On 2/19/2013 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:



On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:







Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo



that are owned by the public?







What would be the point?







Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell



an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why



can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own



drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I



want to?







Why am I being punished?







That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years











I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were



incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find



another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent



methods available to suicidal persons?







The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of



the left's favorite example of gun control.











Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say



under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those



other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those



stats above? Not so many.







The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.







Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory



breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat



belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)



That might save more people than banning guns.





Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.

Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity.



What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?



If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he

can *stop* it though.





Salmonbait





I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the

princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that

pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.


Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.
BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when the sun is shinning.

Didn't realize that the old boat was only 240 lbs You must have got 2
footitis and moved all the way up to 16 feets. Lessee 850 lbs for the
boat. 200 lbs for the engine. 500 lbs for the trlr. 200 lbs of gear and
batteries and you are a tad overloaded. It's not a matter of the engine
pulling it. But , CAN YOU STOP on a moderate downgrade with the car
loaded up with passengers and more gear. I think John already cautioned
you about that.

On 2/19/2013 8:15 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:



On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4,
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:







Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and
ammo



that are owned by the public?







What would be the point?







Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to
shell



an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why



can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own



drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it
when I



want to?







Why am I being punished?







That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years











I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were



incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find



another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent



methods available to suicidal persons?







The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of



the left's favorite example of gun control.











Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people
(let's say



under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all
those



other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those



stats above? Not so many.







The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.







Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory



breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat



belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)



That might save more people than banning guns.





Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on
the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.

Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not
limiting towing capacity.



What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?



If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can
tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he

can *stop* it though.





Salmonbait





I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the

princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that

pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.


Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.
BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when
the sun is shinning.



What's Meyer boating in this days...oh, I forgot...it's a state secret.

Neither you or Don have alluded to your current pride and joys. You
didn't get a Bayliner, did you?

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:19:14 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:58:33 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

The number of suicides by gun might drop if it were a bit more difficult
and time consuming to buy pistols. In my state, there's a waiting period
that ends up running about 10 days from purchase to approval by the
state police. If you are suicidal and want a gun to end it and you don't
have one, you might change your mind in 10 days.

Not likely. Most people who seriously contemplate suicide, eventually
decide to do it. Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US and
they have virtually zero firearms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aokigahara

They're really good at sharpening knives too.

Salmonbait

I love my Japanese water stone. I have also used a Dozuki too. And, I
pulled the Dozuki across my finger nail by accident once. It always
amazes me when you do something stupid to yourself and the first things
you see is the blood, bright red and oozing, and them the pain hits.

In article om,
says...

On 2/19/2013 6:23 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 6:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 6:07 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 5:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:


Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they
will never do that...


Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train
or in
a bus?

You really don't know anything about anything.


Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to
usenet?
But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives,
but it
would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you
are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with
your
several bankruptcies...



And once again you demonstrate you don't know anything about anything.

Do you really think I am gonna' read any of this? LOL!


Hey, most of your posts make absolutely no sense. Why should your latest
idea of having everyone's cells shut off at 10 mph be any different.

Oh...my wife just messaged me from her iPhone. Her commuter bus, the one
on which is she a passenger and the one that travels at more than 10 mph
except when it is stuck in traffic arrived at her stop downtown 10
minutes late so she probably will be home a littler later than usual.

Under your plan, she wouldn't be able to send such a message.

You're a moron.


Not a critical message.

Why would the morning arrival time of a bus affect the departure time of
the evening bus? When I rode the 11Z the morning arrival time didn't
affect the the evening schedules. If the bus was late to arrive at 14th
and C then I had a shorter lunch.

On 2/19/2013 9:26 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 8:15 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:



On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4,
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:







Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and
ammo



that are owned by the public?







What would be the point?







Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to
shell



an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why



can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own



drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it
when I



want to?







Why am I being punished?







That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years











I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were



incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find



another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent



methods available to suicidal persons?







The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of



the left's favorite example of gun control.











Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people
(let's say



under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all
those



other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those



stats above? Not so many.







The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.







Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory



breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the
seat



belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)



That might save more people than banning guns.





Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on
the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.

Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not
limiting towing capacity.



What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?



If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can
tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he

can *stop* it though.





Salmonbait





I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the

princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that

pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.


Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.
BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when
the sun is shinning.



What's Meyer boating in this days...oh, I forgot...it's a state secret.

Neither you or Don have alluded to your current pride and joys. You
didn't get a Bayliner, did you?

harry krause can't tell us about anything now that we all know he's
hiding assets from folks he owes... Sucks to be him, what a scum bag.

On 2/19/2013 9:23 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:



On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4,
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:







Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and
ammo



that are owned by the public?







What would be the point?







Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to
shell



an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why



can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own



drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it
when I



want to?







Why am I being punished?







That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years











I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were



incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find



another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent



methods available to suicidal persons?







The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of



the left's favorite example of gun control.











Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people
(let's say



under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all
those



other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those



stats above? Not so many.







The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.







Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory



breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat



belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)



That might save more people than banning guns.





Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on
the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.

Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not
limiting towing capacity.



What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?



If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can
tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he

can *stop* it though.





Salmonbait





I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the

princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that

pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.


Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.
BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when
the sun is shinning.

Didn't realize that the old boat was only 240 lbs You must have got 2
footitis and moved all the way up to 16 feets. Lessee 850 lbs for the
boat. 200 lbs for the engine. 500 lbs for the trlr. 200 lbs of gear and
batteries and you are a tad overloaded. It's not a matter of the engine
pulling it. But , CAN YOU STOP on a moderate downgrade with the car
loaded up with passengers and more gear. I think John already cautioned
you about that.

Assholes like him don't give a **** about "your" family. They always
justify it with **** like "I only tow a little way", etc... In reality
they are just selfish assholes, but you knew that.

On 2/19/13 9:43 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 9:26 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 8:15 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:



On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4,
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:







Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and
ammo



that are owned by the public?







What would be the point?







Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to
shell



an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why



can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my
own



drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it
when I



want to?







Why am I being punished?







That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years











I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were



incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find



another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less
violent



methods available to suicidal persons?







The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan,
one of



the left's favorite example of gun control.











Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people
(let's say



under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all
those



other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all
those



stats above? Not so many.







The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.







Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory



breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the
seat



belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)



That might save more people than banning guns.





Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on
the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.

Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not
limiting towing capacity.



What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?



If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can
tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he

can *stop* it though.





Salmonbait





I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the

princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that

pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.


Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.
BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when
the sun is shinning.



What's Meyer boating in this days...oh, I forgot...it's a state secret.

Neither you or Don have alluded to your current pride and joys. You
didn't get a Bayliner, did you?

harry krause can't tell us about anything now that we all know he's
hiding assets from folks he owes... Sucks to be him, what a scum bag.


Yet another PsychoSnotty tale...

--
I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist
racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work
for me.

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:22:15 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/19/13 9:17 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:17:34 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/19/13 8:14 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote:

That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A.

===

We all know that foad is Harry Krause. Chances are that urinal is
also given Harry's past record of creating peole who agree with him.



Sorry, whiner...Mr. Pee ain't me, and when I changed my handle to FOAD,
I announced it here.

It is true, isn't it, that "etc" is your altered ego?

When I change my handle to Wayne Is A Moron, I'll let everyone know.


You can use the handle I gave him... W'hine. Or, better, Lil W'hine.

How about Insayne?

On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 22:44:48 UTC-4, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On 2/19/2013 9:23 PM, Meyer wrote:

On 2/19/2013 8:11 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:

On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:



On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:







On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:



On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4,

wrote:



On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:















Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and

ammo







that are owned by the public?















What would be the point?















Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to

shell







an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why







can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own







drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it

when I







want to?















Why am I being punished?















That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years























I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were







incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find







another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent







methods available to suicidal persons?















The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of







the left's favorite example of gun control.























Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people

(let's say







under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all

those







other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those







stats above? Not so many.















The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.















Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory







breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat







belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)







That might save more people than banning guns.











Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on

the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.



Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not

limiting towing capacity.







What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?







If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can

tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he



can *stop* it though.











Salmonbait











I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the



princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that



pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.





Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.

BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when

the sun is shinning.



Didn't realize that the old boat was only 240 lbs You must have got 2

footitis and moved all the way up to 16 feets. Lessee 850 lbs for the

boat. 200 lbs for the engine. 500 lbs for the trlr. 200 lbs of gear and

batteries and you are a tad overloaded. It's not a matter of the engine

pulling it. But , CAN YOU STOP on a moderate downgrade with the car

loaded up with passengers and more gear. I think John already cautioned

you about that.



Assholes like him don't give a **** about "your" family. They always

justify it with **** like "I only tow a little way", etc... In reality

they are just selfish assholes, but you knew that.


You'd better keep an eye out for me on South Windsor streets, MiniMan.

On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 22:23:47 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 8:11 PM, True North wrote:

On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:

On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:



On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote:







On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:



On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote:



On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote:















Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo







that are owned by the public?















What would be the point?















Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell







an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why







can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own







drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I







want to?















Why am I being punished?















That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years























I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were







incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find







another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent







methods available to suicidal persons?















The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of







the left's favorite example of gun control.























Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say







under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those







other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those







stats above? Not so many.















The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns.















Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory







breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat







belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974)







That might save more people than banning guns.











Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more.



Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity.







What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4?







If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he



can *stop* it though.











Salmonbait











I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the



princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that



pyrite gray devil of a rave 4.





Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne.

BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when the sun is shinning.



Didn't realize that the old boat was only 240 lbs You must have got 2

footitis and moved all the way up to 16 feets. Lessee 850 lbs for the

boat. 200 lbs for the engine. 500 lbs for the trlr. 200 lbs of gear and

batteries and you are a tad overloaded. It's not a matter of the engine

pulling it. But , CAN YOU STOP on a moderate downgrade with the car

loaded up with passengers and more gear. I think John already cautioned

you about that.


Boat alone weighs just over half a ton.
Johnny cautioning me... SNERK!