unformed 0 #26 January 11, 2007 I heard of this stuff years ago. Man that was scary times. I'm glad they took that shit off the market. I mean, I can't imagine my kids walking with dihydrogen monoxide polluting our air and water...sheesh.....This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #27 January 11, 2007 DHMO is truly frightening. Even terrorists are getting their hands on it. I've heard they even ingest it. The filthy animals. Taking something that is trying to cover our world and putting it into their bodies. Oh, the humanity. Ban it now before the terrorists use it against us.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #28 January 11, 2007 Unoriginal AND stupid.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Douva 0 #29 January 11, 2007 Quote Unoriginal AND stupid. Is it just me, or does anyone else think Kallend's rebuttals are getting exponentially weaker with each post he makes? PS. Kallend, when something is described as "classic," you can usually assume it's not going to be original. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #30 January 11, 2007 QuoteHoly Moses! JohnRich and a gun thread, covered in Muslinm "matters" - how new is that? ROFLMAO - I just love it ________________________________ Stop it! You're killin' me! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #31 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuote Unoriginal AND stupid. Is it just me, or does anyone else think Kallend's rebuttals are getting exponentially weaker with each post he makes? No point in wasting words over a repost.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Douva 0 #32 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote Unoriginal AND stupid. Is it just me, or does anyone else think Kallend's rebuttals are getting exponentially weaker with each post he makes? No point in wasting words over a repost. Oh, it's a repost. Well, I guess you got me there.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #33 January 11, 2007 Hypothetical situation.....all ownership, possession, and manufacture of firearms is banned. BFD. Give me a small lathe and I'll reproduce any firearm ever made. Give me a small CNC mill and a turret lathe and I could mass produce them in my basement. Any caliber, any action. Same goes for ammunition. Any ban on firearms does nothing, can do nothing, and will do nothing to stop someone who is resourceful from getting one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #34 January 11, 2007 Hmm. You could say exactly the same thing about nuclear weapons. It's harder, but is eminently doable - even reactor-grade uranium (readily available) can be used to make a bomb that would fit in a shipping container. Any attempt at a ban does nothing, can do nothing, and will do nothing to stop someone who is determined to have one, and has the skill to build one. So are such bans useless? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #35 January 11, 2007 LOL. Terrorists are responsible for terrorism. Without guns, they'll find some other way to terrorize. That's what they do. Next, we'll be banning fertilizer and pointy sticks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 January 11, 2007 QuoteHoly Moses! JohnRich and a gun thread, covered in Muslinm "matters" - how new is that? ROFLMAO - I just love it Holy Moses - christelsabine coming into a thread just to slam John and not add anything constructive - how new is that?? Oh yeah...it's not.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #37 January 11, 2007 QuoteLOL. Terrorists are responsible for terrorism. Without guns, they'll find some other way to terrorize. That's what they do. Next, we'll be banning fertilizer and pointy sticks. Um...actually...if you buy fertilizer in large enough quantities, the Feds are going to be paying you a visit.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #38 January 11, 2007 At least they haven't banned it yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #39 January 11, 2007 QuoteA Muslim lawyer, and writer for a policy institute, thinks that he has the solution to ridding America of the threat of terrorism: revoke the 2nd Amendment and ban all guns! Article:In the Fight Against Terrorism, Some Rights Must Be Repealed The idea of terrorist cells operating clandestinely in the United States, quietly amassing handguns and assault rifles, and planning suicide shooting rampages... what about the threat posed by terrorists with guns? The idea of public gun ownership simply does not make sense anymore... The more important consideration is public safety. It is no longer safe for the public to carry guns... The idea of curtailing rights in the name of homeland security does not seem implausible given the current state of civil liberties in the United States. The war on terror has already taken an enormous toll on the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments. In light of this precedence, it seems reasonable that scaling back or even repealing the right to bear arms would be an easy task. So long as guns remain available to the general public, there will always be the threat of terrorists walking into a crowded restaurant, a busy coffee shop or a packed movie theater and opening fire upon unsuspecting civilians. The Second Amendment is not worth such risks. Source: Institute for Social Policy Point 1) The guy is a law abiding professional US citizen working for a respected national institute. Why do you find it neccessary to bring his religion into this? Would you have done so if he was Jewish or a Mormon? By doing so you detract from your argument. Point 2) Of course the availability of firearms easily purchased makes it easy to carry out the attack that he describes (without much imagination) would it stop a trained and determined terrortist group? Of course not. Would it stop a unhinged group of pissed off teenagers who wana be terrorists? Maybe. All in all if someone wants to obtain a firearm for the purposes of terrorism they will regardless of the legal status of such weapons, however it would make it more difficult in a society where firearms are not freely available. To make the US such a society isn't really feasable.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #40 January 11, 2007 Quote ..... Holy Moses - christelsabine coming into a thread just to slam John and not add anything constructive - how new is that?? ..... Just to aerate the atmosphere a bit, perhaps? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #41 January 11, 2007 I sse your point. However, the materials for making a personal firearm and ammunition are readily available and can be purchased and/or produced without drawing attention to yourself. Nuclear weapons, on the other hand, require materials that are not easily produced unless you have the resouces of a large government. Yes, there is the black market, but there are so many agencies keeping tabs on that thru intelligence networks that it would be tough getting the required quantities of the required materials without being noticed. An interesting debate I was in the other day was started when a friend told me that he thought our 2nd ammendment was outdated and no longer had a valid use. His reasoning was that our civilians, armed with what we currently own, could do nothing to stop a miltary takeover. All I had to do was point to the situation in Iraq. $600,000,000,000 spent and we're still being held at bay by insurgent using leftovers from the Cold War and improvised munitions. Guns have very little to do with terrorism other than being another tool. They will get these tools if they want them, even if they have to make them. On the worst day in our history for terrorism, 9/11/01, all they needed were a few box cutters. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #42 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteLOL. Terrorists are responsible for terrorism. Without guns, they'll find some other way to terrorize. That's what they do. Next, we'll be banning fertilizer and pointy sticks. Um...actually...if you buy fertilizer in large enough quantities, the Feds are going to be paying you a visit. ___________________________________ I'm glad I'm not a farmer! I'd never get anything done because of the visits from the feds! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #43 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuote ..... Holy Moses - christelsabine coming into a thread just to slam John and not add anything constructive - how new is that?? ..... Just to aerate the atmosphere a bit, perhaps? ________________________________ That's good! Things can and do get a bit intense at times... especially about guns. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #44 January 11, 2007 Quote ..... That's good! Things can and do get a bit intense at times... especially about guns. Chuck ...... dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shortyj 0 #45 January 11, 2007 that's crazy again this shouldn't even have to be said guns don't kill people. people kill people. Save the gunsPlaytime is essential. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #46 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuote ..... That's good! Things can and do get a bit intense at times... especially about guns. Chuck ...... ____________________________________ I just try, to keep it light. Life, is too short to get too intense. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #47 January 11, 2007 QuoteHey, the 9th and 10th Amendments have been swept under the rug! The 4th? Fuck it, too! The Second would be AWESOME, YEAH! Then, nobody will fight back when we get the other ones... Sad but very true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #48 January 11, 2007 Ban sales of more than one Big Mac a day to a single person, and pass laws that will severely punish by imprisonment any person know to have possession of the parts needed to assemble one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #49 January 11, 2007 Quote Life, is too short to get too intense. Chuck No need to discuss about it, you are just right, Chuck. BTW: Couldn't you send us a bit of your wonderful snow right now? We have spring temperatures - no winter to be seen! In my garden, I have flowers: roses! Can you imagine that? Roses full of vermin OK. What was thread's title again? Are guns responsible .... I say No. Gun users are responsible for all. Does that count? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #50 January 11, 2007 QuoteQuote Life, is too short to get too intense. Chuck No need to discuss about it, you are just right, Chuck. BTW: Couldn't you send us a bit of your wonderful snow right now? We have spring temperatures - no winter to be seen! In my garden, I have flowers: roses! Can you imagine that? Roses full of vermin OK. What was thread's title again? Are guns responsible .... I say No. Gun users are responsible for all. Does that count? No snow for you!!! where are your papers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
