KaskadskyjKozak

But do revolvers? I mean as opposed to say, a semi-automatic Glock?

Hunting rifles are for hunting, and I was talking about self-defense. Yes, there are plenty of good, modern hunting rifles that people should be able to acquire. Generally they don't require large-capacity magazines and rapid-fire. Kind of the idea of hunting is killing on the first shot. Pretty easy to come to agreement here amongst sensible folks - again w/o resorting to a discussion of 1776-era muskets.

I think we can agree that a shot gun or revolver are 1) adequate for home defense and 2) within the spirit of the founders' intentions and the 2nd amendment. All without bringing up the ridiculous proposal to go back to muskets.

It's hard to overstate just how profoundly ignorant that statement is. considering the source, par for the course

I'm a lot more afraid of "preppers" stockpiling weapons in bunkers than I am of my own government "coming to get me"

Not.

You'll be officially old yourself soon enough. Chronos is a motherfucker. :-)

And back then the 1st amendment was primary for political and religious free speech not for the right for Ivan to be as disgusting and offensive as he prefers to be on a daily basis. :-)

A shotgun.

red herring anti-guns people repeatedly claim that use of a gun in defense very rarely happens and if it is tried, it is very risky and likely to fail. GGK: bugger off, you are on permanent ignore wtf, red-herring? relevant to my argument. interpret the 2nd amendment in the "originalist" fashion conservative jurists are so in love with. the founders gave you a right to a musket, no more. also, "red herring" to say those who aren't for a wild-west gun environment are "anti-gun" This homeowner had a revolver with 6 shots. She fired them all and hit the intruder 5 times and he fled, later unable to continue due to his injuries. He is in the hospital. A musket would have been a failure to do much in this case.

red herring anti-guns people repeatedly claim that use of a gun in defense very rarely happens and if it is tried, it is very risky and likely to fail. GGK: bugger off, you are on permanent ignore

Wait... this never happens (according to trash)

Perhaps you should give up your aspirations as most of your posts sound like they're written by an autistic 12 y/o high on crack. Irony alert!

Definitely not our Vanya - he is a wanna-be russkiy chelovek.

Yes, but Nastia is Russian, and tough as nails.

Bummer. Blue balls suck.

Clearly the flame-thrower loop-hole must be closed!

Skis: $50 Volkl Mantra 118 cm, no bindings (require wide bindings which we moved to another pair of skis) Skis are suitable for up to advanced/expert slopes. The Mantras are wide and excellent all-mountain skis, good also on powder days. Boots: $40 Rossignol compj/j3, 22.5 (mondo size) 3 buckle All gear used for 20-40 days of total skiing.

It is the part where they enacted huge tax cuts and started two wars. You don't need a diagram. And spending under Obama has been, how, exactly? Including military - I mean in comparison to Bush?

check them out and report back, please :-)

A brand new, custom-built Les Paul

You have high standards.

What made Jim great was his rhythm playing: complex, full of infinite subtle variation. There has been nobody like him since. And his songs are definitely memorable and different from each other. Listen to "Are You Experienced?" and "Axis: Bold as Love" back-to-back. They couldn't be more different. SRV is great in his own right, but IMO his music sounds too much "the same" to put him on a level with some of the greatest guitarists - like Hendrix and others.

You're absolutely spot on. Until the tax code is revamped and loopholes are eliminated, it's all just smoke and mirrors. The working class will continue to be sodomized by the affluent. Dems are just Repub-lite. Isn't the simple solution to tax dividends/interest/appreciation over a modest amount (say $50k a year) as ordinary income? The simple solution is to adjust AMT so anyone making any income above some amount, no matter the deductions and other loopholes they take, get assessed a flat (or progressive), minimum tax. Then you'd never have a guy making over a million paying, say 2% tax on total income.