davjohns

+1 I've just peeked at this thread a couple of times, but it is rather strange. Go for the red handle. .02 I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I've been working and the television has been going on about her. I noticed they mentioned the 'Don't ask. Don't tell.' issue for some reason. Is she openly gay? Not a joke. I haven't had time to learn anything about her and I was working / jumping this weekend. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

0/2/0 I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Rhys - I quoted your own words from the original post where you acknowledged that what you did was not moral. Now, you ask me to prove to you that what you did was not moral? I read your initial post multiple times. I just reject your underlying premise that your conduct can be justified by someone else's. I believe that individuals are ultimately responsible for their own behavior. Nobody can 'convince' you, because you have created your own moral relativity. Logical arguments are meaningless to you. Moral relativity is pretty much synonymous with making up the rules as you go. By the way; insulting the intelligence of others because they can't win a game against you where you make up the rules as you go is pretty immature. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

You answer your own question here. You admit what you did was morally incorrect. You just claim that your victim being unethical justified your immoral behavior. So...cops getting together after hours to hold up known drug dealers and keep the money is cool? Afterall, they're criminals. Surely you can steal from them. I think you are in an area of semantics that will not support your argument here. You admit the policy is utilized because the public is presumed to be good, moral and honest. I know. My words. But I use them because you intentionally avoided them. Then, you go on to exclude yourself from that group. The conclusion is that you once again admit that your actions are wrong. I was respecting your argument that Wal Mart is not good and pure right up until you declared yourself the ultimate arbiter of how much profit they NEED to make. Exactly how much do they NEED to make oh exalted one? Bingo I only stole a few dollars out of your wallet. No significant impact. So, no crime. Right? Agreed. That's the purpose of a corporation. In fact, there is case law that too much philanthropy puts them in breech of a fiduciary duty to the shareholders. Your argument is that if they are too zealous about upholding their legal obligation to the shareholders, they are doing wrong. An interesting Catch 22 you've put them in. Kind of like a small lie isn't really a lie? I'm not sure that's what you wrote earlier, but I'll try not to split hairs. Hold on there. You just went from morals and ethics to legalities. The line between legal and illegal is very different from the line between right and wrong. Once you cross into illegal, you have long since passed 'wrong'. You are now so firmly in the realm of 'wrong' that we, as a society, are willing to lock you up to prevent your having to make those tough choices for a while. Don't kid yourself. You never intended to purchase the product. You intended to rent it without cost. Sorry. I think the fact that you have to villify the other party to try to justify your actions makes it clear. You did this for self-gratification. You decided you were the ultimate arbiter of what is just and you acted to punish the one you villify. The fact that their rules allow it does not somehow vindicate you. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Beautiful women are dangerous to men Sorry. Had to fix it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

LOL! Actually, I think this is a poor sample group. I expect most of the women in this venue will agree with you. However, I have known the other sort. The reason I was thinking about it is that I have decided the other sort are not the sort I ever want to date again. :) I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Hmmm....I thought the last option was whimsical enough that one would recognize it as "Not mandatory at all". Sorry about that ambiguity. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I find it hard to give an opinion on this. Did you run over something? Was it intentional? If it was a pure accident, it seems like something that should be covered by insurance and I would not pay the bill. Why should an impact to the oil pan be different from an impact to the windshield or fender? If it shows up on your credit report, federal law requires the credit reporting bureaus to post any rebuttal you send in as well. If you were somewhere you shouldn't have been, or mistreating the auto, you are responsible and should pay. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I am talking about makeup worn by a woman. I have posted a separate poll for the women. I got to thinking today about women who refuse to go out because they aren't wearing makeup. I am curious where the women draw the line and where men draw it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I hope it is obvious that I am talking about makeup worn by a woman. I'll post an identical poll for guys. It just crossed my mind today that a couple of women I have known would throw up 'lack of makeup' as a reason for not going somewhere. I am curious where the line is drawn for most. Feel free to comment if I missed the mark on the poll options. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

So, if a white assistant principal told the hispanic kids they couldn't wear a Mexican flag, it would be racist. But if the hispanic assistant principal tells the white kids they can't wear the American flag, he couldn't be racist? Really? Really? I love how everyone thinks only white males are prejudiced and everyone else is virtuous. That assertion alone is prejudiced. Maybe you missed that day in histroy class where they talked about: - African slaves - American Indians - Women - Chinese - Hawaiians - Japanese-American internment - On and on and on and on........ Now I hate that I am held accountable for my predecessor white males, but this isn't a tit-for-tat issue. IOW's a balck calling me cracker doesn't have the same sting as me calling him, "boy." Don't be mad at your local black guy, be pissed at your predecessors 5 and 10 generations back. Stop. You lose the debate. You make a huge leap of inferrence; use a non-sequitur and show prejudicial thinking all at once. Your argument ASSUMES that I am just like some white males that came before me because I have those two things in common with them. Therefore, I am to be held accountable. You've made an unwarranted leap that does not logically follow and you've managed to stereotype at the same time. And you think this is perfectly acceptable because I am a white male. Way to go. You are clearly a liberal. And you proved my point. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

So, if a white assistant principal told the hispanic kids they couldn't wear a Mexican flag, it would be racist. But if the hispanic assistant principal tells the white kids they can't wear the American flag, he couldn't be racist? Really? Really? I love how liberals think only white males are prejudiced and everyone else is virtuous. That assertion alone is prejudiced. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

OK folks. Look at what I said. Monarchy IS a form of government that has servede humanity well at times. It can be constitutional as one person pointed out, but does not have to be (see Nepal for a recent example). Many monarchies have been extremely popular and still are. And as to the quote above - if you think you choose the president in the good old US of A, please do some research on the electoral college. It was created just to make sure us peasants can be set on the true path by the elites if we get it wrong. I love the US. But our founding fathers said repeatedly that the government we put together here was not perfect and never will be. Communism works in small communities in Israel and other places. Monarchies have worked and ares till working throughout the world. No form of government is inherently good or evil. Those qualities come from the people who run it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

They have been many things over the years. Sometimes many thing within one lineage. Monarchy is a form of government. If done properly, it could be a pretty good form. Someone who is raised specifrically for the purpose of leading and taught the requisite skills is not such a bad idea. There just need to be safeguards in place to prevent abuse; Just like any other form of government. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

You're right. You can't explain it to her. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I agree with Rhaig's comment above. It is clear that the law does not say what opponents are claiming. So those who want to oppose it then start claiming the enforcement of it will be a problem. The opponents of immigration enforcement (that's what they now amount to) now claim that law enforcement officers are evil and will do what is unlawful to enforce this law. Ridiculous and baseless. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I hate to say this, but I would contact the manufacturer to see if the canopy is safe. I once had a cat pee on some ammunition. It left a visible stain on the brass. When I shot the ammo, much of the brass split down the side. Since I reload, this was an unhappy thing. The reloading had weakened the brass, but that was the only time I ever saw it split like that. It's possible canopy material will fare better. But I would check with the manufacturer. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Anyone know of a military discount on an AAD? Preference is the Vigil. Thanks for any help. dwj I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMqc7PCJ-nc Not sure if I posted it correctly, but I think this is the original video that caused litigation. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

So global warming is causing illegal immigration? When will it all end??? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

The new law says that law enforcement must do their jobs. If they have reasonable suspicion of a crime, they must ask questions. That's pretty much it. I'm getting tired of everyone telling lies about what the law says. Almost all of them have failed to look for facts. Pure emotional drivel. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

rehmwa - Don't be ridiculous. I am forming a committee. We'll publish the complex guidelines eventually. Meanwhile, there will be fact-finding missions to fun places to SCUBA, hang glide, skydive and such. I'll get back to you. For now, just send money so I can conduct this very important work. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Did somebody check option four of the poll as a joke? Anyone who checked that option should send their money to me. After a series of inefficient and ineffective uses of the money, I'll take care of you with the debt that is left over. You'll be responsible for the debt of course. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I can't help but recall when Hillary said Americans had too many civil liberties. We never found out which ones she considered excessive. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.