Too_Many_Tools wrote:


Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

"Pete C." wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:


Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

That doesn't work, Pete. There are a few studies around that strongly
suggest it isn't true, at least in terms of outcomes.

What's interesting -- and I just saw this recently, so I think it's new
data -- is that the presence of a gun doesn't seem to have much influence on
*rates* of violent attacks. But it does result in significantly higher
mortality rates from those attacks. I think that's about what common sense
would tell us, too.

I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

--
Ed Huntress

On Dec 11, 10:35 pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

Bull**** it does.

The presence of a weapon that can be used in an instance but regretted
for a lifetime makes all the difference in the world.

Anytime there is a domestic problems, the first question asked is are
the firearms out of reach...secured...locked down.

TMT

On Dec 12, 12:31 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Pete C." wrote in message

...

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

That doesn't work, Pete. There are a few studies around that strongly
suggest it isn't true, at least in terms of outcomes.

What's interesting -- and I just saw this recently, so I think it's new
data -- is that the presence of a gun doesn't seem to have much influence on
*rates* of violent attacks. But it does result in significantly higher
mortality rates from those attacks. I think that's about what common sense
would tell us, too.

I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed is correct.

The powerful the weapon, the more likely the outcome will be fatal for
someone.

As I said elsewhere, a gun can be used in an instance and regretted
for a lifetime.

If you have a gun and use it, be prepared for all the consequences
whether or not they are favorable or not to you.

That is what RESPONSIBLE gun ownership is all about.

TMT

"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
...
On Dec 12, 12:31 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Pete C." wrote in message

...

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

That doesn't work, Pete. There are a few studies around that strongly
suggest it isn't true, at least in terms of outcomes.

What's interesting -- and I just saw this recently, so I think it's new
data -- is that the presence of a gun doesn't seem to have much influence
on
*rates* of violent attacks. But it does result in significantly higher
mortality rates from those attacks. I think that's about what common
sense
would tell us, too.

I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe:
it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a
crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large
multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that
data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed is correct.

Ed is correct if 1) his recollection is accurate, because I was sifting
through data pretty fast and not recording it, and 2) if the sources of
data, assuming he recalls accurately what they say, are themselves accurate
and sufficiently complete to be a reasonable representation of the truth.

At this point, that is not a sufficient basis on which to conclude that I am
correct. d8-)


The powerful the weapon, the more likely the outcome will be fatal for
someone.

Assuming the more powerful weapon also is as likely, or nearly as likely, to
be used. That's what the data purport to show. It is not unreasonable, but I
would never accept data like that on face value. Never. Double-check.
Triple-check, if possible.


As I said elsewhere, a gun can be used in an instance and regretted
for a lifetime.

That's true, and they often are.


If you have a gun and use it, be prepared for all the consequences
whether or not they are favorable or not to you.

That is what RESPONSIBLE gun ownership is all about.

Well, that's a big part of it.

I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying overall, but the studies and
reports on gun-related issues are so consistently biased and corrupted that
you have to read a lot of them before you gain any sense of what the truth
may be. The idea that the weapons used in crimes are completely
substitutable is pretty much debunked, and it has been for years. But the
data I'm talking about suggests that they're highly substitutable in *some*
crimes.

The ones Pete was talking about, which is family disputes that lead to
violence, do seem to have similar rates no matter what weapons are
available. What I was remarking about is that the mortality rates appear to
go way up when guns are available. I was talking about his comment regarding
*outcomes*.

--
Ed Huntress

On Dec 11, 4:42 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"SteveB" wrote in message

...







"Don Foreman" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:14:22 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:02:02 -0800 (PST), rigger
wrote:

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Have you been paying *no* attention to the news? Or do you really
believe that
places like Columbine CO, Pearl MS, or Grundy VA are included in
"the
dangerous parts of our most dangerous cities"??

And the fact that when citizens DO help control the
situation, while armed, this almost never gets re-
ported by the media. And also ignored are the
thousand of times each year (acknowledged by the
Dept. of Justice and FBI) guns are used to thwart a
violent crime.

Ive not been following the news lately, but after reading a report on
the Lady "Security Guard" who shot the badguy at the church...

It should be noted..she was NO "security guard", but a lady parisoner
who volunteered to act as security as she had a CCW permit (along with
some 20 other parisoners.

And she.. a simple armed citizen with a CCW..shot the bad guy before
he could kill far more.

She was/is a former Minneapolis police officer. She was fired for
"untruthfulness", denying that she had been verbally abusive with a
perp (zounds!) when they had tape proving otherwise.

The article didn't say what happened to the perp.

The spin the media is putting on the "Security Guard" business would
lead people to believe she was in uniform, in the employ of a security
firm. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Right. She was acting as a private citizen.

The Medias spin is pecular and apparent.

They are doing everything possible to avoid saying an armed citizen
ended the onslaught.

Gunner

But how can this be? It has been stated here that there is a
causation/correlation argument the whole thing. And everyone knows
that it is just a bunch of paranoid CCW holders that are spreading these
vicious rumors.

If you've read the reports from the mainstream media, there is no spin. She
is a former cop who volunteers to do security for the church, including
being a bodyguard for the pastor. As the pastor says, she is "well-trained."
In contrast to what Gunner and you are implying, she isn't just an ordinary
church lady who happened to have a pistol in her garter while she sold
brownies at the church bake sale.

Furthermore, Gunner says there are "some 20 other parishoners" who have
CCWs. I don't know where he found that; the gunsites I checked said 12. I
don't know where they could have gotten that, either. But there are 14,000
parishoners in that church. About 1/2 of 1% of Colorado residents have CCW
permits, according to the state, which suggests that parishoners of that
church are quite a bit less likely than average CO residents to have one.

That's probably why they have security guards, both paid and volunteer. And
a former cop is a top candidate to be a volunteer security guard.

If you noticed the earlier posts from which I copied the NYT and the Wash.
Post quotes on the story, they contained all of this information except for
the number of CCW permit holders in the congregation, which probably is a
crock of crap anyway, wherever Gunner got it, and which most people would
consider irrelevant to the story.

What was that you were saying about spin?

--
Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Knowing the number of permit holders is a ploy by the pro gun crowd to
capitalize on the incident.

Bloodsuckers.

Ask yourself this...do you know how many permit holders are in YOUR
church?

And as always...as time goes on the story gets more
interesting....like the shooter doing himself in..and that the church
knew the shooting was coming.

Nothing is as it appears....

I would be asking what drove the shooter to use violence...this stuff
rarely happens "just because".

TMT

Police: Church gunman KILLED HIMSELF


By JUDITH KOHLER, Associated Press Writer


The man who killed four people at a church and missionary training
center shot himself in the head and died after being hit by shots
from
a church security officer, police said Tuesday.


Matthew Murray, 24, was struck multiple times by a security officer
at
New Life Church Sunday, but his death was ruled a suicide, the El
Paso
County Coroner's Office concluded after an autopsy.


Murray shot himself in the head, said police Sgt. Skip Arms.


Volunteer security guard Jeanne Assam shot Murray after he entered
the
church. Though investigators had earlier suggested he killed himself,
they credited Assam's bravery with averting a greater tragedy.


Assam, a 42-year-old former Minneapolis police officer, said her
faith
allowed her to remain steady under pressure.


"It seemed like it was me, the gunman and God," she said, her hands
trembling as she recounted the shooting during a news conference
Monday.


The first attack Sunday took place at Youth With a Mission, a
training
center for missionaries in the Denver suburb of Arvada; the other
occurred about 12 hours later at the New Life Church in Colorado
Springs.


Officials said revenge was one apparent motive for the attacks.
Police
said Murray had sent hate mail to the Youth With a Mission center in
the last few weeks after being removed from the program years ago.


In a statement, the training center said health problems kept Murray
from finishing the program, but elaborated little. Murray did not
complete the lecture phase or a field assignment as part of a 12-week
program, Youth With a Mission said.


Authorities also believe Murray authored an anti-Christian diatribe
online that closely repeated a rant by one of the Columbine killers,
a
newspaper reported Tuesday.


The most recent post to the site, a forum for people who have left
evangelical religious groups, was Sunday morning in the hours between
his attacks in Arvada and Colorado Springs, according to KUSA-TV in
Denver, which first reported on the writings.


"You Christians brought this on yourselves," Murray wrote, according
to the station, which did not identify the site. "All I want to do is
kill and injure as many of you ... as I can especially Christians who
are to blame for most of the problems in the world."


The language in the post is almost identical to the text of a
manifesto written by Eric Harris, one of the teens who carried out
the
1999 massacre at Columbine High School.


The online posts, under the pen name "nghtmrchld26," spanned several
weeks, and in an earlier one, Murray appeared to reject offers of
psychological help.


"I've already been working with counselors. I have a point to make
with all this talk about psychologists and counselors `helping people
with their pain,'" he wrote, according to KUSA.


The station said Murray's posts were removed from the site after
Sunday's killings, and that authorities were aware of them and
investigating. Police in Colorado Springs and Arvada would not
comment
on the writings.


In a search warrant affidavit, investigators said Murray attended a
home-based computer school and worked at his computer for three to
five hours a day for the past two years. Police said Murray's only
previous brush with the law was a traffic ticket earlier this year.


His relatives said they were grief-stricken and baffled.


"We cannot understand why this has happened. We ask for prayer for
the
victims and their families during this time of grief," said Phil
Abeyta, Murray's uncle, who read a statement from the family Monday.


Also Tuesday, Minneapolis police Sgt. Jesse Garcia said Assam was
fired from the Minneapolis force in 1997 for lying during an internal
investigation. Sgt. John Delmonico, president of the Police Officers
Federation of Minneapolis, said police were investigating a complaint
that Assam swore at a bus driver while she was handling an incident
on
a city bus.


=============

Gunman warned of 2nd attack By GEORGE MERRITT, Associated Press
Writer


In between his two deadly shooting sprees, church gunman Matthew
Murray apparently posted furious threats on the Internet to kill
Christians. But whether the warnings reached police before he struck
again was unclear Tuesday.


The warnings -- and other anguished, despair-filled messages over the
past few months -- were posted by someone using the screen name
"nghtmrchld26." The postings paint a picture of a home-schooled
Colorado youth once affiliated with the Youth With a Mission program
--
as 24-year-old Murray had been.


"I'm coming for EVERYONE soon and I WILL be armed to the @#%$ teeth
and I WILL shoot to kill," one threat posted Sunday by nghtmrchld26
said.


"God, I can't wait till I can kill you people. Feel no remorse, no
sense of shame, I don't care if I live or die in the shoot-out. All I
want to do is kill and injure as many of you ... as I can especially
Christians who are to blame for most of the problems in the world."


At least one visitor to the site contacted the FBI promptly, before
the second attack, the site's administrator said. The FBI would not
immediately confirm that.


In all, nghtmrchld26 made at least 11 posts between the two shootings
on a site run by the Association of Former Pentecostals, a nonprofit
group that says it was created to help people who have left
Pentecostal and charismatic churches.


"It's time for me to head out and teach these (expletive) a lesson,"
another message said. "See you all on the other side, we're leaving
this nightmare behind to a better place."


The last of the threatening messages was posted at 9:55 a.m. or 10:55
a.m. -- the time zone was not clear, said Joe Istre, the
association's
site administrator and president.


Either way, that was several hours after Murray killed two people at
Youth With a Mission, a training center for missionaries in the
Denver
suburb of Arvada, and at least two hours before he killed two more
people at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs around 1 p.m.


An autopsy determined that Murray killed himself with a bullet to the
head after he was brought down by gunfire from a volunteer security
guard at the church, authorities said.


Denver FBI spokeswoman Rene Vonder Haar said the agency began an
investigation immediately after receiving a phone call at 10:30 a.m.
on Sunday. She refused to discuss the nature of the call but said the
information was passed on to police in Arvada and Colorado Springs.


Colorado Springs police Sgt. Scott Schwall said that police there did
not learn the Murray family home's address in Englewood until after
the church shootings, and that a search did not begin until well
after
dark. The department did receive some information from the FBI well
after the New Life shooting took place, he said, declining to say
what
the information was.


Arvada police spokeswoman Susan Medina confirmed that the FBI passed
on information regarding the mission center shootings about 10:30
a.m.
She would not discuss the information in detail but said "we began
work on that tip immediately."


Medina said Arvada detectives did not go to Murray's home and speak
to
his family until 3 p.m., well after the second attack.


Medina said police cannot say with certainty who nghtmrchld26 is.


On Tuesday night, Murray's uncle, the Rev. Phil Abeyta, joined with
friends and parishioners at his church to pray for victims, the
Murray
family and Matthew Murray.


The family spent Tuesday quietly, "in reflection and prayer for the
families of the victims and those who were injured," Abeyta said as
he
addressed the gathering of about 70 at His Love Fellowship.


Murray was dismissed from Youth With a Mission in 2002 for what the
training center has described only as health reasons. Youth With a
Mission maintains an office at New Life Church's World Prayer Center.


Murray's parents donated $250 to the prayer center several years ago,
New Life Senior Pastor Brady Boyd told The Associated Press. The
church also discovered a visitors card indicating that Matthew Murray
attended services several years ago, Boyd said.


But Boyd said no Murray family members were members of the church,
and
he downplayed the connections.


"We're a large church, very visible, and (Matthew Murray) was not a
member, was never connected, never affiliated with the church, and
neither were his parents," Boyd said. "It has no bearing on the
events
or the shooting."


The online rants make passing references both to New Life and
founding
pastor Ted Haggard, who was dismissed last year after a former male
prostitute alleged a relationship with him.


The online threats appear to include whole passages lifted from a
manifesto written by Eric Harris, one of the teens who carried out
the
1999 massacre at Columbine High School -- 13 miles from Murray's
hometown.


In the weeks before the shooting, nghtmrchld26 posted a number of
messages about his own pain, despair and fury toward Christianity.
One
post, called "My YWAM Horror Story," complained about being removed
from the Arvada youth mission program.


"Why was I told that I couldn't be a missionary because I wasn't
'social enough'? I was told that I was 'an introvert,'" nghtmrchld26
wrote. "Everyone else got to go on their outreaches except for a few
who lied about smoking (cigarettes). The authoritarianism and
hypocrisy is outrageous."


In an Oct. 6 post, nghtmrchld26 wrote about his anger at the church.


"We'll make our own religion and be our own God's instead listening
to
some abusive pedophile church like what I was raised in telling us
who's 'saved' and who's not," the person wrote.


"During this dark period I've realized this is not the way just to be
a martyr. I can't walk alone any longer and I'll fight for the ones
who can't fight. If I lose at then least I tried. If I have to give
my
life you can have it."


The user appeared to reject offers of psychological help.


"I've already been working with counselors," he wrote. He added:
"It's
so funny how many people want to help you and love you and counsel
you
and 'work with you through your pain' when there's money involved."


More details on how several victims died emerged Tuesday. The
coroner's office said Stephanie Works, 18, and her sister Rachael,
16,
were each killed by a single gunshot to the torso. They were shot
outside New Life Church.


Tiffany Johnson, 26, was shot at the Arvada mission. She survived the
ride to the hospital and tried to describe the gunman to an official
in the ambulance, her father, Tom Johnson, told the AP. But she had
been shot eight times, Johnson said.


He was told his daughter died on the operating table.

On Dec 11, 9:42 pm, "SteveB" wrote:
"nick hull" wrote in message

.. .

In article
,
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

The Problem is that irresponsible people have access to weapons.

A lot of them have badges too

Was that supposed to be funny?

It is truer than anyone wants to admit.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools wrote in article
...

Good comparsion....it was pointed out to me years ago that for the
money it costs to carry a spare tire around versus the moments you
need it, you could easily afford AAA. and have money left over.

They were right.

But I still carry my spare tire.

Old habits die hard.

TMT



AAA will NOT provide a spare tire for you.

And, AAA doesn't pay the service outlet enough money-per-call to make two
trips - i.e. remove tire, take it to shop for repair/replacement, return to
install repaired/new tire.

You MUST have a spare for them to install, so AAA membership isn't the
answer.

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:47:19 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

After a Computer crash and the demise of civilization, it was learned
Gunner wrote on Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:21:22
-0800 in rec.crafts.metalworking :

I still worked two guys in their primes, asses off and outlasted them,
so Im not too broken down yet...chuckle.

I tend to be "mission oriented"..damn the torpedos and full speed
ahead and all that.

Modify the mission orientation: you don't get points if you don't
complete it.

True enough.

When I was young..I didnt realize my capabilities were that high until
called to push the envelope.

Now that Im older..I didnt realize my capabilities were that low,
until called to push the envelope.

And it really sucks to have to blow the bonus on medical treatments

$125. 2 hours labor.
:-)

Im feeling better. Yesterday I took it easy, ate well, got lots of
sleep last night, feel almost decent this morning. Munching on yogurt
and oatmeal as I type this.

Good stuff, that.

Indeed. Ill be stocking up on them.

Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:43:19 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 10, 12:05 am, "SteveB" wrote:
I saw a clear full body picture of the Omaha shooter. Anyone who had a
concealed weapon and who could shoot decently could have lessened the
carnage. If you got a CCW, carry your weapon.

Steve

Or we could have made sure the shooter never had access to the gun in
the first place....

How?

Oh yeah....bring my gun to the mall and to church.

*Shaking my head*

I thought this was the Land of the Free and the Brave.

Yet you wish to deny others freedom.

Looks like to me that it is the Land of the Coward and the
Paranoid...attempting to use a gun to bandaid the real problem will
not fix it.

Everyone should have joined handsr, and sung Kumbya directed to the
madman. All he needed was a group hug.

Right?

Doesn't anyone else see that a serious problem exists?

Which one?

Meanwhile we continue to allow people to be killed by those who should
never have access to guns.

How to prevent it?

Hmm...maybe taking your gun to church isn't such a bad idea....I bet
the sermon would become a lot shorter. ;)

TMT

So you are advocating shooting the preacher?

Another madman who should not own guns outs himself.

I always knew you were crazy.

Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:50:28 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 10, 8:27 am, Lew Hartswick wrote:
wrote:

Dont you wonder, in your more lucid moments, late at night (if you
have them) thats there is something fundamentally wrong with a society
where the populace need to be armed to cope with the nuttier
members........

Andrew VK3BFA.

Mostly we know what the problem is. It's that the courts are so full
of "bleeding heart liberals" (like those in England and Australia)
that the "nutters" are on the street instead of an instution where
they wouldn't be any threat.

...lew...

The Problem is that irresponsible people have access to weapons.

Fix that problem and the innocent will stop dying.

How? Be specific and use as much whitespace as necessary.

Requiring psych testing for gun ownership and usage would be a good
first step.

Illegal.

SEVERE penalties for allowing others unauthorized access to your
weapons would be another.

Blink blink..do you read what you write?

TMT

Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:53:25 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:


I don't make light of what you're saying, but I think you'll find that such
rare-but-dangerous situations are treated similarly around the world,
wherever they're encountered. Interviews with Israelis who have had narrow
escapes from suicide bombers provide a much more significant example of how
people react to higher incidences of such horrors. They shock and give one
something to think about, but the fact is that the chance of *you* being
caught in one is statistically remote. So life goes on, almost without a
hiccup.

--
Ed Huntress

Good discussion.

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

TMT


Cites?

Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:19:55 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 11, 10:35 pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

Bull**** it does.

The presence of a weapon that can be used in an instance but regretted
for a lifetime makes all the difference in the world.

Anytime there is a domestic problems, the first question asked is are
the firearms out of reach...secured...locked down.

TMT

You are aware that the majority of domestic killings and woundings are
with knives?

Ill be waiting for your calls for pysch testing for knife ownership,
with bated breath.



Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:23:34 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:


I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed is correct.

The powerful the weapon, the more likely the outcome will be fatal for
someone.

Unless you compare stabbings and shootings...

As I said elsewhere, a gun can be used in an instance and regretted
for a lifetime.

So can a Western Auto tire iron.

If you have a gun and use it, be prepared for all the consequences
whether or not they are favorable or not to you.

Of course. The same also holds true with power tools, automobiles,
house hold chemicals and so forth.

Gunner


That is what RESPONSIBLE gun ownership is all about.

TMT

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:41:53 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:21:22 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

Read it cover to cover Sunday while laid up.

WIA? Spill, mon.

Walking pneumonia.

Again? Bummer. Didn't you have that same malady last year, before
the heart attack?

Ayup. Its becoming a yearly event. I had pneumonia at 6 weeks of age,
and it very nearly killed me but for some miricle drug or another that
was new in 1953.

I appear to be prone to it.


I sorta kinda collapsed Friday night. Managed to
make it to home..slept nearly 12 hours, hit a urgent care clinic..got
a diagnosis and a couple shots of antibiotics in the ass and a
dressing down for letting myself get so worn out..

There goes half your profit from this job.

Nah..it was surprisingly cheap.

Granted..I was the only native english speaker in there....


Seems Im a bit old to be doing a months worth of 18-36 hour stints of
hard work in cold buildings, fueled by fast food and Monster energy
drink. Partiularly during "cold season".

You fuel! Fast food has no nutrition and energy drinks are a quick
way to skew your entire metabolism. Sugar water, sometimes caffeine,
and a few assorted totally-unbalanced vitamins won't support life.
Next time, find a health food cafe and get stuff to go.

True..but hard to do late at night in an industrial area.


I still worked two guys in their primes, asses off and outlasted them,
so Im not too broken down yet...chuckle.

Until you were nearly hospitalized. Cool move, Bozo.

Blush....


I tend to be "mission oriented"..damn the torpedos and full speed
ahead and all that.

Ditto here. I've worked my ass off on a fencing job the past two days
and will take tomorrow off to just lay some more rocks in a fieldstone
pathway.


Im feeling better. Yesterday I took it easy, ate well, got lots of
sleep last night, feel almost decent this morning. Munching on yogurt
and oatmeal as I type this.

Eat better and snack in between with -good- foods, guajalote. Your
body will thank you by not dropping dead on you.

Indeed. I should treat it better. Ive become quite attached to it over
the years.


I didnt let it get in the way of the job, and they still got their
monies worth yesterday,

A big fat check at the end of the month, sent to your funeral, won't
be nearly as much fun.

It will be, once they open my will and see who and where it goes....
very big laughter


Fascinating book. Well
documented and foot noted.

I thought so, too. It's a book which kicked my perceptions up a notch
and made me look around a bit more at the crap the environmental
terrorists are pulling.

Indeed,

Now go take your beauty rest, eh?

Be well.


Ive not been home since the week before thanksgiving, nor had a day
off since thanksgiving, but for the last weekend.

What I really really need now..is to get well and truely laid.


Shrug


Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:46:05 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:21:22 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

Im feeling better. Yesterday I took it easy, ate well, got lots of
sleep last night, feel almost decent this morning. Munching on yogurt
and oatmeal as I type this.

I forgot to comment on that one. Knowing you, it was probably that
pseudo-flavored, dead-culture yogurt from the supermarket, the one
with 36 grams of sugar and no flora in it.

Cant say. It did have real simulated imitation fruit in it. Said so
right on the label.

I like Brown Cow Cream Top (plain) with raw hiker's trail mix on the
top. It's enough real fuel to get you to the top of a mountain.


Never heard of or seen it.

7-11 sell it?

Gunner

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:57:26 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 10, 11:24 am, "*" wrote:
wrote in article
...







Dont you wonder, in your more lucid moments, late at night (if you
have them) thats there is something fundamentally wrong with a society
where the populace need to be armed to cope with the nuttier
members........

I know its historical for you people, wild west, Hollywood, etc
etc..something in your constitution, but don't you wonder WHY shopping
centre massacres are a almost weekly occurrence....

How do you cope with this, the paranoia of buying a bottle of milk? -
there MUST be some alternative besides being armed to the teeth...

A while back, the liberals insisted on the rights of the mentally
challenged - who were being housed as much for their own protection as that
of innocent civilians - to be mainstreamed into society....

....and they were all released from a protective custody that was, in
actuality, a two-way street that protected the mentally-incapacitated from
themselves, and the innocent from the mentall-incapacitated/dangerous.

Of course, the liberals are NOW whining about the plight of these
"....poor, often mentally-challenged, street people....." - a class which
they, themselves, created.

One - not necessarily the entire - answer would be to again house some of
these people who are now roaming the streets - threatening innocent people,
shoplifting and stealing to survive, commiting crime, etc.

Everybody would be better protected by such a move.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You mean all those homeless mentally challenged vets?

TMT

Ayup..and the far larger number of homeless mentally challenged that
the the Democrats were so anxious to register to vote Democrat.
This of course doesnt include all the felons inside prison that the
Dems want to register as Democrat either.

The Democrat Party..the Party of the incarcerated, the insane and the
addicted.

Gunner

In article , "Ed Huntress" wrote:

I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

I suspect that the survival rate is intimately connected to who gets his
weapon ready first.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Dec 12, 5:41 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:50:28 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 10, 8:27 am, Lew Hartswick wrote:
wrote:

Dont you wonder, in your more lucid moments, late at night (if you
have them) thats there is something fundamentally wrong with a society
where the populace need to be armed to cope with the nuttier
members........

Andrew VK3BFA.

Mostly we know what the problem is. It's that the courts are so full
of "bleeding heart liberals" (like those in England and Australia)
that the "nutters" are on the street instead of an instution where
they wouldn't be any threat.

...lew...

The Problem is that irresponsible people have access to weapons.

Fix that problem and the innocent will stop dying.

How? Be specific and use as much whitespace as necessary.



Requiring psych testing for gun ownership and usage would be a good
first step.

Illegal.



SEVERE penalties for allowing others unauthorized access to your
weapons would be another.

Blink blink..do you read what you write?



TMT

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One who likely will lose his guns in the future.

TMT

On Dec 12, 5:43 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:53:25 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:

I don't make light of what you're saying, but I think you'll find that such
rare-but-dangerous situations are treated similarly around the world,
wherever they're encountered. Interviews with Israelis who have had narrow
escapes from suicide bombers provide a much more significant example of how
people react to higher incidences of such horrors. They shock and give one
something to think about, but the fact is that the chance of *you* being
caught in one is statistically remote. So life goes on, almost without a
hiccup.

--
Ed Huntress

Good discussion.

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

TMT

Cites?

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do your own homework...I do mine.

TMT

On Dec 12, 5:44 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:19:55 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 11, 10:35 pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

Bull**** it does.

The presence of a weapon that can be used in an instance but regretted
for a lifetime makes all the difference in the world.

Anytime there is a domestic problems, the first question asked is are
the firearms out of reach...secured...locked down.

TMT

You are aware that the majority of domestic killings and woundings are
with knives?

Ill be waiting for your calls for pysch testing for knife ownership,
with bated breath.

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Go ahead Gunner...provide the cites for your claim.

NRA lies...I mean stats don't count.

TMT

On Dec 12, 5:46 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:23:34 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:

I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed is correct.

The powerful the weapon, the more likely the outcome will be fatal for
someone.

Unless you compare stabbings and shootings...

As I said elsewhere, a gun can be used in an instance and regretted
for a lifetime.

So can a Western Auto tire iron.



If you have a gun and use it, be prepared for all the consequences
whether or not they are favorable or not to you.

Of course. The same also holds true with power tools, automobiles,
house hold chemicals and so forth.

Gunner





That is what RESPONSIBLE gun ownership is all about.

TMT- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Excuse, excuse, excuse...excuses won't save your guns.

TMT

On Dec 12, 5:55 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:57:26 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:24 am, "*" wrote:
wrote in article
...

Dont you wonder, in your more lucid moments, late at night (if you
have them) thats there is something fundamentally wrong with a society
where the populace need to be armed to cope with the nuttier
members........

I know its historical for you people, wild west, Hollywood, etc
etc..something in your constitution, but don't you wonder WHY shopping
centre massacres are a almost weekly occurrence....

How do you cope with this, the paranoia of buying a bottle of milk? -
there MUST be some alternative besides being armed to the teeth...

A while back, the liberals insisted on the rights of the mentally
challenged - who were being housed as much for their own protection as that
of innocent civilians - to be mainstreamed into society....

....and they were all released from a protective custody that was, in
actuality, a two-way street that protected the mentally-incapacitated from
themselves, and the innocent from the mentall-incapacitated/dangerous.

Of course, the liberals are NOW whining about the plight of these
"....poor, often mentally-challenged, street people....." - a class which
they, themselves, created.

One - not necessarily the entire - answer would be to again house some of
these people who are now roaming the streets - threatening innocent people,
shoplifting and stealing to survive, commiting crime, etc.

Everybody would be better protected by such a move.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You mean all those homeless mentally challenged vets?

TMT

Ayup..and the far larger number of homeless mentally challenged that
the the Democrats were so anxious to register to vote Democrat.
This of course doesnt include all the felons inside prison that the
Dems want to register as Democrat either.

The Democrat Party..the Party of the incarcerated, the insane and the
addicted.

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you talking about all those homeless mentally ill vets the
Republicans are showing to the curb?

TMT

On Dec 12, 6:58 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , "Ed Huntress" wrote:
I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

I suspect that the survival rate is intimately connected to who gets his
weapon ready first.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

No...it is who uses it first.

So are you going to shoot first and ask later?

Have fun in prison when you shoot an unarmed person or a family member
who forgot their keys.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Good comparsion....it was pointed out to me years ago that for the
money it costs to carry a spare tire around versus the moments you
need it, you could easily afford AAA. and have money left over.

They were right.

But I still carry my spare tire.

Old habits die hard.

I'm the type that likes to be able to 'self rescue' myself out of
inconvienient situations. As far as AAA it it looks like a fairly good
deal for non-McGiver types.

Wes

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:51:51 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:41:53 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:21:22 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

Read it cover to cover Sunday while laid up.

WIA? Spill, mon.

Walking pneumonia.

Again? Bummer. Didn't you have that same malady last year, before
the heart attack?

Ayup. Its becoming a yearly event. I had pneumonia at 6 weeks of age,
and it very nearly killed me but for some miricle drug or another that
was new in 1953.

I appear to be prone to it.

All the more reason to take it somewhat easier. Push it a bit too much
and that ticker will go out next. THEN where will your profits go?
I had nasty bouts of colic as a baby and the brilliant MD put me on
downers, straight phenobarbitol. I was addicted at a month old. sigh


I sorta kinda collapsed Friday night. Managed to
make it to home..slept nearly 12 hours, hit a urgent care clinic..got
a diagnosis and a couple shots of antibiotics in the ass and a
dressing down for letting myself get so worn out..

There goes half your profit from this job.

Nah..it was surprisingly cheap.

That's good.


Granted..I was the only native english speaker in there....

Si, yo conosco.


True..but hard to do late at night in an industrial area.

Most people forage for food during daylight hours, stocking it away
for late night consumption. YMMV.


Eat better and snack in between with -good- foods, guajalote. Your
body will thank you by not dropping dead on you.

Indeed. I should treat it better. Ive become quite attached to it over
the years.

The older I get (we're the same age), the better I treat my old bod.


A big fat check at the end of the month, sent to your funeral, won't
be nearly as much fun.

It will be, once they open my will and see who and where it goes....
very big laughter

Can I have your forklift when you go to the big machine shop in the
sky?


Ive not been home since the week before thanksgiving, nor had a day
off since thanksgiving, but for the last weekend.

What I really really need now..is to get well and truely laid.

I suggest doing so in that order, too. G'luck!

Q: What's the weight of the copper wiring you're installing there? How
much did the thieves steal?

--
My future starts when I wake up every morning...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
-- Miles Davis

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:53:14 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:46:05 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:21:22 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

Im feeling better. Yesterday I took it easy, ate well, got lots of
sleep last night, feel almost decent this morning. Munching on yogurt
and oatmeal as I type this.

I forgot to comment on that one. Knowing you, it was probably that
pseudo-flavored, dead-culture yogurt from the supermarket, the one
with 36 grams of sugar and no flora in it.

Cant say. It did have real simulated imitation fruit in it. Said so
right on the label.

ITYS.


I like Brown Cow Cream Top (plain) with raw hiker's trail mix on the
top. It's enough real fuel to get you to the top of a mountain.

Never heard of or seen it.

7-11 sell it?

Newp. You have to go to a real grocery store or health food store for
that. I get it at Gooseberries (cute name, huh?) here in GP. A lot of
farmer's markets are carrying healthy foods nowadays. Check there. Do
you have a fridge in your motor home or trailer down there in HelL.A.?

--
My future starts when I wake up every morning...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
-- Miles Davis

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Requiring psych testing for gun ownership and usage would be a good
first step.

Do you trust the government to evaluate your suitablity for gun ownership? I
have a feeling the Schumer administration wouldn't have anyone working in
the psych testing department that thinks anyone wanting arms is mentally
balanced.

Wes

"SteveB" wrote:

A lot of them have badges too


Was that supposed to be funny?


Did they find that Peterson lady yet?

Wes

Too_Many_Tools wrote in article
...


Are you talking about all those homeless mentally ill vets the
Republicans are showing to the curb?



Hey, all we need to do is to get the currentl Democrat-controlled
legislature to undo the damage done by the previously Democrat-controlled
legislature, and allow state and federal government to return to housing
and caring for the needs of these people.

As it stands right now, pick up a few homeless people - veterans or
otherwise - provide them with some sort of group home that will protect
them and deal with their problems - drugs, employment, etc. - and SOME
knee-jerk, do-gooder agency will have you in court for restricting the
rights of those people.

Don't forget the P.E.T.A.-types originally went after homelessness until
many of the homeless told them to mind their own business. They then turned
to protecting animals who could not reject their "do-goodness."

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 04:32:15 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, "Pete
C." quickly quoth:

Larry Jaques wrote:

Y'know, the outstanding upside to all this is that the religious
freaks are now starting to off themselves, and others of their ilk,
just like the gang bangers have for years.

Think of it as evolution in action. wink

Works for me. If all the christians and muslims manage to kill each
other off as they are trying to do, then the remaining sane, civilized
world may have a chance at peace.

Let's just hope they don't glass over any large parts, thereby putting
tons of fallout in the atmosphere to share with the rest of the world.
MAD sucks. sigh

--
My future starts when I wake up every morning...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
-- Miles Davis

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:36:11 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:47:19 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:
Modify the mission orientation: you don't get points if you don't
complete it.

True enough.

When I was young..I didnt realize my capabilities were that high until
called to push the envelope.

Now that Im older..I didnt realize my capabilities were that low,
until called to push the envelope.

Scary, ain't it?


And it really sucks to have to blow the bonus on medical treatments

$125. 2 hours labor.

Labor? Hell, Gunner, we didn't even know you were pregnant! When
someone mentioned a gut yesterday, I assumed it was the same old
middle age spread that most of us end up with.


Munching on yogurt and oatmeal as I type this.

Good stuff, that.

Indeed. Ill be stocking up on them.

Try to find the healthier stuff. It goes a lot farther.

--
My future starts when I wake up every morning...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
-- Miles Davis

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:20:48 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:


The Problem is that irresponsible people have access to weapons.

Fix that problem and the innocent will stop dying.

How? Be specific and use as much whitespace as necessary.



Requiring psych testing for gun ownership and usage would be a good
first step.

Illegal.



SEVERE penalties for allowing others unauthorized access to your
weapons would be another.

Blink blink..do you read what you write?

Did you read what you wrote? Or are you staying mute because of
embarrassment?



TMT

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One who likely will lose his guns in the future.

TMT

Why would I loose my guns in the near future? I'm quite sane,
competent, a non criminal and behave responsibly with them.

Or are you saying that if a Democrat becomes President, they will
Attempt to remove firearms from all law abiding individuals?

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:22:01 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 12, 5:44 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:19:55 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 11, 10:35 pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

Partly true if you're implying guns, however that ignores the fact that
nearly every one of those situations would still have happened if guns
were not available, just with different weapons. The presence of a gun
makes little difference in rates or outcomes.

Bull**** it does.

The presence of a weapon that can be used in an instance but regretted
for a lifetime makes all the difference in the world.

Anytime there is a domestic problems, the first question asked is are
the firearms out of reach...secured...locked down.

TMT

You are aware that the majority of domestic killings and woundings are
with knives?

Ill be waiting for your calls for pysch testing for knife ownership,
with bated breath.

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Go ahead Gunner...provide the cites for your claim.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/ivc98pr.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/wuvc01.txt


NRA lies...I mean stats don't count.

TMT

Your bias and utter ignorance is laughed at.

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:22:41 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 12, 5:46 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:23:34 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:

I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed is correct.

The powerful the weapon, the more likely the outcome will be fatal for
someone.

Unless you compare stabbings and shootings...

As I said elsewhere, a gun can be used in an instance and regretted
for a lifetime.

So can a Western Auto tire iron.



If you have a gun and use it, be prepared for all the consequences
whether or not they are favorable or not to you.

Of course. The same also holds true with power tools, automobiles,
house hold chemicals and so forth.

Gunner





That is what RESPONSIBLE gun ownership is all about.

TMT- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Excuse, excuse, excuse...excuses won't save your guns.

TMT

blink blink..huh?

Molon Labe, mother****er.

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:25:22 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 12, 6:58 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , "Ed Huntress" wrote:
I also saw something recently that will make a lot of gun owners cringe: it
appears that if someone pulls a gun on you while they're committing a crime,
and you don't have a gun, your chances of surviving are some large multiple
of your chances if you do have a gun. I'm not going to go explore that data
but it was published in some peer-reviewed journal. I find it a little
suspicious but, who knows.

Please provide cites. And no..Kellerman has long been disproved, and
he himself admitted his errors.

I suspect that the survival rate is intimately connected to who gets his
weapon ready first.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

No...it is who uses it first.

To shoot or threaten?

So are you going to shoot first and ask later?

Ask what?

Have fun in prison when you shoot an unarmed person or a family member
who forgot their keys.

TMT

Forgive me, in a previous post I called you biased and ignorant. I
wish to retract that.

You are biased and stupid.

Ignorance can be cured, you are stupid for life.

Pity

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:21:10 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 12, 5:43 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:53:25 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:

I don't make light of what you're saying, but I think you'll find that such
rare-but-dangerous situations are treated similarly around the world,
wherever they're encountered. Interviews with Israelis who have had narrow
escapes from suicide bombers provide a much more significant example of how
people react to higher incidences of such horrors. They shock and give one
something to think about, but the fact is that the chance of *you* being
caught in one is statistically remote. So life goes on, almost without a
hiccup.

--
Ed Huntress

Good discussion.

Actually the greatest danger from personal weapons is domestic
shootings...family members or friends shooting each other....not from
the crazy mall or church shooters.

TMT

Cites?

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do your own homework...I do mine.

TMT


Your claim..your responsibility to back it up.

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:59:37 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 03:51:51 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:41:53 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:21:22 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
Gunner quickly quoth:

Read it cover to cover Sunday while laid up.

WIA? Spill, mon.

Walking pneumonia.

Again? Bummer. Didn't you have that same malady last year, before
the heart attack?

Ayup. Its becoming a yearly event. I had pneumonia at 6 weeks of age,
and it very nearly killed me but for some miricle drug or another that
was new in 1953.

I appear to be prone to it.

All the more reason to take it somewhat easier. Push it a bit too much
and that ticker will go out next. THEN where will your profits go?
I had nasty bouts of colic as a baby and the brilliant MD put me on
downers, straight phenobarbitol. I was addicted at a month old. sigh


I sorta kinda collapsed Friday night. Managed to
make it to home..slept nearly 12 hours, hit a urgent care clinic..got
a diagnosis and a couple shots of antibiotics in the ass and a
dressing down for letting myself get so worn out..

There goes half your profit from this job.

Nah..it was surprisingly cheap.

That's good.


Granted..I was the only native english speaker in there....

Si, yo conosco.


True..but hard to do late at night in an industrial area.

Most people forage for food during daylight hours, stocking it away
for late night consumption. YMMV.


Eat better and snack in between with -good- foods, guajalote. Your
body will thank you by not dropping dead on you.

Indeed. I should treat it better. Ive become quite attached to it over
the years.

The older I get (we're the same age), the better I treat my old bod.


A big fat check at the end of the month, sent to your funeral, won't
be nearly as much fun.

It will be, once they open my will and see who and where it goes....
very big laughter

Can I have your forklift when you go to the big machine shop in the
sky?


Ive not been home since the week before thanksgiving, nor had a day
off since thanksgiving, but for the last weekend.

What I really really need now..is to get well and truely laid.

I suggest doing so in that order, too. G'luck!

Q: What's the weight of the copper wiring you're installing there? How
much did the thieves steal?


Ive hung about 2500 lbs. The pre existing conduit must have had at
least double that in it, just in small gauge alone.

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:24:00 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 12, 5:55 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:57:26 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:24 am, "*" wrote:
wrote in article
...

Dont you wonder, in your more lucid moments, late at night (if you
have them) thats there is something fundamentally wrong with a society
where the populace need to be armed to cope with the nuttier
members........

I know its historical for you people, wild west, Hollywood, etc
etc..something in your constitution, but don't you wonder WHY shopping
centre massacres are a almost weekly occurrence....

How do you cope with this, the paranoia of buying a bottle of milk? -
there MUST be some alternative besides being armed to the teeth...

A while back, the liberals insisted on the rights of the mentally
challenged - who were being housed as much for their own protection as that
of innocent civilians - to be mainstreamed into society....

....and they were all released from a protective custody that was, in
actuality, a two-way street that protected the mentally-incapacitated from
themselves, and the innocent from the mentall-incapacitated/dangerous.

Of course, the liberals are NOW whining about the plight of these
"....poor, often mentally-challenged, street people....." - a class which
they, themselves, created.

One - not necessarily the entire - answer would be to again house some of
these people who are now roaming the streets - threatening innocent people,
shoplifting and stealing to survive, commiting crime, etc.

Everybody would be better protected by such a move.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You mean all those homeless mentally challenged vets?

TMT

Ayup..and the far larger number of homeless mentally challenged that
the the Democrats were so anxious to register to vote Democrat.
This of course doesnt include all the felons inside prison that the
Dems want to register as Democrat either.

The Democrat Party..the Party of the incarcerated, the insane and the
addicted.

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you talking about all those homeless mentally ill vets the
Republicans are showing to the curb?

TMT

Nope. Im talking about the vastly larger number of Democrat homeless
that the DNC uses as props for campaign background scenes, by bribing
them with booze, food and drugs, then abandoning them once the cameras
are put away.

Gunner

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:05:08 -0600, "*" wrote:



Too_Many_Tools wrote in article
...


Are you talking about all those homeless mentally ill vets the
Republicans are showing to the curb?



Hey, all we need to do is to get the currentl Democrat-controlled
legislature to undo the damage done by the previously Democrat-controlled
legislature, and allow state and federal government to return to housing
and caring for the needs of these people.

As it stands right now, pick up a few homeless people - veterans or
otherwise - provide them with some sort of group home that will protect
them and deal with their problems - drugs, employment, etc. - and SOME
knee-jerk, do-gooder agency will have you in court for restricting the
rights of those people.

Don't forget the P.E.T.A.-types originally went after homelessness until
many of the homeless told them to mind their own business. They then turned
to protecting animals who could not reject their "do-goodness."


Indeed. It was the Dems who passed the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act,
which closed down most of the mental institutions and put the insane
out on the streets.

http://www.claytoncramer.com/mental.htm

So much for compassionate liberals.

They protect animals, and force the insane to live on the streets,
where they die in droves.

Gunner