 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Hepatitis / December 2005In Memory of John Lennon
http://www.john-lennon.net/whoauthorizedtheassassinationofjohnlennon.htm Imagine Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try, No hell below us, above us only sky, Imagine all the people, living for today. Imagine there's no countries, it isn't hard to do, Nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too, Imagine all the people, living life in peace. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one, I hope someday you'll join us, and the world will be as one. Imagine no possessions, I wonder if you can, No need for greed or hunger, a brotherhood of man, Imagine all the people, sharing all the world. You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one, I hope someday you'll join us, and the world will live as one. John Lennon Alan "A society whose citizens refuse to see and investigate the facts, who refuse to believe that their government and their media will routinely lie to them and fabricate a reality contrary to verifiable facts, is a society that chooses and deserves the Police State Dictatorship it's going to get." - Ian Williams Goddard Nemesis Peace Centre http://www.veloceraptor.free-online.co.uk/protector.html Abuse of Women and Children http://theoriginalfirebird.blogspot.com/ Nemesis News http://lordcerneabbas.blogspot.com/ Absolute Anarchy http://lordcerneabbastoo.blogspot.com/ http://www.john-lennon.com/ That's why I always say that a well armed society is a POLITE society... > http://www.john-lennon.net/whoauthorizedtheassassinationofjohnlennon.htm > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > http://www.john-lennon.com/ > That's why I always say that a well armed society is a POLITE society... Hear hear!!! WS > > That's why I always say that a well armed society is a POLITE society... > > Hear hear!!! > > WS I've got Planetary Bill of Rights linked in somewhere that agrees with you, and even though we haven't got guns, I do have this rather sharp Samurai sword, which is hanging on the wall at a convenient height, purely for decorative purposes you understand. I think Mr Bush has got some problems. http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/BA0BD6DB-6ED0-493B-92DC-E06294EEB1F4.htm Iraq leaders demand pullout timetable I do love they way they use the word "demand". LOL http://www.john-lennon.com/imagine.ra Firebird Never trust anybody who is too sophisticated to own a rubber chicken. http://www.veloceraptor.free-online.co.uk/index.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/hitchhikers/guide/theguide.shtml http://www.john-lennon.com/imagine.ra >> > That's why I always say that a well armed society is a POLITE >> > society... [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > which is hanging on the wall at a convenient height, purely for decorative > purposes you understand. Of course! <innocent smile> WS "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. > That's why I always say that a well armed society is a POLITE society... > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > > > http://www.john-lennon.com/ Here we go. Check your peices at the door. heh heh heh cactus jammies --- pursuade with love and lots of vanilla pudding > "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] >> > >> > http://www.john-lennon.com/ > "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. It's also the choice of behavior, when they both have one! jk I was raised to believe that being polite was something that people of quality did, not something that one did to keep from being killed. > > "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. > > It's also the choice of behavior, when they both have one! > > jk >> > "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. >> >> It's also the choice of behavior, when they both have one! >> >I was raised to believe that being polite was something that people of >quality did, not something that one did to keep from being killed. Well, yeah. But when in Rome... ;-) I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days aren't! I was taught from a very early age that taking things that weren't yours was wrong yet some people seem to think that they can steal whatever isn't nailed down. People don't obey speed limits or stop signs unless there is a cop sitting there. Courtesy virtually doesn't exist today. Even in an office setting I can be standing right in front of an elevator and people will walk right in front of me when the doors open. So yeah, I believe that there are people out there who would shoot, stab, or steal from me or my family like it was nothing. The only thing they understand unfortunately is a gun barrel to snap them back into "politeness" and honesty... >I was raised to believe that being polite was something that people of > quality did, not something that one did to keep from being killed. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >> jk You obviously live on the East Coast! hehe! People are downright polite here in the Midwest. But if you f.ck up, they'll blow your a.s away! Elmo //////// I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days aren't! I was taught from a very early age that taking things that weren't yours was wrong yet some people seem to think that they can steal whatever isn't nailed down. People don't obey speed limits or stop signs unless there is a cop sitting there. Courtesy virtually doesn't exist today. Even in an office setting I can be standing right in front of an elevator and people will walk right in front of me when the doors open. So yeah, I believe that there are people out there who would shoot, stab, or steal from me or my family like it was nothing. The only thing they understand unfortunately is a gun barrel to snap them back into "politeness" and honesty... "Gordo Mondragon" <ga_mondragon@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ga_mondragon-C4925F.21402621112005@news-rdr-01-dummy.rdc-nyc.rr.com... I was raised to believe that being polite was something that people of quality did, not something that one did to keep from being killed. In article <lsvgf.90$2W1.31@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Jim Klein <rumin8@ix.netcom.com> wrote: Gordo Mondragon wrote: "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. It's also the choice of behavior, when they both have one! jk http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum > You obviously live on the East Coast! hehe! People are downright > polite here in the Midwest. But if you f.ck up, they'll blow your a.s > away! > Elmo > //////// Hey that's not right we're rude, yeh, but we'll blow your a.s away too. we're just rude about it. heh heh. Doug >I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days aren't! >I was taught from a very early age that taking things that weren't yours [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > understand unfortunately is a gun barrel to snap them back into > "politeness" and honesty... Gun control unfortunately disarms the people who may need to protect themselves, and it emboldens the ones who they need protecting from. If everyone had guns, you can bet there would be way less home-invasion types of crime. WS >>I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days aren't! >>I was taught from a very early age that taking things that weren't yours [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >WS True. But then, you could also bet there'd be way more folks killing family members in all those homes... >>>I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days >>>aren't! [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > family > members in all those homes... Nah. Remember, the teenagers would be way more polite. <grin> Waterspider > >>>I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days > >>>aren't! [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Nah. Remember, the teenagers would be way more polite. <grin> He wasn't talking about parents killing their children, I think. More common are husbands/wives killing each other, and children offing their parents. I won't have a gun in my home. G >> >>>I was raised that way too but it seems that most people now a days >> >>>aren't! [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > common are husbands/wives killing each other, and children offing their > parents. I know, that was just a bad joke. > I won't have a gun in my home. Perhaps if you were a middle-aged female living alone in a remote area with virtually no police protection...? >>I won't have a gun in my home. > > Perhaps if you were a middle-aged female living alone in a remote area with > virtually no police protection...? And how many times have you had to use it for self defence? That said, I quit heroin due to a gun, a gun that was held at my temple by my connection who said I didn't pay him (when I did). That scared the living sh.t out of me. Cody >>>I won't have a gun in my home. >> >> Perhaps if you were a middle-aged female living alone in a remote area >> with virtually no police protection...? > > And how many times have you had to use it for self defence? Once. I shot a hole through my bedroom ceiling, over the head of a man I didn't know who appeared in the doorway to insist that I wanted his company in bed. I would not have fired the gun, but when I first pointed it at him, saying, "Get the f.ck out of my bedroom!" he merely laughed and said, "Oh, that's not a real gun." Was he drunk and/or high on crack or something? Yes, most likely, but a gun fired indoors, especially in a small room, is surprisingly loud and he abruptly sobered up, came to his senses and ran out the door, never to be seen again. Turns out the guy had been in Pender Harbour working construction for a relative, who contacted me a week or so later to apologize. The idiot who presumably wanted to rape me had a bit of a history of this kind of thing. > That said, I quit heroin due to a gun, a gun that was held at my temple by > my connection who said I didn't pay him (when I did). That scared the > living sh.t out of me. I'll bet it did, and those situations aren't unusual in those circles. Interestingly enough, some of the appeal of heroin is the lifestyle that goes with it. The excitement, the intrigue, the danger. Not for me; I prefer lighter substances and mellower people :-) Spidey >>>>I won't have a gun in my home. >>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > relative, who contacted me a week or so later to apologize. The idiot who > presumably wanted to rape me had a bit of a history of this kind of thing. You could have done the same thing with a can of mace. And, if he was drunk, there's a good chance he was all I wanna but no canna. >>That said, I quit heroin due to a gun, a gun that was held at my temple by >>my connection who said I didn't pay him (when I did). That scared the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Spidey So do I :), which is why I haven't done any since that fateful night, July 9, 1972. Cody Re: In Memory of John Lennon Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Tue, Nov 22, 2005, 6:35pm (CST+7) From: nospam@nuncaspam.comorg (Michael Cody) Waterspider wrote: I won't have a gun in my home. Perhaps if you were a middle-aged female living alone in a remote area with virtually no police protection...? And how many times have you had to use it for self defence? That said, I quit heroin due to a gun, a gun that was held at my temple by my connection who said I didn't pay him (when I did). That scared the living sh.t out of me. Cody ////////// An ex of mine was home alone, in Hawaii, with the kids when I had to work overnight. Someone was trying to break in thru the sliding glass doors when my ex shoved my double barrel 12 guage shotgun in his face. She said the guy got this really 'surprised' look on his face, turned and ran....jumped off the 20 ft high seawall and was never seen again. Lots of break-in's, rapes and burglaries on the North Shore of Oahu..... elmo http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum [...] > Perhaps if you were a middle-aged female living alone in a remote area with > virtually no police protection...? Known for her outspokenness in Usenet newsgroups? I get your point. I just hate guns and I think that most people have the ability in them to go crazy at certain times. The combination scares me. >> Perhaps if you were a middle-aged female living alone in a remote area >> with >> virtually no police protection...? > > Known for her outspokenness in Usenet newsgroups? LOL! > I get your point. I just hate guns and I think that most people have > the ability in them to go crazy at certain times. The combination > scares me. It scared me too, so I had my sweetie hide my guns before I started tx because I was aware that I might be less than rational at some times during tx. One particularly rough afternoon, with head pounding and riba raging, I phoned my nearby neighbours and said, "Shut up that f.cking bird (an incessantly shrieking cockatoo) or I'll go down there and shoot it!" They brought Thumper indoors, but I'm sure I wouldn't have harmed a feather on his pretty white head because I know he screams because he's lonely and neglected-- that's why he's kept outside where I can hear him and his owners can't. Its owners, on the other hand, might not have fared so well... <g> Waterspider > Gun control unfortunately disarms the people who may need to protect > themselves, and it emboldens the ones who they need protecting from. If > everyone had guns, you can bet there would be way less home-invasion types > of crime. > > WS Oh, I'll quit immediately after this, but I couldn't help it... Are you serious, WS? Yes because, you know, English is not my first language and then I could have misunderstood your thoughts. Otherwise, if you were serious, then I won't mind telling you you're actually talking sh.t, and noone more than you that live in the US (or close to, like you) should know that allowing everybody go out and buying a gun and feel free to go for a walk and use it freely just increased the criminality rates. You were just not present to yourself when you posted, were you? Regards, jeeb. >> Gun control unfortunately disarms the people who may need to protect >> themselves, and it emboldens the ones who they need protecting from. If [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Oh, I'll quit immediately after this, but I couldn't help it... Good to hear from you, Heebie-Jeebie! Hope you're doing well. > Are you serious, WS? > Yes because, you know, English is not my first language and then I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > buying a gun and feel free to go for a walk and use it freely just > increased the criminality rates. I stand by my statement, but perhaps I can explain it better to you: Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. Responsible people would ensure that they knew how to use a gun, would store it safely, and would only use it for self-defence in an emergency situation. But, if you have "gun-control" laws, then these responsible people will turn in their guns and thus have no more defence against the criminals (who will *not* turn in their guns) who have no respect for the laws or for other people. Okay, now let's imagine that we are both criminals, and that we have guns. We're planning to break into a home and rob the people who live there. Would you choose to do a home invasion where you knew that it was against the law to own a gun, or in a place where people had the right to own guns and to use them to protect themselves in their own homes? Waterspider > Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go > around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. > > Waterspider Only their children do. Cody >> Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >> around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. > > Only their children do. Well, yeah, in some cases but that's a whole other issue. I was raised in a home with guns, and from an early age was taught to respect guns and taught how to handle them correctly and safely. As with many things, I think education is the key. WS >>> Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >>> around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > WS Here...here..... You are asolutely correct WS. Doug >>>Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >>>around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > WS Tell that to the students and teachers at Columbine. Cody >>>>Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >>>>around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Tell that to the students and teachers at Columbine. You're suggesting that gun control will prevent acts of violence by mentally ill people? I know that I'm really reaching for a logical analogy here, but that would be like making antifreeze illegal because a few sad individuals drink it for the buzz. WS Hi WS!! Don't you think it's those few "sad individuals" that make every recreational drug illegal??  SignatureShawn (use the "reply feature on your browser to send a private reply via E-Mail.) >>>>>Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >>>>>around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > WS > Hi WS!! Don't you think it's those few "sad individuals" that make every > recreational drug illegal?? Aha, you're on to something here, Shawn. Do you suppose that some other sad individuals in the recreational drug arena are politicians? Waterspider >>>>>>Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not >>>>>>go around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> >> WS Hmmmmmmm......(chomping on carrot) "cooould be doc!!" SignatureShawn (use the "reply feature on your browser to send a private reply via E-Mail.) >> Hi WS!! Don't you think it's those few "sad individuals" that make every >> recreational drug illegal?? [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >>> >>> WS Columbine was a horrendous act of violence and senseless murder. To use it to try to justify gun control or the outlawing of guns is blasphemous. I have a 7 year old nephew who was killed in an automobile accident by a drunk driver. This kind of lack (or lack of it) means that I should be advocating both the outlawing of guns and alcohol! You can commit a senseless act of violence with a variety of things. You can kill someone with a steak knife, hockey stick, hammer, automobile, or a baseball bat. You cannot legislate morality nor can you outlaw everything that could possibly be used to commit murder! Gun control won't work anymore than prohibition worked... >>>>>Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >>>>>around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > WS > Columbine was a horrendous act of violence and senseless murder. And just one example of the many horrendous acts of violence that involved easy access to guns. Columbine was not an isolated case. > To use it > to try to justify gun control or the outlawing of guns is blasphemous. Having a gun is part of a religion? Which one, fundmentalist Christian? > I > have a 7 year old nephew who was killed in an automobile accident by a drunk > driver. This kind of lack (or lack of it) means that I should be advocating > both the outlawing of guns and alcohol! How about leaving both guns and cars in the hands of professionals and forbidding the massive "you're cool if you drink" adverts and making pot legal? Yeah, I want to take away your right to drive or own a car. > You can commit a senseless act of violence with a variety of things. You can > kill someone with a steak knife, hockey stick, hammer, automobile, or a > baseball bat. Or your fists. Not exactly the same, however, as what you can do with an automatic weapon like an AK47 or an M16. > You cannot legislate morality Tell that to John Ashcroft ;-) > nor can you outlaw everything > that could possibly be used to commit murder! You could reduce the easy access to automatic weapons and pistols. > Gun control won't work anymore > than prohibition worked... So, in addition to it being part of your religion, your gun gets you high? "Happiness is a warm gun, bang, bang, shoot, shoot". Gun control has worked for ages in Europe but, then again, Europe isn't full of trigger happy redneck cowboys that vote for idiots like Bush either. Oh, and I am against hunting and war. Cody >>>>>>Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >>>>>>around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >>WS Yeah like POT is a better alternative... Just what I would expect from a liberal! If people like you had their way we would have done nothing when Pearl Harbor was bombed not to mention when the World Trade Center was blown to smitherines. I'll keep my marksmanship up to snuff thank you very much just in case. How would you like your kids riding on a bus with a stoned driver or having stoned teachers? Doctors? Surgeon? Airline Pilot? Impairment whether it be by alcohol, marijuana, or any other substance, is still impairment! >> Columbine was a horrendous act of violence and senseless murder. > [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] >>> >>>WS > Yeah like POT is a better alternative... Much better. Not addictive, easy to grow, no one smokes too much, doesn't provoke idiotic or criminal behavior, liver friendly. Did you know that pot was made illegal in the USA so that it would be easier for the cops to bust Mexicans and musicians? It being illegal has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it is bad or good for you. > Just what I would expect from a > liberal! LOL, as if being liberal was bad. Liberal: open to change Conservative: closed to change > If people like you had their way we would have done nothing when > Pearl Harbor was bombed Um, the president knew it was going to happen and did nothing. He wanted to send young men over to Europe and the Pacific to win the "good war". > not to mention when the World Trade Center was blown > to smitherines. Personally, I think Bush the Terrorist was behind that, not any "Islamic terrorists". > I'll keep my marksmanship up to snuff thank you very much > just in case. Well aren't you the macho boy? > How would you like your kids riding on a bus with a stoned driver or having > stoned teachers? Doctors? Surgeon? Airline Pilot? Impairment whether it be > by alcohol, marijuana, or any other substance, is still impairment! Considering I never said that, your point is absurd. I merely said that pot is better than booze. You only have one liver, you know. I notice you said nothing to the FACT that in Europe we have gun control and a lot less crime than the USA. We don't have the barbaric and very antiquated death penalty either. And, get this, if you're over 70, you can't go to jail or prison no matter what you do. Further, the longest allowed sentences are 30 years. Put that in your shotgun and smoke it, a.shole. Cody >>>Columbine was a horrendous act of violence and senseless murder. >> [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] >>>> >>>>WS Funny I didn't take you for a doctor so how do you KNOW so much about pot? Could it be that you're regularly under the influence? "Doesn't provoke idiotic or criminal behavior", you need to re-read your posts! Calling someone an "a.shole who you have never see or talked to personnally seems to me like you're more "closed to change" than "open to change". As far as pot being "liver friendly", I'm no doctor. What I DO know from my experience in law enforcement is that it is lung un-friendly and that it impairs judgement, balance and in many people, causes them to move on to more addictive substances which are absolutely NOT "liver friendly". If you were in front of me and were "macho" enough to make those kinds of comments, well lets just say you'd leave in a very different condition than you came. As far as liberals being "open to change" and conservatives being "closed to change" I'm not sure where you fabricated that idea. The men who founded America were Christians and VERY conservative yet they were very much about change. The difference is that they favored change that was positive for everyone not just people who they considered "deserving". As far as peple over 70 being able to do "anything" without penalty, why would anyone think that this is a good thing unless they are a pot smoking moron with impaired mental capacity. You made my point rather well... >> Yeah like POT is a better alternative... > [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] >>>>> >>>>>WS > Funny I didn't take you for a doctor so how do you KNOW so much about pot? Research. > Could it be that you're regularly under the influence? "Doesn't provoke > idiotic or criminal behavior", you need to re-read your posts! Calling > someone an "a.shole who you have never see or talked to personnally seems to > me like you're more "closed to change" than "open to change". You're acting like an a.shole. Sooo, if you don't want to be called an a.shole, don't act like one. > As far as pot > being "liver friendly", I'm no doctor. What I DO know from my experience in > law enforcement is that it is lung un-friendly and that it impairs > judgement, balance and in many people, causes them to move on to more > addictive substances which are absolutely NOT "liver friendly". Bullshit. > If you were in front of me and were "macho" enough to make those kinds of > comments, well lets just say you'd leave in a very different condition than > you came. My, my aren't you the macho boy! Kiss my a.s. > As far as liberals being "open to change" and conservatives being "closed to > change" I'm not sure where you fabricated that idea. Erm, the dictionary. > The men who founded > America were Christians and VERY conservative yet they were very much about > change. Oxymoron from a moron. > The difference is that they favored change that was positive for > everyone not just people who they considered "deserving". Yeah, like the slaves they owned and the indians they massacred. Pull the other one, chum, it has bells on it. > As far as peple over 70 being able to do "anything" without penalty, why > would anyone think that this is a good thing unless they are a pot smoking > moron with impaired mental capacity. You made my point rather well... Because it works? USA: draconian penal code with a high crime rate. Europe: a compassionate penal code with a low crime rate. Proof's in the pudding and all that jazz, Mr Macho Boy. Cody >>>Yeah like POT is a better alternative... >> [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] >>>>>> >>>>>>WS Okay guys, both of you, stand back and take a look at this. You've both deteriorated to name-calling and gotten completely derailed from the original, interesting debate. You know, there are times when it just makes things worse to continue trying to persuade someone else that your views are right, and it's not important who is right or wrong. Much can be learned from exchange of ideas between folks with differing opinions, but nothing but damage is done by flaming each other. I ask for a favour: Let's say you both agree to disagree, and drop the thread. As an alternative, if either of you wants to carry on this go-nowhere-but-down silliness, how 'bout doing it with me because I'm pretty sure I understand where each of you is coming from and agree with each of you about some (but not all) of your points. Worth a try? Peace. Waterspider [...] > As far as liberals being "open to change" and conservatives being "closed to > change" I'm not sure where you fabricated that idea. The men who founded > America were Christians and VERY conservative yet they were very much about > change. Again, if you actually paid attention to facts you'd know that men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Paine did not consider themselves christians. This is documented fact. The United States Constitution contains only two references to religion and both of them were to clearly separate the government from the churches. They were really smart men. People would be well off to pay more attention to what they actually wrote. As far as liberals being "open to change" and conservatives being "closed to change" I'm not sure where you fabricated that idea. //////////// Perhaps you should get out the dictionary and look up the word 'conservative'. You're a dipshit! elmo http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum > As far as liberals being "open to change" and conservatives being > "closed to change" I'm not sure where you fabricated that idea. > //////////// > Perhaps you should get out the dictionary and look up the word > 'conservative'. You're a dipshit! > elmo I can't remember the source, but to paraphrase a quote: " A man who is not a liberal at age 21 has no heart; a man who is not a conservative at age 41 has no brain." Thom >>As far as liberals being "open to change" and conservatives being >>"closed to change" I'm not sure where you fabricated that idea. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thom It's a quote from Ronald Reagan and you saw what happened to his conservative brain. Cody [...] > It's a quote from Ronald Reagan and you saw what happened to his > conservative brain. You're getting mean again. It's not a quote from Reagan, and Alzheimer's is a terrible tragedy no matter who it happens to. How it affects a country when a president has it is and is manipulated by the people around him is a different subject. G > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > G And the fact that Reagan cut funding for Alzheimer research is another one, a direct result of his conservatism. Cody [..] > I can't remember the source, but to paraphrase a quote: > " A man who is not a liberal at age 21 has no heart; a man who is > not a conservative at age 41 has no brain." It has been attributed to Churchill but there's no evidence he ever said it. G > [..] > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > G Great quote, no matter where it came from. WS > Yeah like POT is a better alternative... Just what I would expect from a > liberal! If people like you had their way we would have done nothing when > Pearl Harbor was bombed not to mention when the World Trade Center was blown > to smitherines. I'll keep my marksmanship up to snuff thank you very much > just in case. Anyone who believes that the vast majority of people who would call themselves liberal wouldn't have supported responding to a direct attack by the Japanese, or who didn't support the taking out of the Taliban in Afganistan is someone who needs to stop listening to so much Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly (both proven and consistent liars) and start listening to what people are actually saying. Gordo <snip> not to mention when the World Trade Center was blown to smitherines. I'll keep my marksmanship up to snuff thank you very much just in case. //////////// Yeah, if everyone who had a gun in NYC had been guarding the World Trade Center, they could have shot the two jetliners down before they hit the buildings. Imagine that...... ahahahahahahahahaha!!!! elmo http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum > > Columbine was a horrendous act of violence and senseless murder. > > And just one example of the many horrendous acts of violence that > involved easy access to guns. Columbine was not an isolated case. While I believe that fewer guns in general would be a good thing, I think that kids - especially in rural areas - have had access to their parent's guns for much longer than they've been bringing them to school for a massacre. Sure, if their parents had not had guns they couldn't have done it but it wasn't access to guns that made it happen . > > To use it > > to try to justify gun control or the outlawing of guns is blasphemous. > > Having a gun is part of a religion? Which one, fundmentalist Christian? No, the worshipers of the god that is a specific interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. > > I > > have a 7 year old nephew who was killed in an automobile accident by a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > forbidding the massive "you're cool if you drink" adverts and making pot > legal? Yeah, I want to take away your right to drive or own a car. What about that woman who put her children in her car and rolled them into a lake? I don't think that talking about the crazy folks who would find a way to act out their craziness in many different ways provides much to any argument. The argument about cars is just stupid. Most people are not served by public transportation. [...] > Gun control has worked for ages in Europe but, then again, Europe isn't > full of trigger happy redneck cowboys that vote for idiots like Bush either. "Europe" is not a country and is not every country in Europe has the same gun control laws, nor do they have the same crime rates. G Re: OT - Re: NO Gun control??? Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Sat, Nov 26, 2005, 11:44am (CST+7) From: nospam@nuncaspam.comorg (Michael Cody) Ray wrote: Columbine was a horrendous act of violence and senseless murder. And just one example of the many horrendous acts of violence that involved easy access to guns. Columbine was not an isolated case. To use it to try to justify gun control or the outlawing of guns is blasphemous. Having a gun is part of a religion? Which one, fundmentalist Christian? I have a 7 year old nephew who was killed in an automobile accident by a drunk driver. This kind of lack (or lack of it) means that I should be advocating both the outlawing of guns and alcohol! How about leaving both guns and cars in the hands of professionals and forbidding the massive "you're cool if you drink" adverts and making pot legal? Yeah, I want to take away your right to drive or own a car. You can commit a senseless act of violence with a variety of things. You can kill someone with a steak knife, hockey stick, hammer, automobile, or a baseball bat. Or your fists. Not exactly the same, however, as what you can do with an automatic weapon like an AK47 or an M16. You cannot legislate morality Tell that to John Ashcroft ;-) nor can you outlaw everything that could possibly be used to commit murder! You could reduce the easy access to automatic weapons and pistols. Gun control won't work anymore than prohibition worked... So, in addition to it being part of your religion, your gun gets you high? "Happiness is a warm gun, bang, bang, shoot, shoot". Gun control has worked for ages in Europe but, then again, Europe isn't full of trigger happy redneck cowboys that vote for idiots like Bush either. Oh, and I am against hunting and war. Cody ///////// Aw, c'mon Cody. Not everybody who owns a gun is a 'trigger happy cowboy'. I own 2 guns and didn't vote for Bush. :-) Nor do I own a cowboy hat. elmo http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum [...] > Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go > around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. Responsible people would > ensure that they knew how to use a gun, would store it safely, and would > only use it for self-defence in an emergency situation. On the other hand, you have look at reality in the US where the easy legal availability of guns means that they can be more easily stolen or purchased by the criminals that you're trying to protect yourself from. Fewer legal guns = fewer available guns = fewer guns available for crime. > But, if you have "gun-control" laws, then these responsible people will turn > in their guns and thus have no more defence against the criminals (who will > *not* turn in their guns) who have no respect for the laws or for other > people. How many people do you think actually end up using guns to defend themselves - so what is the actual risk of responsible people giving up their guns? Compare that to the fact that having a gun in your house makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be killed with a gun in your house. Compare that to the drying up of the source of illegal weapons and the number of people who won't be killed with them. > Okay, now let's imagine that we are both criminals, and that we have guns. > We're planning to break into a home and rob the people who live there. Would > you choose to do a home invasion where you knew that it was against the law > to own a gun, or in a place where people had the right to own guns and to > use them to protect themselves in their own homes? I don't think that it would make a difference, because criminals are not choosing between states or countries with or without gun control laws. Most people who break into houses, I have to assume, are doing so locally. Imagine you're breaking into a house and you have a gun and you see someone. Tell me what you think you, as that criminal, would do if thought it was good chance that the person you see has a gun, vs not having one? Seems pretty obvious to me. G >> Guns do not create criminals. Responsible people who own guns do not go >> around wantonly commiting crimes with their guns. Responsible people [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > purchased by the criminals that you're trying to protect yourself from. > Fewer legal guns = fewer available guns = fewer guns available for crime. This is where education plays a big role. People need to know how to store their weapons securely, so they won't be stolen. >> But, if you have "gun-control" laws, then these responsible people will >> turn [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be killed with a gun in > your house. What I'd like to see factored into those statistics is the number of people who do not have a gun in their house, but are killed by a gun anyway. Compare that to the drying up of the source of illegal > weapons This will never happen. Gun control laws only disarm the law-abiding citizens. >> Okay, now let's imagine that we are both criminals, and that we have >> guns. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Most people who break into houses, I have to assume, are doing so > locally. Yes, it is a hypothetical situation. > Imagine you're breaking into a house and you have a gun and you see > someone. Tell me what you think you, as that criminal, would do if > thought it was good chance that the person you see has a gun, vs not > having one? Seems pretty obvious to me. Run like hell? :-) Waterspider Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a weapon into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year old can get a permit to drive a car but a 15 1/2 year old cannot get a permit to carry, own, or buy a gun. There are far more people killed with cars than with guns! If we really want to save lives we should ban automobiles. If that isn't what our purpose is than I would ask what are we really trying to do? BTW, knives, and baseball bats work just as well at taking someone's life, shouldn't we consider them as dangerous weapons also? > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > G > Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a weapon > into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year old can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to do? BTW, knives, and baseball bats work just as well at taking > someone's life, shouldn't we consider them as dangerous weapons also? Damn it, Ray, don't talk like that or next thing you know we'll need a licence to use a steak knife! Waterspider hahahahahahahahahahahah! Good one... >> Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a >> weapon into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Waterspider > hahahahahahahahahahahah! Good one... Why thank you! :) >>> Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a >>> weapon into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> Waterspider >> Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a >> weapon into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Waterspider Waterspider Here ya go.. Doctors' kitchen knives ban call http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm >>> Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a >>> weapon into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Waterspider Here ya go.. Doctors' kitchen knives ban call > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm Omygod! I was just joking, honest! Ray! Ray? Where are you? I *told* you this would happen!!! Waterspider p.s. Thanks, Doug, I would never have believed it. I'm here Waterspider! But who would've thought it? I guess it just goes to show you that there is no end to the stupidity that this world has to offer... >>>> Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a >>>> weapon into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > p.s. Thanks, Doug, I would never have believed it. > I'm here Waterspider! But who would've thought it? I guess it just goes to > show you that there is no end to the stupidity that this world has to > offer... Laugh... or cry. WS [...] > Waterspider Here ya go.. Doctors' kitchen knives ban call > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm Ah, the English. You can always count on them to be entertaining. > Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a weapon > into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year old can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > do? BTW, knives, and baseball bats work just as well at taking someone's > life, shouldn't we consider them as dangerous weapons also? On of the most dangerous places you can be is in a moving vehicle. I think they should only be driven by professionals and cities should be flattened and redone with everything within walking distance. Not only would millions of lives be saved from accidents, millions of obese people would lose weight and live longer. I haven't owned a car in over 15 years and don't miss the car payments, fines, repairs, insurance payments or the headaches from trying to find a place to park. I have also lost a lot of weight. Now, I use public transportation if, say, I want to go to Madrid. Most of the time, however, I walk to wherever I want to go. Cody >>[...] >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >> >>G The purpose of a gun is to injure or kill. The purpose of a car is to transport people from one location to another. There are a whole lot more cars being driven than guns carried around. I'm sorry, but this argument just doesn't make sense. > Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a weapon > into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year old can [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > > > G > The purpose of a gun is to injure or kill. The purpose of a car is to > transport people from one location to another. There are a whole lot > more cars being driven than guns carried around. I'm sorry, but this > argument just doesn't make sense. Regardless of the purpose, cars have killed more innocent civilians than Bush and Cheney could kill even in their wildest wet dreams. USA cities are built for cars so companies like General Motors and Firestone can make money with these death traps. One of the most dangerous places you can be is in a moving vehicle. Cody >>Let me just throw my two cents worth in! You cannot legally carry a weapon >>into a bar but you can legally drive a car to a bar. A 15 1/2 year old can [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] >>> >>>G First off, guns are not necessarily for killing and injuring people! Guns can be used for a variety of things including target practice for sport as well as putting food on the table. The fact that guns CAN be used to kill or injure someone is the same as a baseball bat or a knife CAN be used to kill or injure someone. Sorry pal, YOUR argument doesn't make sense. As for me, I will give up my guns when they pry my cold dead fingers from them, and not before! > The purpose of a gun is to injure or kill. The purpose of a car is to > transport people from one location to another. There are a whole lot [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] >> > >> > G <quote Ray> First off, guns are not necessarily for killing and injuring people! Guns can be used for a variety of things including target practice for sport as well as putting food on the table. The fact that guns CAN be used to kill or injure someone is the same as a baseball bat or a knife CAN be used to kill or injure someone. Sorry pal, YOUR argument doesn't make sense. </quote> Oh, I see, so a a baseball bat manufacturer makes baseball bats for the same reason a kalashnikov manufacturer builds kalashnikovs! Actually, that is soo clear.... And, RIGHT, then a kalashnikov manufacturer builds kalashnikovs because he knows that, well, "kalashnikovs can also be used for sport". Again, Why I didn't get it before.. sh.t! Let me tell you this: If you, like me, lived in a different country (not USA, as I think you do, and I like USA, I mean it) you would be surprised, reading this thread. Now, sorry for _my_ *useless* babbling mode: this, from you, says a lot: <quote> As for me, I will give up my guns when they pry my cold dead fingers from them, and not before! </quote> Have a nice day there, in the far old West. jeeb. Wrong: Narrow thinking. Sorry Gordo. Gun Value = Protection, Sport, Hunting. Individual Rights are tied up in this. Hurting people is incedental to the correct use of a gun just like hurting people is incedental to the correct use of an automobile. Doug > The purpose of a gun is to injure or kill. The purpose of a car is to > transport people from one location to another. There are a whole lot [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] >> > >> > G > Wrong: Narrow thinking. Sorry Gordo. Gun Value = Protection, Sport, > Hunting. Individual Rights are tied up in this. Hurting people is > incedental to the correct use of a gun just like hurting people is > incedental to the correct use of an automobile. Doug You said that so much nicer than I did. WS > The purpose of a gun is to injure or kill. The purpose of a car is to > transport people from one location to another. There are a whole lot > more cars being driven than guns carried around. I'm sorry, but this > argument just doesn't make sense. But it does. The whole anti-gun thing is supposedly about saving lives, and Cody's right about cars being far more dangerous than guns. That's why we don't let 10-year-olds drive Porsches and we make those of legal driving age take tests to be issued a licence. Why not do the same thing with guns? And steak knives. Waterspider Because cars have a positive purpose with an associated risk. Guns are only used for shooting. > > The purpose of a gun is to injure or kill. The purpose of a car is to > > transport people from one location to another. There are a whole lot [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Waterspider >"Gordo Mondragon" <ga_mondragon@yahoo.com> wrote in message > Guns are only used for shooting. Well duh... Gordo. Ahahahah Have a happy Thanksgiving. Doug <quote WS> Good to hear from you, Heebie-Jeebie! Hope you're doing well... </quote> Hi WS, thanks for your kind answer. I'm doing quite well. I'm experiencing that nice energy IMPROVEMENT a couple of months after end of treatment. But I cannot sleep well yet and this sucks, believe me. And a couple of things really don't work in my family lately and I'd like to talk with somebody, but, hey, that is too serious. :) But thanks for asking I hope that you're doing good (but I know you are, aren't you?). About the topic: I'll stand by my statement, as well. I live in a Country where we (still) don't need lots of weapons to be available to keep criminality at a lower rate compared to what happens in the US. Anyway, some months ago, one of the parties here pushed the govern and reached the goal to modify the law about weapons usage because there has been an increment of house robberies, yes, but made by immigrants, most coming from Eastern Europe Countries. What should we do? kill them all? Selling more guns to end users so that they can defend themselves? Or we'd better adjust our law on immigration, make more things to integrate those who have the right to live and work in our Country (see England). Ok, enough said. I don't want to bother you more. We'll be sharing some puffs on the same "cigarette" in a while. Cheers, jeeb. > <quote WS> > Good to hear from you, Heebie-Jeebie! Hope you're doing well... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > IMPROVEMENT a couple of months after end of treatment. But I cannot > sleep well yet and this sucks, believe me. Interesting that you mention this. My sleeping patterns went down the toilet while I was on tx and they haven't ever got back to normal. I keep telling myself what I've heard (old wives' tale?) that as you get older your sleep patterns change, you sleep less, etc. I sleep okay once I fall asleep, but it's the falling asleep that's the problem. If my internal sleep-clock is left to run the show, I'm awake (and alert) for 20 hours, then sleep soundly for 12. This would be fine except that the rest of the word has a 24-hour day. > And a couple of things really don't work in my family lately You have teenagers? and I'd > like to talk with somebody, but, hey, that is too serious. :) Serious is okay too, and you might find the feedback helpful. I'll bet that whatever the problem, if it's hep-c or tx related, someone here has experienced it. > But thanks for asking I hope that you're doing good (but I know you > are, aren't you?). [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > What should we do? kill them all? Selling more guns to end users so > that they can defend themselves? You offer the solution in the following statement: > Or we'd better adjust our law on immigration, make more things to > integrate those who have the right to live and work in our Country (see > England). > > Ok, enough said. > I don't want to bother you more. No bother, it's a good debate. > We'll be sharing some puffs on the same "cigarette" in a while. LOL! Here's to ya! <cough> Waterspider [...] > About the topic: I'll stand by my statement, as well. > I live in a Country where we (still) don't need lots of weapons to be > available to keep criminality at a lower rate compared to what happens > in the US. I've stated my belief that fewer guns in the US would be a good thing, but like most things it's not so simple. I found this site interesting: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html Maybe because of our evangelistic background, we're just a more violent country and that's why we like guns so much. Gordo >> About the topic: I'll stand by my statement, as well. >> I live in a Country where we (still) don't need lots of weapons to be [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Gordo Interesting link, thanks Gordo. Not related to the gun thing at all, but the tables do seem to show good reason to control immigration, or at least use different criteria than we North Americans use today. Waterspider > I was raised to believe that being polite was something that people of > quality did, not something that one did to keep from being killed. Being "the choice of behavior when they both have one" doesn't imply that it's not the choice of behavior in other situations for other reasons. I'm sorry but I can't get to anything else for quite a while. jk >> "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. > > It's also the choice of behavior, when they both have one! Hey, Klein, I agree with you on this one! Waterspider >> "polite" being defined by the one with the gun. > > It's also the choice of behavior, when they both have one! Hey, Klein, I agree with you on this one! Waterspider I heartily agree!!! Nothin' says lovin' like an Uzi in the oven!!! (Yeah,Yeah some people like gun safes...) SignatureShawn (use the "reply feature on your browser to send a private reply via E-Mail.) > That's why I always say that a well armed society is a POLITE society... > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] >> >> http://www.john-lennon.com/ top-post: Coincidentally, I caught a snip of a tv interview with Lennon's assasin just the other day. Everyone feeling crazy on tx should see it; it will make you feel quite sane and rational. WS > http://www.john-lennon.net/whoauthorizedtheassassinationofjohnlennon.htm > Imagine [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I hope someday you'll join us, and the world will live as one. > John Lennon John Lennon the day dreamer! (lsd head) Imagine....... and f.ck the United Nations! I love being an American. A member of the soverign nation, The United States of America. Randy > John Lennon the day dreamer! (lsd head) Imagine....... and f.ck the > United Nations! I love being an American. A member of the soverign > nation, The United States of America. Randy I'm with you dude!!! Let them have their little coffee klatches in Islamabad!!! SignatureShawn (use the "reply feature on your browser to send a private reply via E-Mail.) > John Lennon the day dreamer! (lsd head) Imagine....... and f.ck the > United Nations! I love being an American. A member of the soverign > nation, The United States of America. Randy > I'm with you dude!!! Let them have their little coffee klatches in > Islamabad!!! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > United Nations! I love being an American. A member of the soverign > > nation, The United States of America. Randy My saddest memory of John Lennon's death is that I first learned of it from Howard Cossell during a Monday night football game.... Hardly seems a worthy good-bye. Thom |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.