kbordson

I'm on page 7. But that's ok. It just means that I'm selective. (but not prudish like those on page 8-1000+)

But... I want my delicious, no fat, no calories cake and eat it too! What's wrong with that? (besides.... I just feel bad for House. He should be happier in life.)

*and what is this comment except an argument "around the 'point'" *Firearms are not soley used as "weapons." If you read the defination, it describes something used to. Thus intent is critical in titling an object as a weapon. Words can even be weapons and words can injure, defeat, or destroy. "Common sense" has little to do with the object itself. It's sitting there in the corner.... just a tool. The common sense has to do with PERSON using the object and his/her intent. (for the record... trying to insult all those that don't hold your opinion with a comment like "Human beeings with some brain in the head instead of hot air" won't win you the argument.) *If this topic is boring you, move to a different, maybe easier, debate... or ...Here These arguments aren't really valid.

"Is he mean"? Sometimes. Patients go to the doctor to get cured AND feel better ("warm & fuzzy" if you must). I just think he's a bit too bitter. Maybe this next season will bring some humanity back to his character. (near-death experiences sometimes will do that)

One of my favorite things in life.... Breathing. Not just the subconscious mechanical action of exchanging CO2 for O2. I mean the deep, full, amazing breath that makes your whole body feel good. Like when you're swimming and take a breath that feels like it will last you all the way to the other end of the pool. And breathing without pain. I really feel bad for people when they have asthma attacks. what a horrid feeling that must be. But today, with the new day, just be happy for the simple things. Don't let the chaos and turmoil muddy the clearness of the fact that you are alive and have things to learn, do and experience. Karen

Agreed. He's just a bit too callous and .... mean. Yes, he says what we might sometimes be thinking, but he's way too bitter. (and there are some other things in that show that are a bit annoying - like internal medicine docs doing brain surgery and deliveries and Level 4 containment stuffs and B&E.... doesn't really happen that way)

LMAO!!!!!

But in this thread (which was originally about the force of bullets in freefall) the debate was if guns were evil and designed to kill. By expanding the scope, that distracts. I know that other objects are vilified and my argument works for them too. The uranium-235 isn't evil. It's the application of the object. Drugs aren't evil. Cocaine was once in Coca-Cola. It's illegal here now, but so was alcohol at one time. Doesn't mean that EtOH is evil. Things can not be evil. "Designed to kill." implies intent. Intent is what conveys context. Objects can be used in certain contexts... but lets again play with semantics. "The first gun was designed to survive." vs. "The first gun was designed to kill." Same gun. Gun doesn't know which side is "right" or "wrong." It's not the object. But then... to really broaden the discussion. Perception of the situation will change the reality of "right" and "wrong". Woman uses the gun in self defence (yeah gun! It SAVED me) or Young teen dies tragically while asking for directions (evil gun! It KILLED him) But... in the end. The ultimate reality is that the teen is dead.... We just don't want to discuss the complex interplay of the social situation, so lets argue that it's the guns fault. Easy answer.

You should ask your whole society that. They have been following GW like sheep because of vilified objects. WMD, Mushroom Clouds, Nuclear Bombs, Liquids, Vaseline, Hair Gel the list goes on..... Getting off topic here. Stay focused. Argue the point and don't use distractors Semantics, when you change "are" to "were" then the sentence is 100% correct. Provide reasons for your arguments. (We need to have debating classes before letting people post....)

Why vilify an object so viciously? Is it fear? Ignornace? Hate? What emotion drives one to accuse an OBJECT of evil nature? Yet, you do not scream "people are born to kill." Not because they don't, rather because you might recognize that it's not the intent of an infant to commit evil. The infant does not have the knowledge or ability to commit evil. Nor does the gun. "All firearms are designed to kill." Wrong. Designs are made real by blueprints. Nowhere on this Blueprint or this one or even this one does it say "kill." In fact, it just has parts and assembly. So the blueprints don't support your argument. Or maybe you're looking at the fancy names that are given: "Assault Rifle" that the press loves to banter about. OK - but then you have to accept "Survival Rifle" as a true title as well. Again proving that not all firearms are designed to kill. Some are designed to survive. So now you argue for the sake of saving face "Flip side of the same coin"? Maybe. But the intent of the rifle is to survive. If that is done through killing, then that is a secondary action. Lets look at those who designed guns. For if guns are evil, then surely the designers are evil as well. Leonardo da Vinci Or maybe those that researched the physics and kinetic energy of the firearm Coriolis or maybe just man. I think to be evil, INTENT to harm is critical. Objects have no intent. Man does. Man has the capability to be evil. Even before guns, before knives, before tools, man could kill. Were the tools designed to assist with life or death.... that's only for man to debate. Or maybe it's just easier to be lazy and spout that "GUNS ARE EVIL" so that your argument seems as educated as any of the sheep. (ps. my use of the term "man" above includes both sexes of the species)

Yeah. Why don't you "cut" your steak with some small projectiles at high speed? A nice little .22 calibre would do the job, just 80 - 120 quick shots - et voilà! Steak's cut and ready for a nice BBQ! Ummm.... for the record. A few years back some friends came out to visit when I was in the Black Hills. We were baja'ing and a tree was down over a land bridge between two streams/lakes. We took our vehicle down the bank and back up. One of our friends had a real fear of being trapped in a vehicle in water so decided to try to scale the tree across the road. Yup. You guessed it. Stuck. We had no saws, no machetes, just the guns that we were going out to the range to shoot. So... we used the guns to cut the tree. So Yes, Virginia... you can cut with guns. Karen edit for some spelling errors

Cute.... but a wheel gun?! blech.

What about Duncan MacLeod? k.

SSSSHHHHHH! We don't want to bring attention to whores. That is a legitamate occupation which provides a service to the community. It should not be discussed in the topic of bans. (But, should post-whores be tested on a regular basis for diseases? Maybe we should debate that one.) But back to the original ban discussion. Which government will establish the criteria on these bans? Or will it be a UN decision? And do all countries have to abide? Or is it just whatever HH decides? Edit to add Be Quiet Karen

HEY! Those two that checked no - it's past your bedtime. k.

[reply kick the token american in the head. good times! That's why the fates picked on you with the guy on the train! Meanie.

Thank you. Don't forget to tip the waitress.

1. Spontaneous Helo jump with Paul Rafferty at Cross Keys 4/2004. 2. First skydive - Tandems with the Knights in Raeford. 3. Jump #3... first solo turn!!! UN-FUCKING-BELIEVABLE!!!! and every other one is pretty cool too!

Maybe he was just stargazing ... Uranus is quite nice to look at. Karen

Maybe he was winking at himself?

I preview.... and I must admit that I have websters as a bookmark on my computer. Yes, I'm a geek and a touch of a perfectionist. and (meekly) I've pmed others with mistakes. But that's just to allow the poster to change or edit their post if they wanted to.... or not. Karen

Middle child of three surviving children. VERY COMPETITIVE..... and I usually win (unless I want to let the other win ) But, I try not to gloat about it. I need to push it, to take up the challenge, risk it all.... but when it comes to the end of the game, I still want to be friends with everyone. (except Tanja - one of my friends from School. Her and I will compete tooth and nail.)

Not to hijack a thread of emotion and ego in the speakers corner... but getting back to the title of the topic: Freefalling Bullets and the debate surrounding that But even if it might not produce a lethal wound, shoot safe and know your backstop. (and back to the emotion and ego - Guns are evil, Knives are evil, Fricken Laser beams are evil, baseball bats / tire irons / bricks / power drills / rocks / things that weigh as much as a duck .... or objects are neither evil nor good, but PEOPLE that do horrid things are evil. You decide.)

The external links at the bottom of the page gives a link to dz.com! WOW.... DZ.com is in wikipedia.... we're special!

"Suits" are presentable.... aren't they?