Ammunition is pretty scarce [modified]
-
I think that a lot of people should forget this obsession with stockpiling enough weaponry to single-handedly declare war on a small nation and do something about the escalating number of antibiotic resistant pathogens. It's difficult to care about individual rights when you've died of pneumonia or meningitis or whatever.
I certainly wouldn't tell you what I think your priorities should be. But there are some who would impose on me what they think my priorities should be. I do like to go to the range and plunk at a rc target once a month or so. I would rather use $14 dollar ammunition, rather than $30 as any reasonable person would.
MrPlankton
“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.” William Tecumseh Sherman -
Gary Kirkham wrote:
I am doing my part...I take all of the pills the doctor prescribes.
Nice work! :) :thumbsup:
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Other than spending millions on a home laboratory, what else should I be doing and how would buying a few rounds of ammo here and there distract me from that?
I dunno, get a degree in microbiology and do research or run clinical trials or whatever else you can think of. It was just an example of something better to do.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
something better to do
Make a law. Tell them what they should be doing.:~
MrPlankton
“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.” William Tecumseh Sherman -
I think that a lot of people should forget this obsession with stockpiling enough weaponry to single-handedly declare war on a small nation and do something about the escalating number of antibiotic resistant pathogens. It's difficult to care about individual rights when you've died of pneumonia or meningitis or whatever.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I think that a lot of people should forget this obsession with stockpiling enough weaponry to single-handedly declare war on a small nation
Nawww, we'll leave that to the pansies. We're going to invade East Timor under pretense that we're peacekeepers and then grab all their oil and gas.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
I certainly wouldn't tell you what I think your priorities should be. But there are some who would impose on me what they think my priorities should be. I do like to go to the range and plunk at a rc target once a month or so. I would rather use $14 dollar ammunition, rather than $30 as any reasonable person would.
MrPlankton
“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.” William Tecumseh ShermanMrPlankton wrote:
I certainly wouldn't tell you what I think your priorities should be. But there are some who would impose on me what they think my priorities should be.
Personally, I don't understand how science or maths could NOT be one of somebody's priorities, but that's just me. It's certainly more interesting and useful than hoarding an absurd number of weapons for no real reason other than it makes you feel manly.
MrPlankton wrote:
I do like to go to the range and plunk at a rc target once a month or so. I would rather use $14 dollar ammunition, rather than $30 as any reasonable person would.
Well yeah, that's all right.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I think that a lot of people should forget this obsession with stockpiling enough weaponry to single-handedly declare war on a small nation
Nawww, we'll leave that to the pansies. We're going to invade East Timor under pretense that we're peacekeepers and then grab all their oil and gas.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
Nawww, we'll leave that to the pansies. We're going to invade East Timor under pretense that we're peacekeepers and then grab all their oil and gas.
Disease is a threat greater by many orders of magnitude than any impoverished third-world country. If only pathological research had the kind of resources that the US military does. :omg:
-
MrPlankton wrote:
I certainly wouldn't tell you what I think your priorities should be. But there are some who would impose on me what they think my priorities should be.
Personally, I don't understand how science or maths could NOT be one of somebody's priorities, but that's just me. It's certainly more interesting and useful than hoarding an absurd number of weapons for no real reason other than it makes you feel manly.
MrPlankton wrote:
I do like to go to the range and plunk at a rc target once a month or so. I would rather use $14 dollar ammunition, rather than $30 as any reasonable person would.
Well yeah, that's all right.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
science or maths could NOT be one of somebody's priorities
Well yeah, that's all right.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Well yeah, that's all right.
Gee, thanks.
MrPlankton
“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.” William Tecumseh Sherman -
Oakman wrote:
Nawww, we'll leave that to the pansies. We're going to invade East Timor under pretense that we're peacekeepers and then grab all their oil and gas.
Disease is a threat greater by many orders of magnitude than any impoverished third-world country. If only pathological research had the kind of resources that the US military does. :omg:
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
If only pathological research had the kind of resources that the US military does
It does. You should see the biological labs at Area 51.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
If only pathological research had the kind of resources that the US military does
It does. You should see the biological labs at Area 51.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
It does. You should see the biological labs at Area 51.
But those are just for the extraterrestrials. I'm talking about the underfunded research into understanding microbes.
-
Oakman wrote:
It does. You should see the biological labs at Area 51.
But those are just for the extraterrestrials. I'm talking about the underfunded research into understanding microbes.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
But those are just for the extraterrestrials
Of course. But France was taken over by Ganymedians back in the '80's.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
I think that a lot of people should forget this obsession with stockpiling enough weaponry to single-handedly declare war on a small nation and do something about the escalating number of antibiotic resistant pathogens. It's difficult to care about individual rights when you've died of pneumonia or meningitis or whatever.
:laugh: LMAO! You are a funny little kid. :doh:
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Which part of "American" don't you understand? Many of the population groups who came here had very strong cultural memories of tyrants taking their weapons away and than taking away anything resembling a right. The right of self defense therefore became instutitionalized at the very foundation of our civilization. It is considered as sacred and fundamental by most Americans as any right you could mention.
Is there any conceivable way in which everyone could have their precious firearms confiscated?
Stan Shannon wrote:
A far more pertinent question is: "WTF is it with you lot and abortion and homosexuality?"
How so?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Is there any conceivable way in which everyone could have their precious firearms confiscated?
Of course, there are many concievable ways. Thats sort of the problem.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
How so?
Because neither issue has any basis in the foundations of our civilization. They are both completely manufactured, artificial issues. No one ever sacrificed their life in any war so that someone else could abort a child or have anal sex. And I greatly suspect that there are damned few who would do so now.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Is there any conceivable way in which everyone could have their precious firearms confiscated?
Of course, there are many concievable ways. Thats sort of the problem.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
How so?
Because neither issue has any basis in the foundations of our civilization. They are both completely manufactured, artificial issues. No one ever sacrificed their life in any war so that someone else could abort a child or have anal sex. And I greatly suspect that there are damned few who would do so now.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
or have anal sex
You keep bringing this up. Why do you consider it important?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
or have anal sex
You keep bringing this up. Why do you consider it important?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
Why do you consider it important?
Because it is a quintessentially social issue. It is a perfect example of how our culture is being defined for us by an oligarchy (which you easily dismiss because, well gee, after all, we have always been an oligarchy :rolleyes: )
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Oakman wrote:
Why do you consider it important?
Because it is a quintessentially social issue. It is a perfect example of how our culture is being defined for us by an oligarchy (which you easily dismiss because, well gee, after all, we have always been an oligarchy :rolleyes: )
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Because it is a quintessentially social issue
So are blue laws or if it's homosexuality that frosts your cookies so are civil unions. Or if its marriage you want to talk about, so is miscegenation. Yet you seem to focus in on a specific form of sexuality that is practiced according to some studies by around 10% of all heterosexuals and 25% of college age heteros. And which is not practiced, regardless of what you believe, by all male homosexuals.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
But those are just for the extraterrestrials
Of course. But France was taken over by Ganymedians back in the '80's.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
But France was taken over by Ganymedians back in the '80's.
Ah hah! I knew it! I kept telling people that those Frenchies couldn't possibly be human, but they rebuffed me. I was being silly, they said. GROW UP, THEY SAID! :mad:
-
:laugh: LMAO! You are a funny little kid. :doh:
Um...OK...? :~:confused:
-
Um...OK...? :~:confused:
You still have a lot to grasp.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Because it is a quintessentially social issue
So are blue laws or if it's homosexuality that frosts your cookies so are civil unions. Or if its marriage you want to talk about, so is miscegenation. Yet you seem to focus in on a specific form of sexuality that is practiced according to some studies by around 10% of all heterosexuals and 25% of college age heteros. And which is not practiced, regardless of what you believe, by all male homosexuals.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
Or if its marriage you want to talk about, so is miscegenation. Yet you seem to focus in on a specific form of sexuality that is practiced according to some studies by around 10% of all heterosexuals and 25% of college age heteros. And which is not practiced, regardless of what you believe, by all male homosexuals.
It isn't a question of who practices what. The question is where should the power to define appropriate social parameters exist? Who gets to say which behaviors are acceptable and which are not? If the people create anti-sodomy laws, and there is nothing in the constitution which says explicitely that they cannot, than the courts do not have a say on the issue. It belongs to the people. To make an argument that both represent different forms of oligarchy and are therefore equivalent is absurd. The court is an oligarchy, the people are not.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Oakman wrote:
Or if its marriage you want to talk about, so is miscegenation. Yet you seem to focus in on a specific form of sexuality that is practiced according to some studies by around 10% of all heterosexuals and 25% of college age heteros. And which is not practiced, regardless of what you believe, by all male homosexuals.
It isn't a question of who practices what. The question is where should the power to define appropriate social parameters exist? Who gets to say which behaviors are acceptable and which are not? If the people create anti-sodomy laws, and there is nothing in the constitution which says explicitely that they cannot, than the courts do not have a say on the issue. It belongs to the people. To make an argument that both represent different forms of oligarchy and are therefore equivalent is absurd. The court is an oligarchy, the people are not.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Who gets to say which behaviors are acceptable and which are not? If the people create anti-sodomy laws, and there is nothing in the constitution which says explicitely that they cannot, than the courts do not have a say on the issue.
Even if you were right about the courts -- and you're not -- none of this explains why you seem to always be talking about anal intercourse.
Stan Shannon wrote:
The court is an oligarchy, the people are not.
Oligarchy does not define the ruling group, it defines the entire system, both rulers and ruled.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
You still have a lot to grasp.
Fuck you.