| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gactimus" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2005 09:27:17 AM |
| Object: |
Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
It looks like Spike Lee was right. Mr. Michael "Bowling for Columbine"
Moore's bodyguards do carry guns,
"Filmmaker Michael Moore's bodyguard was arrested for carrying an unlicensed
weapon in New York's JFK airport Wednesday night."
Well, well, well, could a man who believes that you don't have the "right to
bear arms" actually have a gun packing bodyguard protecting him? I guess as
far as Moore is concerned, there's one standard for all of us peons and
another standard for VILs (very important liberals) like himself.
Sure, Moore may think that "ordinary people" -- like YOU -- can't be trusted
to have a gun to defend your families. It's just too risky. Oh, but if
Michael Moore might be in danger, well that's a different matter all
together; he's special, you see, the rules that he wants to apply to the
"little people" shouldn't apply to him.
What a hypocrite.
.
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
24 Jan 2005 10:14:54 PM |
|
|
In article <stydnZyx0bvSHGjcRVn-3w@comcast.com>, The Sandman
<rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b5ednY83hcDe1GjcRVn-oQ@comcast.com...
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <DfGdnaRDw6v9gWncRVn-qQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
Oh boy, I see he is back to lying again. Not allowed to carry a weapon?
Every one of us are qualified, we HAVE to be or else we don't have a job.
You are a guard, not a police officer.
So what? You aren't one either.
For some reason he gets a kick thinking he can insult correctional officers.
Ego boosting? Who knows, but it is childish.
Yep....and tiresome....many people get too inflated an idea of what they
are worth to society..
But we know what Osprey is worth. 27K per year.
.
|
|
|
| User: "RD The Sandman" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
25 Jan 2005 02:52:09 PM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <stydnZyx0bvSHGjcRVn-3w@comcast.com>, The Sandman
<rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b5ednY83hcDe1GjcRVn-oQ@comcast.com...
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <DfGdnaRDw6v9gWncRVn-qQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
Oh boy, I see he is back to lying again. Not allowed to carry a weapon?
Every one of us are qualified, we HAVE to be or else we don't have a job.
You are a guard, not a police officer.
So what? You aren't one either.
For some reason he gets a kick thinking he can insult correctional officers.
Ego boosting? Who knows, but it is childish.
Yep....and tiresome....many people get too inflated an idea of what they
are worth to society..
But we know what Osprey is worth. 27K per year.
Does that fact give you a woodie? Do you masturbate to the thought of
his paycheck?
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
26 Jan 2005 01:05:06 AM |
|
|
In article <VqydnXptx57nLGvcRVn-pw@comcast.com>, The Sandman
<rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
Oh boy, I see he is back to lying again. Not allowed to carry a
weapon?
Every one of us are qualified, we HAVE to be or else we don't have a
job.
You are a guard, not a police officer.
So what? You aren't one either.
For some reason he gets a kick thinking he can insult correctional
officers.
Ego boosting? Who knows, but it is childish.
Yep....and tiresome....many people get too inflated an idea of what they
are worth to society..
But we know what Osprey is worth. 27K per year.
Does that fact give you a woodie? Do you masturbate to the thought of
his paycheck?
12, right? You're 12.
.
|
|
|
| User: "RD The Sandman" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
26 Jan 2005 12:01:26 PM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <VqydnXptx57nLGvcRVn-pw@comcast.com>, The Sandman
<rdsandman@comcast.net> wrote:
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
Oh boy, I see he is back to lying again. Not allowed to carry a
weapon?
Every one of us are qualified, we HAVE to be or else we don't have a
job.
You are a guard, not a police officer.
So what? You aren't one either.
For some reason he gets a kick thinking he can insult correctional
officers.
Ego boosting? Who knows, but it is childish.
Yep....and tiresome....many people get too inflated an idea of what they
are worth to society..
But we know what Osprey is worth. 27K per year.
Does that fact give you a woodie? Do you masturbate to the thought of
his paycheck?
12, right? You're 12.
No, you are acting like you are.
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 02:59:58 PM |
|
|
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you can use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't. I was required to carry one because I was a police officer
in a country that allows every ***** who wants a gun to have one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 04:03:57 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a danger
to society.
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't. Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 04:10:52 PM |
|
|
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 04:49:12 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 05:33:54 PM |
|
|
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:5oudnawn3ohxtGncRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a
valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me,
I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I
am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
What they fail to realize is that guns are not the problem, it is our
society.
It is SEVERAL different issues within our society. You can have all the gun
control laws you want, it will NOT stop criminals from getting guns.
As the old saying goes, and it was true then as it is today...
Guns don't kill...people do.
And that couldn't be a more true statement.
They wish to go after the things that are not the problem instead of
addressing the real problem and working on solutions. They would rather
control our lives, rather than deal with the problems that are causing
people to commit crimes.
Although we may never know exactly what causes people to commit crimes,
there are SEVERAL theories, we can still work on finding ways to address the
problems at the root. Guns are not the root of the problem.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 09:36:11 PM |
|
|
In article <rsCdnQgg2_JUrmncRVn-oA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:5oudnawn3ohxtGncRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a
valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me,
I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I
am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
What they fail to realize is that guns are not the problem, it is our
society.
Osprey is talking to me again through others.
It is SEVERAL different issues within our society. You can have all the gun
control laws you want, it will NOT stop criminals from getting guns.
How could we know that?
As the old saying goes, and it was true then as it is today...
Guns don't kill...people do.
People with guns do.
And that couldn't be a more true statement.
You are an idiot. There is your true statement. I guess you advocate
convicted criminals having guns, too. After all, Guns Don't Kill
People, People Kill People.
They wish to go after the things that are not the problem instead of
addressing the real problem and working on solutions.
So we should allow drinking and driving, too. Child pornography should
be legal, too. You have advocated that before. Is that your
suggestion?
They would rather
control our lives, rather than deal with the problems that are causing
people to commit crimes.
Like you Republicans do. LOL!
Although we may never know exactly what causes people to commit crimes,
there are SEVERAL theories, we can still work on finding ways to address the
problems at the root. Guns are not the root of the problem.
Moron. According to this goofy theory, we should not lock up our homes
at night. After all, unlocked homes don't cause crime, people cause
crime.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 04:54:18 PM |
|
|
In article <5oudnawn3ohxtGncRVn-ug@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
You sure have a lot of "notes." LOL!
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
Are you simple minded or just stupid?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 05:50:34 PM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051454185746%spam@aol.com...
In article <5oudnawn3ohxtGncRVn-ug@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to
have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the
response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a
valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs,
people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and
electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is
a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut,
he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for
me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I
am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
You sure have a lot of "notes." LOL!
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
Are you simple minded or just stupid?
Are you talking to yourself?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 09:36:11 PM |
|
|
In article <hfqdnTUD_5fTpWncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051454185746%spam@aol.com...
In article <5oudnawn3ohxtGncRVn-ug@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to
have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the
response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a
valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs,
people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and
electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is
a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut,
he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for
me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I
am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
You sure have a lot of "notes." LOL!
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
Are you simple minded or just stupid?
Are you talking to yourself?
Do you really think this makes you look anything but childish? Don't
you see that you look like a buffoon who can't respond?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
24 Jan 2005 11:08:58 AM |
|
|
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051936111937%spam@aol.com...
In article <hfqdnTUD_5fTpWncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051454185746%spam@aol.com...
In article <5oudnawn3ohxtGncRVn-ug@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051410529435%spam@aol.com...
In article <VJmdnbtiZZfMgmncRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120051259584154%spam@aol.com...
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at
all
confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns,
not
anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to
have
certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like
BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the
response
was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be
banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a
valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since
you
can
use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs,
people
have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and
electricity
while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon
is
a
danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a
nut,
he
thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost
control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for
me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon.
I
am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do
it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't.
Sorry, but you are on record as stating that a handgun is a danger
to
society, as the bearer of such a handgun then you must similarly be
a
danger
to society.
Your "logic" is failing.
Inability to refute is noted.
You sure have a lot of "notes." LOL!
Either the handgun is a danger to society or it isn't.
<Yawn> It is.
Who has it doesn't
change that if it truly is an aspect of the tool.
Wrong.
Oh, first you say it's the handgun that is a danger to society, then
you
change your mind and assert it's the person holding the handgun that
determines if it is a danger to society.
You need to make up your mind.
Are you simple minded or just stupid?
Are you talking to yourself?
Do you really think this makes you look anything but childish? Don't
you see that you look like a buffoon who can't respond?
Talking to your self. I can accept that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "RD The Sandman" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
24 Jan 2005 01:10:53 PM |
|
|
David W. Barnes wrote:
In article <rZGdnSxo58qzlGncRVn-3A@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050939257794%spam@aol.com...
In article <jumdnanPgobJQm7cRVn-pA@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Scout" <4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com...
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes
<GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all confuses
you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not anything
to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was
non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't like BANNED!
Those certain items don't include all guns, so the response was
unresponsive.
Tell us all again, why ANY particular weapon should be banned.
Lack of need? Danger to society?
1) Feel free to demonstrate that a "lack of need" is a valid
reason
for
banning anything.
By the way, you really don't "need" a car, since you can use
public
transit
So let's ban cars.
You really don't need soap and deodorant, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's ban soap and deodorants
Your really don't "need" electric light bulbs, people have
survived
without them for millenia
So let's do away with light bulbs and electricity while
were
at
it.
2) Feel free to demonstrate that any particular weapon is a danger
to
society
All handguns are a danger to society.
How?
Scout,
Don't even waste your time, killfile that idiot. He is a nut, he thinks
cops who have to use their weapons, do so because they lost control.
He doesn't believe in the second amendment.
Osprey is a guard who isn't allowed to carry a weapon. As for me, I
used to be a police officer who WAS allowed to carry a weapon. I am
STILL licensed to carry a concealed weapon. I just don't do it.
So tell us why were you a danger to society????
I wasn't. I was required to carry one because I was a police officer
in a country that allows every ***** who wants a gun to have one.
But you are not required to carry one now. Welcome to the world of
every ***** who wants to carry a gun......or are you somehow....different?
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
School - Four walls with tomorrow inside.
"The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to
impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves."
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making
decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who
pay no price for being wrong" Author Thomas Sowell
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Michael Moore: Guns Are Okay For Me, But Not For You |
23 Jan 2005 11:34:16 AM |
|
|
In article <-KKdnRNICapNQ27cRVn-jQ@adelphia.com>, Scout
<4guns@adelphia.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:230120050923059003%spam@aol.com...
In article <10v7n48ooa9cp03@corp.supernews.com>, SaPeIsMa
<SaPeIsMa@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:cgu5v09ujgpej8p4ljo9k3v59e1brfq22l@4ax.com...
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:31:26 -0500, AH#49 writes <GRONK@BCComics.net>
said in alt.atheism:
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:18:12 -0500, AH#49 writes:
What part of he wants to ban ANY particular gun at all confuses you?
The claim was that he doesn't want to ban all guns, not anything to
do
with banning any particular gun. Your 'response' was non-responsive.
Pardon me, but Mike Moore _DID_ say that he prefers to have certain
items that he and the liberal front doesn't l | |
