From: NameHere on
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 19:47:23 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:

>
>weg9 says: It would be very difficult to just kill one attacker with a
>nuclear bomb. I can carry a S&W model 38 snubby revolver, which is only
>accurate at distances of less than 40 feet or so, and protect myself from
>one or two people very well, without taking out the whole town of hundreds
>or thousands of innocent people. To compare my desire to carry that revolver
>with, "everyone carrying a nuclear weapon" is highly unrealistic. I don't
>want the power to wipe out the whole town.......I just want what they used
>to call (in the early West) an "equalizer". A hand gun gives and old woman
>the same power as a 6 foot 20 year old male. (assuming she takes the time
>and trouble to go to a range once in a while and practice with it.)

It's not that simple. Works fine in a town or small city, but not when you
live in a world. Anyone who has a weapon of greater power than you will
always be able to control you with it. The "equalizer" principle only works
when everyone on earth is truly equal.

Does anyone have any information on that town in Texas USA? I think it was.
Where a law was made that everyone in that town had to own and carry a gun.
What are their crime rates compared to the rest of the country or other
countries? I suspect enough time has passed now to provide useful and
credible data.
From: Robert Coe on
On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:24:29 -0600, Gary Theilsen <nocontact(a)spamfree.com>
wrote:
: On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:54:09 -0500, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote:
:
: >On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:17:30 -0600, Gary Theilsen <nocontact(a)spamfree.com>
: >wrote:
: >: On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:38:41 -0500, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
: >: wrote:
: >:
: >: >If you want to smoke, that's your business. But, don't screw up my lungs
: >: >with your second hand smoke.
: >:
: >: You need to watch Penn & Teller's cable show called "Bullshit!", the
: >: episode where they cover this issue. Are you aware that not even ONE person
: >: has ever died from second-hand smoke? All of this started by one biased and
: >: badly done research paper ...
: >
: >I can't refute that, and I have to admit that you may very well be right. But
: >I can tell you this: I was born in 1937. At least through young adulthood, I
: >was prone to getting frequent splitting headaches for no apparent reason. But
: >as smoking was banned in more and more places that I frequented, the frequency
: >of my headaches lessened dramatically. Now except for one guy I walk past most
: >mornings on the commuter rail platform, I almost never encounter a smoker. And
: >I literally can't remember the last time I had a headache. Is that proof of
: >cause and effect? No. Do I believe it's cause and effect? You bet. So would
: >you, if you were in my shoes. And you would most certainly want the legal
: >system to help you avoid smokers for the rest of your life, as do I. And
: >whenever the opportunity presents itself, I'll vote to make that happen.
: >
: >I have been a registered Republican since 1958. You can look it up (in the
: >party records in Connecticut and Massachusetts). So don't even think of
: >referring to me as a "liberal".
:
: Then when the opportunity presents itself to ban all non-smokers from every
: place I patronize, I will vote to make that happen. I pay taxes too, my
: rights must be represented equal to your own. If not, then no taxation
: without representation. Ever hear what that lead to in the past? You lousy
: self-righteous self-serving hypocrite.

The difference between you and me is that you won't succeed. I will. For all
practical purposes, I already have. :^)

Don't fret, though; you may yet have an opportunity to avoid "lousy
self-righteous self-serving hypocrites" like me. You can move to Texas after
it secedes from the Union. (We won't stop them this time.) Maybe you can talk
them into repealing their anti-smoking laws. Just don't get lung cancer; they
probably won't have universal health care either.

Bob
From: Robert Coe on
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 20:02:45 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
:
: "Gary Theilsen" <nocontact(a)spamfree.com> wrote in message
: news:5830k5pn0etcrovkev223n4n2ub9fnpiio(a)4ax.com...
: > On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 21:54:09 -0500, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> wrote:
: >
: >>On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:17:30 -0600, Gary Theilsen <nocontact(a)spamfree.com>
: >>wrote:
: >>: On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:38:41 -0500, "Peter"
: >><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
: >>: wrote:
: >>:
: >>: >If you want to smoke, that's your business. But, don't screw up my
: >>lungs
: >>: >with your second hand smoke.
: >>:
: >>: You need to watch Penn & Teller's cable show called "Bullshit!", the
: >>: episode where they cover this issue. Are you aware that not even ONE
: >>person
: >>: has ever died from second-hand smoke? All of this started by one biased
: >>and
: >>: badly done research paper ...
: >>
: >>I can't refute that, and I have to admit that you may very well be right.
: >>But
: >>I can tell you this: I was born in 1937. At least through young adulthood,
: >>I
: >>was prone to getting frequent splitting headaches for no apparent reason.
: >>But
: >>as smoking was banned in more and more places that I frequented, the
: >>frequency
: >>of my headaches lessened dramatically. Now except for one guy I walk past
: >>most
: >>mornings on the commuter rail platform, I almost never encounter a smoker.
: >>And
: >>I literally can't remember the last time I had a headache. Is that proof
: >>of
: >>cause and effect? No. Do I believe it's cause and effect? You bet. So
: >>would
: >>you, if you were in my shoes. And you would most certainly want the legal
: >>system to help you avoid smokers for the rest of your life, as do I. And
: >>whenever the opportunity presents itself, I'll vote to make that happen.
: >>
: >>I have been a registered Republican since 1958. You can look it up (in the
: >>party records in Connecticut and Massachusetts). So don't even think of
: >>referring to me as a "liberal".
: >>
: >>Bob
: >
: > Then when the opportunity presents itself to ban all non-smokers from
: > every
: > place I patronize, I will vote to make that happen. I pay taxes too, my
: > rights must be represented equal to your own. If not, then no taxation
: > without representation. Ever hear what that lead to in the past? You lousy
: > self-righteous self-serving hypocrite.
: >
: >
: >
: weg9 says: If you don't get a headache when that diesel bus is going down
: your street, spewing diesel fumes into the air, then your allergy is not as
: bad as you seem to think.

Haven't you heard? Diesel busses are a lot cleaner than they used to be. It's
the law. ;^)

: I believe smoking should be banned in all public buildings and places where
: a normal person might have to go, but I believe that a smoking bartender
: should have the right to buy his own bar, and put a sign on the front door
: that says, "Warning - This is a smoking establishment. If you enter here,
: you will be subject to second hand smoke. If this is unacceptable, then
: please go down the block to Mike's place.....They don't smoke there."
: After all, you will be better off if all the smokers in that area are
: crowded into the smoking bar, than you would if they were all out on the
: street standing on the street corners smoking, wouldn't you?

If cities didn't limit the quantity of liquor licenses they issue, I'd agree
with you. But they do; so if they allow smoking in some licensed saloons, that
limits a non-smoker's options. If you think you can get the liquor laws
changed, you have my support. If you win that battle, you can stoke up to your
heart's content while you guzzle your booze.

Bob
From: Ray Fischer on
Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>"George Kerby" <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> "Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote:
>>>> Long ago I pondered how it would be if every person on earth was given a
>>>> nuclear bomb as a birth-present to carry with them to use at any time
>>>> during their life. Imagine how much more respectfully everyone would
>>>> treat
>>>> each other their whole lives.
>>>
>>> I can counter that argument with just two words:
>>> "Suicide Bombers".
>>
>> Same here: "Muslim Radicals"
>
>weg9 says: That's right. The real believers would gladly take out a whole
>town in order to get those 72 virgins for the rest of eternity. After all,
>they believe that's what Allah really wants them to do......

You bnigots love to blame Muslims while ignoring the fact that it was
actually Christians who created modern terrorism. And McVeigh killed
over a hundred people and was a good 'ol American.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Chris H on
In message <4b403449$0$1598$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, Ray Fischer
<rfischer(a)sonic.net> writes
>Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>"George Kerby" <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> "Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>> Long ago I pondered how it would be if every person on earth was given a
>>>>> nuclear bomb as a birth-present to carry with them to use at any time
>>>>> during their life. Imagine how much more respectfully everyone would
>>>>> treat
>>>>> each other their whole lives.
>>>>
>>>> I can counter that argument with just two words:
>>>> "Suicide Bombers".
>>>
>>> Same here: "Muslim Radicals"
>>
>>weg9 says: That's right. The real believers would gladly take out a whole
>>town in order to get those 72 virgins for the rest of eternity. After all,
>>they believe that's what Allah really wants them to do......
>
>You bnigots love to blame Muslims while ignoring the fact that it was
>actually Christians who created modern terrorism. And McVeigh killed
>over a hundred people and was a good 'ol American.

"Modern" terrorism has been around about 100 years. The British have
been fighting it for a century or so. (Which is why the "new" US Counter
terrorism manuals are a direct copy of the British ones from the 1950's
& 60-'s)

As for the stupidity and Bigotry of Bill..... there are no 72 virgins.
That is a Myth. Also you can find as may Christian martyrs though out
history.

What has happened recently is the radical Muslims have sunk to the same
level as the Christians (mainly the US) in *retaliation* . 9/11 was a
THIRD *RETALIATION* strike due to the Christian US and the Jewish
Israelis waging war on Islamic civilians around the world.

The number of civilians (mainly Moslem) killed by the US military since
2001 is about 200 thousand....

The number of human rights violations, violations of UN resolutions and
International law by the US and Israel in the last decade dwarfs all the
rest of the world put together.


Not that in virtually every drone strike the US does there are 5-10
"suspected terrorists" ie civilians and usually another 10-20
civilians.... The US seems to think killing civilians (if foreign or
Islamic) is OK but whines like hell when the same tactics are used in
reverse.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/