1
   

Aussies, Hide Your Steak Knives

 
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 05:59 pm
To upgrade, become part of the cycle of life, not be a bystander.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:01 pm
LOL! I love you guys!
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:02 pm
cjhsa wrote:
To upgrade, become part of the cycle of life, not be a bystander.


Laughing
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:06 pm
Msolga, teaching a kid how to hunt and fish is a great way to keep them out of trouble.

Remember, give a man a fish, and he won't be hungry for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll be able to feed himself for a lifetime.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:10 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Msolga, teaching a kid how to hunt and fish is a great way to keep them out of trouble.

Remember, give a man a fish, and he won't be hungry for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll be able to feed himself for a lifetime.


Teach a child how to shoot! Shocked Good grief!
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:14 pm
I don't have a problem with (responsible) fishing.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:14 pm
You aussies all seem to be standing on your head with your arguments. Of course teach a child how to shoot - that's the most important time, even if they never own a gun in their lives. Teach them gun safety from the moment they are curious.

My 8-year old loves to shoot my old bow. You got a problem with that? Kids are natural hunters, you just have to hone their instincts.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:18 pm
I think we'll just agree to disagree, yes? You'll never change my mind & I'm certain I'll never change yours.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:23 pm
Young people, old people. Big kids, little kids. Athletic kids, disabled kids. They love it.

http://www.tnkfk.com/gallery_02/DSC00025.jpg

It it my belief that you have forgotten the natural heritage of mankind. Sure, technology is wonderful and makes our lives so much easier, but it also makes it so easy to forget how we got here.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:25 pm
Msolga, just curious, but do you have any kids (especially boys)?
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 06:32 pm
Let's leave this now, OK? Gotta go get some food ... at the supermarket.
Bye!
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 09:31 pm
My idea of gun control is consistent 3" groups at 25 yards, standing offhand rapid fire.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Mar, 2004 10:33 pm
That is awe-inspiring. That is, unless your barrel length is 24 yards. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
g day
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 11:47 pm
****...

Next they'll want our bloody laser guided boomerangs!
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Mar, 2004 11:55 pm
Rolling Eyes

Yeppers.....lol.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 04:10 pm
We already stole that idea.

http://www.edwards.af.mil/gallery/html_pgs/images/bomber/b2-1_072.jpg
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 06:53 pm
msolga wrote:
I think we'll just agree to disagree, yes? You'll never change my mind...

I had a friend make this statement to me about the gun issue a while back, and I couldn't help but wonder whether he really realized what he was saying... that he didn't actually care what factual data or arguments any one could bring to him, he had his opinion and it was proof against any new information.
0 Replies
 
Adrian
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 07:18 pm
Quote:
he didn't actually care what factual data or arguments any one could bring to him, he had his opinion and it was proof against any new information.


What "factual data" are you talking about?

I was unaware that the premise "Guns 'R' Good!" had been proven.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 07:29 pm
Adrian, while guns may be put to criminal or other improper use, guns, being mere inanimate objects, are neither inherently good nor inherently evil. What has not been proven, despiter acres and acres of trees consumed in the publication of study after study, is that stringent gun control beneficially impacts gun crime, or even that it impacts crime itself. Consider Washington DC or New York City, two of the most stringently "Gun Controlled" cities in the nation, and both high on the statistivcal lists of both crime in general and guncrime in general. Contrast the rates of gun crime in those two cities to the rate of gun crime in less regulated political subdivisions, such as Vermont, which effectively has no gun control. A marvelous comparison exists between the contiguous Arlington Va and Washington DC; acquiring a firearm in Virginia is a simple matter. The incidence of gun crime in Virginia, and in Arlington in particular, is not merely substantially, but remarkably, lower than the incidence of gun crime in Washington DC. I doubt the Potomac or its bridges have anything to do with the phenomenon.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 07:36 pm
No, Timber, the river and the bridges don't make the difference--the 14th street bridge bus crosses on a regular basis, as i know from having lived there as an adolescent.

However, the demographics do matter--the property values, the rents, the proximity to the Pentagon and the consequent high proportion of military and civilian defense department employees who live there (like the Major General in our duplicate bridge club--you don't meet a lot of them in your average DC residential neighborhood). Most residents of the district, who don't live in Georgetown, couldn't afford a cup of coffee in Crystal City, much less to shop in any of the stores.

Apples to oranges, Timber . . . as Adrian pointed out, nothing is proven . . .
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 08:42:57