birdlike

I'm not a Democrat, either. (I'm also not a Republican! I know, right?!) But let's remember, these people who won't stick to enforcement of their own rules, who are roundly criticized for not applying criminal sanctions forcefully enough in the real world (i.e. "soft-on-crime", a well-known criticism of Democrats) are looking to rule the country. Is this how they would be doing it? Why should we believe otherwise? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Would you mind, please, noting with a little more alacrity the fact that I did not strike the dog, nor swing at it? Would you prefer if I had stood there, frozen, and done nothing to put myself in a ready defensive stance and just waited to see if I began to be mauled before I took my first defensive step? The fact is, had I been bitten, the law would have been on my side, and indisputably. I was minding my own business inline skating down the block when an untethered dog left its property and acted aggressively. Did I ever say "Hit a dog for barking?" I like dogs too, you know. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Please explain your position if you would. When I learned that the Democratic National Committee had decided to change its mind (and break its own rules, essentially) and grant delegates to Michigan and Florida even though, after warnings, those states held early primaries in contravention of the DNC rules, I felt that this was typical of Democrats. They don't like the results if they stick to the rules, so they bend them, they get creative. Very similar to the way they read the Constitution. Ever heard a Democrat "read" the 2nd Amendment? They almost invariably change the actual wording, kind of like they are unable to help themselves. They start saying stuff like, "...in the service of a militia" as though those words are there in the copy! More importantly, they refuse to stick to their own statements or commitments. I find it appallingly unprincipled. This decision speaks horribly of Democrats' judgment and respect for rules. I feel it is emblematic of them. What do the rest of you think? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

To me a human being is also the soul... your very essence.. your being... and when you kill other people it lessens ones soul..In that respect I see you as you ARE. Fine, you are entitled to have that view even if I disagree with it. I was not aware that a soul was a quantity, I thought it was just an entity, a whole. Can a soul be somehow "weighed" and be "less" after the person who is that soul did something bad? I don't see it that way. I also recognize that "most of the world" lives with a very different set of values, and most of them live in poverty created in part from their own ignorance or stubbornness. I really don't care how they view me or America. And after it's all said and done, I doubt there is a person from this board, with whom I disagree vehemently, with whom I would not skydive or hoist a beer. Go figure. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I get it. You think it's okay to bitch about other people allegedly doing it while you do it yourself. Don't be surprised if anyone calls you on such hypocrisy. I understand. But in all honesty, the way I live my life, I try to remain ever open to being shown where I am wrong if I am wrong, and reevaluating my positions on things in view of new information or corrections. I also strive to not engage in hypocrisy, and try to stamp it out of my own behavior when noticed, when possible. EVERYONE lives with a bit of hypocrisy on their own part. But usually it is in parts of their lives that are hard to cut out. It's easy to cut it out when you are doing it in your debating, and still, I see many people here engage in it as a very regular thing. The rest of what you wrote is essentially a dead issue. If you wouldn't have stood on ceremony, you would have seen that right up front, I was intending to make good on the debt incurred by the wager, even though I did not consider it a settled issue that you had truly won. You blindsided me with an insistence that I give the money myself to an organization I dislike, and now say I am "welshing" (is that the word?) because I won't pay more than the dollar I owed (you tried to hit me up for an additional 33%!), or to anyone but the person who I said I would pay. Too bad, so sad. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Let's do the math. Let's assume that EVERY ONE of the 30,000 annual gun-related deaths were an individual CRIME (forgetting that about half are suicides, and some of the remaining half are legitimate, "good" shootings that save lives from criminals). And let's assume that each one is committed with a separate gun (very unlikely, especially where crimes are concerned). Divide 30,000 by the 300,000,000 guns, and you get 0.0001, or one one-hundredth of a single percent. Oooh, big catastrophe. And yes, I recognize that each shooting death is a catastrophe to each individual family. But we know that lives end. They could just as easily -- hell, MORE easily -- be ended by an AUTOMOBILE and amount to the same degree of catastrophe. (And not only that, but the family is now out a car!) Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

About 200 million weapons in private property are "a few"?? Bwahahahaha - that's Jeffrey (the peaceful) in full action on highest level - LMAO Apart from having a somewhat confrontational style when it comes to discussion, I live a very peaceful life. If you want to impugn it, why don't you put up or shut up? Show me where I've done stuff that's "un-peaceful" and please direct your focus to the guns I own that you evidently don't think I should own. And I said "to worry what a few American gun owners might do." I did not say that there were only a few American gun owners. I was referring directly to the "few" among them who commit criminal acts with guns. As in, they are a tiny minority. By the way, where on earth did you get 200 million? Nearest estimates I've heard were 80 to 90 million gun owners, and 250 to 300 million guns. But what's accuracy to a gun hater? Maybe if you were into guns, you'd care more about being accurate in other aspects of your life. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

We've seen more European people and countries misuse their MILITARIES for me to worry what a few American gun owners might do. By the way, I sure hope you don't own a motor vehicle, a hatchet, or any kitchen knives. You wouldn't want to be responsible for what a thief might do with them to innocent people. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Even though they were wrong..... What is up with people like you who swoop in, call someone wrong, but refuse to say why they're supposedly wrong? Let me point out that I did not claim to be making a comprehensive list of the disqualifiers in the first place. But what was wrong, anyway? That's rich, from a guy who refuses to answer the issue of innocent people being executed in several recent threads. Talk about a non-sequitur! IF I had "refused to answer ..." what would that have to do, at all, with the validity of what I just said here? And if I failed to answer a direct question, please inform me what it was and I'll see about answering it. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Honestly, I'm not all that familiar with the so-called false smears that you're apparently talking about. I do know that a handful of things are known about Obama that make him someone I will NEVER vote for: - unabashed support for restrictive gun control - doublespeak to cover for same, while claiming to "support the 2nd Amendment" - close association with some of the most vile, rabid anti-Americans and anti-whites in the country - lies to claim that he wasn't all that close with same - support for him comes from a long list of people whose ideology I abhor; and I can't imagine that people would be supporting a guy unless they had cause to believe that he shared their ideology But then, I'm a real piece of work, so what do I know? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Please don't pretend that Obama, through inaction, is somehow championing freedom. IF Obama could gather the support needed, he would do away with the right to keep and bear arms in any meaningful way so as to essentially nullify it. This is borne out by his personal statements, and by legislative proposals for which he has proclaimed his support. It's completely ridiculous to paint Obama as someone who worked to get himself elected to the Senate in order to be the guy who kept Congress from passing more laws to restrict us. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Oh, grow up -- it's fuckin' Speakers Corner. Why single out my poll? Because this is the thread for your poll. Is it about following ME around to MY threads to dog ME about anything that can be found, or is it about the way the poll options were worded? I asked if my poll was singled out, because there are LOTS of SC polls that get asked in sneaky, snide ways (like mine was -- do you see me denying it?) but I don't know if so many people pile on about them the way they seem happy to do when it's my poll. Seems a bit hypocritical is all. But then, who would deny that hypocrisy is the norm in SC? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Once AGAIN, someone who disagrees with my fully articulated and explicated position(s) drops by to say a stupid one-line attack and then nothing more. What's the matter? Can't you express WHY you disagree? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Very few dogs live to 20 years. Try to stay on topic, Mr. knee-jerker. How did you get this confused?? Where the hell did you get the idea that I was talking about a dog living 20 years? I was talking about waiting 20 years for social changes to take care of the crime problem, meanwhile what do people do NOW if victimized. YOU need to try to keep up. But I'm about to stop bothering trying to keep you kept up. That must be why I've discharged my firearm in public so many times. That must be why so many of the other gun owners represented here are using their "hammers" to fire "nails" at so many people. More idiotic hyperbole--as if I'm walking around with "my arsenal." I'm glad to know you're pro-gun. I hope you are an NRA member, doing your part to support THE group that has been protecting our rights all this time. I do know of people who have had their lives SAVED by a gun against a vicious dog. Are there other alternatives? Of course. I just don't prefer them. But when I go skating around the neighborhood, I have a collapsible baton (legal with my license) as well as my gun. One time, a small-medium sized dog ran across a yard toward me as I turned the corner, on my skates. The owner was busy gardening. As the dog, unleashed and unpenned, barked and ran toward me, the guy called out a yell and it stopped. I, meanwhile, had raised my baton and was poised to use it defensively before I would have resorted to getting the gun out. As the dog stopped, and I began skating away, I yelled out to the guy, "Good way to lose a dog! Did I call you that?? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Oh, grow up -- it's fuckin' Speakers Corner. Why single out my poll? Do you hit ALL the polls with smartass choices and make the same ridiculous complaint? Your position makes very little sense to me. You long for making these people feel pain and death, and at the same time oppose making these people feel pain and death. Yeah, um, good luck with that. I'm currently embroiled in a dispute with the Kalifornia DMV over trying to retire the registration of an ancient car of mine that I finally sold to a junkyard when it died. The State LOST my title to this car over twenty years ago. They lost it. But they continued to register it. Now they want to jack me up for cancelling the insurance on this junked non-existent car. They're telling me I can't sell it without the title, which THEY lost (I bought the car new in 1984 and paid it off by 1989). I can't even get somebody who speaks ENGLISH to talk to on the phone. I suppose eventually I'll have to ask for help from my State Assemblyman's office. But my point is that if I can't trust the state to let me junk a dead car, if I can't even find a state official who speaks English, WHY would I ever want to empower that same state to take anyone's life, for any reason? Then why on earth would you trust the state to send a person to prison, in solitary confinement, for life? Why on earth would you trust the state to not "lose" the correspondence he attempts to send to his attorney, regarding appeal? Yeah, and you believed them. Ever heard of a "jailhouse conversion"? It's when a convict "finds Jesus" and is reallll serious about "turning his life around and giving it to the Lord" -- just long enough to convince a fuckin' parole board full of people just as credulous as you. ME, I find it far more likely that they are saying that just to keep people believing that they have it worse than if they'd been put to death like sick dogs. Yeah, well, we have some of our more "compassionate" SCers, the anti-death-penalty ones, who wish for just that kind of extralegal execution. Just as long as the state doesn't conduct it, they're ok with it. What on earth makes you think that the Liberals will just sit back and tolerate "suffering" of convicts in prison, anyway? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I see. So I guess you won't be criticizing Kallend anymore, since you use the same tactics that you allege he uses. Nah. It's good enough for everyone else here, so to not do it would be to tie my hand behind my back in the debates. Face it, you won't conduct yourself in good faith about it, so you won't be getting the money you claim I owe you. You're the only one who thinks I answered in "bad faith." Oh, you've polled everyone on Dropzone.com. That must have taken a while. Is that where you've been all this time? I offered a worthy cause (ACLU) to which the money could be donated on my behalf, but you complained that you would only pay the money to me. I never agreed in the first place to "donate" the money from the wager. I raised the idea when you refused to take the hit for the charges to get the money sent to you. I pointed out that I never agreed to incur any fees other than the single dollar that was the term of the wager. So it was a concession on my part in the first place to attempt an alternate arrangement, but you cannot demand that I be forced to make a donation to an organization I do not support in philosophy. You have the chronology all fucked up. The first thing I did was ask for the Paypal address. You started quoting me a cost above and beyond the dollar of the wager. The donation shit came afterward, as an alternative I suggested, but I informed you that I would not be willing to donate to the ACLU. So sorry. Yeah, uh huh -- I have a vested interest in making myself look like I wouldn't keep my word. Right. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Yeah, but until say 20 years from now when the changes start to really help (as though we have a formula that we believe is going to accomplish that) what the fuck do people do NOW, if confronted by the robber at the ATM, or the mugger in the parking lot? Your ethereal "let's make the world better" stuff does not accomplish a real-world solution in the here-and-now. You're right. It is illogical to both support proactive crime prevention and punish criminals. I bow to your superior Internet fantasy world black and white reasoning ability. No sarcastic emoticon needed. Yeah, go with smarmy. Smarmy works. Meanwhile, what should a crime victim do TOMORROW? You chose to not understand that that was my point. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

So you think we should just pick and choose which parts of the Constitution are important, and which parts we can ignore? Well, if it's OK for Kallend... Face it, you won't conduct yourself in good faith about it, so you won't be getting the money you claim I owe you. Why did you decline when I offered to donate that dollar directly to USPA? Is it not a worthy-enough cause? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

And yet Kallend suggests that I need the anger-management course. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I think he got all the due process, where it counts, that one should really hope for. You guys are making it seem like an innocent guy got executed but wouldn't have if we'd only given him this phone call to the consulate. At least I have something that might help. What can we do for you? Are there support groups for people who just can't talk a good-faith argument without throwing in all kinds of disingenuous stuff? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

The fact that he hasn't got a damned thing backing up his idiotic "Change!" zombie-mantra is not a "false smear." And I'm not a "GOP supporter," just someone who hates what the Democrats are trying to do to our once-great nation. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

As Eric Cartman said, "No, but most of them are... and all it takes is most of them." Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Echelon, Carnivore, Omnivore... hardly a surprise. That said, the 'watch list' is stupid anyway. If they're a threat, investigate and arrest them. With that said...weren't you the one wanting the same sort of database with medical data to be available online in regards to firearms purchases? And he didn't have a problem with people responding to a call by the police to have them "voluntarily" come in and have their guns examined to prove themselves innocent of a shooting crime. The fact that he is here bitching about any kind of surveillance of free citizens is a fucking JOKE coming from him, as far as I am concerned. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Pssst Human beings ARE animals..... some are just closer to their animalistic nature than others.. right Jeffrey??? I hesitate to use the word "intellectual" in any post that is about you, Jeanne, but this junk above is just more intellectual sleight-of-hand by you. We know what you mean when you say "animals" in reference to convicted rapists and murderers, and it isn't the biological definition you're using. Yes, well, when it suits you, you describe them as animals, using the term in the pejorative sense. Then when it suits you, and you want to condemn my willingness to put these vermin to death, suddenly you are referring to them as "living human beings." Voila! They're transformed!! Suddenly they are worthy living creatures, who deserve our compassion, no longer trash that we should just eliminate! Less of a human being? Howzat? If you tested my DNA, before and after executing vermin, it would be the same, Jeanne. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Did you ever see the South Park where the class was taken by this environmentalist teacher-lady on a tour through the rainforest? By the end, so many things had eaten or attacked them that when she and they were saved by a guy with a bulldozer who squished all the dangerous animals and plants and knocked down trees, she was thanking him, saying, "Fuck the rainforest, I fuckin' hate it!" (You had to be there...) Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire