Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Hammers and guns and Jim and Michael

Hey k-man,

You keep throwing this term “leftist” around, wtf is that?

What’s your definition?

I assume there’s a “rightist” def that goes along with that?

I really do believe that you're stupid enough to ask such a dumb
question. Really!
Throw that definition up here while you’re at it.
Idiot.

It’s a shame you won’t share your “thoughts of wisdom” on the NY legislation.

I did, you frappin' moron. I can't help it if you can't read.
I'm sure you're a man of deep "conviction"!

I'm sure you have been.
Ahaha ----

They're coming to take you away.
 
not even a response -- I suppose the evolution thing threw you -- I'm sure your offended by it and your love for your grandma and grandpa, adam and eve.

again with the idiot.

you're very creative.

and -- ever hear the word factious? (secret service)? obviously NOT (hilarious)

I'm over your head asswipe.

Wrong. What you're over your head in is shit. You can't even post
properly. What a stupid ass.
 
I don't filter anyone. I can't always read and respond to everything,
but I'm actually quite interested in what people have to say.

It mystifies me that MKR thinks that reversing the gains of liberty
with a big anti-constitutional floor show--going after good citizens'
rights, to accomplish nothing--is progress of any sort, much less
worthy of national attention.

Who thinks it's more important than the many other pressing problems
we face? Almost no one. The polls reflect that, too.

Bread and circuses.
 
G

George Herold

Jan 1, 1970
0
It all seems crazy to me.  (similar to fears over nuclear energy.)
Let's say that all the legislation reduces the number of 'wacko'
killings by 50%.  So there will be 20-50 fewer people per year killed
by wacko's with guns.
We'll never notice the change!
I'm much more worried about my kids being killed on the highway.
George H.

That's very well-stated.  Not only is the total number of _people_
lost to rifles very small, the number lost to "scary-looking" supposed
assault rifles[*] is a small fraction of that, and the fraction that
are children is even less.  We're fixing nothing.

We lose far more kids to swimming pools, plastic bags, teen drivers--
even babysitters.[**]

* (which is what they mean by "assault," since those particular rifles
are no different in functionality or design than non-"assault", only
in styling)

** (I read in the FBI stats posted earlier that 39 kids died that year
at the hand of their babysitters.  That's way more than the average by
"assault" rifles.)

I'm totally comfortable with my fellow citizens owning firearms.  Good
people are no danger, and even criminals don't shoot for no reason.
If they use a gun (or a car) as part of a crime, the problem is the
criminal behavior to start with, not the implements.

Of course we want people to be safe.  Rendering good people
defenseless at every turn doesn't help that a whit.  And, around here
anyway, it'll prevent lots of lives currently saved.

--
Cheers,
James Arthur- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Grin, be careful James, I'm still a liberal weenie at heart.
I have a selfish interest in guns, and the hunters that kill off the
local deer population. (Fewer that I might hit with my car.)
I've also have some small caliber guns to take care of vermin.

I wouldn't mind a gun culture that was closer to the
Swiss militia, with guns goes some responsibility.
(non-registered guns are verboten.)
This notion that we'll have to use guns to over turn our own
government seems a bit ridicules to me. We use elections now.

George H.
 
J

josephkk

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 00:55:26 -0800 (PST), [email protected] wrote:

Fix your damned line length! Idjits.


Idiotic statement. One person, probably not. A community, well, take
a look at The Battle of Athens. No tanks or F22s around. Rifles,
yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)


Indeed. You conveniently forget The Battle of Athens, though.


Repeating nonsense doesn't make it any more true.


Who's fault is that? It just shows how dumb you can be.


Go for it. Until then, it is the law.


Yet you're all for it anyway. Go figure.


No, the real solution is to harden the targets so the little
chichenshits have a harder time. You'd piss your pants, though.


True. That Constitution thing is just so limiting. Just ignore it,
right? Who cares if a family or a hundred is wiped out, ten thousand
killed, or a million more crimes as long as we do nothing about the
"problem". Actually, banning guns makes the "problem" worse.


You are some piece of work.


You got ripped off.

Keith, you reading problem has bit you again. The person you are trying
to dis is a gun owner and very pro gun ownership. Not that you can
entertain the concept of self-checking that far.

?-/
 
Keith, you reading problem has bit you again.
Typical.

The person you are trying
to dis is a gun owner and very pro gun ownership. Not that you can
entertain the concept of self-checking that far.

There are no gun owning idiots? An idiot is an idiot. It really is
that simple.
 
On Jan 16, 5:35 pm, Jon Kirwan <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:49:54 -0800, I wrote:
<snip>
The links I provided in a way-too-long post show that there
are both organized groups of individuals and individuals
working hard to develop practical 3D printing capabilities
bent towards this aim. Particularly, a lot of time on the
idea of the lower receivers, which are what is the controlled
part of an auto weapon in the US.
<snip>
This article just appeared:

...with the idea of banning 3D printing of ammunition
magazines.
(Just "skip ad" when you get to the link.)
I _knew_ someone would recognize what 3D printing means to
this.
See this youtube video for the making of such a magazine:


It all seems crazy to me.  (similar to fears over nuclear energy.)
Let's say that all the legislation reduces the number of 'wacko'
killings by 50%.  So there will be 20-50 fewer people per year killed
by wacko's with guns.
We'll never notice the change!
I'm much more worried about my kids being killed on the highway.
George H.

That's very well-stated.  Not only is the total number of _people_
lost to rifles very small, the number lost to "scary-looking" supposed
assault rifles[*] is a small fraction of that, and the fraction that
are children is even less.  We're fixing nothing.

We lose far more kids to swimming pools, plastic bags, teen drivers--
even babysitters.[**]

* (which is what they mean by "assault," since those particular rifles
are no different in functionality or design than non-"assault", only
in styling)

** (I read in the FBI stats posted earlier that 39 kids died that year
at the hand of their babysitters.  That's way more than the average by
"assault" rifles.)

I'm totally comfortable with my fellow citizens owning firearms.  Good
people are no danger, and even criminals don't shoot for no reason.
If they use a gun (or a car) as part of a crime, the problem is the
criminal behavior to start with, not the implements.

Of course we want people to be safe.  Rendering good people
defenseless at every turn doesn't help that a whit.  And, around here
anyway, it'll prevent lots of lives currently saved.

--
Cheers,
James Arthur- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Grin, be careful James, I'm still a liberal weenie at heart.
I have a selfish interest in guns, and the hunters that kill off the
local deer population. (Fewer that I might hit with my car.)
I've also have some small caliber guns to take care of vermin.

I wouldn't mind a gun culture that was closer to the
Swiss militia, with guns goes some responsibility.
(non-registered guns are verboten.)

Exactly what is it that you think that registration accomplishes?
This notion that we'll have to use guns to over turn our own
government seems a bit ridicules to me. We use elections now.

It might seem ridiculous, if it weren't occasionally necessary. Too
bad it wasn't an option for the German Jews.

Do you really think the Constitution can defend itself?
 
G

George Herold

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:49:54 -0800, I wrote:
<snip>
The links I provided in a way-too-long post show that there
are both organized groups of individuals and individuals
working hard to develop practical 3D printing capabilities
bent towards this aim. Particularly, a lot of time on the
idea of the lower receivers, which are what is the controlled
part of an auto weapon in the US.
<snip>
This article just appeared:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/16/congressman-says...
...with the idea of banning 3D printing of ammunition
magazines.
(Just "skip ad" when you get to the link.)
I _knew_ someone would recognize what 3D printing means to
this.
See this youtube video for the making of such a magazine:
Jon
It all seems crazy to me.  (similar to fears over nuclear energy.)
Let's say that all the legislation reduces the number of 'wacko'
killings by 50%.  So there will be 20-50 fewer people per year killed
by wacko's with guns.
We'll never notice the change!
I'm much more worried about my kids being killed on the highway.
George H.
That's very well-stated.  Not only is the total number of _people_
lost to rifles very small, the number lost to "scary-looking" supposed
assault rifles[*] is a small fraction of that, and the fraction that
are children is even less.  We're fixing nothing.
We lose far more kids to swimming pools, plastic bags, teen drivers--
even babysitters.[**]
* (which is what they mean by "assault," since those particular rifles
are no different in functionality or design than non-"assault", only
in styling)
** (I read in the FBI stats posted earlier that 39 kids died that year
at the hand of their babysitters.  That's way more than the average by
"assault" rifles.)
I'm totally comfortable with my fellow citizens owning firearms.  Good
people are no danger, and even criminals don't shoot for no reason.
If they use a gun (or a car) as part of a crime, the problem is the
criminal behavior to start with, not the implements.
Of course we want people to be safe.  Rendering good people
defenseless at every turn doesn't help that a whit.  And, around here
anyway, it'll prevent lots of lives currently saved.
Grin, be careful James, I'm still a liberal weenie at heart.
I have a selfish interest in guns, and the hunters that kill off the
local deer population.  (Fewer that I might hit with my car.)
I've also have some small caliber guns to take care of vermin.
I wouldn't mind a gun culture that was closer to the
Swiss militia, with guns goes some responsibility.
(non-registered guns are verboten.)

Exactly what is it that you think that registration accomplishes?
This notion that we'll have to use guns to over turn our own
government seems a bit ridicules to me.  We use elections now.

It might seem ridiculous, if it weren't occasionally necessary.  Too
bad it wasn't an option for the German Jews.

Do you really think the Constitution can defend itself?

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

(OK no more politcial stuff.)


- Hide quoted text -
 
T

tm

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:49:54 -0800, I wrote:
<snip>
The links I provided in a way-too-long post show that there
are both organized groups of individuals and individuals
working hard to develop practical 3D printing capabilities
bent towards this aim. Particularly, a lot of time on the
idea of the lower receivers, which are what is the controlled
part of an auto weapon in the US.
<snip>
This article just appeared:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/01/16/congressman-says...
...with the idea of banning 3D printing of ammunition
magazines.
(Just "skip ad" when you get to the link.)
I _knew_ someone would recognize what 3D printing means to
this.
See this youtube video for the making of such a magazine:
Jon
It all seems crazy to me. (similar to fears over nuclear energy.)
Let's say that all the legislation reduces the number of 'wacko'
killings by 50%. So there will be 20-50 fewer people per year killed
by wacko's with guns.
We'll never notice the change!
I'm much more worried about my kids being killed on the highway.
George H.
That's very well-stated. Not only is the total number of _people_
lost to rifles very small, the number lost to "scary-looking" supposed
assault rifles[*] is a small fraction of that, and the fraction that
are children is even less. We're fixing nothing.
We lose far more kids to swimming pools, plastic bags, teen drivers--
even babysitters.[**]
* (which is what they mean by "assault," since those particular rifles
are no different in functionality or design than non-"assault", only
in styling)
** (I read in the FBI stats posted earlier that 39 kids died that year
at the hand of their babysitters. That's way more than the average by
"assault" rifles.)
I'm totally comfortable with my fellow citizens owning firearms. Good
people are no danger, and even criminals don't shoot for no reason.
If they use a gun (or a car) as part of a crime, the problem is the
criminal behavior to start with, not the implements.
Of course we want people to be safe. Rendering good people
defenseless at every turn doesn't help that a whit. And, around here
anyway, it'll prevent lots of lives currently saved.
Grin, be careful James, I'm still a liberal weenie at heart.
I have a selfish interest in guns, and the hunters that kill off the
local deer population. (Fewer that I might hit with my car.)
I've also have some small caliber guns to take care of vermin.
I wouldn't mind a gun culture that was closer to the
Swiss militia, with guns goes some responsibility.
(non-registered guns are verboten.)

Exactly what is it that you think that registration accomplishes?
This notion that we'll have to use guns to over turn our own
government seems a bit ridicules to me. We use elections now.

It might seem ridiculous, if it weren't occasionally necessary. Too
bad it wasn't an option for the German Jews.

Do you really think the Constitution can defend itself?

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

(OK no more politcial stuff.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Do the Swiss have a protected getto underclass like the US has?

I thing a mandatory year in the service and an assigned life long weapon
with annual qualification would be a good thing. Good by crime.
 
J

Jeroen Belleman

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:02:38 -0800 (PST), George Herold [...]
Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

It *is* a romantic notion. Local newspapers report the occasional
incidents, mostly suicides and family quarrels getting out of hand.
But Switzerland is a small country, so it's bound to happen less
often.

Jeroen Belleman
 
On Jan 17, 2:15 pm, [email protected] wrote:
On Jan 17, 9:04 am, George Herold <[email protected]> wrote:
On Jan 16, 5:35 pm, Jon Kirwan <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:49:54 -0800, I wrote:
<snip>
The links I provided in a way-too-long post show that there
are both organized groups of individuals and individuals
working hard to develop practical 3D printing capabilities
bent towards this aim. Particularly, a lot of time on the
idea of the lower receivers, which are what is the controlled
part of an auto weapon in the US.
<snip>
This article just appeared:

...with the idea of banning 3D printing of ammunition
magazines.
(Just "skip ad" when you get to the link.)
I _knew_ someone would recognize what 3D printing means to
this.
See this youtube video for the making of such a magazine:


It all seems crazy to me.  (similar to fears over nuclear energy.)
Let's say that all the legislation reduces the number of 'wacko'
killings by 50%.  So there will be 20-50 fewer people per year killed
by wacko's with guns.
We'll never notice the change!
I'm much more worried about my kids being killed on the highway.
George H.
That's very well-stated.  Not only is the total number of _people_
lost to rifles very small, the number lost to "scary-looking" supposed
assault rifles[*] is a small fraction of that, and the fraction that
are children is even less.  We're fixing nothing.
We lose far more kids to swimming pools, plastic bags, teen drivers--
even babysitters.[**]
* (which is what they mean by "assault," since those particular rifles
are no different in functionality or design than non-"assault", only
in styling)
** (I read in the FBI stats posted earlier that 39 kids died that year
at the hand of their babysitters.  That's way more than the average by
"assault" rifles.)
I'm totally comfortable with my fellow citizens owning firearms.  Good
people are no danger, and even criminals don't shoot for no reason.
If they use a gun (or a car) as part of a crime, the problem is the
criminal behavior to start with, not the implements.
Of course we want people to be safe.  Rendering good people
defenseless at every turn doesn't help that a whit.  And, around here
anyway, it'll prevent lots of lives currently saved.
- Show quoted text -
Grin, be careful James, I'm still a liberal weenie at heart.
I have a selfish interest in guns, and the hunters that kill off the
local deer population.  (Fewer that I might hit with my car.)
I've also have some small caliber guns to take care of vermin.
I wouldn't mind a gun culture that was closer to the
Swiss militia, with guns goes some responsibility.
(non-registered guns are verboten.)

Exactly what is it that you think that registration accomplishes?
This notion that we'll have to use guns to over turn our own
government seems a bit ridicules to me.  We use elections now.

It might seem ridiculous, if it weren't occasionally necessary.  Too
bad it wasn't an option for the German Jews.

Do you really think the Constitution can defend itself?

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

Then do. Meanwhile, you made the assertion...
But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

Guns point to where they're needed. That's sorta the object of the
whole thing. If you think a whitebread mindset is somehow healthier,
perhaps you should move to Switzerland?
George H.

(OK no more politcial stuff.)

If you can't stand the fire...
 
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:02:38 -0800 (PST), George Herold [...]
Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

It *is* a romantic notion. Local newspapers report the occasional
incidents, mostly suicides and family quarrels getting out of hand.
But Switzerland is a small country, so it's bound to happen less
often.

It's also a homogenous society, which we certainly do *not* have. Less
so every minute.
 
J

Jeroen

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Jan 18, 9:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:02:38 -0800 (PST), George Herold [...]

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

It *is* a romantic notion. Local newspapers report the occasional
incidents, mostly suicides and family quarrels getting out of hand.
But Switzerland is a small country, so it's bound to happen less
often.

It's also a homogenous society, which we certainly do *not* have. Less
so every minute.

That too is a myth. I think that more than half the inhabitants of
Geneva are foreigners, often with very different cultural backgrounds.
It's probably a bit less extreme in other cities, but it's a far cry
from being homogeneous.

Jeroen Belleman
 
On 2013-01-18 16:18, George Herold wrote:
On Jan 18, 9:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
]

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

It *is* a romantic notion. Local newspapers report the occasional
incidents, mostly suicides and family quarrels getting out of hand.
But Switzerland is a small country, so it's bound to happen less
often.

It's also a homogenous society, which we certainly do *not* have. Less
so every minute.

That too is a myth. I think that more than half the inhabitants of
Geneva are foreigners, often with very different cultural backgrounds.
It's probably a bit less extreme in other cities, but it's a far cry
from being homogeneous.

How many gang bangers "live" in Geneva?
 
J

Jeroen

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:38:37 +0100, Jeroen Belleman

On 2013-01-18 16:18, George Herold wrote:
On Jan 18, 9:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
]

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

It *is* a romantic notion. Local newspapers report the occasional
incidents, mostly suicides and family quarrels getting out of hand.
But Switzerland is a small country, so it's bound to happen less
often.

It's also a homogenous society, which we certainly do *not* have. Less
so every minute.

That too is a myth. I think that more than half the inhabitants of
Geneva are foreigners, often with very different cultural backgrounds.
It's probably a bit less extreme in other cities, but it's a far cry
from being homogeneous.

Jeroen Belleman

How many Blacks or Mexicans or Muslims?

...Jim Thompson

Just by looking around me, Mexicans don't really stand out, but
blacks, quite a few, and muslims, quite a lot. I'd have to
look up the numbers to be more accurate.

Jeroen Belleman
 
M

mkr5000

Jan 1, 1970
0
I can see I got through to you -- you make it so obvious.

I win !

Of course, why am I talking to an invalid 13 year old with a laptop anyway?

Shame on me.

Bye Bye.
 
On 2013-01-18 19:04, [email protected] wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:38:37 +0100, Jeroen Belleman

On 2013-01-18 16:18, George Herold wrote:
On Jan 18, 9:20 am, [email protected] wrote:
]

Sorry I really should just stay out of the political discussions.

But I have this image that the Swiss milita are united with their guns
pointing outwards to defend their borders from intruders. While here
in the US it seems we have our guns pointing inwards. Against each
other. The Swiss mindset seems healthier... but this may just be a
romantic notion of my own.

George H.

It *is* a romantic notion. Local newspapers report the occasional
incidents, mostly suicides and family quarrels getting out of hand.
But Switzerland is a small country, so it's bound to happen less
often.

It's also a homogenous society, which we certainly do *not* have. Less
so every minute.

That too is a myth. I think that more than half the inhabitants of
Geneva are foreigners, often with very different cultural backgrounds.
It's probably a bit less extreme in other cities, but it's a far cry
from being homogeneous.

How many gang bangers "live" in Geneva?

That idiom doesn't seem to have the same meaning over here as it
does over there with you. Try to type "gang bang Geneve" to see. ;-)

QED. (Gang bangers aren't named for their parties)
 
Top