 | | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
Tim Culberson wrote in message <3A55160C.9A731E80@y...oo.com>... (...) <opinion> Good! Guns are freaking dangerous and the more that have their ownership known, and the less that get owned, the better! </opinion> (...) It's obviously going to reduce (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Uhh, back to tax again ;-) (Was Re: Is space property?)
|
|
Christopher Weeks wrote in message ... (...) problem (...) I (...) The _concept_ of ownership is an ancient one, certainly, but as far as I know the laws of government are the only thing that _assign_ the right of ownership. (...) voluntarily (...) (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Fair enough - I agree that it is similar to car registration and whether or not one agrees with car registration is rather irrelevant in the sense that car registration is a relatively old law and the fact that you DO have to register your (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
Um, I was replying to Scott, if you didn't notice. Scott seems to have the attitude of "screw the minorities" - everything's fine with him, because he's in the majority in the UK. And he seems to think that if he DOES end up in the minority, he can (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) I'm _not_ telling you _not_ to own a gun. Nor is the Canadian Government. What it _is_ telling you is that you _have_ to register the ownership of the gun, which is no more onious than registering the ownership of your car- you can chose not (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Well that's great for YOU....but many other people have several reasons to own guns - hunting, target shooting, collections for the sake of collection, and for some, personal protection. Although I hate to presume I'm guessing that you live (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
That's certainly your choice. But don't try to tell others not to own them. If they aren't hurting you by owning them, it's none of your business whether they own any or not. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) So someone's money should be stolen from them for up to 18 years because of another's (and THEIR PARTNER'S) deception. Nice world you live in - take everyone else's money, whether they need it or not. -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
Your case is not relevant - your mother and step-father obviously understood you were not "his". There was no fraud involved. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) This statement.... (...) And this statement... Conflict. So you're saying the NON-biological father SHOULD support the child, strictly from a legal marriage contract (that generally assumes fidelity), he should support them because he's been (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) In the UK, one has to practice overseas to take part in this "sport". I think it is a price worth paying. (...) This sounds like you had a minority opinion. (...) Scotland better. :-) Scott A (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
I see no need to own a gun. I see no need to own 2 guns. I see no need to own 3 guns. Sure, guns may look good in the movies - but I can live without them. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Just don't register it, most people won't do it either… I won't! It’s simply propaganda and a way of government imposing restrictive control over its law-abiding citizens. I’ve read reports stating that the new regulations have even hampered (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My Gun Control Rant
|
|
Well...as of a couple days ago if you own guns and live in Canada and didn't apply for a liscence (for the guns you already own of course) you are now a criminal subject to fines or jail time. In 2 years if you are still a law-abiding citizen and (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Presidential Succession?
|
|
(...) Wow! I knew The Constitution would be the place to look, but I was daunted by the scope of the task and I'm not too familiar with the text beyond that amendment about giving a chicken bone to a dog. Thank you for the information and the link. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) Granted, but i'd be suprised if anything is ever solved in debate. Personally, I prow around here because I enjoy a gentlemanly clash of arms and because I think that it's fundamentally important to speak up about certain things. For instance, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Presidential Succession?
|
|
(...) If the Pres-Elect dies the VP-Elect becomes the Pres-Elect. US Constitution, Article XX, Section 3. It is not clear to me what happens if the VP-Elect dies before inauguration. The same Article XX might apply; if so, Congress would decide the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) Actually Bill, I agree with you to a greater extent than you might imagine. Which is why I made the flippant (hence the "no, really", meaning, "seriously") statement in the first place. I agree wholeheartedly that "intimacy should be shared by (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) The fact that you suggest the self-evidence of marriage indicates that you and I have two fundamentally divergent worldviews. That's fine, of course, but we need to recognize that certain issues are therefore insoluble between us, and this may (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
"Steve Thomas" <steve_thomas_2000_n...tmail.com> wrote in message news:G6nK8M.5ny@lugnet.com... (...) for (...) daughter (...) I'll add that if the consequence and the initial action are teleologically related (as are sex and procreation), then the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
