USDoT cooks the books

[randomJACKASS]

HELL YEA!!!!

Let's ruin lives because we think perhaps something could happen, maybe.

Oh WAAA!!! I have to put my cans in a different can than my garbage!...It's too much, I am so put upon, perhaps I should buy an assault rifle and start the revolution! Then we can all do any damn thing we please! Think what a better world it would be!



That's fine if you feel that way, but as I have said before at least, differing though your viewpoint may be, their seems to be some sane and rational thinking. This jimpeel guy seems like a real wing-nut to me, and what or why it is so important to him to make me wrong and prove to me he is right is beyond me. I am sure he's an OK guy in real life, but on this board, nothing he has done or said has done anything for me but reduce his credibility....

I don't agree with you jimpeel, and you can quit your job and make a full time avocation of working to convince me, but it's your loss, because you don't stand a chance. It really isn't that I don't consider information from various sources, it's just that I am not going to take your word on ANYTHING, given that is so obvious you have some strange agenda that I am not even interested in to begin with!

Eventually I will hit the ignore feature up or just find another place to chat via BBS. If I really felt the need to prove myself right, I could find a wealth of information from "reputable scientists" that counter your point, but in the end I am sure it's all just theoretical at this point anyway....

 

[Gonz]

Think what a better world it would be!

Without nosy neighbors & bossy government, yes it would be.

You do your thing. I'll do mine. Keep to your side of the fence & I'll do the same. All will be well.

As far as jim goes, he's got something to say & he backs up his points with information. It's better than parroting & it's more informative than saying "because I said so."

If [a] book be false in its facts, disprove them; if false in its reasoning, refute it. But, for God's sake, let us freely hear both sides if we choose

 

[spike]

Jim sets up straw men to argue against. Then gives a bunch of heavily biased crap to fight the straw man. Then tries to declare himself "teh winnah" while ignoring that his false reasoning has been refuted.

All this in a desperate fight against responsibility.

Without nosy neighbors & bossy government, yes it would be.

You do your thing. I'll do mine. Keep to your side of the fence & I'll do the same. All will be well.

You realize that you argue that exact opposite on many occasions right?

I remember you being all for government enforced marriage which would be the epitome of bossy government and hardly keeping to your own side of the fence.

 

[randomJACKASS]

Without nosy neighbors & bossy government, yes it would be.

You do your thing. I'll do mine. Keep to your side of the fence & I'll do the same. All will be well.

As far as jim goes, he's got something to say & he backs up his points with information. It's better than parroting & it's more informative than saying "because I said so."

From your favorable opinion of him I'm guessing you two agree more often than not? All the same I will have discussions when civility and sanity are at least strived for, but I don't see that happining with jimpeel, now or likely ever.

 

[randomJACKASS]

You know Gonz, you might be very surprised that I am all for anyone being able to get an assault rifle, because that is within the spirit of the constitution. The constitution wanted to provide us with a means to defend ourselves from oppressive government, even if it was our own! I don't think felons should be denied rifles, as they are citizens too, and may have a right to be armed against unjust government intrusion. Also, it's a lot harder to commit violent gun crime for gain with a full size rifle, and I think with the exception of drive-bys, full size rifles are rarely used for crime when compared to handguns.

Handguns or concealable weapons, on the other hand, did not even exist at that time. I am in favor of VERY severe restrictions on who can have one, if not an outright ban.

 

[jimpeel]

This jimpeel guy seems like a real wing-nut to me, and what or why it is so important to him to make me wrong and prove to me he is right is beyond me. I am sure he's an OK guy in real life, but on this board, nothing he has done or said has done anything for me but reduce his credibility....

There is no effort whatsoever to prove you wrong. The effort is to have you debate the subject and back up your contentions and refutations with cites and documentation. You have done neither; and your efforts, to date, seem to be directed entirely at attacking me.

I don't agree with you jimpeel, and you can quit your job and make a full time avocation of working to convince me, but it's your loss, because you don't stand a chance.

As I said, there is no effort to convince you of anything. The entire effort is to bring to you information which may, just may, make you think.

As to my quitting my job to take on the Herculean task of changing your mind one iota; you think far too highly of yourself.

(a)It really isn't that I don't consider information from various sources, (b)it's just that I am not going to take your word on ANYTHING, given that is so obvious you have some strange agenda (c)that I am not even interested in to begin with!

(a) You have stated that you will not consider anything that I have linked for you; all of which are from various sources.

(b) I don't want you to take my word on anything. I want you to think for yourself.

(c) Then why are you ardently discussing it?

Eventually I will hit the ignore feature up or just find another place to chat via BBS.

Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.

If I really felt the need to prove myself right, I could find a wealth of information from "reputable scientists" that counter your point, but in the end I am sure it's all just theoretical at this point anyway....

We agree on something.

 

[jimpeel]

Handguns or concealable weapons, on the other hand, did not even exist at that time. I am in favor of VERY severe restrictions on who can have one, if not an outright ban.

I don't have to prove you wrong. You do quite a bang up job all by yourself; and so many times after only 19 posts on this board. Now I have to show you the error in your knowledge on this subject.

The handgun started in feudal China being known as a hand cannon. It was fired by touching a punk to a touch hole. Handguns predated long guns.

Then came the wheellock, the matchlock, the flintlock, and percussion firearms.

At the time of the signing of the Constitution, handguns -- concealable weapons as you put it -- were very much in the norm of common usage.

Were, or are, you under the impression that the Hamilton-Burr duel, fought within a few years of the signing, was carried out with rifles or swords; or that pistols were invented somewhere between the signing and 1804?

http://www.nysha.org/library/exhibits/burrhamilton/index.htm

http://www.nysha.org/library/exhibits/burrhamilton/burrhamiltonsite/DuellingPistols.htm

 

[Gonz]

You realize that you argue that exact opposite on many occasions right?

Since marriage is a states right, it should be left to the states. However, if that is the case, then the federal law that contracts be upheld by all states, shoud be null & void. Unfortunately, that's part of the Constitution so it'll be awfully hard to cancel out such an important section.

 

[spike]

The important part of this being that you are not really for a less bossy government or staying on your own side of the fence and that you have been caught arguing the other side of that.

 

[randomJACKASS]

I don't have to prove you wrong. You do quite a bang up job all by yourself; and so many times after only 19 posts on this board. Now I have to show you the error in your knowledge on this subject.

The handgun started in feudal China being known as a hand cannon. It was fired by touching a punk to a touch hole. Handguns predated long guns.

Then came the wheellock, the matchlock, the flintlock, and percussion firearms.

At the time of the signing of the Constitution, handguns -- concealable weapons as you put it -- were very much in the norm of common usage.

Were, or are, you under the impression that the Hamilton-Burr duel, fought within a few years of the signing, was carried out with rifles or swords; or that pistols were invented somewhere between the signing and 1804?

http://www.nysha.org/library/exhibits/burrhamilton/index.htm

http://www.nysha.org/library/exhibits/burrhamilton/burrhamiltonsite/DuellingPistols.htm

Umm yeah, that's EXACTLY like the handguns of today, they were easily concealable in panteloon pockets and they were always knocking over liquor stores and "ye olde Seven Elevens" with them. The kids back then were forever using them to hold up all manner of places, in fact the crips and bloods pre-dated pirate ships and....

If it was not for jimpeel we would all be so blind and stupid, thank god for our nation's chief historian and the arbiter of all that is good and true!



How do you fit through doorways with that ego and all?

 

[Cerise]

Handguns or concealable weapons, on the other hand, did not even exist at that time.

 

[jimpeel]

Now THAT was one of the most wonderful non-answers that has ever been posted on this board! Congratulations. Spike is going to have to work REALLY hard to even come close to matching that. And here we all thought he was the undisputed King of mental masturbation. Hail to the new King.

Do you two know each other?

Umm yeah, that's EXACTLY like the handguns of today, Not what you claimed

they were easily concealable in panteloon pockets They were called pocket pistols (PICTURE)

and they were always knocking over liquor stores Which actually did not exist, unlike your claim about handguns

and "ye olde Seven Elevens" Which actually did not exist, unlike your claim about handguns with them.

The kids back then were forever using them to hold up all manner of places, in fact the crips and bloods Which started in the landlocked cities of Watts and Compton, CA pre-dated pirate ships and....

If it was not for jimpeel we would all be so blind and stupid, You make it so easy thank god for our nation's chief historian and the arbiter of all that is good and true! Yes. Have you read your own sig line lately?



How do you fit through doorways with that ego and all? I have you. How are you able to get so many things wrong in 20 posts? That's gotta be a new record.

 

[nalani]

Now THAT was one of the most wonderful non-answers that has ever been posted on this board! Congratulations. Spike is going to have to work REALLY hard to even come close to matching that. And here we all thought he was the undisputed King of mental masturbation. Hail to the new King.

Do you two know each other?

Y'all argue about being adults and 'debating' issues and what not.

Can you explain how this post is being a mature adult? This is sinking to a whole new stupid level.

 

[jimpeel]

Y'all argue about being adults and 'debating' issues and what not.

I'm willin' if he's willin'.

Can you explain how this post is being a mature adult? This is sinking to a whole new stupid level.

Tit for tat. Stupid is as stupid does. He took his first swipe at me with his third post -- after being a member of this board for less than 48 hours. Can you say "Troll"?

So how much inanity are we supposed to let someone get away with without calling them on it? He makes wild claims with impunity without even a modicum of sensibility. I don't see you calling him on it.

The very least he could do is to actually look something up before he posts his unsupported stupid s---. His posts actually make Spike's posts seem ... well ... lucid.

He is wrong on drugs.

He is wrong on firearms.

He is wrong on history.

He is wrong on environmental matters.

He hasn't the first clue about global warming.

And, by the way, he can't spell "pantaloons". (neener, neener)

 

[jimpeel]

RandomJACKASS

By the by ... in the race to see who would end up on the other's ignore list first, you won. Congratulations, buddy.

You may now continue to post whatever your fertile imagination can conjure; and you will find few, here, who will be willing to challenge you on it.

Miss ya already. Don't forget to write; but don't expect an answer.

 

[randomJACKASS]

THANK GOD!!

 

[spike]

The same old thing. When the debate doesn't go well for him he resorts to insults.

Kinda threw a tantrum there.

 

[jimpeel]

The same old thing. When the debate doesn't go well for him he resorts to insults.

Kinda threw a tantrum there.

Don't get too cocky; or I'll take you off of ignore and trounce you instead. Seems that H2O Boy is doing a fine job of that so I can wait my turn.

 

[spike]

Don't get too cocky; or I'll take you off of ignore and trounce you instead. Seems that H2O Boy is doing a fine job of that so I can wait my turn.

You couldn't trounce me or any other member here if you had an army. H20 has been ranting, resorting to insults, setting up straw man arguments, and generally not making much sense in a very similar way that you do though.

I can only imagine the ridiculous spectacle in logical absurdities that would occur if you guys debated each other.

 

[jimpeel]

I can only imagine the ridiculous spectacle in logical absurdities that would occur if you guys debated each other.

Why would we debate each other? We agree with each other; and we also agree that your ideologies are flawed at best and dangerous at the worst.