[Wayne.B]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:19:40 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 9:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 9:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 19:58:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Let me ask you something:

If the danger exposed in an investigative report is *real* as in the
case of the Chevy trucks catching fire due to the unprotected side
saddle fuel tanks and as outlined in the Center For Auto Safety report
cited above, is a dramatization of the danger by artificially igniting
the fuel an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?

===

Dramatization takes it out of the category of news and responsible
journalism, and turns the story into fiction and entertainment.


Fiction?

It is based on verifiable data, i.e. accident reports with deaths.
Is it an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?



Wayne is just another hardline gunnutzi

===

Non sequitur, but I'm sure you have more guns than I do.

[Boating All Out]

In article ,
says...


This place is hilarious. If you don't like something ... deny it
exists. Simple.


Christ, you're a slow learner. Been that that way for years.
And your sanity and civility won't be reciprocated.
It's in the DNA.



Yup, everyone here but you and Harry are ****ed up.


See what I mean?

[Harrold]

On 11/6/2014 12:08 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:42:37 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:19:40 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 9:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 9:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 19:58:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Let me ask you something:

If the danger exposed in an investigative report is *real* as in the
case of the Chevy trucks catching fire due to the unprotected side
saddle fuel tanks and as outlined in the Center For Auto Safety report
cited above, is a dramatization of the danger by artificially igniting
the fuel an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?

===

Dramatization takes it out of the category of news and responsible
journalism, and turns the story into fiction and entertainment.


Fiction?

It is based on verifiable data, i.e. accident reports with deaths.
Is it an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?



Wayne is just another hardline gunnutzi

===

Non sequitur, but I'm sure you have more guns than I do.

Harry certainly takes his gun out and plays with it more than anyone
else here. He seems to be adding a new widget every week.


Oh? "THE GUN" I thought you were talking about something else.

[F*O*A*D]

On 11/6/14 10:59 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:04:50 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/6/2014 12:08 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:42:37 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:19:40 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 9:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 9:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 19:58:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Let me ask you something:

If the danger exposed in an investigative report is *real* as in the
case of the Chevy trucks catching fire due to the unprotected side
saddle fuel tanks and as outlined in the Center For Auto Safety report
cited above, is a dramatization of the danger by artificially igniting
the fuel an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?

===

Dramatization takes it out of the category of news and responsible
journalism, and turns the story into fiction and entertainment.


Fiction?

It is based on verifiable data, i.e. accident reports with deaths.
Is it an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?



Wayne is just another hardline gunnutzi

===

Non sequitur, but I'm sure you have more guns than I do.

Harry certainly takes his gun out and plays with it more than anyone
else here. He seems to be adding a new widget every week.


Oh? "THE GUN" I thought you were talking about something else.

That was what I was talking about all along. I can't help it if people
jump to other conclusions.

The jokes do start writing themselves at a certain point tho. ;-)

His is long, black with a larger than normal diameter but it doesn't
shoot as many times in a row as normal.
What? I am just talking about a 10 round HBAR.
"A variation of the gun used at Sandy Hook".. (according to CNN)

It is his only hobby ...
,,, and he calls other people gun nuts.


Unlike most of the righties here, all of my guns still shoot.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

[F*O*A*D]

On 11/6/14 12:37 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:03:40 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 10:59 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:04:50 -0500, Harrold wrote:

On 11/6/2014 12:08 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:42:37 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:19:40 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 9:55 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/5/2014 9:44 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 19:58:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Let me ask you something:

If the danger exposed in an investigative report is *real* as in the
case of the Chevy trucks catching fire due to the unprotected side
saddle fuel tanks and as outlined in the Center For Auto Safety report
cited above, is a dramatization of the danger by artificially igniting
the fuel an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?

===

Dramatization takes it out of the category of news and responsible
journalism, and turns the story into fiction and entertainment.


Fiction?

It is based on verifiable data, i.e. accident reports with deaths.
Is it an attempt to mislead the public or provide false information?



Wayne is just another hardline gunnutzi

===

Non sequitur, but I'm sure you have more guns than I do.

Harry certainly takes his gun out and plays with it more than anyone
else here. He seems to be adding a new widget every week.


Oh? "THE GUN" I thought you were talking about something else.

That was what I was talking about all along. I can't help it if people
jump to other conclusions.

The jokes do start writing themselves at a certain point tho. ;-)

His is long, black with a larger than normal diameter but it doesn't
shoot as many times in a row as normal.
What? I am just talking about a 10 round HBAR.
"A variation of the gun used at Sandy Hook".. (according to CNN)

It is his only hobby ...
,,, and he calls other people gun nuts.


Unlike most of the righties here, all of my guns still shoot.

You seem to "clean" it a lot


Yes, well...a clean gun is a happy gun.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

[Poco Loco]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 23:44:07 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 13:09:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:32:52 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:


no shortage of hits on "gun show loophole."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b-ztawuh98

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/0...Unanimous-Vote

many hits for virginia...here is one:

http://tinyurl.com/mywfmo6

I can get thousands of hits on "the Mossad blew up the world trade
center" too but that does not make it true.
The fact is that these guys on MSNBC broke federal laws to make their
little movie. Would more laws make it more illegal?

Dick produced a stat that says less than one percent of crime guns
came from a gun show.



Oh. If so, then they must be ok.

Certainly not the problem the hype would have us believe.

Seven tenths of one percent? That is like the number of hunters who
get shot by their dog.

That was funny!!

[Poco Loco]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 23:53:07 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 15:40:47 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 1:14 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 11:27:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


You obviously didn't pay much attention to the report or video.

OK I am watching it now.
The gun show where they "scored" was in Tennessee violating federal
law, then they went to 2 more states plus Georgia where they started.
I was wrong, they had 4 counts each of violating 3 sections of the
federal law I posted (not 3)
I missed South Carolina where they did get refused on camera along
with acknowledging that they were refused a few other times but that
is not what they hit hard on in the piece.

I will say again, they would not have to walk far from the Atlanta
studio to buy crack and there is probably a pusher right in the
building. Does that say crack is not illegal enough?


Are we watching the same video?

If so, as a self proclaimed legal scholar, maybe you should call the
BATF and demand arrest and prosecution. Maybe there's a reward in it
for you.


BATF would tell me they don't really care about small time gun running
like this. If these guys had 1000 guns in a truck they might care.

Holder would have them transferred to Mexico.

[Poco Loco]

On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 23:29:25 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


This place is hilarious. If you don't like something ... deny it
exists. Simple.


Christ, you're a slow learner. Been that that way for years.
And your sanity and civility won't be reciprocated.
It's in the DNA.



Yup, everyone here but you and Harry are ****ed up.


See what I mean?

Sorry, should have added you to the un-****ed up pair!