SkyDekker

No, it won't make dangerous people les dangerous. What is reduces is the ability to act on an impulse. When lots of guns are around, like they are in the US, they are easy to be used on impulse. That is significantly harder when you have to build a bomb first, or some of the other options bandied about.

I said, lack of guns doesn't seem to hurt. And when you look at Canadaian gun issues and compare them to US gun issues, it does indeed seem that lack of guns doesn't hurt. Obviously there are many other factors at play. Further, my choice of words makes it pretty clear I am not making a scientific argument, but an anecdotal comment. Relatively simple logic says that with significantly fewer guns around and significantly less freedom to tote the guns around, there is less chance for there to be issues with the use of the guns. This does not mean that banning guns in the US is a logical conclusion from that, so you can unwad your panties. Anmd pot isn't legal in Canada. And since you probably think it is legal in Holland, I'll burst that bubble for you too. Pot is not legal in Holland either.

Nice! The black and white looks great! Why thank you

Avatar updated

Yes....JUst look North of the border, or across the pond. I agree that no system is perfect.

Other than the ancestral homeland part, I was wondering the same thing.

Right, I agree. They aren't simply elected.

You don't see this as an issue? To me elected judges, sherrifs and DA's create a problem in the justicial system. Justice isn't based on what's right or wrong...it is based on campaign funding and re-election. It is absolutely stupid. This is a common argument for so-called "merit selection" of judges and chief prosecutors. It's also naive. Politics and money - and being beholden to others for one's office - is every bit as much involved in the nomination and anointment of judges and chief prosecutors under an "appointed" system as under an elective system; it just has some different nuances, mostly cosmetic. In fact, an under-funded, poorly-"connected" "outsider" has at least a sporting chance of attaining judicial office under an elective system; whereas under an appointment system the same person's chances would effectively be nil. Of course it is....just like it is in any corporation. But I'd rather have the politics associated with a merit system amongst intelligent people than an elective system leading to justice based on popular opinion. If it is such a great system, why aren't the judges for the Supreme Court elected?

I will pass a law I will lower/raise taxes These are examples of campain promoises Telling the masses you are going to have the most transparent admin ever Or, I will have no lobiests in my cabinest are topics he it using to tell us his level of integrity. Not campain promises But we now know for sure, this president has no integrity or accountability (at least to those who see him as a mesiah) Don't you think that your blind hatred for the guy is exactly the same as those who blindly follow him?

You don't see this as an issue? To me elected judges, sherrifs and DA's create a problem in the justicial system. Justice isn't based on what's right or wrong...it is based on campaign funding and re-election. It is absolutely stupid.

Absolutely true. A reduction in spending is a vital part of solving our budget problem. Yet, you support someone who is "lashing out" against those would like to reduce spending. Based on what you posted, I can only make assumptions about why you might do that. Untill some one comes along and proposes a straight 50% to 60% cut in Defense (Attack?) spending, I will consider anything else just political gamesmanship. (Obviously along with many other cuts)

Just an incredibly cool marketing stunt. Watch the blooper real...some good stuff in there as well.

Clearly Bush is a traitor being all smiley and friendly around communist kenyan terrorist Hussain Obama. Incredible that a Republican former President demanded to have himself and his family flown to South Africa on the tax payers dime. That is something a Liberal would do.

Did Al Gore do something illegal? Isn't this just pure capitalism? Why does it become "illegal" when a Democrat makes a lot of money? You can do a search and see my long-held opinion that Al Gore is the greatest capitalist of the last 50 years. Al Gore created a whole fucking industry! Not the internet but the green energy industry. Starting with the Earth in Balance and his role in Senate and as Veep, the guy has laughed all the way to the bank. Who else can get comped private jets to take him from place to place so he can lecture about a carbon footprint for $150k per speech? The guy managed to turn global warming into a political and legal fact and rake in the cash. He's managed to uniquely blend the characteristics of religious leadership with snake oil sales solutions. L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics is nothing compared to An Inconvenient Truth! Exactly! And if a Republican had done it, many would have claimed him to be one of the greatest Americans ever. Al Gore is exactly the type of American Dream the country has been "selling" for decades. I always get a kick out of people, who normally talk so much about the American Dream and American Values, continue on to put Al Gore down.

So now you get to define honorable ?? NOT You picked the wrong word. He was defining campaign.

+1

American schools are indeed underperforming.

Well, at least they know how to have a good time at a funeral. They aren't at a funeral.

Did Al Gore do something illegal? Isn't this just pure capitalism? Why does it become "illegal" when a Democrat makes a lot of money?

http://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/829839/are-homeschooled-kids-really-lacking-in-socialization Ah, maybe you need to get out more.

I don't speak for Darius. But, I took the posting to be more a complaint about the difference in reaction by society as a whole. If this "neighbourhood watch" program consisted of nothing but muslims and there was some mention of sharia along the way, his contention was that reaction would be completely different. I agree with Darius, I also think the reaction would be entirely different.

Really? Are you aware of the atrocities committed against the Tories and Loyalists? There were atrocities committed by both sides, neither was blame free. Are you kidding me? These are the Founding Fathers we are talking about. They never did anything wrong...ever. I can prove it too, there isn't anything in any history books about it...so it can't be true.

No, but you wrote the stupid fucking thread title, didn't you? Actually the democratic party throws the fucking race card every single chance they can when someone who doesnt agree with the president. So if you dont like the title...I honestly dont give a fuck. How you like them apples? You don't give a fuck, yet you post about it every chance you get.

Well, somebody has to pay for America's blood lust around the world. The wealthy supply the money, the poor supply the cannon fodder. How else would you suggest it is done? Good luck trying to get the rich to supply manpower.

+1