tvashtarkatena

Hi, I'm the guy who thought building the Hummer would be a fantastic idea. I'm a little embarrassed for cash right now, but its only temporary, I promise, so could I have a few billion? From a profitibality standpoint, building all those SUVs WAS a fantastic idea. Remember who buys all those gas guzzlers. Like government, we get the auto industry we deserve.

In such a situation, continue to shuffle your feet, eyes downcast, head bowed, whispering "Yassa Massa" over and over.

sounds similiar to the chinaman in "true grit" "outside is place for shooting!" to which john wayne responds "ain't no good fighting for rights for a rat" Matewan I agree with FiggerEight. I never thought about those border parks, but he's probably right on that score.

Gunowners.org? Not exactly a sociologist's dream source for statistics. It's not really a lib/cons thing. I know a few liberals, and I mean pretty extreme liberals, who own lots and lots of guns. I you polled the hunters out there, you might find a surprising number of Obama supporters among them. After all, hunters like habitat preservation...and the RNC doesn't. Personally, I'm pretty neutral on guns. Target shooting is kind of fun, but not enough to get into it. As for the whole personal defense thing; I just don't see the need in my situation. I've killed stuff; I don't enjoy it, so hunting's out. Besides, who wants to carry all that extra shit? I object to guns in NPs out of concern for the wildlife that will be inevitably shot by that minority of dumbshit yahoos who seem to always show up whenever the Guns Allowed sign goes up. In my view, NPs are FOR the wildlife; visitors who are too lazy to train themselves to go out there unarmed can rent the DVD. I don't buy the whole "violation of the 2nd amendment" argument RE NPs. Visitation is completely voluntary and optional; if you don't like the rules, go to the Bahamas instead. There simply isn't any compelling threat to personal safety in our NPs that would outweigh the threat to public and wildlife safety from the copious bad judgement that gun owners show in quantity in this country. Maybe its just a few dumbshits, but boy do they make a lot of noise. As for war; during my lifetime that's always been, every single fucking time, some blowhard politician with his own agenda trying to blow smoke up my ass. In the end its always a fucking disaster. No thanks.

But, but didn't you just...?

Hint: Ain't gonna be no fire in the hole.

One thing still stands: "No guns at the table!" Movie? Anyone? What movie?

That's a little premature. It's 3rd hand from one of the Gov's emissaries. There is no other indication that Jackson did anything wrong. When stories like this break, or any big story, for that matter, much of what comes out initially, especially on the not-so-professional news channels like MSNBC, is rumor. Remember the "Palin's baby?" non-story? The Gov himself seems guilty as hell, given the mountain of evidence already out there, but as far as more tenuous involvement, such as Jackson, the real story will settle out soon enough.

Seems like just another good old fashioned gun/no gun discussion to me.

Inspired by TruckNutz

Some Canuck ventilated the sign at Marble Canyon with 12 gauge slugs. You coulda put your fist through the holes. Oh well, never was a big fan of signage, anyway. The bullet holes in the outhouse walls at the Washington Pass campground gave one pause, though.

Part of the machine sees the light of day: Interesting timeline It seems the Gov. was a bit of a Larry Craig character; acting the poster child for for one crusade while doing exactly what he crusaded against. The people probably need to award him a nice, long stay at a federal resort to show our appreciation.

Smokem peas pipe.

I personally don't have any problems with the special case of courtrooms where guns and volatile emotions can result in violence however, in some cases, if someone had been packing in a "gun free" zone, e.g., Virginia Tech, then maybe the action of one law abiding, armed citizen could have prevented further bloodshed. Very hypothetical, and stopping a crazy gunmen, which, after all, is one of the rarest of crimes, is probably not a very compelling reason for the Feds to force the administrations of schools like Virginia Tech to allow gun proliferation on their campuses. I think those administrations are in the best position to determine how to run their own campuses, not the Feds. One could just as easily and hypothetically claim that, had campuses like Virginia Tech allowed guns, many more students would have died all over the country due to gun related crime, the passion of jealous youth, and accidents. Crime statistics show pretty clearly that the 18 to 22 year old crowd is not the one you'd prefer to be packing.

Sex Goddesses had real breasts back then. Weird.

When the ban is lifted, I'm going to trailer a howitzer up to MRNP and make the lower Nisqually Safe for Democracy.

Merry Christmas everyone

If we could only harness that repulsive force to power our cars and heat our homes....

Actually, the difference between you and me is that I respond to you what you actually write, and you pretend to actually know me. To be comfortable with the fact that some things remain unexplained is not to be incurious about them, BTW. Anyone who knows me would have a good laugh at that characterization. I will admit that I'm not very curious about crowd pleasing magic tricks, like 'lifting fog'. In other words, I'm not that gullible. Even most Northern Californians wouldn't fall for that crap. And I said you are dissatisfied with the universe the way it is, not bored with it. If you were not, you would not be looking to charlatans like Master Chuan and his Linebackers for answers. Well, surprise, surprise, I've already gone through the requisite early-20s study of buhddism, taoism, the philosophers, and incorporated what resonated into my life. You see, a lack of belief in Master Chuan does not constitute a lack of appreciation for these Eastern philosophies which, sadly, you seem to think are something novel to the rest of us here. I do have a little credibility test I employ before I waste my time reading some clown's drivel. You should try it sometime. Christianity, in any form, fails the test across the board. I can get "Love thy neighbor", the only useful takeaway I've been able to glean from Christianity, from a number of other sources with much more robust teachings.

When deciding what limits to place on an individual exercising a civil right, the courts must consider the effect on all persons, not just the 'exerciser'. If, for example, the right of an individual to carry a firearm into a coutroom is outweighed by the harm (the obvious threat to public safety), then the court or legislature can and has instituted a limitation on the practice of that right. The 2nd Amendment and it's proponents, mainly the well funded, well connected NRA (the nation's strongest lobbying group), ensure that the slippery slope is neither long nor steep.

Hey Matt, Why don't you just post our PM exchange and stop misrepresenting it? Oh wait, you get banned for posting PMs. Carry on, Mr/ Moderator, keep making shit up. In addition, if you have a problem with something FW posted, deal with him. Leave me out of it, thanks. What an utter douche.

A strange and interesting tale of influence peddling The Illinois governer's corruption shit storm

It's interesting that several states: Kentucky, Tennessee, Kansas, and Texas to name a few, never ratified the 21st Amendment lifting prohibition. Those states still have dry parrishes/counties, which pretty much guarantees that their borders remain an unbroken Maginot line of watering holes.

I consider that a problem. It's back to what started this discussion, a basic Bill of Rights amendment being restored. You have a common misunderstanding of what a civil right is. All civil rights, including free speech, are subject to reasonable restrictions. You can't yell 'Fire!' in the crowded theatre, you can't threaten to murder someone, and you can't carry a gun into courtrooms, bars (in WA), and, in many cases, NPs. Thank God wiser heads than yours protect us from a simpleton's libertarianism.

Idiot? No. Other things? Maybe.... What urks me about guns in National Parks is those areas are one of the very few places left where you don't have to worry about yahoos with guns; shooting wildlife needlessly out of ignorance, shooting up the infrastructure (don't even think about pretending like this isn't going to happen; it happens in every other remote place where guns are allowed), and, as will most certainly happen eventually, shooting other park visitors. I think the safety and piece of mind of the non-gun toting population in national parks, which far outnumbers those who feel the need to always be packing, trumps the pretend need for 'self protection'. You can go anywhere else in the wilderness and carry all the firepower you want. It's not a basic 2nd Amendment issue, either; the state has a right to restrict guns in a variety of public places. So what's the problem?