Children toting firepower...
 

"J i m." wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"NotNow" wrote in message
...
D 1 wrote:
Don White wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
Don White wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...


At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans
coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow. “It is attempted
intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry
the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can
purchase
at a local gunshop.”

Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some
that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to
listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person
in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is
wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of
a
gun.”
Sooner rather than later, one of the gun-toting right-wing
nincompoops is going to open fire or "have an accident" or get into
a brawl with law enforcement.

When these armed idiots show up at public meetings at which the
president is going to appear, it increases the workload of the
secret service and local police forces.
Some kind of federal law restricting weapons within a couple thousand
feet of anywhere the President of member of congress may be is in
order
This is something you couldn't trust the individual states to
pass/enforce.
I've been practicing so I can handle the impending invasion of the
Loogy/JustHate Zombies...


http://tinyurl.com/ma5znl


First five shot group at 100 yards from the new ZombieKiller Rifle. I
was plopped on a ground cloth and using the rifle's built-in sights.
Took a couple of shots first to sight in for elevation...there wasn't
any wind.

Tomorrow I'm going to try some shots with the new scope I just
attached. Once I get used to it, I should be able to put five between
the eyes of your typical zombie at 100 yards.

I have an old semi-auto 22 cal rifle with a 6x scope that I haven't
fired in 25 years or so.
I should get it out and do some practice myself.... just in case those
'zombies' make it across the border. ;-)


Whatever you do - don't clean the barrel! The first shot will do that
for you.
What an idiot! He thinks zombies are real.

I deal with you, the freak and a motley assortment of your fellow
irregulars everyday.
Why wouldn't I believe in 'merican zombies?

The zombies in N O ignored the warnings for Katrina.
Bill will be knocking on your door Sunday.
Will we be calling you a zombie on Monday morning?


You're going to be sorley disappointed when we ride out a good blow.
Maybe I'll get the Princecraft out for some wave surfing.

Children toting firepower...
 

Don White wrote:
"J i m." wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"NotNow" wrote in message
...
D 1 wrote:
Don White wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
Don White wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
jps wrote:
Couldn't agree with this writer more...


At The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Gingrey’s home state, writer
Jay Bookman takes issue with the increasing trend of Americans
coming
to public meeting with deadly force in-tow. “It is attempted
intimidation,” he wrote. “It is an acknowledgment
that, lacking the intellectual firepower and ammunition to carry
the
day, the person in question is prepared to try to settle the issue
using the kind of firepower and ammunition that any idiot can
purchase
at a local gunshop.”

Bookman continues: “It also reflects a growing mindset among some
that
the government just isn’t listening and thus must be made to
listen,
one way or the other. There’s a fundamental childishness to that
attitude, a notion that equates listening to agreement. The person
in
question is not prepared to accept the idea that having listened to
him, a majority of his fellow Americans might decide that he is
wrong.
So he reserves the right to try to impose his view at the point of
a
gun.”
Sooner rather than later, one of the gun-toting right-wing
nincompoops is going to open fire or "have an accident" or get into
a brawl with law enforcement.

When these armed idiots show up at public meetings at which the
president is going to appear, it increases the workload of the
secret service and local police forces.
Some kind of federal law restricting weapons within a couple thousand
feet of anywhere the President of member of congress may be is in
order
This is something you couldn't trust the individual states to
pass/enforce.
I've been practicing so I can handle the impending invasion of the
Loogy/JustHate Zombies...


http://tinyurl.com/ma5znl


First five shot group at 100 yards from the new ZombieKiller Rifle. I
was plopped on a ground cloth and using the rifle's built-in sights.
Took a couple of shots first to sight in for elevation...there wasn't
any wind.

Tomorrow I'm going to try some shots with the new scope I just
attached. Once I get used to it, I should be able to put five between
the eyes of your typical zombie at 100 yards.

I have an old semi-auto 22 cal rifle with a 6x scope that I haven't
fired in 25 years or so.
I should get it out and do some practice myself.... just in case those
'zombies' make it across the border. ;-)


Whatever you do - don't clean the barrel! The first shot will do that
for you.
What an idiot! He thinks zombies are real.
I deal with you, the freak and a motley assortment of your fellow
irregulars everyday.
Why wouldn't I believe in 'merican zombies?

The zombies in N O ignored the warnings for Katrina.
Bill will be knocking on your door Sunday.
Will we be calling you a zombie on Monday morning?


You're going to be sorley disappointed when we ride out a good blow.
Maybe I'll get the Princecraft out for some wave surfing.


Nothing could be further from the truth. Unlike your BFF Harry, I do not
wish harm to people. Hope your ready. It could be a doozie.

Children toting firepower...
 

On Aug 20, 2:23*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:51:50 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Aug 20, 12:31*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:08:07 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

read the legislation. it was written by phil gramm, a texas
republican, and his wife, a sr. VP at enron. and we know how the GOP
loved enron. another chance to fleece the middle class.

Look at the votes on Gramm-Leach-Bliley.
155 house democrats and 38 democratic senators voted for it
Bill Clinton signed it into law

yep because they got stampeded...just like you have...by the myth of
the 'free market'. even after the biggest collapse in US history you
still thump your chest and tell us how the markets need to be
deregulated.

Bill Clinton was in front of that stampede. Did you watch the signing?
He was telling us this was the best thing since sliced bread.

of course he did. many of us bought the free market kool aid and
politicians ignored it at their peril. just look at how true believers
like yourself continue to hang onto this little security blanket of
the 'rich will protect us'.

I never said that
I am saying you can't trust the democrats to save you either.

In fact it was the democrats who killed H.R.4161 in 2005 that would
have regulated Fannie/Freddie and would have tempered this housing
crisis. That was Dodd and Frank.

the GOP controlled congress in 2005. it was not until 2006 that the
democrats were a majority

The GOP did not have a filibuster proof senate.-

which, of course, is irrelevant to your point. the fact is the GOP
deregulated markets allowing CDO's to balloon to sixty two trillion
dollars.

anyone older than 5 years old would have known that was unsustainable.
but the free market fundamentalists in the GOP steam rollered the
political machinery to make regulation impossible.

Children toting firepower...
 

On Aug 20, 1:37*pm, "SteveB" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Aug 20, 12:08 pm, H the K wrote:





SteveB wrote:
"wf3h" wrote

and then got idiots like you to tell us how fortunate we are to be
raped by the rich

ROFLMAO!! i love this logic. the children who suck the dicks of the
rich think that the middle class should

All your posts are filled with homosexual references. Have you tried to
get
any help for this obsession, or do you just cruise Interstates for
entertainment and writing materials? I mean, if you're gay, that's okay
by
me. But just come out and say it. Most gays are just angry people, but
they manage to hide it. You do not. Your constant references to
homosexual
practices and the violent nature you exhibit are becoming boring.

Steve

Wow...someone who lives in Mormonville whining about what he perceives
to be be perversions on the part of others. Classic.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

he's a moron?

that explains ALOT....

reply:

you have now become insufferably boring. *buybye.

says the homophobe

Children toting firepower...
 

On Aug 20, 2:26*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:28:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Aug 20, 12:41*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:13:04 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

in fact gun control is meaningless. we need to repeal the 2nd
amendment and ban guns completely

At least you are being honest now. How do you think that would work
out? Is the government going buy them all or are you repealing the 5th
amendment too.

you use the daniel patrick moynahan *method. guns would be illegal.
you shut down gunsmiths, make the sale of ammo illegal, etc. over time
guns, being a mechanical object, would start to disappear as parts
became unavailable, no now guns entered the system, etc.

you destroy the gun culture along with the guns.

You would just drive the ammo market underground. That has been so
successful in the drug war hasn't it?

when people inject ammo into their veins you be sure and let me know.
when ammo becomes a psychoactive chemical, drop me a note.

In real life the people who use the most ammo are not the ones who
cause the problem.-

risk/benefit calculation. value of guns: zero

cost to society of their use: billions.

they should be banned.

Children toting firepower...
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:38:01 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

You're going to be sorley disappointed when we ride out a good blow.
Maybe I'll get the Princecraft out for some wave surfing.


How high are you ASL. That makes the biggest difference in these
things. You can survive the wind but the water will get you.


My house is about 160 feet above sea level.
The hugh mature trees in the backyard scare me.

Children toting firepower...
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:41:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 20, 2:26 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:28:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Aug 20, 12:41 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:13:04 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

in fact gun control is meaningless. we need to repeal the 2nd
amendment and ban guns completely

At least you are being honest now. How do you think that would work
out? Is the government going buy them all or are you repealing the
5th
amendment too.

you use the daniel patrick moynahan method. guns would be illegal.
you shut down gunsmiths, make the sale of ammo illegal, etc. over time
guns, being a mechanical object, would start to disappear as parts
became unavailable, no now guns entered the system, etc.

you destroy the gun culture along with the guns.

You would just drive the ammo market underground. That has been so
successful in the drug war hasn't it?

when people inject ammo into their veins you be sure and let me know.
when ammo becomes a psychoactive chemical, drop me a note.

People don't inject marijuana into their veins but a lot of people die
because it is illegal.
You only have to look at "prohibition" to see the problem with banning
anything.

In real life the people who use the most ammo are not the ones who
cause the problem.-

risk/benefit calculation. value of guns: zero

cost to society of their use: billions.

I could say the same thing about golf, recreational boats or
motorcycles, what's your point?

they should be banned.

Again, name me one thing that became unavailable because it was
banned? Just one.
All "banning" does is create a criminal enterprise to provide
something.

You're wrestling with a pig here.

Children toting firepower...
 

On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:48:04 -0600, "SteveB"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:41:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 20, 2:26 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:28:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Aug 20, 12:41 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:13:04 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

in fact gun control is meaningless. we need to repeal the 2nd
amendment and ban guns completely

At least you are being honest now. How do you think that would work
out? Is the government going buy them all or are you repealing the
5th
amendment too.

you use the daniel patrick moynahan method. guns would be illegal.
you shut down gunsmiths, make the sale of ammo illegal, etc. over time
guns, being a mechanical object, would start to disappear as parts
became unavailable, no now guns entered the system, etc.

you destroy the gun culture along with the guns.

You would just drive the ammo market underground. That has been so
successful in the drug war hasn't it?

when people inject ammo into their veins you be sure and let me know.
when ammo becomes a psychoactive chemical, drop me a note.

People don't inject marijuana into their veins but a lot of people die
because it is illegal.
You only have to look at "prohibition" to see the problem with banning
anything.

In real life the people who use the most ammo are not the ones who
cause the problem.-

risk/benefit calculation. value of guns: zero

cost to society of their use: billions.

I could say the same thing about golf, recreational boats or
motorcycles, what's your point?

they should be banned.

Again, name me one thing that became unavailable because it was
banned? Just one.
All "banning" does is create a criminal enterprise to provide
something.

You're wrestling with a pig here.

Better than wrestling with you, a stump. You don't even qualify as a
dining room table.

Children toting firepower...
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 20, 2:23 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:51:50 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Aug 20, 12:31 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:08:07 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

read the legislation. it was written by phil gramm, a texas
republican, and his wife, a sr. VP at enron. and we know how the
GOP
loved enron. another chance to fleece the middle class.

Look at the votes on Gramm-Leach-Bliley.
155 house democrats and 38 democratic senators voted for it
Bill Clinton signed it into law

yep because they got stampeded...just like you have...by the myth of
the 'free market'. even after the biggest collapse in US history you
still thump your chest and tell us how the markets need to be
deregulated.

Bill Clinton was in front of that stampede. Did you watch the
signing?
He was telling us this was the best thing since sliced bread.

of course he did. many of us bought the free market kool aid and
politicians ignored it at their peril. just look at how true believers
like yourself continue to hang onto this little security blanket of
the 'rich will protect us'.

I never said that
I am saying you can't trust the democrats to save you either.

In fact it was the democrats who killed H.R.4161 in 2005 that would
have regulated Fannie/Freddie and would have tempered this housing
crisis. That was Dodd and Frank.

the GOP controlled congress in 2005. it was not until 2006 that the
democrats were a majority

The GOP did not have a filibuster proof senate.-

which, of course, is irrelevant to your point. the fact is the GOP
deregulated markets allowing CDO's to balloon to sixty two trillion
dollars.

anyone older than 5 years old would have known that was unsustainable.
but the free market fundamentalists in the GOP steam rollered the
political machinery to make regulation impossible.


You continue to ignore the fact that Clinton did that, in the same way
Bush did all the things we say he did. It happened on his watch and he
could have vetoed the bill. He did exactly the opposite and championed
it while it was flowing through congress with significant democratic
support.

I agree they all drank the Kool aid but "all" is the operative word.
To call this a GOP problem is not intellectually honest.
Bear in mind this was the same time that we were applauding Enron,
Worldcom, Adelphia and a host of other frauds as being "prosperity".
Greenspan was really the only one who was warning us that this might
just be an illusion but even he was half hearted about it.
It is very similar to the way we were relishing the housing market in
2006. I have to say, I knew enough to dump my home builder stocks the
day I heard Centex had stopped building "inventory" houses.
The signs were there. You just had to look.

And it was Rubin's, Clintons Sec of Treasury who pushed Glass-Steagall
dumping. Before he went to CitiBank and made it Citigroup. A pox on both
parties.

Children toting firepower...
 

On Aug 20, 4:33*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:39:48 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:



which, of course, is irrelevant to your point. the fact is the GOP
deregulated markets allowing CDO's to balloon to sixty two trillion
dollars.

anyone older than 5 years old would have known that was unsustainable.
but the free market fundamentalists in the GOP steam rollered the
political machinery to make regulation impossible.

You continue to ignore the fact that Clinton did that, in the same way
Bush did all the things we say he did.

IOW you're agreeing with my point: the free market has failed. we gave
the rich EVERYTHING they asked for and what it resulted in was a
wholesale plunder of the middle class

thanks. i already knew that.


It happened on his watch and he
could have vetoed the bill. He did exactly the opposite and championed
it while it was flowing through congress with significant democratic
support.

hey genius...guess who controlled congress when he signed the bill

the G....O.....P


I agree they all drank the Kool aid but "all" is the operative word.
To call this a GOP problem is not intellectually honest.

what's intellectually honest is to admit the free market has failed.
regulated, controlled markets, not free market capitalism, are the way
to ensure that this mess doesn't happen again.

that includes state sponsored health insurance