rhaig
-
Content
2,766 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by rhaig
-
curious... do you have any (or can you go find any) numbers to back that? Or are you just spraying again trying to stir shit? -- Rob
-
true if you're close enough. though the context was regarding a holstered weapon. I didn't explicitly state it. and the video in the original post the weapons are automatics, and in at least two cases, there were magazines inserted in the automatics. -- Rob
-
Look back at your world history. What industrialized nations have disarmed their citizens where there was not a large number of citizens leaving the country shortly thereafter indeed with some of them being shot in the process. Isn't that much like prison itself? yes, well the reason to cache weapons isn't for home defense. Your world history isn't that poor is it? For personal defense I'd have to resort to the usual blunt items and hope the guy robbing my house couldn't get a gun from his buddies. Doesn't help my wife, as she can't swing a bat (if those would still be legal) as hard as I can and would probably piss the intruder off. So I can't call a bat or golf club "home defense" as even though my wife is trained in it's use, she's not as effective with it as I would be. (quote not the case with a handgun. She's a decent shot) -- Rob
-
if you are a politician running for office in 2 years, votes and their tallies are useful to you: a) in 2 years b) now, in deciding where to campaign c) now, in deciding whom to make promises to d) now, in deciding whom to pay off e) all of the above f) none of the above as elections are just a scam to distract you from the pentaverate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctEDHm0OKms -- Rob
-
that movie kicked ass. -- Rob
-
yeah... pretty clearly making fun of his ears. Racist? wow.... that was a stretch. Even for some of the crap I see posted here. -- Rob
-
yeah.... Those guns? I sold them before the ban. Nope, didn't get the guy's name. he was from AZ. Dave something or another. Seemed like a nice enough guy. And yes. I, a law abiding gun owner, would break that law. I would cache my weapons in some capped 6" diameter PVC pipe buried off my property. Something that is that contrary to our Constitution, I would take as a preamble to civil war. Though I don't know who they'd get to collect the guns in TX. I can't find it now, but a few years ago I read a poll of TX DPS officers. 60% said they'd refuse to collect firearms from the public in the event of a ban. -- Rob
-
explain it to me then. I'm pretty reasonable, and have even admitted here when I've misinterpreted statements made by others. What I see you proposing is a society where all you have to do is rat someone out and the gun collection squad will go busting down their doors in full riot gear. (because after they start getting shot at, they'll start treating gun confiscations as hostile events) -- Rob
-
I'd bet he'd shoot his body towards the open door and pick another place to rob. -- Rob
-
isn't that what a protest is all about? -- Rob
-
just how would the children know whether or not the weapon was loaded or unloaded. Isn't this just as frightening to them? I mean... isn't that your whole reason for this rant? "It's scary to the women and children." But if it's loaded, it's a whole different case? Can you tell the difference between a loaded and unloaded handgun by looking? -- Rob
-
yes yes... I understand the whole corn production subsidies crap. I grew up in the mid-west and experienced the program's genesis through friends who had farms. I understand the health effects of HFCS and its history. It has this horrible side effect of making you feel hungry. Other simple sugars just make you crave more simple sugars. But when you're full, you're full. None of the above counter that these people don't get up off their asses and do anything about their weight. Nor does any of that change the caloric content of a single food item as it is consumed. We're really talking simple math here plus motivation to do something besides bitch about one's condition. -- Rob
-
no, obesity is caused by people eating way more calories than they burn. Mostly lazy people living in a pushbutton world. HCFS, console video games, helicopter parents, all just make it worse, but don't go letting fat and lazy people off easy. They're fat and lazy. They have the power to change that. 1. Get up off your fat ass and walk. 2. Figure out what your base metabolic rate is. 3. Eat 100 calories a day less than that. 4. Do it in 5 meals spread throughout the waking hours. 5. Drink water. Your body needs that shit. That's the simple version. Beyond that, some basic research into healthy content for number 3 will help. (edit: just realized that might be sarcasm. clearly I totally missed it if it was) -- Rob
-
I guess we disagree. I think an untrained person with a loaded gun in a high stress situation IS a danger to themselves and others. the whole point of his post was that these guns will remain unloaded (hammers) because in the adrenaline charged situation, fine motor skills are difficult. That is why they must be trained repeatedly. -- Rob
-
yeah... I read the article. Marginally more useful than a hammer. -- Rob
-
Open carry is interesting... (I mean real, loaded weapon, legal open carry). There are some people in TX who want open carry laws. Some people say it will turn into the shootout at the OK corral, but I heard that about concealed carry back in the day and it never happened. So I don't buy it. I do think that open carrying an unloaded gun is stupid. But likely for different reasons than many. An unloaded weapon is as useful as a hammer. If I lived in that area, and knew of a place where this was happening, I might wear a hammer on my belt one day to go get coffee. Carrying an unloaded gun also makes the wearer used to the weapon being unloaded which is dangerous. Unloaded weapons are dangerous to the wearer. -- Rob
-
summary: wah!! we don't have enough pull to get a concealed carry license in this state!! So we want to show people that there are CA gun owners that want gun rights. Because we don't want to move. Wah!! gunz iz scary!! eww!! I just want my half-caf-skinny-mocha-latte-with-room. wah. we own this business and reserve the right to refuse service. outsider's point of view: oh... this is california?? -- Rob
-
yes, but as I've said before, gun rights people see the presence of guns as lowering violent crime, and gun banners see removing guns as lowering gun crime. gun crime is a very specific subset of violent crime. It cannot be said that when one goes down, the other will also. This is why agreement on that topic will never be met. The argument is not on the same set of ideas. take a gun away from a criminal and there are a few possible courses he might take. one of those was stop committing crimes. Other options include acquiring an illegal weapon, using an alternative, but still legal weapon (club or knife), or committing a type of crime that does not require a weapon. Also as has been stated, it's more the social patterns of violence that are the problem. So I wouldn't expect that the theoretical criminal in the above paragraph will equally choose no crime vs crime. Social patterns don't change that simply. -- Rob
-
Schlitterbahn is moving forward with their new park just down the road from my house (near RM1431 and Parmer). I don't konw about any tunnel plans, but the water-park side of things is moving forward. -- Rob
-
and by the way the law works, other things that might be distracting while driving, that are not explicitly defined as illegal, are legal. Such as? Name something that is as common as a cell phone in a vehicle and as distracting as texting on a cell phone while driving. tits. -- Rob
-
buy what works and meets the bid standards. -- Rob
-
and by the way the law works, other things that might be distracting while driving, that are not explicitly defined as illegal, are legal. -- Rob
-
yeah... that right there makes me take you seriously. yeah... -- Rob
-
look.... a few posts ago I suggested that the definitions simply needed to be modified. I know people in general are stupid, including several of us here. (myself included on many topics) my point, which you are failing to comprehend or failing to communicate your comprehension thereof, is that the feds are making laws using interstate commerce as a big blanket to hide under. -- Rob
-
depends on what the voices are telling me to do. last night they were telling me to pour another. This morning they're still sleeping. -- Rob