Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

USA Politics - Hamster Wheel

Old 3rd Jan 2013, 13:17
  #12161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,607
Hang on Brock.....that kind of flooding has happened before.....several times.

NYC Hazards: NYC Hurricane History
It is just in the recent past that it has not.

Anyone that builds within 10 feet (elevation) of the ocean should be on his own for insurance and disaster relief. I have lived in such places and always felt it was a risk....a risk of my own choosing....and that is why I paid my Flood Insurance Premium and also paid through the nose for my Home Owners Insurance. That is shared risk.....not thinking if I get washed away that Congress shall make me good with Taxpayers money.

The Sandy Bill from the Senate had money for Alaskan Fisherman and all sorts of Non-Sandy spending. That is why the Senate Bill was not taken up by the House.....as it would not have passed due to the "Pork" put into it by the Senate. My Democrat Senator is one of those who sought money for North Carolina for a previous storm that really tore up part of North Carolina as Sandy did very little.

Last edited by SASless; 3rd Jan 2013 at 13:19.
SASless is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:18
  #12162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
The Eastern Seaboard is built next to the.....Sea.....Board.

If someone risks capital and life and limb to build in a hazardous region, you assume the risk.

Christie is a trough sucking Democrat, a show boat.

I say that as a resident of California. The Federal Government was not created to mitigate my risk, or come to my aid when disaster happens.

The absolute ceiling for damages to the seaside was 27 billion. Christie demands 60 billion. Before getting caught out, the number was 120 Billion.

I used to keep swine. I have never met a pig who stops eating with food left in the foodpile.

For the record, I owned a home on the beach, next to the erm....ocean. In the 88 El Nino, a Storm surge broke through the breakwater, and my neighbors and I bought thousands of tons of granite boulders to rebuild it. The harbor built twenty years earlier by the Army Corps of Engineers was the cause of the new degradation of my beach.

I had no thought to go after the Corps, I derived a great benefit from the harbor they built.

If I do not embrace my own destiny, I will not allow others to....I will not be kept, and pay in integrity and self respect to have my Liberty stolen.

Freedom, no Life itself, has risk. I will help raise a barn, or accept a barn raising from my friends and neighbours, but I won't tolerate the disease of babysitting.

If I am not free to fail, I am not free.

Dead to me, you swindler.

Last edited by Lyman; 3rd Jan 2013 at 14:31.
Lyman is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:36
  #12163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
SASless:

So let's take your premise even further.

If you live, or decide to build in, an area prone to tornadoes, you're on your own.

If you live, or decide to build in, an area prone to lightning strikes well, tough titty said the kitty.

If you live, or decide to build in, an area prone to earthquakes,
too bad for you.

And if you live in an area prone to hurricanes, or decide to build in such an area, tough kitty said the titty. (Includes you too SASless, don't it?)

In case you aren't aware, there are people living in their own homes in such areas and have been since before you or I were born. They never had a problem. However, when an "unprecedented" storm arrives and takes away someone's home, AND the miserable insurance companies refuse to pay out I were all supposed to sit around and so "What a shame. They should have known better"?

I think not.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:37
  #12164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
Lyman wrote:

If someone risks capital and life and limb to build in a hazardous region, you assume the risk.
And how far do you live from an earthquake zone, Lyman?
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:38
  #12165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,477
For those who have never read it ...

The source is the United States National Archives.
Constitution
Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official Text
Bill of Rights
Bill of Rights Transcript Text
AMendments 11-27
The Constitution of the United States: Amendments 11-27

Some of your foreigners need to read and comprehend the IX and Xth amendments (as do some Americans) to understand the point of the Constitution as both a framework document for a federal government, and an explicit statement of a form of limited, representative government

To make a change, see Article V.
Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
I reproduce the original Bill of Rights here, from the official link I posted up front, in case anyone chooses to remain ignorant. The preamble is worth reading to understand the Constitution, and why amendments are sometimes called for.

The Preamble to The Bill of Rights
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine. THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights."

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Note: Some of the amendments had their wording modified via later amendments. See the third link I provided above.

There is no further excuse for ignorance when discussing this document. An official source has been provided.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 3rd Jan 2013 at 14:40.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:43
  #12166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
At the time I owned the beach home, four miles from the San Andreas fault. Earthquake insurance? No way. I'd have drowned in the tidal wave before I could call the adjuster!

Tidal wave insurance? For f/s.......



Lonewolf50

Many thanks. When I scrolled down and saw it, I felt fear. I always do. A very good and reasonable fear....

It is emblematic of the essence of absolute power GOD gave us to protect EACH one of us. And ourselves, to the exclusion of all tyranny....

Citizen of the USA....

Last edited by Lyman; 3rd Jan 2013 at 14:49.
Lyman is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:44
  #12167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Age: 56
Posts: 664
This is really more EU-ish, but as the last gun control thread was closed and the topic is foremost in the U.S. currently, I thought I'd mention:

Dec 29 - Denmark - gunman on motorcycle using a full-auto weapon killed two people and wounded two police officers. Denmark has very strict gun control laws in general and regarding full-auto weapons in particular.

Jan 2 - Swiss man kills three and wounds two using formerly issued type of Swiss Army rifle. Switzerland has relatively liberal gun laws and a low gun homicide rate (although suicide by gun is high) as compared to the rest of Europe.

Illinios is proposing to ban all semi-auto rifles, pump shotguns, and nearly all handguns. Chicago, perhaps not coincidentally, had 532 murders in 2012, nearly 90% by gun and nearly all of those by illegal guns. That's 1.5 murdered per day. And the press coverage and the hand-wringing by the Obama Adminsistration has been precisely...nothing.

The New York paper that chose to "out" concealed carry gun owners has hired...wait for it...armed guards after being overwhelmed by negative responses to their decision. The local police has said none of the responses were threats.


Finally, in this hodge-podge of curious U.S. political items, Barry has been carrying on with renditions, operating Guantenemo Bay, and rocketing various terrorists via UAVs, including some Americans.

Carry on...
brickhistory is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:49
  #12168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
brick:

Semi-automatic and automatic assault weapons (mainly rifles) are manufactured for one reason and one reason only: to kill as many people as possible in the shortest period of time. They serve no other purpose.

Civilians have no need for such weaponry. And I don't give a rat's ass who thinks otherwise or any excuses given for civilian possession of such.

These weapons belong to the military and law enforcement.
And nowhere else.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 14:51
  #12169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
Wink

Israel has compulsory military service, and mandatory armed homes.

How do they stack up?



rgbrock1 Enough with the "Assault" rifle nonsense. It is hackneyed and it has lost its accuracy, assault? It was insinuated in the discussion years ago to create a stereotype of Munich style action in "Topeka".

Tom Brokaw has said semi automatic is fine, as long as they are used for hunting only, and kept "at the hunt club". But semi at home should be illegal..

OK to hunt, but not to protect domicile? Could anyone be demonstrably more ignorant?

Layman

From Number VIII

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

Is any one interested in how the IRS completely ignores this, in stealing one's property?

Last edited by Lyman; 3rd Jan 2013 at 15:04.
Lyman is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:19
  #12170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,607
RGB.....you are certainly entitled to your opinion....no argument there.

That being said.....I too am entitled to mine....and likewise without any argument.

My Opinion about your views and your comments quoted below....is you sure know how to talk silly about serious topics.

Let's remind you of what I said....and what you completely ignored.

Anyone that builds within 10 feet (elevation) of the ocean should be on his own for insurance and disaster relief.
As I noted....I paid my Flood Insurance and my Home Owners....and would have been compensated for most of my loss by the Government (Flood Insurance) and the Insurance Company after the Deductibles were taken. When I lived on the Sailboat....I had insurance. It had stipulations for named storms and certain restrictions on being in Florida during Hurricane Season. It was not cheap but it was a necessity if I was to enjoy living on the boat. I took responsibility for my own actions (living at the beach or on the boat) and paid for Insurance to cover my risks (self funded....not putting a hand out to the government), and when necessary took preventive measures to limit my risk and exposure to damage. Operative words.....self reliant, self funded, responsible for own self and own decisions or actions.

If people in New York and New Jersey did not have the correct insurance coverage....purchased by them at their own cost to cover their homes and property....that is their problem.....not anyone else's. If the Insurance company did not pay off and violated their contract then there are legal avenues for those affected.

You think too shallowly on these kinds of topics it appears.....and fall back to a Progressive view of life.


You claim to be a proud Army Ranger in your past....but I fail to see where any of that creed rubbed off on you. You do recall what Rogers was all about and why they undertook the missions they did?

Do you think it inconceivable the Nation might have need of well Armed Civilians again? Do you not understand the People are the Militia and it is not the National Guard the Constitution refers to when it mentions Militia's?

You state with certainty I have no valid use for my Colt AR-15 HBAR.....None!

So you reject the Competitive Shooting Competitions I have competed in....sponsored by DCM (a government program) and the NRA along with other local Gun Clubs and Gun Ranges. You also reject the fact I have used the exact same rifle in hunting....done under the existing gun laws, game laws, and Federal, State, and Local Criminal laws. So much for your position about the only use for such a rifle is to wantonly murder masses of people.

In response to your statement.....I will just say I consider yours to flat feckiing stupid and not based upon anything but emotion, warped thinking, and bomblast. Since that is MY opinion....you will just have to deal with it.

Semi-automatic and automatic assault weapons (mainly rifles) are manufactured for one reason and one reason only: to kill as many people as possible in the shortest period of time. They serve no other purpose.

Civilians have no need for such weaponry. And I don't give a rat's ass who thinks otherwise or any excuses given for civilian possession of such.

These weapons belong to the military and law enforcement.
And nowhere else.

OH....one last comment.....it is off to the Peanut Gallery with you.

Last edited by SASless; 3rd Jan 2013 at 15:37.
SASless is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:34
  #12171 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,278
Hollywood, Electric Scooters Benefit From Tax Breaks in Fiscal Cliff Bill

Turns out that even the urgent nature of passing the fiscal cliff legislation didn’t prevent legislators from cramming in some goodies. Senator John McCain issues a statement deploring the extras in the fiscal cliff bill: $
  • 430 million in tax breaks for Hollywood film and TV producers
  • $70 million in tax incentives for NASCAR track builders
  • $59 million in tax credits for algae growers
  • $15 million in subsidies for asparagus growers
  • $7 million for buyers of 2- or 3-wheel electric scooters
“It’s hard to think,” McCain said, “of anything that could feed the cynicism of the American people more than larding up must-pass emergency legislation with giveaways to special interests and campaign contributors.”

Congress gives out end-of-year perks to interest groups
ORAC is online now  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:38
  #12172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
The last time the United States was Free regarding what the Founders intended, was between 1861 and 1865.

For any one overly invested in "good" and "bad", you might want to go have a Cocoa.

The South was Free to form a more perfect Union? You goddam betcha.

The (US) Government, having failed the Confedaracy, saw fit to prevail, and force its ways on people who had a different idea. It was Fed versus non Fed.

Out of that tearful crisis, the North developed ways of looking at things that prevail to this day. Guns bad, Freedom is scary, the means of production, and of exchange, must be superior to the Constitution, rather than subservient.

From the slim victory won in 1865 came an overreaction, a Fascistic and oppressive fabric of control, rather than "Laissez Faire".

The South will rise again? Most of what they embraced will return, in modern clothing. People, having had a taste, will choose self determination every time.

Tyranny has a long record of failure. If the US Government fails, it won't be because it was observant of the Founding Freedoms.....

just sayin'

From McCain ().

I especially abhor the subsidy for asparagus. Don't get me wrong, I love it. It is actually not vegetable, botanically, it is 'grass'. If it gains popular appeal, there will be less for me, and the givernment will start to "control" its production.....

Groan.....

Last edited by Lyman; 3rd Jan 2013 at 15:42.
Lyman is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:38
  #12173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Age: 56
Posts: 664
Civilians have no need for such weaponry. And I don't give a rat's ass who thinks otherwise or any excuses given for civilian possession of such.
rgb, you rather missed my point. Which was to highlight, especially to the Euros who want to have a say in what we in the U.S. do in our internal acts, that their own house has decided cracks despite their efforts otherwise.


But by writing such as you did in quotes, I am not surprised.

I don't "need" any of the various firearms that I own. I can own them because I am a citizen.

It is not for you to determine for me what I can and cannot own. You become one of those "the government decides what's best for each of us" by your statements and apparent beliefs.

I don't hunt, yet I own hunting-class rifles and shotguns (even pistols). I don't participate in military conflict anymore yet I own implements that were once decidely for that purpose (my father's M1 and .45). You'd take them from me? I have an issue with that and would resist. With serious intent to stop you.

Again, it is not for you, the Euros, or this government to decide for me.

Say, doesn't the UK have laws against this sort of thing?

Man shot dead in Manchester gun violence - Telegraph

My point for including this is not to throw stones, but to point out the futility of trying to banish things people want. In this case, law-abiding people were forced to turn in their weapons.

I do not want the same to happen here.
brickhistory is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:43
  #12174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
Lyman wrote:

Israel has compulsory military service, and mandatory armed homes.

How do they stack up?



rgbrock1 Enough with the "Assault" rifle nonsense.
How do they - the Israelis - stack up? Like comparing apples with coconuts, no? Israel is a state which is surrounded by countries that would like nothing better than to see them "go away".

I don't recall Mexico having ever lobbed missiles north of the border. Nor do I recall Canada doing anything similar toward the south of the border.

Calling assault rifles, assault rifles is not nonsense Lyman.
It's what they are. They are automatic, or semi-automatic, rifles used for assault purposes. Their is nothing inherently defensive about them.

If one needs an assault rifle to protect one's domicile then might I suggest moving? This is not Mexico and we don't need to protect our fortresses from cartels. If one can't defend ones' home using something like a shotgun, then one really shouldn't have any weapons at all.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:47
  #12175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Age: 56
Posts: 664
then one really shouldn't have any weapons at all.
Found it.




We disagree. It is a disagreement with very serious consequences should your view become the attempted law of the land.

YOU do NOT get to decide for me or anyone not dependent upon you what I can and cannot have. You seem to have difficulty with that concept.
brickhistory is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:47
  #12176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
brick wrote:

My point for including this is not to throw stones, but to point out the futility of trying to banish things people want
Some people want Heroin. Others want Crack. Should we then say, fine, if that's what you want we'll make it legal for you to do so?

I do NOT have a problem with your freedoms and to do with those what you want. What I do have problems with is those same freedoms which are used irresponsibly.

With freedom comes responsibility. Without responsibility, freedom is nothing but anarchy.

Last edited by rgbrock1; 3rd Jan 2013 at 15:49.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:49
  #12177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Age: 56
Posts: 664
Not my argument to make.

Defending the Constitution is.

My right as an American is.

You do not get to decide for me.

I do and will oppose that.
brickhistory is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:53
  #12178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
The milk cliff. (Cali style)

For three years, Small dairy has been struggling. They do not get subsidy, and have been forced to sell off cows for meat, or even sell to big dairy their land, and equipment.

Milk prices have hit rock bottom. Eliminating subsidy should have happened long ago. It has merely supported big dairy long enough so that the FDA has taken over control of Cali Agriculture. (thanks Obama). It also put most of small dairymen on the ropes. Now the largest milk producer is a UK firm.

Milk will get very expensive, that is the result of a sinister plan to allow the Fed friendly dairies to make a killing, and payback for accepting Fed money in the interim (sic).

You can make this up, but I didn't, the FED did..

I don't get how California can put up with this takeover, this theft, this dictatorial oppression......wait, where was Feinstein, Bixer, Garamendi, etc?

Oh, right, Feds all.
Lyman is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 15:59
  #12179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 62
Posts: 1,463
RGB:

In case you aren't aware, there are people living in their own homes in such areas and have been since before you or I were born. They never had a problem. However, when an "unprecedented" storm arrives and takes away someone's home, AND the miserable insurance companies refuse to pay out I were all supposed to sit around and so "What a shame. They should have known better"?
The actual point of my question was to be able to broach the subject of states having to pay into the emergency fund only to have to come back begging for their own money later. We need to stop giving to the Feds. If the 7th biggest economy in the world can't handle it's own disaster relief it certainly shouldn't be coming to the remaining states cap in hand. As Lyman says, if you chose to move, lock, stock and barrel right on top of the San Andreas fault then the responsibility is yours not mine.

Next:

Semi-automatic and automatic assault weapons (mainly rifles) are manufactured for one reason and one reason only: to kill as many people as possible in the shortest period of time. They serve no other purpose.

Civilians have no need for such weaponry. And I don't give a rat's ass who thinks otherwise or any excuses given for civilian possession of such.
The following is stolen, unashamedly, from Massad Ayoob:

And, if you will, one more stark and simple thing: Americans have historically modeled their choices of home protection and personal defense handguns on what the cops carried. When the police carried .38 revolvers as a rule, the .38 caliber revolver was the single most popular choice among armed citizens. In the 1980s and into the 1990s, cops switched en masse to semiautomatic pistols. So did the gun-buying public. Today, the most popular handgun among police seems to be the 16-shot, .40 caliber Glock semiautomatic. Not surprisingly, the general public has gone to pistols bracketing that caliber in power (9mm, .40, .45) with similar enthusiasm. The American police establishment has also largely switched from the 12 gauge shotgun which was also the traditional American home defense weapon, to the AR15 patrol rifle with 30-round magazine…and, not surprisingly, the law-abiding citizenry has followed suit there, too.

The reasoning is strikingly clear. The cops are the experts on the current criminal trends. If they have determined that a “high capacity” semiautomatic pistol and a .223 semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines are the best firearms for them to use to protect people like me and my family, they are obviously the best things for us to use to protect ourselves and our families .
Link

Unquestionable logic right there...
Airborne Aircrew is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2013, 16:23
  #12180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,123
As Lyman says, if you chose to move, lock, stock and barrel right on top of the San Andreas fault then the responsibility is yours not mine.

I had other locks, additional stocks, and hundreds of barrels.... The cachet of having my front yard the Pacific Ocean........was worth the risk.

There was no Earthquake, save the one when I unloaded the wheelbarrow full of dough at the bank after I sold 'bear de Mer' to a dot-cam hippie....

rg, I am in consternation re: your gun ethic? I do not currently have guns at home, but I am thrilled my neighbors do....wassup?

Layman
Lyman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.