Florida to allow use of force even outside home - Gov. Jeb Bush said Tuesday he intends to sign a bill that would allow people who feel threatened -- even on the street or at a baseball game -- to "meet force with force" and defend themselves without fear of prosecution.

Great idea....NOT!

Leave a Comment

Nony Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 02:10 AM :
The undertakers will support this one... more business for them. Maybe somebody will take a potshot at Jeb, for feeling threatened by this law. When do you feel threatened by the way? How much threat is needed to be legally allowed to shoot somebody in "self-defence"? If a black guy is going to be beaten to a pulp and shoots his attackers will his story be accepted or not? And this from the guys who wanted to "save" Mrs. Shiavo's life...

NeoCon will find this wonderful. and I guess Patriot is already scouting for a home there. Ideal state for the "if you are not with us you are against us" crowd. Poor Democrats. Looks like hunting season will open shortly...

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 10:08 AM :
Oh boy! Keep everyone armed and frightened. What a good idea. You know, we don't have nearly enough shootings in this country.

Personally I'm terrified. People with guns are going to exploit this law. Surely they'll find a way to prove that innocuous person really was threatening them, and that's why they had to shoot them in the head. People are going to be getting away with murder. Terrfic.

If I wasn't leaving my house in fear of the baptists before, I shall now in fear of the NRA nuts itching to take down the ultimate prey.

sky Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 10:25 AM :
Yeah, I can see it now. Some road rager, who isn't taking his medication, thinks he's been "threatened" and "meets force with force" by blowing a motorist away with his 357 mag. Great law Florida! Still can't connect the dots, can you?

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 10:56 AM :
The sooner I'm outta this place, the better. I think the scary thing is the vote itself. Did you see the crazy majority this law passed by?

NeoCon Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 1:50 PM :
Florida will always be a Red State because:

1) Florida was a Spanish colony for 300 years

2) Half the state is in Dixie

3) The Cuban population in the South is Anti-Communist

I would suggest getting used to it.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:00 PM :
Acutally, I plan on moving. Why should anyone have to get used to outrageously violent wacko laws?

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:38 PM :
I'd move ASAP! I can already see it, some half senile idiots having a shoot-out at the Mall over a parking spot. Mhmm they might even shoot me to threatening to upset their religious preconceptions!

Clara's Mom Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:41 PM :
They'd shoot you for other reasons.

NeoCon Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:41 PM :

Go to your local gun store, exercise your 2nd Amendment rights, and get trained on the 9mm automatic.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:46 PM :
"Clara's Mom" is around... guess Patriot can't be very far away then...

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:51 PM :
NeoCon, maybe I should, and then shoot everybody that carries a gun, as I percieve those guys and galls as a serious threat to my life! Come on, they are packing a gun... they might shoot.. better shoot first! Pre-emptive action you know as endorsed by G W Bush hisself.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:52 PM :
NeoCon, I don't want a gun. I don't want to live in a country where I must be in constant fear of my fellow citizens.

Am I the only one who can see this country slowly turning into something like "The Road Warrior" movie?

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:58 PM :
More something like Mad Max... with Bush and the NeoCons after the last of the petrol. Just let them shoot each other, saves us the bother and more SS dollars for us ... Is called survival of the smartest.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 2:58 PM :
Yes you are. This country was founded with guns. Taking them away will only ensure our society slips further into the hands of the criminals.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:02 PM :
I'm not suggesting removing guns from the hands of law abiding citizens. I'm in favour of the second amendment. However, this law in particular seems very dangerous.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:02 PM :
That is one of the stupidest remarks I have heard in a long time Jeff (not counting NeoCon's) Every nation was at one time founded with weapons... But not all of them are still carrying them. And violent crime is much lower in Europe where they register and control guns.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:04 PM :
I don't imagine that a well armed citizenry really stops crime. A meth addict is going to break into someones house, or rob them, regardless of whether or not their target has a gun.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:11 PM :
Sorry Angela. I'm not a feminist. The more women try to take on roles previously considered male, the more they put themselves at risk, not the other way around.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:13 PM :
I smell Sky's footprints all over this one.

A well regulate militia? The national guard? You've got to be kidding! It's a branch of the armed forces. It's not run by the citizenry you moron. You get a government paycheck and benefits and veteran status. Ask G. W. Bush.

Look up mugging statistics per capita. The states with the most liberal gun laws - Arizona, Texas (liberal in the good sense of the word) across the board have the lowest muggings. Proof is in the pudding.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:17 PM :
Angela just likes to walk around with a big heavy dildo in her purse... and NeoCon and ilk like the semi-sexual conotation of their guns... Look how big and powerfull mine is... LOL

Having a gun does not guarantee you safety Angela. A lot of people feel invincible because they have a gun and so they forget to take the normal precautions non-gun owners take... The psychological effect of having this "invincible" weapon on you can get you into situation where you wouldn't have been if you did not have a gun.

I live in Manhattan, work at night and have run into "situations" So what... If I had had a gun on me I'd probably be dead by now. Guns just offer a false sense of security.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:19 PM :
Jeff, could I have some links please on those statistics? (I smell footprints too, but they aren't Sky's)

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:21 PM :
No, it just means I don't have to buy a gun if I choose not to. This is your argument, as I see it: You must own a gun to defend yourself. I simply don't agree.

A good way to defend yourself is to have a good offense. Don't put yourself in dangerous situations in the first place. Don't go walking alone by yourself downtown. Don't be agressive in public situations. I've seen many people (men and women) get themselves into fights by yelling at strangers in bars, restaurants etc. I'd rather go under the radar. In the 26 years I've been on this planet, I've never been attacked, harrassed or bothered by people. Why? Because I keep to myself. There are other ways of prevent violence on ones person that carrying a gun. Is there a chance of some random attack? Yes. That's why it's a random attack. But I can't live my life in fear of so stray lunatic attacking me. I can wall myself up with a barrier of fear. I'll live my life as I do. It's working for me just fine.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:23 PM :
Rather, I CAN'T wall myself up with a barrier of fear.

Someone Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:26 PM :
Alice, believe me, you HAVE been harrassed.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:27 PM :
Juniper, she called you a bitch. Kinda makes you feel like less of a man, doesn't it? Whatever. One less feminazi.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:27 PM :
I think you owe Angela an apology Juniper. There's no need to be rude. Why do you have to be so insulting to people? It's about time to grow up don't you think? I've seen you blast others on this site about their behavior. Is it any wonder no one pays attention to you?

As for your request for statistics. Since you're such a smart ass, I'm sure you can use google. Any agency that posts them will support my claim.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:27 PM :
Someone, on the internet, yes. In person, in the the real world, no.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:36 PM :
Let me put is another way. You seem to be a rather hardcore feminist. You didn't really ask challening questions, you simply used them as a way to inform me that I am damaging all female kind. As if one woman has that kind of power. You don't like the way I live my life, fine. Believe me, there are women out their that are so traditional and conservative it would make your hair curl.

However, if you want to hold be up as a bad example of womanhood, go ahead. If find it hard to believe that I'm having that kind of impact.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:38 PM :
BTW, I did the best I could to answer your questions. But then you went and insulted Juniper. I happen to think he's a terrific guy. Perhaps her was a little out of line, but he has the right to express himself anyway he chooses.

Golly Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:42 PM :
Angela...What do you look like? Big jigglies maybe?

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:44 PM :
Golly, you are the cure to the afternoon blues. I'm not even gonna report you to HR.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:45 PM :
I have a funny feeling she looks a lot like us from the waist down Golly... I noticed she is arround when Carla or Carla's mother are around... now we're only missing lifeguard.

Golly Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:47 PM :
I'll bet Clara's Mom is hot.

Golly Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:48 PM :
Like us all from the waist down? Hung like a tuna can? Golly don't go deep but he bangs the heck out of the sides.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:49 PM :
Probably as hot as that horrid picture Nony put up on the message board. LOL

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:54 PM :
You sound proud Golly. Good for you! I can't tell you how much you make me laugh sometimes ...

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:54 PM :
Alice, do you think Angela is religious and lives in Arizona? Mabye we could hook her up with NeoCon. They would make a nice couple!

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 3:57 PM :
Actually, I'm not sure about that. I think NeoCon would want a subservient wife. I think Angela would probably kick the shit out of him.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 4:00 PM :
Even better! He'd like that! Then afterwards they came make up again. Keep in mind he adores that Coulter woman!

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 4:01 PM :
Too true. Anyone man who digs her has to have a few kinks in his armour.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 4:07 PM :
Ah yes his kinky armour... LOL.

Got to go Alice. Keep safe in desperado state! (the 45th most dangerous!) Be carefull of the old armed rightwing religious biddies who might feel themselves threatened by your youth! Hope your Canada paperwork comes thru fast... Might look into that myself. NYC is getting too expensive, just got letter from landlord concerning the rent... aarghh.

alice Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 4:12 PM :
Have a great evening Juniper. Don't let the bastards grind you down ...

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 4:14 PM :
Thank you! :)

sky Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 5:01 PM :
Oh and what about some scholarly examination of this Second Amendment question.

Sniff my footprints on that one, mon petit.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 7:14 PM :
Do you get veteran status when discharged from the National Guard asswhipe? Yes you do. If you don't show up for duty would you be considered AWOL? Yes you would. Fucking analytical dumbass. You'd say a duck was a rooster if it crowed in the morning wouldn't you? Fucktard.

Golly Wrote the following on 04/07/2005 8:54 PM :
"Fucktard?!" Need to use that in my next E-I-E-I-O song. Keep em coming Jeff.

Nony Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 02:17 AM :
'If you don't show up for duty would you be considered AWOL? Yes you would.' Bush wasn't!

Golly maybe you should start a post on the E-I-E-I-O song on the message board... add the daily verse...

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 05:49 AM :
"Do you get veteran status when discharged from the National Guard asswhipe? Yes you do."

No, you do not unless you have served on active Fereral service due to being nationalized. Active duty for training does not count.

"If you don't show up for duty would you be considered AWOL? Yes you would."

Yes, a Guardsman is considered AWOL if he doesn't show up for drill or AT, but he isn't AWOL from the Army or the Air Force; he's AWOL from the Guard. It's a matter for the state to deal with as it sees fit. If you fail to show for drill or AT, you do not get a creditable year of service. Your commanding officer has the authority to have the police arrest you and bring you to drill, but not to jail. People who have a habit of being AWOL are usually just discharged. If nationalized and you go AWOL, you are subject to Federal authority.

Jeff, you don't know what you are talking about, so why are you arguing? Your just pissed off that I called you for talking out of school. The fact that you've done it a second time shows your are a slow learner. .

Actually, Nony, Bush was declared AWOL, but those records are now "missing."

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 05:52 AM :
Sky, I'm not sure if the guy who called you "fucktard" will even understand your intelligent answer. A guy like that doesn't care to be confused by facts or truth.

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 06:02 AM :
Oh and one more clarification. Just serving in the military doesn't automatically make one a veteran. If you are an active duty member of the Armed Forces during peacetime, you are not a veteran. While you may be eligible for certain veterans' benefits administered by the VA, you are not a veteran of war. Wartime vets are classified differently and usually Congress adds extra benefits for them. The G.I. Bill is an example. Those who served on acitve duty for a minimum of six consecutive months between February 28, 1961 and May 7, 1975 and were discharged honorably (or with a service connected disability) are Vetenam Veterans. Those who served a full term of service after May, 1975 are not considered veterans unless they have served in a theater of operations for a conflict covered under the War Powers Act.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:33 AM :
I realise that Sky. I just think fellas like that are pathetic. To think they if they shout loud enough, what they think and say will be accepted as truth.

Correct, this would no happen in the real world. Perhaps we do need to vent our spleens in rather immature ways every once in a while. I just think his argument was particuraly lame.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:33 AM :
He didn't give a reply to Juniper posting the link concerning crime rates, proving the opposite of what Jeff claimed.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:35 AM :
I noticed that as well. Perhaps his mommy called him away from the computer.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:37 AM :
And I never got a response from Angela about my being the bane of womanhood. Oh well.

I have to ask, am I really portraying myself as a victim? Am I really setting back the womens movement?

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:42 AM :
I always thought is was the Neo-conservatives who set back the womens movement... claiming women are to be homemakers, raise kids, cook food, provide sexual service etc. Guess you are a bit too outspoken for that Alice.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:47 AM :
That's what I thought. MY only crime, it appears, is that I refuse to carry a gun in my purse everywhere I go. I didn't realise that it's the gun that makes the woman. That is a new one in my book.

I will say this, I am a homemaker. I don't have children though. I simply see it as a good balance in my relationship. Darren works, I take care of managing the household (which I consider a full time job). Everything from bill paying to car maintanence, I take care of it. This allows Darren a good amount of R&R to be able to perform his best at work.

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:49 AM :
"To think they if they shout loud enough, what they think and say will be accepted as truth." Gee, I wonder where they learned this?

Of course he didn't address Juniper's post, Baldric. Neo-cons do not concern themselves with the truth, but only with their revisionist fantasies.

I have my own ideas about the women's movement, which most liberals would not find palatable. They are based in sociology and empiricism, not on ideology. But this isn't the thread for that discussion.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:53 AM :
No, it's not. But then again, we do tend to get sidetracked. My feelings about feminism are based on: personal feelings as a woman, other womens behaviour, and Camille Paglia. Paglia has some very interesting ideas about feminism. Some I agree with, some I don't. But one thing is for sure, she has pissed off a lot of feminists .. that always makes me smile.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 08:55 AM :
BTW, Sky, I'm not a liberal .. but I think you already knew that.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:03 AM :
Never heard about Camille Paglia, have to look into that.

Seems you and Darren have a similar set up as me and the wife... but we have one kid, that adds a lot of additional work to my wife's day so I help out with the dishes and the laundry etc. Guess I'll be sneered at by the gun waving woman beating crowd now... Oh my god I'm such a sissy... no gun and knowing how to operate the washer-dryer...

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:07 AM :
Sounds like a good setup.

I guess the thing with me is that I would never tell someone that my lifestyle is "THE" lifestyle. You have to make choices based on your needs and abilities. Some women work, some don't. It's a matter of what makes sense for you. I do have my own personal beliefs as to how people should live their lives, but that's all they are, MY beliefs. If someone asks of my beliefs, I will share.

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:13 AM :
More to the point of this thread. I had a debate with a friend at lunch yesterday about the "gun issue." I don't own guns and never will, thoug I did years ago when I used to hunt. My friend is an avid hunter and gun owner. He used to keep a hand gun in the night stand next to his bed, but things have changed since he has children now. Gone is the glass-front display case where he once stored his rifles. They are now locked away in a very expensive armory-safe in his study. The hand gun, ostensibly for the protection of his family, is now locked in a case in the bedroom closet. Ah, a responsible father! He understands that those guns are a major danger to his children and has taken appropriate steps to safeguard them. I asked him some simple questions: "Of what use now is that hand gun? It's locked safely away and the keys stored in your dresser. Should someone invade your home do you really think you'd have the opportunity or time to retrieve the key, the gun case, unlock it, load the gun and use it? This would be hard enough when you are awake, but what about 3:00 am when you are suddenly awakened? Can you think that fast immediately upon waking - and perform the aforementioned procedure in the dark? What if you wake to the intruder standing next to your bed with a gun to your wife's head or a knife to her throat? Think he's going to allow you to fetch your gun so it'll be a fair fight? He came into your house ready for everything; do you really think you are a match for him? Finally, you have an alarm system and a bad-ass German police dog to deter would-be criminals, and you keep your cell phone on the night stand. So what further value does your gun have in the protection of your family?"

He thought for a moment and said. "None. You are absolutely right. I suppose I've been deluding myself into thinking my gun made us safer, but really it doesn't at all." He decided that the hand gun will go into the armory-safe and he'll reserve it's use for when he goes camping and hiking.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:17 AM :
Indeed. I've heard from many people that even if the gun is right on hand is a drawer, it's most likely that the gun will be used by the intruder. Most people end up being the victims of their own weapons.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:25 AM :
They probably break in your house to steal your weapons. Most people also don't take the necessary training needed for good gun use. Apparently it is very difficult to shoot another human being. That's why recruits get to shoot so much during training, so that pulling the trigger becomes a reflex.

Some deranged NRA Neo-con will probably buy a house in a really bad neighborhood and lay out a trail of money to the unlocked door. Then he will quitely sit there wanking in the dark turned on by the prospect of legaly killing people, until some poor haples idiots wander in and ... well you can guess the rest...

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:27 AM :
I've no doubt that this law will be abused. I live in Florida. I find it weird to live in a state with this kind of law. It makes you feel like you need to be very careful, as you never know what some other person might find "threating".

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:36 AM :
But, Alice, dear, you don't support Dubya, so you HAVE to be a liberal. Don't you understand that if you think, question, keep yourself informed, and demand that your elected officials represent the best interest of the people (as opposed to the moneybags who bouhgt their office), you are a liberal according to the new paradigm? If you are a ideological liberal, you are deserving of death, since God hates liberals as bad as Allah hates western infidels. The NRA is going to have to make jihad on you.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 09:50 AM :
Boy have I heard that before. I've also been told I'm a democrat as well, which I am not. Also, that I'm a blue stater, which I am not. I don't care much for labels. They don't fit well. But I suppose some people aren't happy unless they can fit people into little boxes and catogorize them. I figure it gives them some kind of comfort.

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:13 AM :
It's called identity politics, Alice. Everyone has to be straight, gay, bi, male, female, democrat, republican, liberal, conservative, black, white, asian, etc. Now combine these into the vast array of "identity groups." This is actually one of the really bad ideas that came out of liberalism. Since, liberals have started to understand that identity politics is actually very devisive. Conservatives, on the other hand, who once rightly criticized identity politics, have not embrace it as a means of choosing which groups they get to hate and, if possible, descriminate against.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:15 AM :
Juniper, check your statistics. I made reference to muggings. Street crimes - by criminals against innocent people. Your statistics are for crime in general. You are confused about more then your sexuality.

States like Arizona and Texas, people are less likely to be accosted in the street. In Arizona you can carry a gun on your hip if you like. If you wanted to rob someone on the sidewalk who would you choose - NeoCon with his 9mm in plane view, or Alice with her "I love trees" T-shirt, and birkenstocks?

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:17 AM :
Alice - truth? Didn't I see you argue for truth being relative on some other thread?

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:20 AM :
I've never owned a pair of birkenstocks in my life. I eat meat, wear leather and hunt occasionally. I happen to detest the hippie ideology.

Sky, I suppose this is a fine example of pigeonholing. I have found that it is not limited to politics. It seem to inhabit every aspect of life. Religion, food, music, style of dress etc. I think people are comfortable with the idea of predictability. When a person appears who they cannot classify, who doesn't fit in with the "norm", they tend to feel threatened and uncomfortable. As though a person who is different will actually affect their lives. Weird, isn't it?

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:22 AM :
I said personal belief was relative. The intangible things in life are relative. Things such as how the National Guard functions is not relative. It's very black and white.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:27 AM :
Alice, your response indicates you don't think you do this too? You judged me as a teenager, because of my impatient response towards Sky. (btw, I've noticed you use harsher language) I judged you as a hippie because of your responses about women's rights and guns. I don't know you. And you don't know me. Our minds fill in the missing parts of the personaility until more information is acquired. It's a function of our perceptions as human beings.

The zinger is that first impressions couch the rest of the personaility. That's why in Golly's line of work - sales, they realize the first impression is almost always the most important. Some people may revise their image of you over time and with more information, but that first impression is the foundation.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:28 AM :
So you're saying personal belief is personal. Isn't this redundant? Are your personal beliefs based on the truth?

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:31 AM :
Jeff, your comments about Texas and Arizona are utterly false! There is not one shred of truth to them. Why do you come in here and make shit up on the fly and try to defend it when others have already caught you up? Why don't you just admit you were wrong? All you neos do this same thing. It's bullshit. If Texas and Arizona are such "safe places" why do they execute more people for capital crimes than just about any other state?

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:34 AM :
Yes, that is what I've said. Believe it or not, some people don't agree with that.

My personal beliefs are based on the truth as I see it. That's whay it's relative. You and I would surely interpret certain ideas differently, based up our respective worldviews.

I never said you were a teenager. I simply made a joking comment. It was meant in fun. Obviously I have no idea as to who and what you are.

As for thinking I'm a hippie because of my views on womens rights, well, you must not know much about hippies.

As for guns, I will repeat this again, I'm in favour of personal gun ownership. However, I do not care for this particular florida law.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:37 AM :
They're not false Sky. If I'm wrong, I will gladly take the free education and admit it. Have you ever been to either state Sky? Have you ever done any research about this issue besides talking to your friends, who may tell you what you want to hear? Have you ever done any research on this issue besides what google presents to you?

What does the death penalty have to do with muggings? People don't get the death penalty for muggings. You're not a bright as you appear.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:41 AM :
Jeff, Juniper still has a point with his statistics... for all the guns around they are still in the top 10 of the most dangerous states. So all those guns don't really seem to help. Muggings are just a small part of the total crime scene anyway. States with really huge urban areas are likely to have a higher rate of muggings thatn states with a mostly rural population, Guns or no guns. I'd mug NeoCon, he has a bloody expensive 9mm! I got mine in hand, he got his on his hip in plain sight, and he is confident nobody is going to fuck with him (got gun you see), the surprise and his 9mm are mine... Let's see if he can outdraw me! That little "hippie" girl with the 'I love trees" T-shirt (sorry alice, his words) probably knows some bizarre unarmed combat sport... better stay away, probably doesn't have anything worth stealing anyway...

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:44 AM :
"My personal beliefs are based on the truth as I see it." This is what I'm asking about Alice. When you say your "personal beliefs", isn't this redundant? If you're talking about your beliefs, wouldn't everyone interpret them as yours? Unless you qualify that you're talking about other's beliefs. And then you further qualify the statement and say your personal beliefs are based on the truth as you see it.

You mean that truth is mere subjective opinion?

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:47 AM :
Jeff, your last comment reminds me of somebody whose moniker starts with a P ... You also seem to know a lot about the people posting here for somebody who only recently started commenting, granted, you could have been a lurker for a while, but still...

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:49 AM :
I guess what I mean is that there are different kinds of truths. For example, some people see the existence of god as "truth". Others don't. However, more tanglible things, like a coffee cup or a car, aren't up to interpetation. The coffee cup and the car simply are. I wish I had a better way to explain it, but I don't. As to why you care how I see things, well, I can't figure that out.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:51 AM :
Hairsplitting to confuse the issue. The use of every word gets questioned... typical, same tactic Patriot uses.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 10:55 AM :
Perhaps it's just a popular tactic. Surely Patriot can't be the only one of this ilk.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:01 AM :
I know alice, but that line You mean that truth is mere subjective opinion? has been used more than once before by Mr. P. in defense of his "truth" etc. To bad the internal codewolf search function doesn't work...

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:03 AM :
I know. I've had this very same conversation about "truth" with Patriot before. I'm just trying not to jump to conclusions. When I've done that, I've ended up on the business end of some not too pleasant comments.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:05 AM :
Sure triggered some unpleasant behavior already.... Mere coincidence ofcourse. Guess I disappear for a while so mr. Blahhhhhhhhhh can get things out of his system.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:07 AM :
I've got things to do as well. Chat with you later!

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:08 AM :
Baldric, You'd mug NeoCon, just so you could brag about it on codewolf.com anyways! LOL

You're not the only one who has made the mistake on this thread to think that gun ownership lowers all crimes. It doesn't. Legal gun ownership, gives the honest citizen a fighting chance. Sky's story brings up a great point though. If someone thinks that owning a gun automatically makes them safer, they are deluding themselves. They have to think through the scenarios.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:13 AM :
I enjoy Patriot's posts. I also enjoy Skys, and most everyone else who contributes here. This is a great site. I can't tell you how many people thank me for telling them about this place. I've posted in the past, but just not recently.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:18 AM :
Alice, Baldric - my questions about truth, aren't couched in religious non-sense. It's just that I really enjoy discussing controversial issues (like gun control, because there really is two sides to the issue) on the net. But my biggest frustration, is to get to a point in the discussion, and have someone throw up their hands and say -"that's just your opinion". What's behind this comment is relativistic thinking, which is a silly idea.

If two people have opposing views of reality, then clearly both of them can't be right.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:27 AM :
I'm back for a moment. I'm not sure how to answer what you're suggesting. I suppose I'd need an example or a topic first.

I've only got about 20 minutes, so try and make it fast.

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:39 AM :
They most assuredly are false and your continual claim that they aren't is absurd. If you care for us to believe otherwise, put your money where your big mouth is and give us evidence to support your claim. Only make sure your evidence is credible and from a primary information source.

Jeff, I am 49 years old and hold two degrees. I've been active in politics since long before you were born and have always had a wide range of interests. Of course I've done research on this! And, my uninformed, but incredibly arrogant young friend, I know how to use google to find authoritative information when I require it. I don't jut put in a simple search phrase and look at the first two hits. And if I find that there is a disctinct bias on a site, I immediately discount it. This is what critical thinking is all about. But I wouldn't expect you to understand that since I have seen no evidence of critical thinking in any of your posts.

"What does the death penalty have to do with muggings? People don't get the death penalty for muggings."

This laughable litlte trick of yours is the product of an untrained mind incapable of rational debatedebate. The only person here who has mentioned anything about muggings and death penalty is YOU. That is not a topic being discussed here. You've lost the arguement. You know you've lost the argument, but rather than behave like a grown man, admit your error and try to learn something from the experience, you attempt to deflect and obfuscate like a spoited brat.

BTW, as for your little jab at Alice, I'd much rather meet up with 1000 Alices in their "I love trees" tees than a single redneck with a 9mm pistol. "Hippies" in Berkenstocks may make me roll my eyes, but at least I don't have to worry about them being a drunk psychopath packing heat.

And another thing. I do have some personal experience with this issue. When I was 14 years old, the redneck kid next store took dad's .22 cal pistol our in the back yard to have a bit of fun. His fun ended when his carelessness resulted in my taking a bullet in the arm. It missed the bone by a couple of millimeters. Had it been a 9 mm or a .357 mag, I probably would have lost the use of that arm. In another incident, my sister's first husband bought himself a 9 mm pistol. He brought it home and was fiddling with it at the kitchen table. His 20 year old brother came in, say the gun, picked up, said "fucking cool!" pointed it at his brother and pulled the trigger. He didn't even ask if it was loaded. My sisters husband took the bullet in the heart and fell to the floor dead, right next to my three year old neice. My sister was at the stove cooking dinner. He was only 26 years old. So yeah, I know a bit more about this subject than what I discuss with my friends, you little shithead. Had I not had these expereiences, I would not have presumed to influence my friend's thinking yesterday.

What a fucking looser you are.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:40 AM :
Well, since you haven't responded, I'll tell you what I'm thinking. If both views or "realities" can't be correct, perhaps you need to find someone who is completely free of bias of any kind, to say who is correct. This is the only possibility I can think of. On the other hand, maybe all truth is relative. I've been reading about superstring theory. If we can exist in 11 dimensions at once, perhaps there can be more than one truth. Who knows?

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:44 AM :
Sky, are you going to pony up the dough for the "I love trees" tee? I wouldn't buy something like that with my own money.

Surfer Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:45 AM :
I wonder when "angela" is going to actually admit that she's not female.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 11:47 AM :
I'm going to try not to judge on that one. Although I must say the whole tone of her posts is decidedly unfeminine. Or, at the very least, unusual for a woman.

But I must dash .. I'm awfully busy destroying the image of women round the world.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:07 AM :
To me it seems that almost all of the discussions on this board eventually turn to moral arguments. And most people approach the discussions in one of two ways.

Here's an example that stays in line with this thread: Is it morally wrong to use capital force (guns) to defend yourself?

Now to answer this question, your mind will touch on various assumptions you've made about what is right. Did you arrive at your conclusion, by way of inventing your morality or discovering it?

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:16 AM :
Sure, Alice, if you'd like. But wouldn't it just be better to plant a tree? Surfer, Maybe "angela" is only "angela" on Saturday nights, if you get my meaning.

I've thought about this for a moment. Jeff actually had proved that Alice's fears are accurate. He talks of muggings. Well a mugging is an assault, usually rapidly executed with the intent to rob. Muggers seldom use guns, but prefer a hit-and-run approach. Now, you may loose your purse or wallet or the bag you're carrying, but does this petty crime warrant an immediate, udjudicated death sentance? That's what could happen in Florida if some whacko decides that his muggers force must be met with deadly force. Police officers can only use deadly force in extreme circumstances and must take extensive training in order to know how to make these judgements quickly. They don't always get it right and must endure internal investigations whenever there is a question. If they get it very wrong, they are subject to criminal prosecution. If we are to hold law enforcment officers to so high a standard, does it make sense to allow untrained citizens to make such judgements? And what if the mugger is using a gun? Does anyone believe that trying to pull a gun is going to get you anything but instantly killed? The real world doesn't work like Dirty Harry movies. And what if once does get the draw on the mugger and he runs. Do we really want the public safety to be put in jeopardy by having untrained people firing at someone running down the street? No, Alice is right. Florida's new law is the empitome of stupidity, notwisthstanding any Second Amendment questions.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:26 AM :
Sky, be careful. You're guilty of sophistry. All of your rhetoric about who you are or about who you think I am matters little to the question we were discussing.

Do states with more traditional hand gun laws have safer citizens on the streets?

The example I used was fewer muggings. If you will review this thread you will notice it was YOU who made reference to the death penalty:

You wrote: "If Texas and Arizona are such "safe places" why do they execute more people for capital crimes than just about any other state?"

Now you're guilty of straw man arguments! My assertion is that states with more traditional hand gun laws have safer citizens on the streets - NOT that violent crime is reduced across the board. The direct cause and effect link, one can reasonable draw with supportable evidence is to street crimes - not to all crime. Pay attention.

My conclusion is predicated on data I researched while preparing a paper on this subject about 7 years ago. I'll try and dig it up this weekend if I have the time. If my memory serves me right, the FBI keeps pretty good statistics about these types of crimes. You can start there if you don't want to wait until after the weekend. Guns laws have changed in the last seven years, but I know from recent experience it is still legal to carry a gun, on your hip in AZ.

Casual Observer Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:30 AM :
Why is it that Codewolf only reprimands the conservatives when they resort to preschool behavior and call names?

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:33 AM :
Because codewolf is a liberal. He only defends his kind. Sky can call people all the names he likes, but if Patriot or NeoCon uses profanity or name calling, I've seen him come in and play referee. I would expect the same unfair treatment of liberals at a right wing nut job conservative site.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:51 AM :
I've just finished getting ready. Got 30 minutes till I leave for the doctor. Let me get started here.

I have on occasion complained to Codewolf about things I thought were very rude (being called a cunt on two occasions). Codewolf did nothing about it. All he said was "try to ignore it".

Sky, you can plant the tree in my name. I'm more the rock garden type. I've never been big on trees.

Jeff, on to you. Is it morally wrong. No. Why do I feel this way? I suppose it's because I don't feel that every life is precious, nor do I believe in a soul. I imagine if I followed any religion, I might feel differently about taking a life. But ask a person that believes in a deity and you might get quite a different answer. Then again, I suppose it depends upon the deity.

I suppose it really is relative. No matter what person you ask, you'll get a different answer, with a different reason to back it up. Who's right. Well, I suppose everyone is, in their own mind. Now, when you have a majority opinion one way or the othe, and a law is mader, an individuals interpretation becomes meaningless, as there is now a law that says one act or the other is a crime. It seems that the government believes that killing another human is ok, depending on the circumstance. I see quite a bit of inconsitancy. Especially now. You hear much about this "culture of life", yet we have a death penalty. Does this mean one life is more valuable than others? Some would have you think so.

Do I have the ultimate answer to all these things? Nope. I'm just a regular gal. I'm not omniscient. I wish I was.

alice Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 12:58 AM :
Jeff, why don't you ask another person here on the board. I'm sure Sky could make a much more cogent argument than I. Try Surfer, he's good with philosophy. Or Golly, he'll just ask you about boobies.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 1:11 PM :
Alice thank you for your honest answer. As for hoping Sky can respond with something besides red herrings, sophistry and strawman arguments.....I won't hold my breath.

I saw the thread where you got called a cunt! Codewolf gave the offending party a warning. I guess Sky is special. Like shortbus special. LOL!!

NOT_Socket7 Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 1:42 PM :
Sky needs a hug.

Golly Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 1:58 PM :
Well Alice. I am offended. True, I consider myself a connoisseur of the jigglies but Golly is misunderstood. There is a deep, sensitive side to Golly. Golly apologizes when he pinches the milky mammaries too hard. Golly often catches himself working the bossoms like a boxer works a punching bad. He quits. Golly has not laid a hicky on these M&M's for years. Oh yes, there is a deep side to Golly nobody has bothered to uncover. Now...give me my porn and...Hello Jeff!!

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:09 PM :
Can't believe this one is still going!

Jeff and Casual Observer, I noticed that Jeff started throwing "terms of endearment" around: moron, asswhipe, fucktard, fucking analytical dumbass, to name a few. I have not observed codewolf posting reprimands! Not his style at all... He has asked me politely to calm down with posting gay stuff. I have no idea what you base your claim of unfair treatment on!

Golly Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:14 PM :
Aha, Jeff is Codewolf. Angela is Clara's Mom and Golly used to be Casual Observer but took too long to type. Golly really should be called "Ug." Much shorter. Have fun without me. Gone until Wednesday.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:20 PM :
Have fun Golly!

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:21 PM :
Yeah....I was having a bad day yesterday. I let Sky drag me down to his level of arrogant preschooler. My apologies for the outburst.

My claim of unfair treatment is based on two posts actually. The one where alice was called a cunt, by "someone". And another post sometime back....I think it was one of the evolution/creation articles where Patriot called someone a ignoramous or something to that effect. Codewolf gave warnings both times. If you can find where CW has reprimanded liberals for their outbursts I'll mail you $100.

Otherwise, I think you're going to have to accept the facts Juniper. Do you honestly believe Codewolf (Andy) is a conservative?

Golly Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:26 PM :
No, no fun. Work related.

Jeff, don't let Sky drag you down in fact it is

Friday and he should be serving his Friday Joke of the week soon.

I still think Clara's Mom is hot.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:33 PM :
Oh super. Can't wait for the belly aching laughter from the king of codewolf comedy.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:33 PM :
No Jeff, I don't but he "reprimanded" me for my gay submissions ... guess I won't get $100 for that one... LOL. Hey the shit with Alice was really bad. That was an outright violation and uncalled for.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:33 PM :
'You're not the only one who has made the mistake on this thread to think that gun ownership lowers all crimes. Jeff, I am a firm believer that gun ownership increased the occurence of violent crimes... Maybe you are right and there are less muggings in Arizona and Texas, but in general they have a very high violent crime rate. I think that is a very bad trade-off. I'd rather take my chances with the random mugging than with the violent psychotic with a gun. As Sky pointed out, the police get trained and trained and trained, and for every bullet fired they have to fill out forms in triplicate etc. and your FL. loony can now just go out there with a gun and start shooting because somebody "threatened" him... Keep in mind, the real criminals can now go out there also. Mabye some KKK fellow can go and shoot blacks because they were "packing heat" as is their right as FL citizens... and what about the Muslims... you walk past the mosque and you see these arab looking types standing there with guns on their hips... they too are American citizens! What is to stop some deranged idiot from starting a shoot-out thinking they are terrorists assembling before some or the other suicide action?

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:39 PM :
Baldric, what makes you a firm believer that gun ownership increases the occurance of violent crimes?

Is this Florida law going to help the criminals, or the law abiding citizens?

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 2:55 PM :
This Florida law is going to turn law abiding citizens into criminals according the laws in other states. As to why gun ownership increases the occurance of violent crime. Simple, because the more guns there are around, the easier it is to use them, and the more they will be used. The more weapons there are, the easier it is for the violent psychopats to get access to them. Just look at the random shootings that have happened lately, they would not have happened if decent gunlaws were in place. Or are you going to deny that? You want to carry a gun, fine, but follow a course in how to handle it. Most people would probably shoot themselves anyway. The wife and I have been mugged at gunpoint in New York, one guy put a knife on her throath and the other covered me with his gun, if I had had a gun I would not have been able to use it, except to shoot them in the back when they ran away. But since they frisked me, they would have found the gun anyway, so they would have had two. Oh, and I called the police and even went to the station to fill out the statement... they made us wait for 5 hours. We went back home without filling it out, the attitude of the NY police was incredible. Later I found out a lot of people being mugged don't even bother to involve the police. You statistics might be a bit wrong.

It's how I feel about it, you feel different, as is your right.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 3:09 PM :
Whereabouts were you mugged Baldric?

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 3:14 PM :
Kips Bay area, 30th and 2nd Avenue, lived in that area for a couple of years before we were married ... 2 very well dressed boys they were. Got to run Juniper, have to finish this bloody project, don't feel like sitting here till 7:00 pm. See you guys monday maybe.

Baldric Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 3:19 PM :
Forgot to mention it, was about 10:00 PM Last thing I expected in that neighborhood I can tell you. So the whole bloody thing was unexpected and random. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 3:24 PM :
Bummer Baldric. Must have been before they build the movie theatre there. I can believe your story about the police, heard similar stories from other people. Guess they got more important things to deal with. (filling out paperwork for the bullets they have used and things like that)

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 3:44 PM :
"It's how I feel about it, you feel different, as is your right."

This illustrates the point, I was trying to make to Alice Baldric. Not necessarily about gun control, but issues in general. Yes you and I have different views on this subject, but because they are opposing, clearly one of them is right and one of them is wrong. The truth of the matter is in the evidence is it not?

The story you offer is an example of a situation where a gun or a knife would not have helped the situation. But is this good reason to argue against a law that would de-criminalize a citizen's right to fight back?

Juniper Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 4:12 PM :
Why does one opinion have to be wrong and one right? Baldric's is right for him and yours is right for you. There are a lot of issues where it's difficult to say who or what is right or wrong. Guess that is why we developed ethics and morals. If everything was clearly defined in right or wrong, life would be simple and I would be out of a job, no more psychiatric patients!

I haven't seen you provide any proof for your opinion that citizens carrying guns make the country safer. Everywhere I look I see evidence of the opposite. As Baldric said, you might be right in the mugging department, been looking for just data on that, but have not found if as of yet. I also wonder how big a percentage of crime muggings represent.

The mugging Baldric describes is pretty typical... it's completely unexpected, and profesional muggers know what they're at, they just hit, take the money and disappear. I guess he makes a good point in the uselesness of guns protecting citizens in this case. Nobody walks around 100% alert 100% of the time. And if he would have shot them in the back, what for? Maximum $100? And the other would probably have shot back at him... When you live in NYC you know better than to carry large sums of money. He probably would have missed anyway and mabye hit an innocent bystander. Nothing as difficult as hitting a person running away from you. Especially when you are not to clearheaded yourself. (being mugged is a bit upsetting) Got to go. Mabye talk to you later.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 4:43 PM :
Juniper, what is your view of morality? Did you invent your morals, or did you discover them?

Lurker Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 5:04 PM :
Why don't you start answering some of the questions these people have asked you instead of avoiding issues and asking these "metaphysical" questions about truth and morality. I have read all 132 comments here and I'm still waiting for your answers.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 5:29 PM :
Lurker, I am answering the questions. And I have questions of my own. It's all part of human communication. If you're here to participate, then ask a question of your own. Otherwise, if your expectation is to be entertained, perhaps you should make a donation to codewolf.

Jeff Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 5:46 PM :
Sky, this maybe a bit off the topic, but something you said in your post strikes a nerve with me.

You wrote: "Personally I believe that guns should be outlawed, but that is only my personal belief and do not feel that I have any right to impose my personal beliefs on others....."

Why the hell not? if your view is the right one, if your beliefs are based in truth and supported with evidence then why not 'gently' force them on others? I'm not advocating that you should be intolerant, or controlling. I'm talking about winning an argument based on facts and evidence!

In the past 20 or so years I've watched what I call the "pussification" of America.

American males are losing touch with an aspect of themselves that is distinctively male and, I would consider, extremely important and valuable. For lack of a better term I called it "the hunter/warrior" in men. We've lost the warrior trait that is built into us and, in the process, males have lost resolve, decisiveness, willingness to stand for something and suffer, experience deprivation and pay a price for something that has transcendent value.

There are precious few people, it seems to me, nowadays that are willing to put their ideology on the line and speak up for what's right and true and good, and far fewer are willing to actually put their body on the line and possibly spill their blood for what is right and true and good. To me this is a serious loss. It is a serious loss, not only in terms of male image--men losing touch with themselves--but it's a serious loss for our culture because I think--though it can be confused--it functions as a very important role in our society, in our households, our communities and the nation as a whole.

If your opinion is the right one about gun control, and you truly believe they should be outlawed, why not put both feet down on one side of the fence and take a stand?

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 5:47 PM :
I must remember to log in! That last sky post was mine.

Oh Mighty Golly, Master of Boobies and Porn Gourmand Extrodiaire, forgive you humble servant's remission of duty! I almost forgot your Friday Joke. Actually, the best joke I've heard all week was CW's Johnny joke. So I'll have to dig around in the darker recesses of my brain to see what I can remember. What will it be....

I suppose I could tell you about Jesse Jame's first train robbery. You see Jesse was a bit more than nervous, so he decided to drop into the saloon and throw back a few to calm his nerves. Well, he threw back a few too many and pretty much got himself hammered. It was hard for him to think straight and his vision was a little blurry, but at least he wasn't nervous anymore. So he boarded the train and waited until it was well out of town before he made his move. He stood up at the front of the car, wavering and dew his pistol. "All righ everbody this is a st-st-stick up," he slurred. "Juus be still a no - burp - body giss hurt. Here how iss gon work. I'm gon rape all the men an rob all the women!" I fellow half way down the isle stood up and said "Young feller, don't you mean your gonna rob all the men and rape all the women?" A rather nattily dressd young man wheeled around and said "Oh sit down and shut up, bitch! Who's robbing this train anyway!"

sky Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 6:06 PM :
Jeff, I can only answer your question with some questions, albeit rhetorical ones. I also believe that drugs should be legalize and that the war on drugs is a mult-billion-dollar boondoggle. Should I demand that drugs be legalized? Were I a woman, I'd never choose an abortion for myself. Do I then have the right to tell all women that they cannot choose abortion? I'm agnostic (not atheist), while I accpet the teachings of Jesus as a good way to live your life, I believe the Christan religion has caused more suffering through the mellenia than should be acceptable. Do I then have the right to demand that Christianity be outlawed? You see the common thread in these questions. No I do not believe that I have the right to demand others accept my will because I am not infallible. Things I used to in which I once believed strongly, I now know I was wrong about or have moderated my view (this happens as you start getting older). What if I had forced my will on others about issues I now know I was way off base about? We live in a country where the will of the majority becomes the law as long as it doesn't violate the rights of an individual. Our system of government only works if we embrace pluralism. If we reject this, as some want us to do, our system would devolve into a totalitarian state in no time. I may not agree with you, but you have a right to your opinions. I can argue with you, that's my right, but I don't have the right to make you accept my point of view.

As for the rest of your post, you will not get an argument from me. I have lived through the feminization of the American male and seen first hand how our sex has been reduced in spirit. I deliberately avoided this topic earlier in this thread and will refrain from discourse again except to recommend Sam Keen's "Fire in the Belly: On Being a Man" and, of course, the poetry of Robert Bly.

codewolf Wrote the following on 04/08/2005 6:34 PM :
Damn, do I have to defend myself in here?!

I reprimanded people only twice, and it was not a choice of liberal vs. conservative. It was only because I had received complaints and just wanted to remind people to take a breath and understand that some people are more sensitive than others here.

My personal beliefs have nothing to do with why I spoke up. I don't give a shit if you guys want to insult each other. You have to learn to grow a thick skin if you're going to argue on the internet.

That said, I value everyone's comments here and would rather not see one individual chastised to the point of not contributing to the discussion. The growing community here is what makes this site interesting to read, fun (at times) to hang out on, and brings more people into discussions. I value everyone's contributions. If I wanted this site to be a liberal haven, it would be. However, I choose to allow anyone to post anything they want. I'd say that speaking up twice in over 14,000 comments is not taking sides.

If you want to know my take on politics just read some of my posts. Although I don't consider myself a liberal, I will do my best to distance myself from the morons in the GOP that are fucking this country up, taking away our rights and changing the laws at their own whim, ignoring the slippery slope they are leading the country down. If you want to call me a liberal for disagreeing with just about everything this current administration has done, go ahead. However, I hold many beliefs that are very far from the typical liberal, often enjoying discussions with conservatives.

alice Wrote the following on 04/09/2005 08:38 AM :
Golly, I'm sorry I offended you. I suppose I knew in my heart that you had great respect for jigglies, I just didn't want to admit it to myself. Am I forgiven.

Golly Wrote the following on 04/09/2005 10:15 AM :
Yes, forgiven. Golly better now.

cjdusa Wrote the following on 02/26/2007 7:49 PM :
Here it is almost 2 years later and the law is a success.

Nony NLI Wrote the following on 02/27/2007 01:52 AM :
Is it now? Any statistics (for whatever those would be worth seeing they would have been approved by the most religious Jeb Bush)

Add a Comment !
Your Name:
Comments :

Some BB code is now supported:

Underline Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of an [u]underlined[/u] comment.

Will produce:

This is an example of an underlined comment.


Italic Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of a [i]italic[/i] comment.

Will produce:

This is an example of a italic comment.


Bold Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of a [b]bold[/b] comment.

Will produce:

This is an example of a bold comment.


URL Hyperlink Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of [url=http://www.codewolf.com]a very cool site[/url]

Will produce:

This is an example of a very cool site


Also: Line breaks will be treated as a new paragraph