"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:20:04 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:22:49 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 21:52:34 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
news9l7u4118158qtoduvcoj6h3rba8uuvm2a@4ax. com...
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:06:34 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
. net...

wrote in message
...
COLUMBIA, SC (WIS) - It is a story bound to re-ignite debate
about
concealed weapons permits in the Palmetto State. On Saturday
night,
police say a man was shot and killed when he tried to rob people
at
an
Alcoholics Anonymous meeting.

For the second time in two months, law enforcement says the
response
is appropriate.

"We've got a violent society. Times have changed. It's not the
60s
and
the 70s, when you didn't have people with guns. You have bad guys
now
and they all have guns. They're committing more serious crimes
against
people. So I think the fact that we've got law enforcement being
assisted by citizens who are properly trained and armed, are
helping
us out," said Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott.

Saturday's fatal shooting of an 18-year-old armed robbery suspect
in
Five Points follows last month's retaliation by an Irmo pizza
deliveryman.

In that incident, investigators say the victim had been
physically
assaulted before he pulled out a gun and killed his attacker.

In both cases, the men who fired back had valid concealed weapons
permits.

State Law Enforcement Division figures show steady increases in
the
number of South Carolinians applying for and receiving those
permits.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's a law enforcement expert saying that guns in the hands of
law-
abiding citizens is a good thing. But, he's not a hand-wringing
pantywaist.


Why don't you just go back to your frontier days. Everyone can
pack
a
couple of six shooters in western style holsters.
You could even use gunfights like the old quick draw method to
settle
disputes.
My question to you...would the palm sisters prefer the six guns
over
your
shortcomings?


Actually the wild west was more dangerous from accidents. The most
dangerous place in the "Wild West" days was NYC.

Geez, I wonder why NYC would be the most dangerous place? They
didn't
have black or hispanic gangs. Must have been the immigrants.

Could it be that more people congregated in NYC?

Tammany Society controlled NYC. And you do realize that they were a
society
of the worst gangs.

Oh yeah. But they couldn't kill with the efficiency of a AK. Look at
what happened at Virginia Tech. 34 people in a matter of minutes.
That's a declaration of war by one person.

The thugs of Tammany Hall beat the livin' snot out of a lot of folks
and I'm sure plenty disappeared but it wasn't the sort of random
mayhem an assault rifle can cause.

There were places in NYC the cops would not go. And they also had cap
and
ball revolvers. Not high capacity fully auto arms. The Romans in
taking
Scotland killed 10,000 and lost 360 of their troops in one battle. That
was
about 80 AD. Not a lot of guns available. People kill people. Samson
used
a jawbone of an Ass to kill 1000 Philistines according to the Old
Testament.
So that makes it BC.

You're quoting war. What's the ratio between American dead and Iraqi
combatants?

We're not talking war, unless you're talking about the one
manufactured by gun manufacturers and the NRA.

Nope, we were talking about guns facilitating killing. Seems as if
killing
goes wholesale without guns.

Okay, then let's talk about the difference between a declared war and
a lunatic going postal on his fellow citizens or family.

I don't consider them the same. The closest we've gotten in domestic
terrorism is McVeigh's fertilizer bomb.

Yup, the fertilizer kill a lot of people. No guns involved.

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:49:10 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
.. .


We're not talking war, unless you're talking about the one
manufactured by gun manufacturers and the NRA.

Nope, we were talking about guns facilitating killing. Seems as if
killing
goes wholesale without guns.

Okay, then let's talk about the difference between a declared war and
a lunatic going postal on his fellow citizens or family.

I don't consider them the same. The closest we've gotten in domestic
terrorism is McVeigh's fertilizer bomb.

Yup, the fertilizer kill a lot of people. No guns involved.

It'd be inefficient to try to bring a building down with a gun. Wrong
tool for the job.

Plus, it would have been next to impossible to kill 168 of your fellow
citizens with firearms without attracting the attention of the
security guards at the US Federal Building.

Pardon my oversight but I've yet to hear of a convenience store
robbery or home invasion where perps threatened the victims with
fertilizer.

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:49:10 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


I don't consider them the same. The closest we've gotten in domestic
terrorism is McVeigh's fertilizer bomb.

Yup, the fertilizer kill a lot of people. No guns involved.

McVeigh's grandfather introduced McVeigh to guns, and he grew
fascinated by them. McVeigh told people he wanted to be a gun shop
owner, and he sometimes took a gun to school to impress the other
boys. After graduating high school with honors, McVeigh became
intensely interested in gun rights and the Second Amendment to the
United States Constitution, and read magazines such as Soldier of
Fortune. He went to work for Burke Armored Car Service.

McVeigh was known throughout his life as a loner; his only known
affiliations were voter registration with the Republican Party when he
lived in New York, and a membership in the National Rifle Association
while in the military.[8] Despite the former, McVeigh self-identified
as a libertarian in a statement that was reported by MSNBC.com and The
Washington Post;[9] and in 1996, while in federal prison, he voted for
Libertarian candidate Harry Browne in the United States presidential
election, 1996.[10] The LP said that he violated the nonaggression
principle and thus was not a true libertarian.

On Apr 14, 2:48*pm, jps wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:55:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
LIberals have steered society into losing the moral and family values
that would otherwise stop a sane person from randomly using a weapon
against others.

Wow. *Care to explain?

Are you saying that the conservatives are the ones that champion
single parent families (that produce 80% of the violent criminals),
favor leiniency on criminals, are anti-christian and family values,
protected the Fannie / Freddie fiasco that has stripped many hard
working folks of their homes and de-stabilized our economy, and have
generally chipped away at the moral fabric of our country for the last
50 years? *Of course not, that would be the liberals.

Did you hear Diane Feinstein tell 60 minutes that the NRA has most of
congress in their pocket?

With you as the judge? *I can handle that.

Excuse me, but the "conservatives" are who favor jails over treatment,
police over job training, the ability to discriminate over the need to
create opportunity.

Your kind want to deal with the problems your shortsightedness creates
rather than building a society that would minimize the problems.

Yes, liberals "champion" single parent families as if we want more of
them... How the hell does your brain make that connection?

Liberals have a history of looking after clean water, clean air, car
safety, work safety, equality between races, sexes, religions,
collective bargaining so workers aren't slaves, child labor laws -
true conservatism as in let's not plunder and spoil our environment
and resources in pursuit of money.

You'd happily throw that away and live in a cancerous sewer if your
house could be bigger and you could drive a nicer car? *What's the
upside for you?

Do you think being a single parent is a curse? *The fault of the
single parent?

Is this code for single black inner city mother who makes babies in
order to increase her welfare payments so she can afford a Caddy?

Do you consider yourself a Christian?

The trouble with your thinking is that it's so damned simple. *Complex
problems aren't reducible to simple, bumper sticker solutions as your
lot favors.


Heh, heh... You're so inflamed, you snipped too much of the original
post so that yours has no reference to make sense, and you posted
twice. Hilarious.

Wipe the spittle off the screen, and try to understand:

Using statements like "your type" is a vain attempt to lump me into a
fictitious group of people that only exists in your mind.
Conservatives, like liberals, run a wide variety of beliefs, and even
have shared beliefs between the two groups. Once you get out of the
simple mindset you're carrying, you might see shade of grey, instead
of black and white. You act as if this is a team sporting event.

You know very little of what I believe, or what positions I hold
concerning many of the issues you list. I've simply provided
counterpoint to your bumper sticker beliefs that guns are bad. You've
gone on a rampage here in a boating NG trying to stir up debate, then
if anyone dares to provide a counterpoint, you call them a
conservative and "your type". That's a weak strategy.

I don't speak in code. That seems to be your pot of tea. I do wonder
why you picked the example you did... projecting a bit?

Am I a christian? Why would it matter to you, or to this issue? Are
you biggoted against christians, and are just looking for a point to
attack?

Bottom line is, there is overwhelming evidence that a child raised in
a home with both a man and a woman as parents, rooted in a religious
belief system, produces the best chance for a well adjusted, law
abiding, sucessful and non-violent adult. The liberal movement has
been the single most enabling element to move our society away from
this norm over the last 50 years.

The liberals most certainly created this mess, and try to bumper
sticker their way out of it. "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child".
BS. It takes a family, with both parents, male and female, and a
solid set of moral values and influences to raise a child. Government
can not do it, it is the most corrupt thing, on BOTH sides of the
aisle, that I can think of. I suspect that is our biggest difference
of opinion.

The liberal movement and Hollywood have done more damage to our
society than conservatives could ever do. Now that "your type" has
unleashed the beast, you're just trying to limit the amount of damage
it can do. All the while sitting back and blaming everyone else but
yourselves. Typical liberal.

Chew on that, then post away. I'm done.

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:25:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 14, 2:48*pm, jps wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:55:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
LIberals have steered society into losing the moral and family values
that would otherwise stop a sane person from randomly using a weapon
against others.

Wow. *Care to explain?

Are you saying that the conservatives are the ones that champion
single parent families (that produce 80% of the violent criminals),
favor leiniency on criminals, are anti-christian and family values,
protected the Fannie / Freddie fiasco that has stripped many hard
working folks of their homes and de-stabilized our economy, and have
generally chipped away at the moral fabric of our country for the last
50 years? *Of course not, that would be the liberals.

Did you hear Diane Feinstein tell 60 minutes that the NRA has most of
congress in their pocket?

With you as the judge? *I can handle that.

Excuse me, but the "conservatives" are who favor jails over treatment,
police over job training, the ability to discriminate over the need to
create opportunity.

Your kind want to deal with the problems your shortsightedness creates
rather than building a society that would minimize the problems.

Yes, liberals "champion" single parent families as if we want more of
them... How the hell does your brain make that connection?

Liberals have a history of looking after clean water, clean air, car
safety, work safety, equality between races, sexes, religions,
collective bargaining so workers aren't slaves, child labor laws -
true conservatism as in let's not plunder and spoil our environment
and resources in pursuit of money.

You'd happily throw that away and live in a cancerous sewer if your
house could be bigger and you could drive a nicer car? *What's the
upside for you?

Do you think being a single parent is a curse? *The fault of the
single parent?

Is this code for single black inner city mother who makes babies in
order to increase her welfare payments so she can afford a Caddy?

Do you consider yourself a Christian?

The trouble with your thinking is that it's so damned simple. *Complex
problems aren't reducible to simple, bumper sticker solutions as your
lot favors.


Heh, heh... You're so inflamed, you snipped too much of the original
post so that yours has no reference to make sense, and you posted
twice. Hilarious.

Wipe the spittle off the screen, and try to understand:

Using statements like "your type" is a vain attempt to lump me into a
fictitious group of people that only exists in your mind.
Conservatives, like liberals, run a wide variety of beliefs, and even
have shared beliefs between the two groups. Once you get out of the
simple mindset you're carrying, you might see shade of grey, instead
of black and white. You act as if this is a team sporting event.

You know very little of what I believe, or what positions I hold
concerning many of the issues you list. I've simply provided
counterpoint to your bumper sticker beliefs that guns are bad. You've
gone on a rampage here in a boating NG trying to stir up debate, then
if anyone dares to provide a counterpoint, you call them a
conservative and "your type". That's a weak strategy.

I don't speak in code. That seems to be your pot of tea. I do wonder
why you picked the example you did... projecting a bit?

Am I a christian? Why would it matter to you, or to this issue? Are
you biggoted against christians, and are just looking for a point to
attack?

Bottom line is, there is overwhelming evidence that a child raised in
a home with both a man and a woman as parents, rooted in a religious
belief system, produces the best chance for a well adjusted, law
abiding, sucessful and non-violent adult. The liberal movement has
been the single most enabling element to move our society away from
this norm over the last 50 years.

The liberals most certainly created this mess, and try to bumper
sticker their way out of it. "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child".
BS. It takes a family, with both parents, male and female, and a
solid set of moral values and influences to raise a child. Government
can not do it, it is the most corrupt thing, on BOTH sides of the
aisle, that I can think of. I suspect that is our biggest difference
of opinion.

The liberal movement and Hollywood have done more damage to our
society than conservatives could ever do. Now that "your type" has
unleashed the beast, you're just trying to limit the amount of damage
it can do. All the while sitting back and blaming everyone else but
yourselves. Typical liberal.

Chew on that, then post away. I'm done.

You're done because your simple, one dimensional, bumper sticker
solutions are all you can muster.

What I blame the liberals for is not being more effective against the
NRA and not fighting for better decisions by our wussy lawmakers.

McVeigh's grandfather introduced McVeigh to guns, and he grew
fascinated by them. McVeigh told people he wanted to be a gun shop
owner, and he sometimes took a gun to school to impress the other
boys. After graduating high school with honors, McVeigh became
intensely interested in gun rights and the Second Amendment to the
United States Constitution, and read magazines such as Soldier of
Fortune. He went to work for Burke Armored Car Service.

McVeigh was known throughout his life as a loner; his only known
affiliations were voter registration with the Republican Party when he
lived in New York, and a membership in the National Rifle Association
while in the military.[8] Despite the former, McVeigh self-identified
as a libertarian in a statement that was reported by MSNBC.com and The
Washington Post;[9] and in 1996, while in federal prison, he voted for
Libertarian candidate Harry Browne in the United States presidential
election, 1996.[10] The LP said that he violated the nonaggression
principle and thus was not a true libertarian.

wrote:

The liberal movement and Hollywood have done more damage to our
society than conservatives could ever do. Now that "your type" has
unleashed the beast, you're just trying to limit the amount of damage
it can do. All the while sitting back and blaming everyone else but
yourselves. Typical liberal.

Chew on that, then post away. I'm done.


Wow...a bigoted Republican conservative lecturing on morality.

snerk


--
"John H" wrote in message
...

Please note that Interstate 90 will be closed this weekend across
South Dakota. This closure will allow the Federal Government free
access to haul a 200 ton piece of coal to Mt. Rushmore so that
President Obama can be added to the Presidents on the monument.
--
John H

--

John Herring, rec.boat's resident racist.

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:49:37 -0400, HK wrote:

wrote:

The liberal movement and Hollywood have done more damage to our
society than conservatives could ever do. Now that "your type" has
unleashed the beast, you're just trying to limit the amount of damage
it can do. All the while sitting back and blaming everyone else but
yourselves. Typical liberal.

Chew on that, then post away. I'm done.


Wow...a bigoted Republican conservative lecturing on morality.

"...Unleashed the beast..."

A gun righs advocate, self-problaimed "conservative" who supported GW
Bush's war and hates liberals is claiming that liberals have
unleashed the beast...

That's rich.

You'd be living in a cancerous cesspool if it werern't for "liberals"
but you're too stupid to recognize it.

Maybe you'll be among the pussies who take the easy way out with a
gun. Let's hope you don't take any collateral with you.

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:25:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote:



Using statements like "your type" is a vain attempt to lump me into a
fictitious group of people that only exists in your mind.

You expound and defend the same positions that other "conservatives"
spout. Don't bother hiding behind your proposed "devil's advocate"
status, since everyone knows it's bull****.

jps wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:25:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote:



Using statements like "your type" is a vain attempt to lump me into a
fictitious group of people that only exists in your mind.

You expound and defend the same positions that other "conservatives"
spout. Don't bother hiding behind your proposed "devil's advocate"
status, since everyone knows it's bull****.


Betcha he owns and flies a confederate battle flag...



--
"

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:39:35 -0400, HK wrote:

jps wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:25:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote:



Using statements like "your type" is a vain attempt to lump me into a
fictitious group of people that only exists in your mind.

You expound and defend the same positions that other "conservatives"
spout. Don't bother hiding behind your proposed "devil's advocate"
status, since everyone knows it's bull****.


Betcha he owns and flies a confederate battle flag...

In the den next to an autographed picture of Dale Earnhardt and his
high school diploma.