Search results

Sometimes people impose rules on others just because they can.

Seriously, what are you talking about? The question is whether the 2nd amendment is still relevant in regards to the gun control debate. I think you're deliberately complicating things.

Let me talk you through it a) We're talking about the viability of a militia in overthrowing a corrupt US government. b) You gave examples of both Syria and Libya to support this. c) I contested this by explaining that Syria is anything but a successful example. Libya is also an inadequate...

I know full well about Syria and Libya. Atrocities have been occurring in Syria for over a year in the name of your celebrated civil wars. The only reason why Libya did not follow suit was because of allied intervention with air superiority. It baffles me that you cannot see the trend with that...

I think TV evangelists use the same reasoning as you do to coerce money out of people. I'll stick to what is likely thank you. In the meantime people are killing children, NOW, with these weapons that might, just ever so maybe might be used in a revolutionary war. Further back on this thread...

Third party solution? http://mailchimp.com/pricing/ Free if you can live with their tag on the bottom of the email. DIY scripts run the risk of getting your mail server blacklisted if you're bulk mailing. EDIT: I just answered a thread that was over three years old - crap. :p

Well apparently I'm both insane and immoral if I dare disagree with him. But apart from that, does anyone else sense Ted Nugent would like to use his guns for a little more than just self-defense? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soH2S9ZHeWE

Are you experiencing the Mayan apocalypse over there?

First up, fallacy of the false dilemma. Secondly, you don't have to be mentally ill to be dangerously irresponsible. It is being speculated that Adam Lanza's mother was in the process of having him committed. Let's say this is true. In what way is it responsible to hold semi-automatic weapons...

No gun use > everyone lived Gun use > someone died. Oh look, the use of superlatives in a pro-gun argument, go figure. :rolleyes: Do please remind me of Saddam's reluctance in these matters or perhaps the Taliban or indeed the current Syrian government over the past two years. EDIT: I...

"A people should not fear their government; a government should fear their people" is the typical "delusion of grandeur" sentiment that the gun enthusiast craves. No bearing on reality, just feeding an ego that feels impotent with a fantasy of power. Total hogwash.

A taser would be far more entertaining but not such a thrill I guess.

The nut route wasn't all that it was cracked up to be *cough* Seriously?!? Read the transcript. You tell me, in what conceivable way, were they lost for words after they stopped talking to the receptionist? In what way did they deviate from their plan when patched through. We're not arguing...

Let's try another tack. Imagine you have a severe bladder infection, You are in serious discomfort and running a fever. You go to the doctor. The doctor considers the infection severe enough to admit you to hospital for further treatment. A prank call is made. The call tricks one of the nurses...

I agree with your frustrations but the law is there to bring those in line who simply don't get it.

Ignore the obscure peanut allergy and focus on this single point. One of the DJ's said: "We couldn't believe that it had worked, absolutely. You didn't expect it to. We thought a hundred people before us would've tried the same thing. We just did not see that actually working." The following...

Reading Oliver Twist at the moment, this part leaped out of the page at me the other day. “We need be careful how we deal with those about us, when every death carries to some small circle of survivors, thoughts of so much omitted, and so little done- of so many things forgotten, and so many...

Your answer over shadows anything I've said. I suspect you are a true gentleman.

and I've shown you how they are inadequate in dismissing negligence. No, precisely the opposite. The application to the real situation is, is that you don't know whether there is a peanut allergy sufferer at the party and you don't know the true hazards of the allergy. They thought they were...

You don't have to worry about it. The law draws them for you.