|
|
 | | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) I was about to seriously flame you, but then I figured that you were being sarcastic. ...You were being sarcastic, weren't you? Duane (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) Give me one example of a fire arm that was produced, but never intened to discharge a projectile (other than a starting pistol). (...) it. (...) I will concede that they are currently protected under the second amendment, but I _personally_ (...) (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Guns, guns, guns (was: Re: New Web Page)
|
| (...) A) Many of us consider this a bad thing. B) Those on the gun-control side of things typically espouse a significant (but faulty) difference between guns and cars in that guns are intentionally dangerous. I am constantly frustrated by this, but (...) (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) If he did that, he would have lost the argument by default. Steve (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) The second amendment means that if they get too carried away with negating our rights, we can take them back. (25 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
