peacefuljeffrey

Don't cry too hard for him. Do you think that it's good, humanitarian sweetie-pie people who tend to know the whereabouts of those who would cut off an innocent man's head with a knife? I tend to think that such a person probably isn't such a great guy on his own. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Should I stop waiting for you to address the two or three other indictments of Moore's veracity that I offered? I don't think it was a poor execution to point out that in order to portray Charlton Heston (and the NRA) as callous and indifferent to Littleton's suffering, Moore had to splice disparate parts of his several speeches into what seems to be one connected utterance -- right down to the fact that Heston is seen to be wearing two different suits in two shots that are separated by the camera panning the audience, with applause covering the gap. I don't think it was a poor execution to point out that Moore staged the scene where he walks out of the bank as though he had been given a rifle inside. The fact remains that the bank does not stock the rifles, nor does it give them away. The purchaser of the CD has to pass all legally required background checks (Moore makes light of this) and has to pick up the rifle he chooses at an altogether different location. I can't figure out why you left these very pithy points out of your quote from me. Had no rebuttal to them, I guess? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

There are some REALLY GOOD criticisms of Bowling for Columbine. You didn't hit ANY of them. My point was to demonstrate how Moore utterly misrepresented reality in order to bias his audience toward believing things that are simply untrue. Demonstrating how Moore had to splice together arbitrary parts of several speeches in order to change the context of the speaker's points is not "hitting any of them"? Nor is the fact that Moore gives the impression of a false timeline when he depicts Heston giving various speeches proof of his deception? After all, Moore very clearly implies that Heston showed up in Littleton almost immediately after the shooting to tell the mayor of Denver to go to hell, and to pry his rifle from his cold dead hands. But we know that the "cold dead hands" speech was given in North Carolina, not Colorado, and not the next week but 9 months later. Watch the film: is that the impression that the lying sack of shit Moore works toward giving? Demonstrating how Moore UTTERLY LIED about the way in which one acquires a rifle from the bank that gives them away for purchasing a certificate of deposit is not "hitting any of them"? How is the exposure of an outright LIE not a good criticism of Bowling for Columbine?? Why did Moore walk out the door of the bank holding his new rifle triumphantly, as though he were handed the rifle inside the bank? Why did he not make clear to his audience that he had to pass all the legally required background checks, and select and acquire his rifle at a completely different location? Answer: Moore lies. Moore likes to twist reality to give whatever impression he prefers to give, regardless of how that impression squares with actual reality. Um, not except for the fact that Heston is wearing two different motherfucking suits in the shots of him. Not except for the fact that transcripts of the speeches show utterly different context from what is shown in the clips in B.F.C. How fuckin' confused are you?! So you attached the ad that the bank ran, offering the rifles to customers... And? No one is arguing that the bank didn't make the rifle offer. If you bothered to understand my post, you'd know that the issue is that Moore makes direct commentary on the "dangerous" idea of giving away guns in a bank -- BUT THE BANK DOESN'T [I]DO[/I] THAT. One does not pick up the rifle at the bank: one has to acquire it at a gun shop. It's like being given a voucher. So when Moore depicts himself getting his rifle AT the BANK and walking out with it, THAT IS STAGED: IT IS *BULLSHIT*. It's proof of Moore's penchant for distorting the way things are in favor of making them seem to support his thesis. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I think I'm gonna be off in the corner retching indefinitely until you tell us all that you were not being serious. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

How you doin'? By now, horny! You? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I can't belieeeeeve that on a skydiving site, no one has quoted this yet: "It's 100 percent pure adrenaline! Other guys snort for it; jab a vein for it; and all you gotta do is jump!" Name it. Then there are the horror movie quotes: "Kill the brain, and you kill the ghoul." "You play a good game, boy. But the game is finished. Now you die!!" (from the same movie): "What we gotta do is, we gotta grab that tall dude, and stomp the shit out of him, and we'll find out what the hell's going on up there!" - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

So it seems this is limited to intercourse positions, from the choices. I voted "take it any way I can get it" because there should always be time made to get a little of everything enjoyed. I couldn't be the only one who actually has the most fun going oral, could I? Where's the option for "head trapped between thighs"? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I have watched for, but NEVER seen, a story in which a parole board paroled a murderer, the parolee murdered again, and the members of the parole board, responsible for loosing the piece of shit on society again (after he's been safely captured and caged) , and held to answer for his murders. No one EVER seems to pay the price for making a stupid-ass decision that puts a murderer or rapist back into society. The day we can put the psychiatrist or parole board member on trial for murder because their charges went out after release and murdered again, that's the day I'll consider whether I support the idea of letting murderers EVER get released. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Never say never. John Hinckley Jr. has been getting out on unsupervised visits, and he tried to murder a fucking president. How do you know that some bullshit bleeding heart idiot on a parole board won't fall hook-line-and-sinker for a conrition act on Manson's part? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Sounds like he knew what the fuck was going on, i.e. there's no "insanity" or "mental illness" defense here. A person who "doesn't know what's going on" wouldn't have the presence of mind to assert innocence about what he didn't know was going on, right? BTW, do you really expect that this will not turn into a pro/anti death penalty thread just because you said, "Without turning this into a pro/anti death penalty post"?? I think murderers should be put to death, yes. Murdering someone justifies your society extinguishing your life -- humanely, fine, but definitely it should be done. Humanity, society, should not have to suffer the burden of having people circulating among normal good people, when they have it in them to commit murder. I think those who oppose putting these murderers to death should be forced to be the guards who keep them incarcerated until they die -- because as far as I'm concerned, a living murderer in a prison is, til the day he dies, a potential escapee or releasee. It happens a LOT, and it shouldn't happen at ALL. Prison breaks, prison escapes, unjustifiable paroles or releases... dead murderers don't leave a prison with the capacity to commit more murders. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Does that mean that particular missile was made / was being made at that facility in Littleton? Bill, this is exactly the fucking bullshit I'm talking about. On a Moore-debunking website I visited recently, they put side-by-side the text of the speech as Moore presented it, and the text of the actual speech. What you reproduced here IS THE EXACT BOGUS FUCKING [I]SPLICE[/I] that proves Moore manipulated things to produce flawed conclusions and impressions in his audience. By the way, the meetings the NRA so callously held in Denver had been planned several years in advance; were supposed to host over 20,000 people; were mandated by New York state law to be held (the state in which the organization's charter was effected). The NRA CANCELED ALL aspects of what would have been an upbeat festival-type convention and instead held ONLY those parts of the meeting that were required by law. Moore, of course, mentions NONE of that. Instead, he shows clips of Mr. Heston holding a musket that was given to him as a gift and proclaiming, "From my cold, dead hands!" and clearly lets it be implied that this was the speech he gave in Denver right after the massacre, when in fact it was in a speech given in North Carolina nearly a year later. Type "Michael Moore gun lie" in Google and you can read the rest of what makes it very clear that Moore is an unscrupulous lying sack of shit with a bent agenda and a fake "documentary" to promulgate it. Besides, "callous" or not, what parts of what Heston said in that "quotation" do you disagree with? Perhaps the part that says the NRA has every right to assemble wherever in our free country it wants? EXACTLY. Moore implied, first of all, that the bank hands over the actual rifle to the customer right there in the bank, ASKS, "Isn't it dangerous to give people rifles in a bank?" and then NEVER FESSES UP THE TRUTH THAT CUSTOMERS DO NOT GET HANDED RIFLES RIGHT THERE IN THE BANK, BUT INSTEAD HAVE TO PICK THEM UP THROUGH A LICENSED FFL DEALER IN ANOTHER LOCATION, AFTER ALL APPLICABLE LAWS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. So why would Moore ask a question about the safety of a bank giving a rifle to a customer right there in the bank when he HAD to know that they DON'T do that -- and that the presentation of the rifle to HIM was a STAGED EVENT?! Moore seems to want to imply that the gun giveaway policy is somehow a negative thing. Why would that be, when the bank will only give the guns to those who would pass all required background checks at a gun shop, per the law? The customers who do this deal have to go to an actual place where guns are sold to pick up their choice. It's not an over-the-counter transaction that happens in a fucking bank, although that is EXACTLY what impression Moore endeavors to create when he walks out the door of the bank after talking with the bank employees, holding "his" new rifle. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

He may be right in this circumstance, but he's hardly the best candidate out there for the GOP. In any event, isn't the most electable more likely to be the one that represents the electorate? How are you defining "best?" And his claims to being straight forward and no-nonsense are a farce. As far as representing the electorate... Many people want us to live under a system in which we elect people who will make decisions for us, rather than make decisions that reflect what those who elected them want. It's a collateral effect of allowing politicians and the public to believe that politicians know better than we do what is best for us and what ought to be done -- and that they are entitled to force it on us once they're in office. It is, on the whole, a reckless, dangerous thing to yourself to remain ignorant and then allow a proxy to determine how your life should be managed -- particularly when it is politicians who will be the ones stepping up with the desire to be those proxies. (You know what they say: any person who has a desire to govern should not be allowed to govern.) - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

That's for sure! I doubt the Republicans will lose enough seats for that to happen, but we can always hope. Yes! Only then will we be kept safe from those deadly assault weapons that are going to start flooding the streets in mid September! Golly me oh my! - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Of course not. Everyone knows it's the fault of the gun manufacturers. [sarcasm off] i don't think it's the manufacturers fault. But if you ask me, being able to legally buy weapons like what they did at 17 is nuts. Um, I think you're confused, because there was NOTHING legal about the way in which they obtained their firearms. Numerous laws were broken. Where did you get the idea that they "legally bought" those weapons? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

You and I and everyone else here know very well that Moore intended for his audience to come away from that movie (an alleged "documentary" -- which won an OSCAR for allegedly being a "documentary") believing that what they had seen was a depiction of FACT. Don't give me bullshit about how he was just out to "entertain" us. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Just curious... What makes you so sure that they did not go bowling that day? (Were you there?) I have done some checking on this too, and it leaves me feeling that there's a 50/50 chance that they were in bowling class that morning. Yes, there are a lot of websites that claim they were not there, but there are just as many that say they were there (including some major news sites like ABC, CBS, and FoxNews - not that those are necessarily any more reliable than the other sites). So you cite for me some of the same "news" sources (excluding Fox, I guess) that show video clips of people firing FULL AUTO rifles when talking about efforts to renew the "assault weapons ban" and ask me to treat the claims as credible? Absent the ability to actually view class records for that day, I take it as reliable that I have read numerous claims that state they were absent from class that day. Okay, so let's split hairs: assume that the killers did go to bowling class. That does not change the fact that Moore filled his movie with lies. - The Lockheed plant in Columbine did not make "WMD" - You CANNOT just walk into that bank, open a CD, and walk out with a shiny new rifle! - Charlton Heston and the NRA did NOT traipse into town and merrily celebrate guns just days after the massacre at Columbine. - Many "quotes" by Heston featured in the movie were pasted together; some "sentences" were constructed from parts of sentences separated by entire paragraphs. - In some cases, editing techniques strongly imply that two separate sentences were made in the same speech, when in fact Heston is shown wearing one suit, the scene is spliced, and Heston is then wearing a different suit. The effect is still that one sentence followed the other in a single speech. I don't have any "hard facts" to "prove" the killers were not at bowling class that morning; but the statements that they were not came from the same web sources that debunked the above portrayals and many others, i.e. they ride on a wave of established credibility and veracity. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Ohhh, hardly the same environment, necessarily, and far too many factors in the growing-up of those different kids to account for. For one thing, first, middle and end kids have different demands placed on them, and make different demands of those around them. My parents were stricter with my older siblings -- I am the youngest of four -- than they were with me. By the time I came up, and got my driver's license, I was allowed to drive from L.I. to Boston for the weekend -- with my license only one month old. My sibs would not have been allowed to do that: I was allowed to, because my sibs had already proven to my parents that it was likely to work out fine. No, one cannot expect all the kids in a household to develop in similar ways just because they sleep in the same house and eat the same dinner. There are millions of different factors that affect the mental development of each individual kid. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Nothing from Bowling for Columbine should be taken at face value. That fraud is full of lies and inaccuracies -- very documentable, very provablly false. If you got an "impression" about the parents -- or anything else in that movie (like how easy it is to walk out of a bank with a new rifle) -- DOUBT IT. Michael Moore was happy to twist perceptions (for instance, by splicing together unconnected sentences from a speech into a paragraph) in order to give an unfounded "impression" to the viewer. Just about everything in that movie departed from its true reality in order to conform to the impression Moore wanted to CREATE. He did not attempt to reflect reality, he sought to change it to suit his whimsy and his agenda. The guy is sick. - - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

All of the other points aside (and I agree with many/most of them), they did not go bowling that day. There are many many websites now exposing the lies, deceptions and inaccuracies contained in Michael Moore's farcical "documentary" Bowling for Columbine, and one of the first points some of them make is that even the title is wrong. The two murderers skipped their bowling class that morning. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Worth mentioning is that for years, this was the DEFAULT AIRPORT for Microsoft Flight Simulator! (Anyone have a current version? Did they change it?) Someone should cut that shitwad Daley's throat for what he did. What a piece of corrupt dogshit that man is. Thanks for the Sedona pics. Back in '92, my sister graduated from University of Arizona (Tucson) and we all went out for her ceremony. Then we made a series of drives to Sedona, Flagstaff and Grand Canyon. While in Sedona, we had to take my brother to that airport to catch a Cessna connection to another airport because his army leave was over. I didn't get to see much of the airport, though, and what I saw was only from the ground. I'd love to fly in there sometime. - - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

This thread reminds me of how my dad has a tendency to make every analogy about flying. (He's a pilot, as am I.) I remember through the years many times when we'd go outside, and he'd look up at the sky and say, "Nice day/night for flyin'." Also, any time we'd drive near enough to Long Island Islip MacArthur Airport (that's where he flies from), he'd see traffic and say something like, "Ohh, looks like they're using 24," or something like that. Sometimes it seemed like too much, but now that I'm a licensed pilot as well, I think the same way! It's hard to hide enthusiasm. With regard to skydiving OR flying, I like to talk about it with others, either whuffos or not. I try to not gush or talk too fast or too loud or seem out of my mind, but I do attempt to convey just how great I think flying and skydiving are. I'm still working on getting some of the people I know out to jump (it's harder now that SoBe is gone). Some people at work actually ask me about my recent jumps and adventures, so I tell them stories. These are whuffos though, who gasp about some of the stuff that is quite normal to us. I also enjoy telling them about my (very realistic) skydiving dreams. It takes social sensitivity to detect whether you're playing to an uninterested/bored crowd or not. Watch for signs of interest. If they ask no questions, chances are you should stop talking about it. Questions indicate interest/involvement. I try to not use skydiving to boast or seem cool. It's easy to want to let someone know that you skydive, to see if it affects how they think of you. But it's cheesy to drop it like a pick-up line, "Hey, baby, I skydive." I avoid that at all costs. But if it comes up, (questions about my pin necklace) I am happy to talk about it. I generally tell whuffos that I have met very few people in my life who I thought should not skydive. I tell anyone who ever thought for a moment that it looked like fun that they owed it to themselves to do it because they'd love it! So here's the breakdown: - If you looked at skydiving and thought the people who do it are morons: don't skydive. (Leave the fun to us "morons.") - If you ever looked at it (on t.v. or elsewhere) and thought it was intriguing ("What's that feel like to actually do it?"): try skydiving - If you ever actually thought about getting out to a dropzone and buckling up because you think you'd enjoy that feeling: GET YOUR ASS IN THE CAR RIGHT NOW. (My friend's wife, down visiting from NY, said she'd been thinking about it: I told her that if she ever even considered it, that means she really has to try it.) - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Hey, man, it was a DEMOCRAT whose esteem was so easily purchased. Go bitch to them. Or is that somehow also the Republicans' fault? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

So, then I would be correct to infer that you KNOW how the NRA's spending breaks down? Please, tell me, what is the percentage breakdown of NRA membership funding that goes to pro-gun lobbying, versus other programs like teaching cops to shoot, or teaching kids, women, and others how to safely handle a gun (when age appropriate), or wildlife conservation, or building shooting ranges. Because if you made that statement without having some pretty specific knowledge about how much NRA money goes to "clearly and overtly PAC-type activities," I suggest you STFU until you can provide EVIDENCE, rather than make insinuations out your butt. I wish I could remember the figures I read once a few years ago, that showed how LITTLE of NRA's money was actually used to lobby. Maybe Kennedy or JohnRich can help. Quade, I have trouble believing you're going to come up with the stats I requested. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I don't know what to say. I have never raised kids, so I really must recuse myself on commenting on whether it is possible or not to see a kid in that kind of trouble. From the outside, it seems to me quite believable for a parent to be oblivious to plenty of things a kid does. Kids know what is allowed or forbidden: if they wish to do what is forbidden, they are very good at concealing it, especially from parents who have not previously been given reason to believe their kid is a liar. Anyone's kids could have emotional trouble. It's just that most people's kids' emotional troubles are pretty mundane, and sort themselves out as they kids get older. Some percentage of the kids will have more severe troubles. At what point would you question your own kids about possible plans they have to go murdering their schoolmates?! That's an awful heavy accusation for a parent to come to grips with making against her son. It's easy for me to see why someone would hold off on making it -- possibly until it is too late. But to claim that a parent should have had "control" over their kid so that a violent episode would actually be precluded is unrealistic. The kid leaves the house for school, he could do anything during the time he is away. Could hijack a bus, push an old lady in front of a train, molest a pre-teen, rob a liquor store, or simply go to school with his friends. A parent can't shadow his kid all day and night long. So of course if a mentally troubled kid -- who on the outside just seems like every other kid with everyday "troubles" -- wanted to do something really bad, all he has to do is wait for those myriad times during the week when no parent or adult is around. I had times when no one was around to stop me if I wanted to get into trouble. So have we all. I even DID things that would have caused me big trouble -- if anyone had caught me (mostly petty vandalism stuff back when I thought I was having fun or being righteous doing it). On the outside, I was a well-behaved, intelligent, successful student/kid. So if I could do bad shit and get away with my parents not thinking anything was amiss, so could others. To a degree, I can easily believe that the parents of these Columbine shooters may not have had culpability for the failure to prevent the attack. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Go with what Kennedy just said. You will serve yourself well to sacrifice a few bucks and go with a name that is never in question. That means Taurus, Ruger, S&W, Colt. The guys in your shop may have motives of varying degrees of nobility, but anyone who pushes a Rossi revolver is not likely doing so with your best satisfaction in mind, I think. They are not some sort of "sleeper" wonderful gun that people just haven't heard much of. They are not just unsung gems. Reputations are built on strength and reliability, and the other companies mentioned have that in spades over Rossi. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"