is there a real answer to a 13 year old stat? did he need to page through to find a stat that would suit his needs?
maybe it's because his people use bombs instead of guns to kill others. no; it's the memory of all those killed by the uk in the aquisition of new land.
but isn't it funny how the uk has been involved in more wars than any other country? and the uk has taken more territory than any other country. you've got a nice bunch of peace loving people there i see.
ahhh now you're just getting jealous!! well spotted about the peace loving people... i think all the true nutters left on some thing called "The Mayflower" ... i could be wrong
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Well, shit. I guess you just invalidated our entire constitutional republic.
Or maybe this is completely tangential and irrelevant.
Axctually, it's prety relevant. When they decided on those statements, gun ownership would have out of the reach of most people, esp slaves. It was beyond their ability to envisage emancipation and eveleopment of the cities we have today, the guns of today, the transport systems etc. It's kind of likke applying Old Testamnet values to modern living. Pretty much everybody here agrees that "sharia law" is not valid in modern times, but supposedly this whole "guns are essentail" thinking is !!
FUrther, in those days, when rich people in power said "everybody", they really meant "everybody like us".
Axctually, it's prety relevant. When they decided on those statements, gun ownership would have out of the reach of most people, esp slaves. It was beyond their ability to envisage emancipation and eveleopment of the cities we have today, the guns of today, the transport systems etc. It's kind of likke applying Old Testamnet values to modern living. Pretty much everybody here agrees that "sharia law" is not valid in modern times, but supposedly this whole "guns are essentail" thinking is !!
You have a point! I'm sure the Founding Father's would support a complete revamp of the 1st Amendment if they could see the likes of Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore and the platform they gain in the "information age".
The freedom of speech, or any other right for that matter, is meaningless without the right to defend those freedoms.
- Guns allow stupid folks to achieve their goals.
- Many Americans are stupid.
2+2=4
- Need money? Rob a convenience store.
- Hungry? grab some munchies on the way out
- Losing an argument? Shoot the opposition.
- Mad at your girlfriend? Threaten her with your gun.
- Don't like your lawyer? Go "quail-hunting" with him.
Assume 10 pct of gun owners are stupid criminals and 90 percent are smart, law-abiding gun owners. Chances are, the 90 percent ONLY have a gun to protect themselves from the 10 percent. Take away the guns from the 10 percent and the rest don't need them either.
Solution:
- Legalize Marijuana
- Offer a pound of weed for every firearm turned into the proper authorities
- Light up.
- Chill the fuck out.
- Live and let live.
Guns make people think they are the big shit. Get real. Each of us, we are nothing. Drops in the bucket of the sands of time. Your lifespan is so short that you should stop worrying about your right to bear arms and start worrying about enjoying the rest of your life....and letting others do the same.
Your lifespan is so short that you should stop worrying about your right
Yeah! Fuck rights! Why stop at the 2nd Ammendment??? Fuck them all! Let's shred the Constitution and smoke that, too! Far out, man. Righteous call, dude.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Yeah! Fuck rights! Why stop at the 2nd Ammendment??? Fuck them all! Let's shred the Constitution and smoke that, too! Far out, man. Righteous call, dude.
he never said that!!! why did you amend his quote... ?
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
he never said that!!! why did you amend his quote... ?
Yikes. I agree. It's one thing to alter a quote legitimately, for example using ellipses, indicating the alteration. It's another to outrightly alter the quote and distort the message.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
he never said that!!! why did you amend his quote... ?
Stop with the bullshit righteous indignation.
I put [ ] in the quote, to indicate that it wasn't part of the original. If you've done any reading, you'll have encountered that in articles. And, here's the kicker, you can actually see his original quote 1 post up.
The point is, he doesn't care about a particular right. Why care about any of them?
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Yikes. I agree. It's one thing to alter a quote legitimately, for example using ellipses, indicating the alteration. It's another to outrightly alter the quote and distort the message.
Oh, please. I explained about the [ ], and in addition, my post said "Why stop with the 2nd Amendment?" further indicating that I was moving beyond his original post. Come on, you people are bright enough to follow along. Are you just nitpicking?
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
The point is, he doesn't care about a particular right. Why care about any of them?
To be fair, you didn't seem to care to much for the protesters in tacoma and their right to peacefully assemble and protest. By this logic, you shouldn't care about your right to bear arms then.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Oh, please. I explained about the [ ], and in addition, my post said "Why stop with the 2nd Amendment?" further indicating that I was moving beyond his original post. Come on, you people are bright enough to follow along. Are you just nitpicking?
I don't accept any justification for distorting someone's message to suit your own purpose. There are acceptable ways to get across your point.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I put [ ] in the quote, to indicate that it wasn't part of the original.
"Square brackets are used to enclose explanatory or missing […] material, especially in quoted text. For example, "I appreciate it [the honor], but I must refuse". Or, "the future of psionics [See definition] is in doubt"." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracket
The intent of the square bracket is not to distort the original meaning to the editor's purpose. That you are defending your ethical mis-step and directing your hositility at others is disappointing.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
To be fair, you didn't seem to care to much for the protesters in tacoma and their right to peacefully assemble and protest. By this logic, you shouldn't care about your right to bear arms then.
I NEVER said that they didn't have a right to assemble or protest. I said they were silly for walking up to the cops with their hands behind their backs. You must have completely missed my point.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I NEVER said that they didn't have a right to assemble or protest. I said they were silly for walking up to the cops with their hands behind their backs. You must have completely missed my point.
You belittled their efforts in standing up for their rights and actually trying to use them as meaningless.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
"Square brackets are used to enclose explanatory or missing […] material, especially in quoted text. For example, "I appreciate it [the honor], but I must refuse". Or, "the future of psionics [See definition] is in doubt"." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracket
The intent of the square bracket is not to distort the original meaning to the editor's purpose. That you are defending your ethical mis-step and directing your hositility at others is disappointing.
Thank you for the grammar lesson. I'll keep this in mind next time. My point was simply to illustrate the danger of dismissing rights simply because we don't understand them or chose to exercise them. Your point would have some merit if he gave me the quote in private, and I twisted his words in public. As it is, his quote was quite visible for everyone to see. In no way can what I did be construed as trying to pull a fast one, unless the audience is exceedingly slow on the uptake.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Thank you for the grammar lesson. I'll keep this in mind next time. My point was simply to illustrate the danger of dismissing rights simply because we don't understand them or chose to exercise them. Your point would have some merit if he gave me the quote in private, and I twisted his words in public. As it is, his quote was quite visible for everyone to see. In no way can what I did be construed as trying to pull a fast one, unless the audience is exceedingly slow on the uptake.
You are getting berated on the same board that has a thread calling a clip montage from the Huffington blog as interesting.
Thank you for the grammar lesson. I'll keep this in mind next time. My point was simply to illustrate the danger of dismissing rights simply because we don't understand them or chose to exercise them. Your point would have some merit if he gave me the quote in private, and I twisted his words in public. As it is, his quote was quite visible for everyone to see. In no way can what I did be construed as trying to pull a fast one, unless the audience is exceedingly slow on the uptake.
Still justifying the unjustifiable, I see. Lack of ownership/responsibility is unbecoming of you.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I belittled that particular action, yes. I didn't belittle their right to protest.
They were using a right that they were unconstitutionally being denied. If it meant being arrested, so be it. I think it takes guts not to just turn around and give up. They saw their rights as more important than being arrested...if only we all cared so much.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Comments
Because you don't have a real answer?
naděje umírá poslední
is there a real answer to a 13 year old stat? did he need to page through to find a stat that would suit his needs?
maybe it's because his people use bombs instead of guns to kill others. no; it's the memory of all those killed by the uk in the aquisition of new land.
naděje umírá poslední
sorry; he mentioned the uk and i ran with that.
however; he did not offer the current population for comparisson.
Well Scotland is, if I'm not mistaken a part of the UK. I don't think it had anything to do with Bloody Sunday.
naděje umírá poslední
as canada is a part of north america.
This reminds me of what my friend said to me yesterday, he just got back from Canada and I asked how it was, he replied:
It was nice, but I really want to go to the real America.
naděje umírá poslední
ahhh now you're just getting jealous!! well spotted about the peace loving people... i think all the true nutters left on some thing called "The Mayflower" ... i could be wrong
Axctually, it's prety relevant. When they decided on those statements, gun ownership would have out of the reach of most people, esp slaves. It was beyond their ability to envisage emancipation and eveleopment of the cities we have today, the guns of today, the transport systems etc. It's kind of likke applying Old Testamnet values to modern living. Pretty much everybody here agrees that "sharia law" is not valid in modern times, but supposedly this whole "guns are essentail" thinking is !!
FUrther, in those days, when rich people in power said "everybody", they really meant "everybody like us".
You have a point! I'm sure the Founding Father's would support a complete revamp of the 1st Amendment if they could see the likes of Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore and the platform they gain in the "information age".
The freedom of speech, or any other right for that matter, is meaningless without the right to defend those freedoms.
Without the 2nd Amendment there can be no others.
- Many Americans are stupid.
2+2=4
- Need money? Rob a convenience store.
- Hungry? grab some munchies on the way out
- Losing an argument? Shoot the opposition.
- Mad at your girlfriend? Threaten her with your gun.
- Don't like your lawyer? Go "quail-hunting" with him.
Assume 10 pct of gun owners are stupid criminals and 90 percent are smart, law-abiding gun owners. Chances are, the 90 percent ONLY have a gun to protect themselves from the 10 percent. Take away the guns from the 10 percent and the rest don't need them either.
Solution:
- Legalize Marijuana
- Offer a pound of weed for every firearm turned into the proper authorities
- Light up.
- Chill the fuck out.
- Live and let live.
Guns make people think they are the big shit. Get real. Each of us, we are nothing. Drops in the bucket of the sands of time. Your lifespan is so short that you should stop worrying about your right to bear arms and start worrying about enjoying the rest of your life....and letting others do the same.
Yeah! Fuck rights! Why stop at the 2nd Ammendment??? Fuck them all! Let's shred the Constitution and smoke that, too! Far out, man. Righteous call, dude.
he never said that!!! why did you amend his quote... ?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Stop with the bullshit righteous indignation.
I put [ ] in the quote, to indicate that it wasn't part of the original. If you've done any reading, you'll have encountered that in articles. And, here's the kicker, you can actually see his original quote 1 post up.
The point is, he doesn't care about a particular right. Why care about any of them?
Oh, please. I explained about the [ ], and in addition, my post said "Why stop with the 2nd Amendment?" further indicating that I was moving beyond his original post. Come on, you people are bright enough to follow along. Are you just nitpicking?
To be fair, you didn't seem to care to much for the protesters in tacoma and their right to peacefully assemble and protest. By this logic, you shouldn't care about your right to bear arms then.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracket
The intent of the square bracket is not to distort the original meaning to the editor's purpose. That you are defending your ethical mis-step and directing your hositility at others is disappointing.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I NEVER said that they didn't have a right to assemble or protest. I said they were silly for walking up to the cops with their hands behind their backs. You must have completely missed my point.
You belittled their efforts in standing up for their rights and actually trying to use them as meaningless.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Thank you for the grammar lesson. I'll keep this in mind next time. My point was simply to illustrate the danger of dismissing rights simply because we don't understand them or chose to exercise them. Your point would have some merit if he gave me the quote in private, and I twisted his words in public. As it is, his quote was quite visible for everyone to see. In no way can what I did be construed as trying to pull a fast one, unless the audience is exceedingly slow on the uptake.
I belittled that particular action, yes. I didn't belittle their right to protest.
You are getting berated on the same board that has a thread calling a clip montage from the Huffington blog as interesting.
This place amazes me.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
You must have spent the morning stretching. Your reach is amazing.
They were using a right that they were unconstitutionally being denied. If it meant being arrested, so be it. I think it takes guts not to just turn around and give up. They saw their rights as more important than being arrested...if only we all cared so much.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
:eek:
I'm shocked!
naděje umírá poslední
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Touche!