Gravitymaster

Note that it was kallend that specifically brought up guns and abortion, thank you. He brought up abortions, you brought up guns. (I wonder if you'll now deny it just because it was me who pointed it out?) WTF did you read post #2?

But is a businessman first. Did I forget to mention that the current POTUS is a lawyer? But Obama was a community activist first, how odd. Right, and see where it's gotten us?

But is a businessman first. Did I forget to mention that the current POTUS is a lawyer?

Now genuflecting is considered making a spectacle of ones self? It wasn't that long ago that it was quite common with athletes.

Nope. Don't want that, never wrote that. Strawman arguments don't work too well here. Neither do vague arguments. Once again, what would YOU suggest be done to keep the guns out of the hands of nutters without infringing on the right of law abiding citizens to own guns. Not that I expect an answer but it is entertaining to watch you squirm and wiggle.

So does this mean that if Romney is the Republican Candidate, that you will vote for him over the community organizer?

Nope. Could you have picked him out of a line-up beforehand to be able to say, "There's a nutter." He could pick him out if he had a Santa Suit on.

He wants all guns banned but knows it isn't popular to say so.

Thank goodness he didn't urinate on them.

Hmmm, sounds like the GOP's "Buffett Plan" for voluntary taxation here. I guess the GOP want the USA to go the way of Greece. As opposed to the *ACTUAL* "I won't pay more unless gov't forces me to" Buffett rule? UPDATE: Warren Buffett has pledged to match 1 for 1 all such voluntary contributions made by Republican members of Congress. “And I’ll even go 3 for 1 for McConnell,” he says. That could be quite a bill if McConnell takes the challenge; after all, the Senator is worth at least $10 million. As Buffett put it to me, “I’m not worried.” Read more: swampland.time.com/2012/01/11/warren-buffett-to-mitch-mcconnell-put-up-or-shut-up/#ixzz1jD7M9K18 It isn'y Republicans screaming they don't pay enough in taxes. They scream enough about the deficit, but apparently won't do anything about it even when a match is on offer. http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2012/01/rand-paul-returns-k-in-office-budget-to-treasury-110637.html .

Kluge would indicate it at least was able to accomplish it's goal regardless of it's process. I'd argue this softwar was made by someone who spoke Chinese to translate German into English.

Couldn't find a single instance of this happening to a police officer. Not saying it never has but it's likely pretty rare. Most police officer shootings you referenced from Google were due to a struggle while trying to arrest a suspect. I'll be sure not to try and arrest anyone. It happened here in Miami years ago. The shooter was never found. As I said, I'm not saying it's never happened, just that it's very rare. I'm equally as sure that it's pretty rare that a criminal sneaks up behind someone who is OC, steals their gun, and then shoots and robs them. Way to many easier targets.

I wonder if he's using some type of translation software.

Couldn't find a single instance of this happening to a police officer. Not saying it never has but it's likely pretty rare. Most police officer shootings you referenced from Google were due to a struggle while trying to arrest a suspect. I'll be sure not to try and arrest anyone.

I agree. Where do politicians get this ability to usurp the authority of the courts?

tell me when you understand how banks work - otherwise you're just talking for the sake of talking. they did indeed pay that nonexistent money out, and expected real money with interest back as a result. unfortunately not enough real dollars in the system to do that - hence crash. no need for you to get confused... Weren't the builders of those homes pissed when they got paid by the banks with money that didn't exist?

I haven't heard of any cases where a cop is walking down the street and someone attempts to take his gun away from him. "Officer shot with own gun" - approx. 102 *million* hits. Again, if it's not a problem, then why the level 3 retention holsters and weapon retention combatives training? I didn't go thru all of them but the ones I did read all had to do with an officer involved in a struggle while trying to arrest a criminal. Not a single case of an officer walking down the street and someone attacking him and tring to take his gun away. If OC is such an awesome deterrent, why do crimes occur at all, what with having uniformed cops and marked cars? Depends on how we figure how many are prevented due to the presence of a uniformed officer. It's difficult to prove something didn't happen OC/CC are both deterrents to various levels of criminals. OC has the downsides of making you a target if it's discovered by a criminal, and scaring the uninformed public. Agreed I'll pass on the extra attention in either case, thanks. I'll continue to avoid situations and places where I feel unsafe.

I agree, open carry is much more of a deterent. I discussed this principle with a Hillsborough County Deputy. His opinion was that if the bad guys see any sign that you may be carrying a firearm, they will take it away from you. He emphasized his statement with, "Don't ever think they won't." However, if the majority of folks on the street are displaying open carry it might be a different story. I disagree with the Sheriff. If concealed carry in itself is a deterrrent as most proponents state, then why wouldn't it be a deterrent from someone trying to take a gun away from someone who open carries? If OC was the deterrent that it's being portrayed as, cops wouldn't have to have level 3 retention holsters and be trained in weapon retention combatives. I haven't heard of any cases where a cop is walking down the street and someone attempts to take his gun away from him. If concealed is such a good deterrent, why do cops wear uniforms and drive marked cars?

Agreed, that's my point.

they'll side with their own best interests - not poodle up to the fading us empire... GAWD ALMIGHTY..!! That's twice in one day you have been correct. The Chinese will side up with what is in their best interests. If you think that it will be with Iran, then I wish you the very best in what must be a very puzzling life. china won't be with iran - it will be against the us... What does China gain by opposing the US? they win top slot. heavyweight champions of the world... Or fall to #10.

But of course, why should faulty research have any impact? It's just a little boo boo. Not like it happens all the time. YEAAAH. Stoopid science. It's all bullshit! Not all, but this certainly is.

they'll side with their own best interests - not poodle up to the fading us empire... GAWD ALMIGHTY..!! That's twice in one day you have been correct. The Chinese will side up with what is in their best interests. If you think that it will be with Iran, then I wish you the very best in what must be a very puzzling life. china won't be with iran - it will be against the us... What does China gain by opposing the US?

I'm sensing dreamdancer is starting to Tap Dance.

It affected this guy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Berg Where's that vast majority?