BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

y?

Are you going to send us some money for every day you enjoyed freedom?

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Jon

On 7/26/2012 2:05 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

y?

Are you going to send us some money for every day you enjoyed freedom?

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Jon

That's called accepting the responsibility of defending yourself.

David

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Jon

Turn in your matches before you flip out and commit deadly arson.

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message ...

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Jon

Turn in your matches before you flip out and commit deadly arson.


I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip other than to provide oneself with the ability to very quickly kill mass quantities of people, mostly through the element of surprise.

In fact, outside of a war-time or swat scenario, pretty sure it would be extremely difficult to find even a single instance where someone's firing a large number of rounds at an agressor from a gun having a large capacity magazine was a decisive factor in an effective act of personal-protection.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 18:07:47 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Jon

Turn in your matches before you flip out and commit deadly arson.

And his car keys, lest he commit a deadly hit and run.
And his propane tanks, lest he commit terrorist explosions.
Rinse, repeat.

--
It takes as much energy to wish as to plan.
--Eleanor Roosevelt

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:05:01 -0500, Jon Elson
wrote:

BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

y?

Are you going to send us some money for every day you enjoyed freedom?

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Had the cinema management not prohibited all the concealed carry
weapons from their theaters, there would have been many fewer deaths,
one of which being the perp himself. The theater owners committed the
atrocity by giving the idiot a -safe- place to spray bullets, where he
would certainly not be stopped. Ditto the school admins who declare
schools to be "Gun Free Zones". That's a key concept to the crazies.
The words "gun-free zone" mean that they won't be stopped when killing
people in these places. Ever see a donut shop robbed?

--
It takes as much energy to wish as to plan.
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...Ever see a donut shop robbed?

Was it "Code of Silence" where robbers try to hold up the bar where
the off-duty cops hang out?

jsw

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100 round
clips for the purpose of self-defense

And before you go off acting as though I don't know anything about guns,
bear in mind that my first rifle was given to me by my father when I was
about ten years old, it was a bolt action remington IIRC...shortly afterward
I was given a lever action 32 special...

Currently, I also own a rifle that's pretty much identical to the one that
was used in Colorado, (except mine usually has a scope attached)...and the
pair of 30 round clip that I have seems to be way more than sufficient.

But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a high
powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an ordinary
citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....

In article ,
says...

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100 round
clips for the purpose of self-defense

And before you go off acting as though I don't know anything about guns,
bear in mind that my first rifle was given to me by my father when I was
about ten years old, it was a bolt action remington IIRC...shortly afterward
I was given a lever action 32 special...

Currently, I also own a rifle that's pretty much identical to the one that
was used in Colorado, (except mine usually has a scope attached)...and the
pair of 30 round clip that I have seems to be way more than sufficient.

But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a high
powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an ordinary
citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....

This is supposed to be a free society in which what one owns is governed
by what one can afford and wants, and not by what someone else percieves
that one "needs". Of course people like you who think that the
government should tell us when we can take a crap and how long we're
allowed to take will never grasp that concept.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 20:53:02 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...Ever see a donut shop robbed?

Was it "Code of Silence" where robbers try to hold up the bar where
the off-duty cops hang out?

g Ayup. g

--
It takes as much energy to wish as to plan.
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
In article ,
says...

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation
as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100
round
clips for the purpose of self-defense

And before you go off acting as though I don't know anything about guns,
bear in mind that my first rifle was given to me by my father when I was
about ten years old, it was a bolt action remington IIRC...shortly
afterward
I was given a lever action 32 special...

Currently, I also own a rifle that's pretty much identical to the one
that
was used in Colorado, (except mine usually has a scope attached)...and
the
pair of 30 round clip that I have seems to be way more than sufficient.

But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a high
powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an ordinary
citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....

This is supposed to be a free society in which what one owns is governed
by what one can afford and wants, and not by what someone else percieves
that one "needs". Of course people like you who think that the
government should tell us when we can take a crap and how long we're
allowed to take will never grasp that concept.


And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else and who think that the rest
of society has no business whatsoever telling them that they can't have a
hand-held thermo detonator that is capable of destroyong the entire planet
with the single press of a button so long as they can personally afford one;
a concept that obviously, knuckle draggers such as yourself are too ****ing
thick-skulled to comprehend.

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100 round
clips for the purpose of self-defense


OK, know it all. What happens to the barrel when you fire 100
rounds, non stop? BTW, sentences end with punctuation. I know you're a
liberal and all, but that was taught in grade school.

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for the
people"


Can you say 'Hypocrite'?

Larry Jaques wrote:

Had the cinema management not prohibited all the concealed carry
weapons from their theaters, there would have been many fewer deaths,
one of which being the perp himself. The theater owners committed the
atrocity by giving the idiot a -safe- place to spray bullets, where he
would certainly not be stopped. Ditto the school admins who declare
schools to be "Gun Free Zones". That's a key concept to the crazies.
The words "gun-free zone" mean that they won't be stopped when killing
people in these places. Ever see a donut shop robbed?


Yes, but not many. It was on one of theose 'Dumbest Crooks' TV
shows.

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation
as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100
round
clips for the purpose of self-defense


OK, know it all. What happens to the barrel when you fire 100
rounds, non stop?

It gets warm.

BTW, sentences end with punctuation. I know you're a

Go **** yourself,

TROLL

liberal and all, but that was taught in grade school.

BTW I'm posting from a new computer...

plonk

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a
high powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an
ordinary citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....

Doubt if I can, they are a lure for imprudent customers who don't
understand they are actually a liability. The original Soviet RPK
machine gun drum they are roughly based on made sense for dug-in
gunners who could duck their heads down while clearing jams.

With your claimed experience you ought to know that assault rifle
cartridges like the .223 are nowhere near "high-powered", that
describes older bolt-action rifles cartridges 2-3 times as powerful,
meant to hit the enemy line half a mile away, and difficult to control
in full-auto house clearing. Assault rifle cartridges have only the
minimum power that's effective at close range, to make the weapon
easier to control when standing or running. They were an upgrade to
replace pistol-cartridge submachine guns which weren't consistently
powerful enough to stop the enemy.

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

TROLL


We all know that you're a liberal DNC troll. Do you have anything new
to add?

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what it has become.

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a high
powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an ordinary
citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....

Doubt if I can, they are a lure for imprudent customers who don't
understand they are actually a liability. The original Soviet RPK machine
gun drum they are roughly based on made sense for dug-in gunners who could
duck their heads down while clearing jams.

With your claimed experience you ought to know that assault rifle

I'm certainly not claining to be an expert--just guns are something I've
been familiar with ever since childhood and as such, my interest is nowhere
near thw level of fascination that commonly displayed today by so many of
those who seemingly are obsessed with them.

cartridges like the .223 are nowhere near "high-powered",

My mistake--I had meant to say "high velocity"

that describes older bolt-action rifles cartridges 2-3 times as powerful,
meant to hit the enemy line half a mile away, and difficult to control in
full-auto house clearing.

Yup...for long distances, a single shot bolt is hard to beat.

Assault rifle cartridges have only the minimum power that's effective at
close range, to make the weapon easier to control when standing or
running. They were an upgrade to replace pistol-cartridge submachine guns
which weren't consistently powerful enough to stop the enemy.

At a close range, I could probably easily pop most people 3 or 4 times with
most any pistol before they could get a single round off with their "assult
rifle" unless perhaps, they've had LOTS of practice firing from the hip.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what it has
become.

Well, I suppose you could always move to Somalia...

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and
for the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of
evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish
individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what
it has become.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_P...of_Bureaucracy

In article ,
says...

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what it has
become.

Well, I suppose you could always move to Somalia...

Why is it that the alternatives for people like you are the crappy
government we have or no government? If the Founders had thought like
that we'd still have a Queen.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:05:01 -0500, Jon Elson
wrote:

BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

y?

Are you going to send us some money for every day you enjoyed freedom?

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Had the cinema management not prohibited all the concealed carry
weapons from their theaters, there would have been many fewer deaths,

So far as I know, there was nobody present who had a ccw permit but left
their gun at home because of theater policy ...

Personally, I wouldn't have given a second thought about violating...


one of which being the perp himself. The theater owners committed the
atrocity by giving the idiot a -safe- place to spray bullets, where he
would certainly not be stopped. Ditto the school admins who declare
schools to be "Gun Free Zones". That's a key concept to the crazies.

Armed security could go a long ways in this particular situation.

The words "gun-free zone" mean that they won't be stopped when killing
people in these places. Ever see a donut shop robbed?

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:22:06 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and
for the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of
evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish
individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what
it has become.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_P...of_Bureaucracy

That reminds me of another Niven/Pournelle saying (which I'm waiting
for Gunner's Great Cull to bestow upon the American public.)

"Think of it as evolution in action."


--
It takes as much energy to wish as to plan.
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
In article ,
says...

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for
the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of
evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals
in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what it
has
become.

Well, I suppose you could always move to Somalia...

Why is it that the alternatives for people like you are the crappy

Why is it that people like you can't understand that government is by the
citizens, which includes yourselves ?

government we have or no government?

Perhaps it's because, we realize that ALL of us still has a say in
government, so long as the democratic process is maintained.

Besides, I'm of the opinion that our government, while not perfect, is still
quite far from being "crappy"

If the Founders had thought like that we'd still have a Queen.

Here's some cheese...to go with your whine...

http://www.wineandleisure.com/images/cheese.jpg

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for
the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what it has
become.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_P...of_Bureaucracy


I can happily report that our own community, through public involvement, was
recently successful at reversing city policy which had been poised to
greatly expand the use of red light cameras...

At this point in time they have removed all of the cameras and additionally,
city planners actually hired a consulting firm and then followed their
recomendations of instituting low-cost safety improvements which included
extending the yellow interval to meet or exceed federal standards and adding
an all-red phase to EVERY light-controlled intersection.

Which sure beats the crap out of having to try and decide within a split
second whether you'd rather get a ticket or have your dog and groceries
forcefully impact the windshield.

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
...
Which sure beats the crap out of having to try and decide within a
split second whether you'd rather get a ticket or have your dog and
groceries forcefully impact the windshield.

I pick a brake decision point as I approach a green light and hold
speed if the light turns after I've passed it. Around here a solid
lane dividing line extends back about the same distance from the stop
line on multilane roads. I think it means not to change lanes that
close to the light, but it's also a pretty good indicator of minimum
stopping distance.

In Germany the light turned red + yellow just before green so all the
BMW drivers knew when to rev up.

On 7/26/2012 6:24 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article ,
says...

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100 round
clips for the purpose of self-defense

And before you go off acting as though I don't know anything about guns,
bear in mind that my first rifle was given to me by my father when I was
about ten years old, it was a bolt action remington IIRC...shortly afterward
I was given a lever action 32 special...

Currently, I also own a rifle that's pretty much identical to the one that
was used in Colorado, (except mine usually has a scope attached)...and the
pair of 30 round clip that I have seems to be way more than sufficient.

But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a high
powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an ordinary
citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....

This is supposed to be a free society in which what one owns is governed
by what one can afford and wants, and not by what someone else percieves
that one "needs". Of course people like you who think that the
government should tell us when we can take a crap and how long we're
allowed to take will never grasp that concept.


aaah, sweet mister clark - how kind of you - perhaps you also favor the
right of Iran to have nuclear weapons and of your neighbor to have
chemical weapons, C4 and biological agents?



--
For a $5 dollar donation today you get credit for $10 with HIM

"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in news:rcmdnXNeKL1cj4
:


I can happily report that our own community, through public involvement, was
recently successful at reversing city policy which had been poised to
greatly expand the use of red light cameras...

Too bad. I'd like to see red light cameras everywhere.

I live in Indianapolis, where it's very common to see drivers running red lights; in fact, in
recent years at least two members of our church have lost their lives to drivers who failed to
stop. A few years ago, I had a 6-month contract job in Columbus Ohio. The two cities are
only 175 miles apart, almost exactly the same size, very similar demographics. I noticed
one difference almost immediately: drivers in Columbus actually stop for yellow traffic lights.
Only rarely did I see a driver run a red light during the entire six months I was there. I
mentioned that at work one day... "Oh, we have red-light cameras here. Don't you?"

At this point in time they have removed all of the cameras

Wow. That was stupid.

and additionally,
city planners actually hired a consulting firm and then followed their
recomendations of instituting low-cost safety improvements which included
extending the yellow interval to meet or exceed federal standards and adding
an all-red phase to EVERY light-controlled intersection.

Giving in to the scofflaws, instead of busting them.

Which sure beats the crap out of having to try and decide within a split
second whether you'd rather get a ticket or have your dog and groceries
forcefully impact the windshield.

I call "bull****".

If "your dog and groceries [would] forcefully impact the windshield" because you stop for a
yellow light, you're driving *much* too fast. Yellow lights last long enough that drivers
traveling at or near the speed limit will *never* be faced with that false choice. If you're too
close to stop, you have enough time to go through while it's still yellow. There is *no*
excuse for being in the intersection when the light is red: if it turns red while you are in the
intersection, you were close enough to stop. *Without* endangering your dog or your
groceries.

In article ,
says...

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:U6KdnVel4OUkaozNnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@scnresearch. com:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for
the
people" and who instead imagine "government" as being some kind of evil,
uncontrollable monster that was created by lazy, selfish individuals in
order to make life miserable for everbody else [...]

That's not what it was created as, of course -- but that *is* what it has
become.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_P...of_Bureaucracy


I can happily report that our own community, through public involvement, was
recently successful at reversing city policy which had been poised to
greatly expand the use of red light cameras...

At this point in time they have removed all of the cameras and additionally,
city planners actually hired a consulting firm and then followed their
recomendations of instituting low-cost safety improvements which included
extending the yellow interval to meet or exceed federal standards and adding
an all-red phase to EVERY light-controlled intersection.

Which sure beats the crap out of having to try and decide within a split
second whether you'd rather get a ticket or have your dog and groceries
forcefully impact the windshield.

That's good but when the Feds start telling the states that they _must_
install such cameras or lose their highway trust fund income do you
think it's going to be as easy to reverse? After all if it only saves
one life . . .

"J. Clarke" wrote in message

That's good but when the Feds start telling the states that they
_must_
install such cameras or lose their highway trust fund income do you
think it's going to be as easy to reverse? After all if it only
saves
one life . . .

The liberal mindset is that they are inherently Good and should be
free to do as they please, but conservatives (=heretics) are
inherently Evil and deserve to be suppressed.

Sometimes they reveal a sullen resentment toward the people who
provide them with what they need but can't provide for themselves,
such as utility services. The innocence of ignorance isn't really a
virtue.

They get a really strange twisted facial expression when I
successfully point out their self-serving irrational bias to them in
person.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

They were visibly depressed to discover the large fraction of very
intelligent, literate and articulate conservatives in Mensa. It just
wasn't any fun to shift the conversation to Renaissance art and music,
and discover that this techie could also discuss Telemann, Palladio,
Monteverdi, Caravaggio, Brunelleschi.

Normally we are too busy DOING to have as much time as they do for
talking, and don't have the insecure need for public self-validation
such as studies "proving" liberals' wished-for mental superiority.

On 7/26/2012 8:59 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in message
I can think of no other purpose for a 100 round clip ....

You're lucky that you know more about machining than firearms.


Notably absent from your response was any kind if plausable explanation as
to why a person would feel a need to have a rifle with couple of 100 round
clips for the purpose of self-defense

And before you go off acting as though I don't know anything about guns,
bear in mind that my first rifle was given to me by my father when I was
about ten years old, it was a bolt action remington IIRC...shortly afterward
I was given a lever action 32 special...

Currently, I also own a rifle that's pretty much identical to the one that
was used in Colorado, (except mine usually has a scope attached)...and the
pair of 30 round clip that I have seems to be way more than sufficient.

But feel free to enlighten me about all those numerous times where a high
powered rifle with a 100 round clip was sucessfully used by an ordinary
citizen to defend himself against an armed assailant.

Hell, find me even a single instance....



Anybody that calls a magazine a "clip" knows nothing about firearms and
undoubtedly never owned one or knows how to use one.

On 7/26/2012 10:22 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

And then of course there are people like YOU...

KooKs....who do not realize that government is "by the people and for the
people"


Can you say 'Hypocrite'?


Just consider who you are responding to. Talk about know-nothing blow hard!

On 7/26/2012 11:46 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
Here's some cheese...to go with your whine...

http://www.wineandleisure.com/images/cheese.jpg



Here's some "clips" to go with your gun.

On 7/26/2012 10:25 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

BTW I'm posting from a new computer...

plonk




Did you sell some "clips" for your gun to buy it?

On 7/26/2012 10:52 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

At a close range, I could probably easily pop most people 3 or 4 times with
most any pistol before they could get a single round off with their "assult
rifle" unless perhaps, they've had LOTS of practice firing from the hip.



What a crock of ****! You don't know ****-all. Do you have lots of
"clips" for all your guns? YOU are the poster-boy for gun control, IF
you ever had a gun, it SHOULD be confiscated! OBTW, just what IS an
"assult" rifle? You are such a dumb ****, know nothing, blow-hard!

Now you're threatening to shoot people? I'll gladly take your challenge
as soon as I find an "assult" rifle.

On 7/26/2012 10:27 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

TROLL


We all know that you're a liberal DNC troll. Do you have anything new
to add?



Even the DNC would have nothing to do with him, he's even worthless to them.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
"PrecisionmachinisT" wrote in
news:rcmdnXNeKL1cj4
:


I can happily report that our own community, through public involvement,
was
recently successful at reversing city policy which had been poised to
greatly expand the use of red light cameras...

Too bad. I'd like to see red light cameras everywhere.

I live in Indianapolis, where it's very common to see drivers running red
lights; in fact, in
recent years at least two members of our church have lost their lives to
drivers who failed to
stop. A few years ago, I had a 6-month contract job in Columbus Ohio. The
two cities are
only 175 miles apart, almost exactly the same size, very similar
demographics. I noticed
one difference almost immediately: drivers in Columbus actually stop for
yellow traffic lights.
Only rarely did I see a driver run a red light during the entire six
months I was there. I
mentioned that at work one day... "Oh, we have red-light cameras here.
Don't you?"

At this point in time they have removed all of the cameras

Wow. That was stupid.

and additionally,
city planners actually hired a consulting firm and then followed their
recomendations of instituting low-cost safety improvements which included
extending the yellow interval to meet or exceed federal standards and
adding
an all-red phase to EVERY light-controlled intersection.

Giving in to the scofflaws, instead of busting them.

Which sure beats the crap out of having to try and decide within a split
second whether you'd rather get a ticket or have your dog and groceries
forcefully impact the windshield.

I call "bull****".

If "your dog and groceries [would] forcefully impact the windshield"
because you stop for a
yellow light, you're driving *much* too fast. Yellow lights last long
enough that drivers
traveling at or near the speed limit will *never* be faced with that false
choice. If you're too
close to stop, you have enough time to go through while it's still yellow.
There is *no*
excuse for being in the intersection when the light is red: if it turns
red while you are in the
intersection, you were close enough to stop. *Without* endangering your
dog or your
groceries.

You're full of it.

On 7/26/2012 11:34 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:05:01 -0500, Jon Elson
wrote:

BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

y?

Are you going to send us some money for every day you enjoyed freedom?

How about the freedom to not be shot up by mentally deranged
gun nuts?

Had the cinema management not prohibited all the concealed carry
weapons from their theaters, there would have been many fewer deaths,

So far as I know, there was nobody present who had a ccw permit but left
their gun at home because of theater policy ...

Personally, I wouldn't have given a second thought about violating...


Another stupid deranged asshole with a gun! -bring plenty of "clips"?