
> @hail.eris.flonk.meow.all.hail.discordia.meow.flon k.mockery.demon.flonk
> .meow.killer.snot-monsters.from.outer.space>, Synthetic Networked
> Android Responsible for Killing and Yardwork says...
>
>> Hail Eris! On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:58:42 -0700, Eris Kallisti Discordia
>> was
>> laughing at the antics of Max Isn't Well, when they suddenly burst out in
>> tears:
>> > TransWench says...
>> >> I was busily flonking away in talk.politics.guns,
>> >> alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights, rec.crafts.metalworking,
>> >> misc.survivalism, and alt.usenet.kooks, when The Goddess Eris Herself
>> >> suddenly made me reply to ZeD:
>> >> > On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:44:09 -0700, Max Isn't Well wrote:
>> >> >>Aratzio says...
>> >> >>> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 15:03:51 -0500, in the land of
>> >> >>> alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >> >>> "RD (The Sandman)" got double secret probation for writing:
>> >> >>> >Aratzio wrote:
>> >> <biggus snippus>
>> >> >>> >> I don't think there is a right to own an assault weapon.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >I don't think you know what an assault weapon is. It is a media
>> >> >>> >term used to describe *semi* auto military look alikes. They
>> >> >>> >fire
>> >> >>> >a medium powered round one shot at a time just like a revolver.
>> >> >>> >Now, if you wish to use the term "assault rifle" that is an
>> >> >>> >actual
>> >> >>> >term that describes *full* auto capable weaponry like what is
>> >> >>> >actually used by the military. Full auto weaponry has been
>> >> >>> >controlled by federal law since 1934. Ownership of full auto is
>> >> >>> >banned in some states. The media also uses this term incorrectly
>> >> >>> >in describing what are assault "weapons".
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >Specific
>> >> >>> >> types of military grade weapons should be tightly controlled.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >They are.....like since 1934.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> And demonstrates that controlling specific types of weapons is
>> >> >>> legal.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>'Legal' but unconstitutional. The second amendment does NOT specify
>> >> >>semi-automatic arms or even small arms.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The purpose of the second amendment being to provide the citizenry
>> >> >>with protection from the government, I an entitled to any weapon
>> >> >>they
>> >> >>have.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's a fact. The anti gun nuts must think they have nothing to
>> >> > fear
>> >> > from their government.
>> >>
>> >> I'm still waiting for you gun nuts to actually *do something* about
>> >> the
>> >> foaming-at-the-mouth government you now have...At the rate you're
>> >> "mobilising", I figure you should be ready to move a week or two after
>> >> Way Too ****ing Late.
>> >
>> > Why in the world would they do that? The way the situation sits at the
>> > moment, they get to look downright moderate by comparison.
>>
>> Well, the ones who're still totally co-opted by BushCo, I wouldn't see
>> getting in on that action, no, but not all of them _are_, going by what
>> some of them have said. But it appears even the moderate pro-gun
>> advocates would rather play politics with those they see as opposing
>> them, rather than making so much as an attempt to go after the ones
>> who're turning the US into one big corporation.
>
> Engulf & Devour, Inc?
>
> I worked for them back in the 70's
>
>
> --
>
> "Tis an ill wind that blows no minds"