>> Good luck in your future career as a convict... maybe you can
 >> discuss it with Bryant for the next 50 years.

 >  NP> That is a very offensive remark. By stating that I would kill
 >  NP> somome and end up in jail seems to me to be on the other side
 >  NP> of the line

 >   I said nothing about you wurdering women and pregnant children (or
 > whatever insanity you have decided to read into my words). This was
 > in
 > repsonse to your statement that you would not turn in your weapons
 > if                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 > the law were changed.

A statement I did not make!

 > It *has* been changed.

In Tasmania it has.  Not nationally as yet

> Do you intend to turn  in  your weapons now?

What makes you think that I have any weapons that fall into the banned
categories in Tasmania.

Do _you_know_ what types of weapons the tasmanian Government has banned ?


 > What comes next is gaol. Say hello to Bryant for  me.

Still got your mind made up that I am criminal I see.


 >   I'm sorry that this is such a touchy subject with you Neils, but
 > life is like that.

It is NOT the subject that is touchy with me.

It is the INCORRECT statements made by YOU based on what you _think_ I
own in the way of firearms, and how I would act in a given situation.

It appears to be a touchy subject for you though given the incorrect and
ridiculous assumptions that you have posted.


 > but don't expect to spout gun-nut theory at me and walk away free.

I was not spouting gun-nut theory, but asking a question.

Check my original message and you will see that I was asking you a
question as to what you thought the public reaction would be to a given scenario.

All I got from you was ridicuous statements as to my criminal tendencies
and that my future would be in gaol.

You didn't answer the question _then_,  and _still_ haven't.

Maybe the question was too hard?


Niels

--- FMail/386 0.98