Currency re-vamp (2 Viewers)

Tasslehoff

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
64
Okay, let's keep things from getting too idealistic here.

Who DOESN'T want money? :confused: Pink Floyd explains it best: "Money, some may say, is the root of all evil today. But if you ask for a rise it's no surprise that they're givin' none away."

Rattle this around in your heads: If God were proven to exist, faith would cease to exist.

And, yes, Col and Rich, I like guns. All I've ever wanted was to stand over some thug with my six-shooter and say, "Do you feel lucky, Punk? Well, do ya?" Except, instead of a revolver, it would be a portable Phalanx equipped with rockets instead of bullets. Oh yeah.
 

Matt Greatorex

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,019
lmnop7854 said:
Nah, that isn't strong enough. And I was wrong in the first place. If we go by the dramatization of what happens when you touch a holy object, those people who are basically good would suffer no ill effects. However, if an evil person were to touch it, they would be burned. So that's it - if evil, money-grubbing people touch money, they would get burned. And more serious burns as the denominations of the bills increase. So they have a wallet full of $50's that they can't touch!! **insert evil laugh here**

Lisa

Hopefully, that would also somehow encompass credit card transactions and electronic money transfers, as I'm sure some the worst offenders physically touch very little of the folding stuff.
 

Tasslehoff

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
64
Matt Greatorex said:
I'm sure some the worst offenders physically touch very little of the folding stuff.

I don't know, if I had millions of dollars I would create a big money-pile of one-hundred dollar bills and roll around in it. :)
 

Matt Greatorex

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,019
Tasslehoff said:
I don't know, if I had millions of dollars I would create a big money-pile of one-hundred dollar bills and roll around in it. :)

Yes, but I did say the worst.

I'm sure you're one of the nice guys. :D
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Tasslehoff said:
I don't know, if I had millions of dollars I would create a big money-pile of one-hundred dollar bills and roll around in it. :)

I'd buy all the land I could in Alabama, put a 12' high electrified cyclone fence around it with razor wire on the top, put a couple dozen dobermans out, and put a double wide moble home smack in the middle of it... :D





 

Bodisathva

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
1,274
KenHigg said:
I'd buy all the land I could in Alabama, put a 12' high electrified cyclone fence around it with razor wire on the top, put a couple dozen dobermans out, and put a double wide moble home smack in the middle of it... :D
Now if it's in Alabama, shouldn't they be Catahoula Leopard Dogs and a 14' x 70':confused:

..oh yeah...and those trucks are supposed to be on blocks!:D
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Bodisathva said:
Now if it's in Alabama, shouldn't they be Catahoula Leopard Dogs and a 14' x 70':confused:

..oh yeah...and those trucks are supposed to be on blocks!:D

These are all post million dollar pictures...:D :D
 

Matt Greatorex

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,019
KenHigg said:
I'd buy all the land I could in Alabama, put a 12' high electrified cyclone fence around it with razor wire on the top, put a couple dozen dobermans out, and put a double wide moble home smack in the middle of it... :D






Oooookay.... and that, Tass, would be one of the not so much nice as scarily-bizarre guys
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Matt Greatorex said:
Oooookay.... and that, Tass, would be one of the not so much nice as scarily-bizarre guys

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Well... Either that or give it away to charity ;)
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:21
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
27,522
As a USAmerican, I must point out that many folks are spreading fallacies among their phallacies. (You may interpret the latter to imply that someone is thinking with the wrong part of their anatomy.)

The folks of the USA do not worship guns. We are, however, firm believers in a little thing that Alan Moore said in "V for Vendetta." I'll misquote it here:

People should not fear their government. A government should fear its people.

(I used the QUOTE markers because the forum doesn't have a misquote marker :D )

As part of that concept, this country stays armed. First, in case some idiot country tries to invade us, they had better duck. You never know who has the gun that will drop your general in his tracks. Might even be sweet little old Aunt Matilde from down on the bayou. Second, in case the government in power goes too far, THEY had better duck. We learned that lesson from... the Brits, back in the colonial days.

Does that mean we have a few gun nuts in this country? Yes, it does. You have them in other countries. They are called terrorists or criminals or many other things. The difference is that there, you get to charge them for having the gun. But the gun is an inanimate object. Here, we charge you for USING the gun when you should not have. In other words, we distinguish between the thing and an action using that thing. Does gun control make guns less available? No. All it does is make them less available to people who would not misuse them in the first place. If a guy/gal wants a gun to do wrong with, that person will get the gun. It will happen. Trust me on that one.

We have a saying that SOUNDS tautological, but really isn't: When owning guns is a crime, only criminals will have guns. Why? Because if someone is enough of a miscreant to want to commit violent crimes, a little thing like a gun law won't stop them.

As to whether we worship money? No, there is a difference between coveting and worshiping. From the outside, viewers in other countries cannot tell which we do. But we don't worship money. We covet it. And we envy those who have it when we don't.

As to the amount of worship of God in this country, I don't know. I think we have too much of the WRONG KIND of worship - the "lip service" worship. Entirely too many people claim to believe in the Great Forgiver and then fail to forgive those who believe differently than themselves. A.k.a. hypocrites. But somehow I doubt that this is an exclusive condition in the USA

For example, look at the furor over gay rights here. Instead of being inclusive, the holier-than-thou bunch becomes exclusive. Bullsnot. The aforementioned Great Forgiver would say that his message of love is not for the privileged few, but for all. And he would say something about forgiving not seven times, or seventy times, but seventy times seven. You think?

Another example: Look at the popular movies and the ones you can't even find on shelves. Violence? Easy to find. War movies OR crime movies OR monster movies (real-crime or fantasy). Ten, a hundred, or a thousand bodies litter the floor after a battle. The good guy is bruised and bloody but the bad guys are pulpy messes with more holes than a Swiss cheese.

BUT - let the good guy take his lady to bed with a genuinely gentle act of love where NOBODY gets hurt, and watch the Bible Belt libido bashers go into action. Let a little bit of decently shaped anatomy show and Mrs. Grundy, the neighborhood censor, has a conniption fit. Let a movie character suggest that his/her partner engage in an ordinary sex act, not even a deviant style, and - abracadabra - X rating.

I mean, Geez, which act is more likely to cause kids to be desensitized to an undesirable thing?
 
R

Rich

Guest
KenHigg said:
I'd buy all the land I could in Alabama, put a 12' high electrified cyclone fence around it with razor wire on the top, put a couple dozen dobermans out, and put a double wide moble home smack in the middle of it... :D


Is that the Berlin wall going up on the border with Mexico? :confused:
 
R

Rich

Guest
ShaneMan said:
Sometimes, your statements make so little sense. You have rubbed me the wrong way a number of times but I don't hold all of England responsible for your rude behavior.
A/ I haven't been anywhere near you
B/ my rudeness is by way of the impression Christian Republican Americans have given the world of themselves
C/ I'm allowed to think for myself and respond as such
D/ Your faith is flawed since you continue to berate me for mine:rolleyes:
 

Matt Greatorex

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,019
The_Doc_Man said:
Does gun control make guns less available? No.

Whilst disagreeing with some of your comments, I can see your point for most of those you made. The above statement, however, just isn't true.

If guns were illegal, then - by definition - law abiding people would not own one. They may well, at present, own one, but they are not currently risking jail by doing so. That fact, on it's own, would reduce the number of guns out there. Yes, criminals would still get them, but there would have to be less of them out there, since decent people wouldn't break the law by getting one. Unless you're suggesting that everyone who owns one would continue to do so, even if they were suddenly made illegal?

If it's true to say that just one of these people would not wish to break the law then your statement doesn't hold up.
 
R

Rich

Guest
As part of that concept, this country stays armed. First, in case some idiot country tries to invade us, they had better duck. You never know who has the gun that will drop your general in his tracks. Might even be sweet little old Aunt Matilde from down on the bayou. Second, in case the government in power goes too far, THEY had better duck. We learned that lesson from... the Brits, back in the colonial days.

Who the hell is going to invade the most powerfully armed country in the world, Mexico? :rolleyes:
Is Granny Clampit really going to take them on?
As for the government taking too much power, does the name Bush mean anything to you? :confused: :rolleyes:
 

bwrobel

Corporate Buttkisser :P
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
60
Matt Greatorex said:
If guns were illegal, then - by definition - law abiding people would not own one. They may well, at present, own one, but they are not currently risking jail by doing so. That fact, on it's own, would reduce the number of guns out there. Yes, criminals would still get them, but there would have to be less of them out there, since decent people wouldn't break the law by getting one. Unless you're suggesting that everyone who owns one would continue to do so, even if they were suddenly made illegal?

If it's true to say that just one of these people would not wish to break the law then your statement doesn't hold up.


Would you bring a knife to a gun fight?

Guns are going to be associated with very bad people, I know I want protect my kids, ok my wife too. If someone breaks into your house, can your baseball bat stop a bullet?
 

bwrobel

Corporate Buttkisser :P
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jul 10, 2006
Messages
60
There is a article in a small town in the US, where most of all it's residents had concealed weapons permits and carried gun. There was near to zero gun crime. Would you try to rob anyone? I'll look for the article
 

Matt Greatorex

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 09:21
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,019
bwrobel said:
Would you bring a knife to a gun fight?

Guns are going to be associated with very bad people, I know I want protect my kids, ok my wife too. If someone breaks into your house, can your baseball bat stop a bullet?

In order:

1) No.
and
2) No. Out of curiosity, what baseball bat are you talking about? At what point did I mention one?

I did try to make myself clear enough but obviously didn't manage it. For that I apologise. I was responding to the original assertion made - that if the US had stricter gun controls there would be no fewer guns out there. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the questions you just asked. I deliberately avoided making any reference to whether or not guns should be legal, since that's an entirely separate argument.

The fact of the matter is that if anything that is currently legal were to be made illegal, there would very soon be less of that item in circulation. Whatever it is - guns being the example used here - many people would not choose to break the law, and so would not choose to own one. Or, as I originally asked, do you believe that every single person who currently owns a gun would continue to do so if they were made illegal? Whether the decrease is huge or tiny is anybody's guess, but nobody can feasibly argue the fact that the number would go down.

I'm not saying that you should put your family at risk, I know some people feel safer if they have a gun close to hand, and I'm not going to get into the whole argument as to whether or not this stuff http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm
is propaganda. My point was in direct response to a patently untrue statement made by the original poster.
 

dan-cat

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:21
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,433
Matt Greatorex said:
I was responding to the original assertion made - that if the US had stricter gun controls there would be no fewer guns out there.

The original assertion is this:

The_Doc_Man said:
Does gun control make guns less available? No.

Which is not the same thing. Quantity of source is not the same thing as ease of access to the source. The thrust of the argument is that accessability to a gun for one that wishes to get hold of one will not be altered by stricter gun controls.

I think this is a reasonable argument considering the current ease of access to illegal drugs in the US.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom