 | | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Cool. Some snippage has occured during the posting process. (...) Indeed. We're stuck because we can't make up new words and the old ones are polluted. At least if you put modifiers on people ask what you mean (some of the time) instead of (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) I think I disagree, though I'd invite anyone to convince me. I think we should do away with all our laws, start over, and put everything up for straight democratic vote. And each and every law/issue would need 75% in favor in order to pass. (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) You are sure of this...why? (...) kicked (...) Animls don't have more rights than people. However, people are just beginning to take our role as stewards of this planet seriously. It would have been better if they could have identified the (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) I made it up myself. ::rant mode set at 11:: My point would be that the traditional, and especially current, uses of the words "radical," "conservative," "liberal," and etc. are so abused as to no longer make any sense at all. They have lost (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GGwMGp.62J@lugnet.com... (...) sustaining (...) I believe space colonization will grow because of the private sector, not because of something a government does. After doing a little (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
<snip> (...) is (...) and (...) the (...) must (...) to (...) stock (...) Greater concealability, better maneuverability. Nothing says "You broke into the wrong house" like .00 buckshot to the chest. -- Overkill is the only sure kill. SR (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Fair enough. (...) Let it slide. (...) You've said this before, and it's true, there is no doubt about that. But it's not relevant unless the goal in posting is, merely by posting, to effect this change. I don't see posting that way, but (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes: <big snip> (...) No, the only ones who "deserve" a say *ARE* the ones that show up on election day. I think the rule should be changed about who can vote anyways. I think if you don't pay taxes, you (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
Number one: I am not blowing hot air. Number two: I am not confused about the electoral college. I was, however, hasty and unspecific in that post but I hope I've clarified to your satisfaction. Number three: Regardless of how detailed or unspecific (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mladen Pejic writes: <snip description of classic resource based "limits to growth" problem) (...) Indeed. (...) Indeed. Open the bottle (to use your metaphor). Or put some of your eggs in other baskets ( to use RAH's). (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) PS, what on earth makes you think I don't grasp this? Not just for handguns either, but for just about everything. (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Why wouldn't it? (...) Are you clairvoyant or is this your self fulfilling prophecy? (...) Lovely thought. (...) As if it it would happen that way. I can be just as clairvoyant on this issue as you. Maybe government officials trying to scoop (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) It's not the system I prefer for our laws about ANYTHING, Dan, and you know it, or you would if you were paying attention. So you can skip the soapbox parts about how bad the government is, because I'm already convinced our current system is (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) Well I agree that we ought not to single out Cuba for special treatment (perhaps Nike should try to set up some factories there so that they can get the same deal China does???) but I'm not so sure I'm convinced that things are "happily (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) I'm willing to go with "really funny". But since I've had the "privilege" of riding in a taxi driven by a Cockney I know that for the accent to be even close to correct it has to be completely unintelligible to an American. (...) It's a (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
Unfortunately, there isn't any way we can live in "harmony" with mother nature. If we really wanted to preserve Earth, then we'd have to give up our current lifestyles. Yup, no more SUV's, no more fertilizer (nitrogen), no more nuclear powerplants, (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) uh...that's not what I meant. Though reading my post again, I see how you were mislead (unless of course you knew what I really and decided to simply play with me a bit). Let's see...actually, never mind. I was sort of trying to make a point (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
I understand some of the benefits that cloning technology could have. Unfortunately, I'm a bit leary (paranoid? Biased?) that the technology seems to be nearing success at the same time that population control is becoming a serious issue...the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Why would that be great? (...) We wouldn't have battle fields. We would have the ugliest guerilla war in history. And pistols would be awfully important because they're easier to conceal when you're approaching a small group of cops. (...) We (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) It does. I find it amusing when people react that way. (...) I think it depends on what you mean by 'well.' Our conservatives have become much more concerned with the domestic agenda than in the recent past. Bush mirrors that concern. I think (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
