troubleski Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 My head feels like a spent piece of 45cal brass... Please someone.... make it stop..... Quote
Greg_W Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by troubleski: My head feels like a spent piece of 45cal brass... Please someone.... make it stop..... Not sure what you're asking here; you want someone to off you? Quote
troubleski Posted November 1, 2002 Author Posted November 1, 2002 if thats what it takes.... but seriously.... tell me that I am not the only one who feels like this today... I remember satan's cheerleaders..... then a long walk.... I can't find my wallet... hey... that could be a blink182 song.... Quote
Greg_W Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 Was there a severed goat's head on your front lawn? Lot's of black candles on your porch? Just asking, I don't know anything... Quote
NoBolt Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 Excellent! lets take the goats head to Index!!! Quote
Greg_W Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 Let it be noted that I didn't start this thread, but saw this and couldn't resist. For those of you who believe that gun control will work, read this Article Maryland is one of the most restrictive states regarding gun ownership. Greg W Quote
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 Dude, the issue in that article is not that Maryland's crime rate is high because of their restrictive gun laws, but because of shitty enforcement of those laws. Plus, most of their crime rates are way down; they only look bad compared to the rest of the nation (not that being 2nd in the nation is a good thing in this department, but their crime rates are simply some of the least low). If they enforced their laws better, maybe the story would be different. Hell, the 2nd Amendment guy even says that the FBI report is "a scathing indictment of Maryland's leadership," not of their laws. Also, the article notes that Florida is at the top of the pile. Isn't there a certain Republican in office down there? Don't tell the Doctor that Jeb Bush is tough on guns. Lastly, that thing about Maryland being "felon-friendly" is pretty stupid. Do they really think that allowing such a small percentage of the population (i.e. convicted and released felons) to vote is somehow going to turn the state into some kind of pro-criminal free-for-all? How many convicted felons could possibly be living there, anyway? Plus, the felons have to apply for the right to vote, and they have to wait three years after their release to do so. It's not as if the state is handing out voter registration cards to every felon who walks out of the state pen. Good troll, though, Greg. [ 11-01-2002, 11:19 AM: Message edited by: Dr Flash Amazing ] Quote
vegetablebelay Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by troubleski: tell me that I am not the only one who feels like this today... he This guy must feel a little like that. 01 Nov 2002 12:12 BST Soldier survives 3,000 ft chute failure BELGRADE (Reuters) - A Yugoslav Army paratrooper has survived a drop from an altitude of 1,000 metres (3,300 feet) after both his parachutes malfunctioned, according to Belgrade daily Glas Javnosti. The paper said on Friday 40-year-old Dragan Curcic escaped with minor cuts and bruises after his main and spare parachutes first failed to open and then became tangled when they opened simultaneously during an exercise on Tuesday. "He went through the roof of an army building. Only God himself saved him from certain death," an eyewitness said. Curcic, with more than 3,000 jumps to his name, performed another parachute drop on Thursday, this time without problems. Another Yugoslav holds the record for surviving a fall from the greatest altitude without a parachute. Air hostess Vesna Vulovic plunged 33,330 feet into a snowbound forest in Czechoslovakia in 1972 when the airliner she was on exploded. http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=1667153 Quote
bobinc Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 The gun control "debate" is pretty simple in many peoples' minds. If their idea of "control" never got beyond the "gun control is 2 hands" phase, they don't want to hear about the relationship between gun availabilty and violent crime, etc. etc. Too many pesky details. Those disgruntled postal workers aren't MY problem. Same goes for gold star Republicans: they only have a few overarching "principles": lower taxes, save the unborn, and kill the guilty. Don't bother me with any more details. How nice to have such a simple view of the world when you only have two colors in your box of crayons. Quote
Greg_W Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by Dr Flash Amazing: Good troll, though, Greg. Not a troll. What you fail to understand is that this is the stance of most gun-haters/gun-controllers: take away the guns and everything will be okay, make more laws, don't enforce what's on the books. Making more gun control laws gets more press than actually enforcing existing laws. THAT was my point. Parris Glendening is at the top of the heap when it comes to gun control advocacy; if he cared about gun crime why doesn't he enforce the laws on the books? He wants to take guns out of the hands of Maryland's citizens. Greg W Quote
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 OK, not a troll; good enough. So, if Glendening really wants to take guns out of the hands of Maryland's citizens, why is he not enforcing his own laws? And the Doctor agrees that it's stupid to create laws and not enforce them. But you can't really judge what effect these gun control laws are having, positive or negative, without them being enforced. Quote
Greg_W Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 Because taking away guns is more paramount to him, not punishing criminals (the presence of guns made them commit crimes, it wasn't their fault). Everyone is a victim to politicians (and idealogues) like Glendenning, even the criminals. Furthermore, enforcement of current laws might just work in reducing crime (it will), and then he would not be able to raise an emotional groundswell to back his gun control schemes. Quote
vegetablebelay Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by Fence Sitter: naw that dude was a freakig pansy...he missed a couple of times...how can you miss when you have a disguised car with a hole in it so you can get really close... that guy should have kept to his tree stump... cause even though he was a snipe in the army, he doesn't have that impressive of a kill ratio (given that his targets are unsusspecting and unarmed civilians) The misses were probably the Malvo kid. Quote
cj001f Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by Greg W: Because taking away guns is more paramount to him, not punishing criminals (the presence of guns made them commit crimes, it wasn't their fault). Everyone is a victim to politicians (and idealogues) like Glendenning, even the criminals. Furthermore, enforcement of current laws might just work in reducing crime (it will), and then he would not be able to raise an emotional groundswell to back his gun control schemes. Having worked in Maryland - it's problems have much less to do with gun control (either side) and much more do to with poverty. Namely Baltimore, the only major urban area other than the DC metro in Maryland, is dirt poor - and is still hemhoraging jobs. Poverty, and little chance to escape it, leads to crime & violence - guns or no guns. For a good gun control argument - look at Washington DC- there murder rates down substantially since they banned pistols. Quote
allthumbs Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by cj001f: For a good gun control argument - look at Washington DC- there murder rates down substantially since they banned pistols. Let me know where I can get some of that shit you're smoking. Quote
Greg_W Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by cj001f: For a good gun control argument - look at Washington DC- there murder rates down substantially since they banned pistols. Is that why the call D.C. "the murder capital"? Be serious, that place is known for its violent crime and it hasn't slowed down any. Quote
Muir_on_Saturday Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 quote: Originally posted by cj001f: For a good gun control argument - look at Washington DC- there murder rates down substantially since they banned pistols. do you know where we might see the data on that? Quote
mattp Posted November 1, 2002 Posted November 1, 2002 Watch out, Greg. He might just know what he is talking about.* CJ--Where's the stats? *Though, even if he is right one would have to acknowledge that the murder rate is probably much more dependant upon factors other than pistol sales or ownership. Quote
Off_White Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 quote: Originally posted by trask: Over the years I have developed the notion that there is a definite connection between marksmanship and morality. A good shot is nearly always a good man, and conversely the bad guys usually cannot shoot for sour owl jowls. This proposition cannot be proven, of course, but I think it has to do with the fact that the essence of good marksmanship is self-control, and it seems pretty clear that self-control is the foundation of good morals. Hurray for our side! cooper Hahaha, I've seen all those movies too. Everyone knows bad guys can't shoot worth shit, good guys don't even have to sight... Quote
cj001f Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 The full stats are in the next post - as a question for you Greg, the following link has DC at #4 in murders per capita, and Baltimore at #6 http://www.morganquitno.com/cit00rank.pdf Mind you Richmond, VA(in Virginia concealed weapons are legal & the only gun control is enforcement of exiting laws) is ranked #8 in murders per capita. Shouldn't there be a bigger difference between Richmond and these 2 bastions of gun control? [ 11-01-2002, 04:31 PM: Message edited by: cj001f ] Quote
cj001f Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm DC banned pistols in 1976 - from the above statistics the murder rates were lower for the following 10 years. I'd attribute it to other factors than the law though. Quote
Fairweather Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 "If you torture the data long enough, it will tell you what you want to hear." Statistics that present are true, valid, unbiased picture of this debate are probably unobtainable. The debate is too polarized. I say, when in doubt look it up in the Bill of Rights. How amazing that among the most vocal defenders of amendment #1, are the same who would throw out #2. Just more liberal hypocricy. [ 11-01-2002, 09:00 PM: Message edited by: Fairweather ] Quote
AlpineK Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 Isn't the 2nd amendment more open to interpretation than the first. I mean does having an armed militia mean that everyone has the right to own a gun. I think the 1st amendment is a lot clearer. Quote
Fairweather Posted November 2, 2002 Posted November 2, 2002 quote: Originally posted by AlpineK: Isn't the 2nd amendment more open to interpretation than the first. I mean does having an armed militia mean that everyone has the right to own a gun. I think the 1st amendment is a lot clearer. I disagree. Indeed, liberals have successfully twisted the First Amendment.... "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the excercise thereof:....." Now we have those who believe "separation of church and state" is written in the constitution. Liberals have denied countless individuals the right to freely excercise their religion(s) in public places by twisting the First Amendment. Why should I trust them to interpret the Second Amendment? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.