Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
31 online now:
DrJones*, Faith, jar, LamarkNewAge (4 members, 27 visitors)
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,721 Year: 18,757/19,786 Month: 1,177/1,705 Week: 429/518 Day: 47/58 Hour: 2/4


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Gun Control Again

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control Again
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(4)
Message 46 of 5179 (683986)
12-14-2012 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by hooah212002
12-14-2012 6:33 PM


So ....where were all the gun owners who have all these guns "for protection" when a fucking shit load of KIDS were gunned down in school?

They were away from the school, where gun control laws said they had to be. Under Connecticut law it's illegal to carry a gun near a school.

I'm not trying to say that more guns would have made the situation better, I'm just answering your question. Where were all the people who could have used their legal guns to stop this guy? They were exactly where you said you they had to be - far away from the school.

I mean, all of you who think this tragedy justifies more strict gun control need to grapple with the fact that this tragedy happened in the state with the second-strictest gun control laws in America; the state with the fourth-lowest rate of gun ownership; the state with no "shall-issue" concealed-carry law; the state where assault rifles are banned. Isn't calling for more gun control at this point the same as observing that tax cuts ruined the economy, and therefore the answer is more tax cuts?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by hooah212002, posted 12-14-2012 6:33 PM hooah212002 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by hooah212002, posted 12-14-2012 7:11 PM crashfrog has responded
 Message 49 by hooah212002, posted 12-14-2012 7:32 PM crashfrog has responded
 Message 63 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 3:55 AM crashfrog has responded

hooah212002
Member (Idle past 110 days)
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 47 of 5179 (683987)
12-14-2012 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashfrog
12-14-2012 7:04 PM


They were exactly where you said you they had to be

When did I ever say guns had to be away from school? Don't attribute a position onto me that you think I hold or have previously held.

Over 25 CHILDREN died today because some idiot retard had easy access to guns and you are defending the right for those guns to be so easily accessible.

Over 25 CHILDREN. Kids. between the ages of 5 and 10 years old died today for no god damn reason other than, apparently, this idiot had the means to kill them. With guns.

Go have some kids and I guaran-fucking-tee you sing a different tune.

I mean, all of you who think this tragedy justifies more strict gun control need to grapple with the fact that this tragedy happened in the state with the second-strictest gun control laws in America; the state with the fourth-lowest rate of gun ownership; the state with no "shall-issue" concealed-carry law; the state where assault rifles are banned. Isn't calling for more gun control at this point the same as observing that tax cuts ruined the economy, and therefore the answer is more tax cuts?

Then maybe the laws aren't strict enough? That's like saying "light" cigarettes are the safest kind.


"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 7:04 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by RAZD, posted 12-14-2012 10:03 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 82 by crashfrog, posted 12-15-2012 10:16 AM hooah212002 has responded

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 1222 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


(2)
Message 48 of 5179 (683989)
12-14-2012 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by hooah212002
12-14-2012 6:33 PM


hooah212002 writes:

So ....where were all the gun owners who have all these guns "for protection" when a fucking shit load of KIDS were gunned down in school? Why did none of you protect them with your guns? Legal guns are for protection, right?
Oh, that's right, because they aren't for protecting anyone other than yourself when someone tries to harm you. Fuck everyone else.

If you follow the NRA logic, those kindergarden children should have been carrying concealed weapons and they could have wiped out that asshole.

There is no reason on earth any person should be allowed to own any of these assault weapons much less pistols etc. that are not meant for hunting.

The "right to bear arms" in the constitution has been so badly interpreted by the courts it is a joke.

That was meant for militia, not "cowboys" who go out and show off by waving their weapons around.
I agree with you hooah.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by hooah212002, posted 12-14-2012 6:33 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 110 days)
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


(4)
Message 49 of 5179 (683990)
12-14-2012 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashfrog
12-14-2012 7:04 PM


Ya know, I have, in the past, been pretty indifferent in regards to gun control. I like guns, but I think they should be controlled. However, I don't like to discuss it because I can see both sides of the argument and don't have a definitive answer or even position.

However, this incident strikes me at my very core because I live in a small town just like Newtown and I have two boys that are right within the ages of the kids who were gunned down today. I expect a reasonable amount of safety to be granted my kids, what with living in the fucking United States of America as opposed to some 3rd world country ravaged by war daily. You're right, Connecticut IS supposed to be a safe as shit place. But guess what? It fucking happened there. Doesn't that tell you something is wrong? Doesn't that tell you that the wrong kind of people have too easy a access to guns?

Even having said that, I still can't solidly say I am completely against guns simply because it is too broad and complex of a topic. Plus, it cannot be reasonably or rationally discussed. America has a gun problem. Plain and simple. I don't care about other country's statistics. America, the supposed leader of the fucking world, has a serious gun problem. You know how it's a problem? When god damn CONNECTICUT gets shot up. Fucking connecticut. A small ass town to boot.

If you can't recognize that there is a problem, you are part of it.

Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.


"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 7:04 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by crashfrog, posted 12-15-2012 10:13 AM hooah212002 has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18873
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


(6)
Message 50 of 5179 (683996)
12-14-2012 8:45 PM


The Reality
The massacres will continue as long as gun availability continues.

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by xongsmith, posted 12-16-2012 11:22 AM Percy has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4649
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


(2)
Message 51 of 5179 (684000)
12-14-2012 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Rahvin
12-14-2012 6:39 PM


You're making a simple error - you're suggesting that gun control on the level of Norway's is intended to eliminate gun deaths.

It's not.

It's intended to reduce them.

I err not. No one can show a definitive causal relationship.

Are there other factors of social norms, the constitution of the society, homogeneous population, disparities in economic spread, that could account for the differences in these rates?

But this is not the point.

The point is that, as we have seen in this thread, we will make this tragedy an excuse to mount a soapbox and blame everyone and everything we oppose in society, EXCEPT why the poor kid went nuts on a killing spree. Could we, should we, have seen any outward signs of extreme emotional distress? Who was watching? Who should have been watching?

Guns are too fucking easy a target and will do nothing to even slow these tragedies, as Anders Breivik and Min Yingjun have already shown.

We waste our breath on guns/no guns while the mental health system remains in tatters.

I guess that's my soapbox.

ABE: Just in case anyone is interested, I do not like guns. I will not allow one in my home. I have also found over the last x decades that the kinds of personalities that usually enjoy owning, caressing, shooting, licking their guns are not usually compatible with mine.

Edited by AZPaul3, : added edit

Edited by AZPaul3, : the usual suspects


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 6:39 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 9:31 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


(2)
Message 52 of 5179 (684002)
12-14-2012 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by AZPaul3
12-14-2012 9:05 PM


I err not.

You argued that, since a gun ban would not stop all gun violence, there's no reason to ban guns.

That's not and never has been my position. My position is that a ban would reduce gun violence, and that's the goal.

See. here's what you said:

You do know about Norway where some of the most strict gun laws have been implemented. You do remember Belgium where, again, very strict gun laws are in force. And certainly you all know about China where private gun possession is a capital offense.

Strict gun laws, even complete bans on guns, doesn't seem to have kept the crazies from raveging through grade schools

You referred to a few well-known anecdotes to demonstrate that gun violence still exists in countries with strict gun control. You claimed that the gun control "didn't stop them."

Nothing can stop them completely. No system short of a time-travelling oracle will be able to prevent all of them.

But the statistics, you know, real data as opposed to simple anecdotes, shows that countries with strict gun control have a FAR lower incidence of gun-related death than the US.

I presented that data to back my argument.

No one can show a definitive causal relationship.

Of course not - human behavior is too complex to be able to tell what the actual cause was in most cases of gun violence.

But while correlation is not causality, it's one fuck of a big hint.

And it's pretty hard to argue that fewer guns can do anything but reduce gun violence. It's hard to shoot a gun you don't have.

The point is that, as we have seen in this thread, we will make this tragedy an excuse to mount a soapbox and blame everyone and everything we oppose in society

I've been advocating a gun ban for years. I'm the last person who says "save the children!" I hate emotional appeals.

I simply note how many people die every year from gunshots, and I think to myself "Guns don't kill people, people kill people... but people with guns kill a lot more effectively than people without guns, and I'd much rather face a lunatic with a knife than a lunatic with a pistol."

EXCEPT why the poor kid went nuts on a killing spree. Could we, should we, have seen any outward signs of extreme emotional distress? Who was watching? Who should have been watching?

I completely agree that mental health care in the US is worse than abysmal. Instead of fixing the hellhole institutions, we just closed them and threw the sick people onto the street.

But not all gun violence is due to the mentally unstable. There have been several recent "stand your ground" incidents in the US where people were killed for no reason at all...because a perfectly sane person had a gun and felt a little threatened when no threat was present. Just as an example. The vast majority of gun-related killings do not occur in a classroom, and are not related to media-frenzy-causing crazy people.

You;re just arguing red herrings and straw men.

Guns are too fucking easy a target and will do nothing to even slow these tragedies, as Anders Breivik and Min Yingjun have already shown.

Yet those two were individual incidents, and when you look at the actual statistics, the frequency of gun deaths...your argument falls to pieces.

Again: nobody says bans will eliminate gun violence. Only that they'll reduce it.

It would appear, given that Norway has less than 1/4 of the gun-related deaths of the US, that their gun laws may have prevented more people from going Breivik by restricting their access to firearms.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.”
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by AZPaul3, posted 12-14-2012 9:05 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

RAZD
Member
Posts: 20156
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 53 of 5179 (684006)
12-14-2012 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by hooah212002
12-14-2012 7:11 PM


state by state laws are no protection
Hi hooah212002, et al,

I mean, all of you who think this tragedy justifies more strict gun control need to grapple with the fact that this tragedy happened in the state with the second-strictest gun control laws in America; the state with the fourth-lowest rate of gun ownership; the state with no "shall-issue" concealed-carry law; the state where assault rifles are banned. Isn't calling for more gun control at this point the same as observing that tax cuts ruined the economy, and therefore the answer is more tax cuts?

Then maybe the laws aren't strict enough?

Connecticut is a small state, small enough that you can travel to New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island all in one day.

Obviously strict laws in one state do not protect anyone from people acquiring guns etc in neighboring states or any state that can be reached with a short drive.

The issue is not the strictness in one area, but the universality of the laws in all areas.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by hooah212002, posted 12-14-2012 7:11 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1185 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


(1)
Message 54 of 5179 (684009)
12-14-2012 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Percy
12-14-2012 3:25 PM


My heart hurts. I just cannot watch or read anymore of this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Percy, posted 12-14-2012 3:25 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33313
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


(2)
Message 55 of 5179 (684015)
12-15-2012 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Coragyps
12-14-2012 3:39 PM


After I cry my eyes out over these horrific murdering rampages I yell to whomever is listening, online or off, WHERE ARE ALL OUR UPRIGHT CITIZEN GUN OWNERS TO PROTECT PEOPLE WHEN WE NEED THEM?

A few armed citizens at the sites of these murders could have stopped the rampage cold long before so many had been killed.

It's not that we have too many guns it's that they aren't in service when they are needed, and we certainly DON'T need more gun control. The founders knew what they were doing. When guns are not available to private citizens for self defense and defense in such situations as these shootings, soon the whole population is at the mercy of criminal and government powers, standing armies and so on. The founders knew what they were doing. BUT more of the citizen owners of guns need to be packing them, especially these days.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Coragyps, posted 12-14-2012 3:39 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Theodoric, posted 12-15-2012 12:23 AM Faith has responded
 Message 60 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-15-2012 3:08 AM Faith has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6677
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 4.3


(6)
Message 56 of 5179 (684016)
12-15-2012 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Faith
12-15-2012 12:17 AM


You don't know what the fuck the founders wanted. They wanted an organized militia. They were talking about guns that could shoot one shot per minute. To think the founders ideas of weapons has any credence with todays technology and culture is fucking asinine.

When guns are not available to private citizens for self defense and defense in such situations as these shootings, soon the whole population is at the mercy of criminal and government powers, standing armies and so on.

Shame on you. You take this tragedy as an opportunity to post wing nut talking points. Shame on you.

You think more guns and more untrained, stupid wannabe rambo's is the answer?

The stupidity is astounding.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 12:17 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 2:28 AM Theodoric has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33313
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 57 of 5179 (684020)
12-15-2012 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Theodoric
12-15-2012 12:23 AM


Second Amendment
Theodoric writes:

You don't know what the fuck the founders wanted. They wanted an organized militia.

You're such a sweet thoughtful considerate guy Theodoric, so kind and patient and gracious toward those who disagree with you.

Shame on you. You take this tragedy as an opportunity to post wing nut talking points. Shame on you.

You think more guns and more untrained, stupid wannabe rambo's is the answer?

The stupidity is astounding.

Many here take this tragedy as an opportunity to advocate gun control, right? That's what this thread is about, right? It always comes up when there is a tragedy like this.

Presumably we all care about bringing these murders to an end, we just differ on the means.

Actually I do know what the founders wanted and it was NOT an organized militia for the very reason that such a body can be used against the people which is the exact opposite of the intent of the amendment. The concept of an armed citizenry goes back to England and possibly other sources long before the second amendment was written, which built on that history. The point was for individual citizens to have the means of self defense.

It was understood to require training.

And I'm sure we could agree on WHAT weapons are suitable for private ownership, that's not the problem here.

The intention was to preserve us from foreign enemies as well as possibly the nation's own standing army which historically easily becomes a threat to the people, but obviously it should be effective for these crazy individual enemies as well.

Here are some quotes from men of the founding era:

James Madison:
http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm

The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained in arms, is the best most natural defense of a free country.

Patrick Henry:
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/361839.Patrick_Henry

“The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.”

George Mason,
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Mason

Forty years ago, when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British parliament was advised by an artful man, [Sir William Keith] who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people. That it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.

http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quotes_by/george+mason

Who are the militia, if they be not the people of this country...? I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.

Samuel Adams
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quotes_by/samuel+adams

And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress … to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms…

It is always dangerous to the liberties of the people to have an army stationed among them, over which they have no control ... The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them.

Alexander Hamilton
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton

The militia is a voluntary force not associated or under the control of the States except when called out; a permanent or long standing force would be entirely different in make-up and call.

Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

Richard Henry Lee
--> --> --> -->https://www.facebook.com/unorganizedmilitia/notes

A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms...To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms...The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Henry_Lee

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."[3]

Here's an interesting scholarly article on the concept:
History of the Second Amendment
David E Vandercoy
1994
http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1956...

This study gives the history of the “citizen army” in England, which is the same thing as the “militia” intended by the Second Amendment, that goes back centuries. I’m just going to quote from The Conclusion:

English history made two things clear to the American revolutionaries: force of arms was the only effective check on government, and standing armies threatened liberty. Recognition of these premises meant that the force of arms necessary to check government had to be placed in the hands of citizens. The English theorists Blackstone and Harrington advocated these tenants. [sic] Because the public purpose of the right to keep arms was to check government, the right necessarily belonged to the individual and, as a matter of theory, was thought to be absolute in that it could not be abrogated by the prevailing rulers.

These views were adopted by the framers, both Federalists and Antifederalists. Neither group trusted government. Both believed the greatest danger to the new republic was tyrannical government and that the ultimate check on tyranny was an armed population. It is beyond dispute that the second amendment right was to serve the same public purpose as advocated by the English theorists. The check on all government, not simply the federal government, was the armed population, the militia. Government would not be accorded the power to create a select militia since such a body would become the government's instrument. The whole of the population would comprise the militia. As the constitutional debates prove, the framers recognized that the common public purpose of preserving freedom would be served by protecting each individual's right to arms, thus empowering the people to resist tyranny and preserve the republic. The intent was not to create a right for other governments, the individual states; it was to preserve the people's right to a free state, just as it says.

The right to self protection, such as against crime, is included in the discussions of the Constitutional framers, as quoted in that article.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : Added the last half of the last paragraph quoted.

Edited by Faith, : add bolding


He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Theodoric, posted 12-15-2012 12:23 AM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by vimesey, posted 12-15-2012 2:45 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 77 by Theodoric, posted 12-15-2012 8:38 AM Faith has responded
 Message 100 by shadow71, posted 12-15-2012 4:44 PM Faith has responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1003
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 7.7


(2)
Message 58 of 5179 (684022)
12-15-2012 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Faith
12-15-2012 2:28 AM


Re: Second Amendment
Fairly recently, in Chester in England, it was legal to shoot a Welshman with a bow and arrow within the City walls after midnight. It was an old piece of legislation dating back to when the English and Welsh used to fight each other.

We decided to get with the times and repeal it though.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 2:28 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7092
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 59 of 5179 (684023)
12-15-2012 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by crashfrog
12-14-2012 6:56 PM


Re: guns versus mentality
Crashfrog writes:

I don't understand why you can't understand it, when it's been explained to you - we have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and you don't. You don't have that.

That's why you can enact gun control and we can't. We have a law that says we can't. I don't know how to make it any simpler than that.

And is this Constitutional Right made by a God which won't allow change or interpretation?


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 6:56 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Kairyu, posted 12-15-2012 4:48 AM Tangle has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 8.0


(4)
Message 60 of 5179 (684024)
12-15-2012 3:08 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Faith
12-15-2012 12:17 AM


After I cry my eyes out over these horrific murdering rampages I yell to whomever is listening, online or off, WHERE ARE ALL OUR UPRIGHT CITIZEN GUN OWNERS TO PROTECT PEOPLE WHEN WE NEED THEM?

Yeah, remarkable, isn't it? There are over 300 million civilian firearms in the USA, so out of all the nations on Earth American citizens should be the most securely protected against being shot. Why doesn't it work out like that? It's a mystery.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 12:17 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 3:34 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019