Page 15 of 935 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565115515 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 225 of 14013

Thread: Stupid World

  1. #211
    Join Date
    5th November 2009 - 09:50
    Bike
    GSXR750, KTM350EXCF
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,264
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post


    New laws cost $3.5m each - study... so we're paying to remove our own freedoms... oh the irony.
    And sadly it is lost on the one that doesn't vote.

  2. #212
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Law change in way of anti-corruption convention

    "Correspondence from the Ministry of Justice reveals a change made to an anti-money laundering Bill in 2009 is the problem.

    At the time, Parliament removed a requirement for prominent public servants to be subject to enhanced due diligence around such matters."

    and remember, at all costs you must protect your own bwaaaa ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa. This has to be my fave for a while.
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

  3. #213
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post
    Shame you see them as random press links... but I guess that was to be expected.

    Have another old chap.

    New laws cost $3.5m each - study... so we're paying to remove our own freedoms... oh the irony.
    More fatuous comments.

    Why is the cost of legislation related to the removal of freedoms?
    The fact is that passing a new law costs money.
    Are you inferring that $3.5m is excessive? because Prof. Wilson at Otago University says it's good value:
    http://www.3news.co.nz/Health-legisl...2/Default.aspx

    You also don't give us any proof of connection between new legislation and loss of freedom. We don't have to go that far into the past to come up with legislation that gives more freedom: Gay Rights, Civil Unions, or the Bill of Rights Act.

  4. #214
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    More fatuous comments.

    Why is the cost of legislation related to the removal of freedoms?
    The fact is that passing a new law costs money.
    Are you inferring that $3.5m is excessive? because Prof. Wilson at Otago University says it's good value:
    http://www.3news.co.nz/Health-legisl...2/Default.aspx

    You also don't give us any proof of connection between new legislation and loss of freedom. We don't have to go that far into the past to come up with legislation that gives more freedom: Gay Rights, Civil Unions, or the Bill of Rights Act.
    Legislation removes my choice and therefore removes more of my freedom. Calling that fatuous, well let's not go down that road suffice to say that I see things very differently from yourself.
    Of course it costs money, I'm not saying that it doesn't, I'm not saying that in the current environment that it isn't value for money (other than it only needs to be done because the justice system cannot rely on common sense alone any more, hence the above story of "protection" of those in power), you're the one who has opened up the "argument" further than it needed to go, as is your bent.

    As above, legislation removes my choice and therefore removes more of my freedom. Why do we need legislation to allow people to be gay? or black? or female? or to TELL us what our rights are? As I said, your freedom is not your choice, unless your choice has been legislated for. An exceptionally archaic way of doing things... but hey, politics wouldn't be politics without the government telling us what we aren't allowed to do. the funny thing is, it doesn't stop those who exercise their "bad" choices anyway. Those who believe that we need our lives legislated in such a way are nothing but sheep.
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

  5. #215
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post
    Legislation removes my choice and therefore removes more of my freedom. Calling that fatuous, well let's not go down that road suffice to say that I see things very differently from yourself.
    Of course it costs money, I'm not saying that it doesn't, I'm not saying that in the current environment that it isn't value for money (other than it only needs to be done because the justice system cannot rely on common sense alone any more, hence the above story of "protection" of those in power), you're the one who has opened up the "argument" further than it needed to go, as is your bent.

    As above, legislation removes my choice and therefore removes more of my freedom. Why do we need legislation to allow people to be gay? or black? or female? or to TELL us what our rights are? As I said, your freedom is not your choice, unless your choice has been legislated for. An exceptionally archaic way of doing things... but hey, politics wouldn't be politics without the government telling us what we aren't allowed to do. the funny thing is, it doesn't stop those who exercise their "bad" choices anyway. Those who believe that we need our lives legislated in such a way are nothing but sheep.

    That's better - you're using your words.
    Your original post had the link and some silly comment about irony (which, strictly speaking it wasn't). It's good to see that you have some opinions of your own.

    You still have a problem with comprehension, though - I said your remarks were fatuous, not the legislation.

  6. #216
    Join Date
    5th November 2009 - 09:50
    Bike
    GSXR750, KTM350EXCF
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    That's better - you're using your words.
    Your original post had the link and some silly comment about irony (which, strictly speaking it wasn't). It's good to see that you have some opinions of your own.

    You still have a problem with comprehension, though - I said your remarks were fatuous, not the legislation.
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Oscar again.

    At least he's learning.

  7. #217
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    That's better - you're using your words.
    Your original post had the link and some silly comment about irony (which, strictly speaking it wasn't). It's good to see that you have some opinions of your own.

    You still have a problem with comprehension, though - I said your remarks were fatuous, not the legislation.
    cheers Dad. It is Ironic to me. You have your own view and you don't see the post as ironic, just fatuous . Fair enough, that's your comprehension of what I am getting at in 4 or 5 words of posting ... entertaining if nothing else .
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

  8. #218
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by BoristheBiter View Post
    At least he's learning.
    That makes 1 out of the 3 of us ... although I always knew that 1 of us was open to learning.
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

  9. #219
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post
    cheers Dad. It is Ironic to me. You have your own view and you don't see the post as ironic, just fatuous . Fair enough, that's your comprehension of what I am getting at in 4 or 5 words of posting ... entertaining if nothing else .
    You missed my meaning (comprehension again).
    Having to pay for losing your freedoms isn't ironic.
    It doesn't qualify as irony:

    Irony: The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

  10. #220
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    You missed my meaning (comprehension again).
    Having to pay for losing your freedoms isn't ironic.
    It doesn't qualify as irony:
    It is ironic if you believe that we are paying for our freedoms (plenty of people believe this is why we pay for our legislation)... I find it humorous that that is the opposite that is actually happening. Perception, not comprehension is the difference. I understand why you don't see it as ironic. Seems to be a one way street here .
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

  11. #221
    Join Date
    16th September 2004 - 16:48
    Bike
    PopTart Katoona
    Location
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,542
    Blog Entries
    1
    You have the right to remain silent. Anything you do say will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right for an attorney, should you not have an attorney the court will provide you with one.

    Have anything to say.
    Thought fucken not.

    Freedom is a form of sanitary pad, not a right anymore.
    Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.

  12. #222
    Join Date
    5th November 2009 - 09:50
    Bike
    GSXR750, KTM350EXCF
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2,264
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post
    It is ironic if you believe that we are paying for our freedoms (plenty of people believe this is why we pay for our legislation)... I find it humorous that that is the opposite that is actually happening. Perception, not comprehension is the difference. I understand why you don't see it as ironic. Seems to be a one way street here .
    legislation is only because we can't kill the stupid.

    The problem is if you have the right to do what ever you want, I guess that is a freedom, you are impacting on someone right to not be bothered by you.

    If common sense was allowed into law non of this would be necessary.

  13. #223
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by BoristheBiter View Post
    legislation is only because we can't kill the stupid.

    The problem is if you have the right to do what ever you want, I guess that is a freedom, you are impacting on someone right to not be bothered by you.

    If common sense was allowed into law non of this would be necessary.
    I thought it was to stop people from doing that very thing ... even stupid people work, don't I, I mean they.

    Teaspoon of cement?

    heh... now that I agree with.
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

  14. #224
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post
    It is ironic if you believe that we are paying for our freedoms (plenty of people believe this is why we pay for our legislation)... I find it humorous that that is the opposite that is actually happening. Perception, not comprehension is the difference. I understand why you don't see it as ironic. Seems to be a one way street here .
    (sigh)
    It's not perception, it's definition.
    It's not irony.

    If you voted to removethe freedom to vote, maybe that would be irony...I dunno.
    Alanis Morrisette has a lot to answer for.

  15. #225
    Join Date
    6th May 2008 - 14:15
    Bike
    She resents being called a bike
    Location
    Wellllie
    Posts
    1,494
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    (sigh)
    It's not perception, it's definition.
    It's not irony.

    If you voted to removethe freedom to vote, maybe that would be irony...I dunno.
    Alanis Morrisette has a lot to answer for.
    Perception changes definition. If it didn't, then lawyers wouldn't be required.
    It is.

    I'm sure she does... but fortunately I never paid her any attention to start with.
    I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •