Why do the liberal Democrats want to take guns away from Americans? page 227

5861 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

you would be all for legalizing drug use. Everything about you goes against anything society accepts.

Jhco, if drugs are legalised, it is in part because they have become accepted by society. Not your society, certainly. But mainstream American society.

Society changes. It is a living thing, and never stays in the same state for long. You have to move with the times or get left behind.

Fact is, legalising drugs and then regulating them, makes it far easier to control them than making them illegal. Why? Well because it is no-longer an automatic criminal offense to be in possession of the drug, so it makes it easier for those with dependency problems to come forwards and get help. Additionally, since the drugs are legal, we can control their purity and bring the price down. If it no-longer costs a hundred bucks to get high for a week (guessing here as I don’t use them) and instead costs $15, then the incentive to steal to get your next fix is all but history.

That wipes out the druggies breaking into your house to steal your stuff in one fell swoop. Crime rates in general drop, as there is no-longer this need for huge sums to support a habit, and getting off that habit is much easier than ever before.

 
Flag Post

In the Netherlands the number of most hard drug addicts have fallen so hard that now we are dealing with an ageing addict population. It’s no longer profitable for dealers to deal in heroine but there are some old people who are no longer able to get enough money to afford it and can’t kick the habit because they are to old. (they are 60+ but their bodies are 20-30 years old because of the drugs). Legalising weed creates a two fold barrier. So while a large part of the population tries weed a smaller part of the population will go on to try hard drugs.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

My post was clear…

Yes…abundantly so. YOU did a fine job of showing how absurd some ideology can be.

…. so I’m guessing you just wanted to toss some insults my way.
Nah…any comments ASSUMED BY YOU to be “insults” are given in an effort (as proof?) that YOUR point is actually very “dull”.

You really are a poor excuse for a human being, but who am I to judge you. :)

LOL….and YOU “wonder” why many of yer posts are deleted. AND, I find it hugely comical how YOU like to see ME as being angry and afraid. Yet, I don’t need to stoop to ad homenims…tsk..tsk..tsk.

Let’s just say, you wouldn’t be drinking coffee with my bunch, they wouldn’t put up with your BS.

Oh, jake-o….you silly boy. What makes YOU think I’m not already one of ’em? I could be a “mole” for the “lefties”. BUT, seriously,,,,tell me, just why in the world would I even consider talking w/ your “coffee bunch”…..other than to ask the “Gay guy” if he knows exactly what YOU think of HIM?

It only fits your profile that you would be all for legalizing drug use.

LOL…..NOW, ya’re a “profiler”. AND, ya can do it via the Internet. Folks, it’s “Tin-Foil-Hat” time on SD…..AGAIN.

Everything about you goes against anything society accepts.

Discounting the hyperbole…ya couldn’t be more wrong,,,,well, more wrong than usual about me. I’m all about finding solutions that can actualize exactly what society wants//accepts. YOU, on the other hand, are the one who endeavors to rancid levels to thwart these desires……EVEN WHEN IT HARMS//HURTS your fellow Americans…..even when it is being done UNCONSTITUTIONALLY.
Originally posted by thijser:

In the Netherlands the number of most hard drug addicts have fallen so hard that now we are dealing with an aging addict population. It’s no longer profitable for dealers to deal in heroine but there are some old people who are no longer able to get enough money to afford it and can’t kick the habit because they are to old. (they are 60+ but their bodies are 20-30 years old { OLDER? } because of the drugs). Legalising weed creates a two fold barrier. So while a large part of the population tries weed a smaller part of the population will go on to try hard drugs.

It’s no longer profitable for dealers
THAT is a huge part of my point for legalization.
The legal cost is lower, the “tax” money pays for the regulation and the “fallout” (bad) use.
Money isn’t going to support the criminal world.
Does anyone really not understand what happened to America during (alcohol) prohibition?

 
Flag Post

I have to say thijser, if the Netherlands has created an opioid wonder-drug that halves your biological age, and restores your health overall health, I’m all for it. Could you pass some over here, please?

 
Flag Post
Oh, jake-o….you silly boy. What makes YOU think I’m not already one of ’em? I could be a “mole” for the “lefties”. BUT, seriously,,,,tell me, just why in the world would I even consider talking w/ your “coffee bunch”…..other than to ask the “Gay guy” if he knows exactly what YOU think of HIM?

Thank you for the boy in your response. I just turned a year older and that made me feel better. :) Well you can’t be my gay friend as he doesn’t come anymore. He was also an alcoholic and it has caught up with him. He’s not doing well anymore. I stopped by to see him awhile back and he was really looking bad. Sad, but he made his choice. If you were a mole you would have to be the restaurant owner or the teacher. The owner is republican and the teacher is a democrat. You must be the teacher. lol.

 
Flag Post

I meant to say older. So their bodies are 80-90.
Oh and 1000th post.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

I have to say thijser, if the Netherlands has created an opioid wonder-drug that halves your biological age, and restores your health overall health, I’m all for it. Could you pass some over here, please?

Hell, send me a boatload of it. I’ll be both a hero and rich. lol
Originally posted by thijser:
Oh and 1000th post.

Congrats….
your gold-engraved certificate and one-size-fits-all sombrero w/ appropriate SD logo will soon arrive in the mail.

 
Flag Post

I wonder…if this passes will they want cocaine, or heroin next? I would assume from watching these types of end runs many times the answer would be yes. I really doubt the public will be duped by this taxing and regulation BS the proponents are pushing.

Jhco, heroin and cocaine have been used for medical purposes virtually since their discovery. They are very effective pain killers and have always been used, and likely always will be used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cocaine_analogues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid

Ever been to the dentist you’ve probably had Lidocain injected.

Heroin is unlikely to ever be made legal. It causes too many temporary and permanent health and cognition issues. It is much more damaging than ethanol ever was. At best we might see a regulation status of the drug whereby alternatives to street heroin are refined for those poor sods whose continued health relies on continually taking it.

Vika, Do you have any scholarly citations for permanent damage caused by pure heroin use? Drug facts is garbage, and purposefully mixes the risks of intravenous drug use in to misrepresent the danger and does not cite any studies. I’m sure medical grade Morphine comes with similar warnings that it will cause HIV yes?

We already do use Heroin legally, it is just a question of semantics. Heroin is converted in the body into Morphine, that is where it’s effect comes from. Heroin, morphine, and the entire Opiod family which is used nigh continually throughout the first world medical culture all have very, very, little to separate them. Direct heroin analogues are still even in use medically.

Jhco,
bq. So, let me see if I can connect these arguments. Some want to regulate firearms to the point homeowners don’t have them when they need them. Criminals don’t deserved to be killed just because they are in your house illegally and threatening to you family, and drugs should be legal for recreational use.

I have no problem with shooting home intruders. Nowhere did I make such an argument. I will restate my question for you Jhco. I would appreciate an answer. Should we be individually judging people, or allowing some form of that, to assess their danger to society? This is of equal relevance to both drugs and guns, and if you fail to see how the Direct Intervention Of State Control To Forbid You Things On The Presumption They Will Be Dangerous is of consideration to both then you are just being stubborn.

 
Flag Post

Ung

Certainly. Morphine is a very dangerous substance to take, and the side effects are the same. When it is given clinically, the patient is placed under 24h supervision, because of the risk of respitory failure, particularly with higher doses. Heroin users self-administer whatever they like. Which is a huge problem.

Example of the problem and a basic drug overview, looks correct certainly.

Suppressed resperation if untreated causes oxygen depravation in the brain, which itself leads to all sorts of nasty problems.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

I wonder…if this passes will they want cocaine, or heroin next? I would assume from watching these types of end runs many times the answer would be yes. I really doubt the public will be duped by this taxing and regulation BS the proponents are pushing.

Jhco, heroin and cocaine have been used for medical purposes virtually since their discovery. They are very effective pain killers and have always been used, and likely always will be used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cocaine_analogues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid

Ever been to the dentist you’ve probably had Lidocain injected.

I don’t think you understand exactly what happened with medical marijuana. It is a state by state decision, not federal. When we passed this law, it was up to the state to set up how the law would work. State representatives had the job of figuring out regulations, licenses, etc. Pot is dispensed through storefronts just like drugstores. Some of the problems are burglaries and armed robberies becoming common with these businesses. This is why I stated earlier the problems with making drugs legal. If someone who takes drugs need a fix, they are going to get one any way they can. Everything works in stages. It starts small and then grows larger until there is no more control. Drugs will work the same way unless we stop it.

It is the same thing with gun control. We allow one infringement and the anti-gun people run at it like we approve of everything they want…in steps. We screwed up when we allowed government to pass the 1934 legislation regulating machine guns and sawed off shotguns. Gun owners could see nothing wrong with controlling those items since the mob was well known for using them. Step by step, infringement on the 2nd Amendment began to progress. In 1968 the congress pushed through the 1968 gun control act and we woke up.

The NRA was originally an organization started by a retired Marine Officer to instuct men and Boy Scouts the proper methods for shooting. It was a club of people dedicated to the shooting sports and those who enjoyed hunting and competition. In the 60s there was a change in the direction of the organization. Members realized that unless there was someone with enough power to fight for our 2nd Amendment we would soon lose it and our Constitutional rights, all of them. The leadership of the NRA redirected their efforts to protecting the 2nd Amendment with full member support. Since then it has grown to over 4 million (it varies from time to time) members. Other groups have joined the fight. Groups like the Second Amendment Foundation, Gunowners of America, the Pink Pistols of California, and various state organizations.

You may not realize this, but our government only goes so far with their desires to control all of America because of our right to own firearms. They will push as far as they can and then pull back. You have to remember, there are over 350 million firearms in the hands of the citizens. American citizens are a literal army, much larger than our country’s standing army. I have heard some say we wouldn’t have a chance fighting our own government, but I disagree. We have the numbers on our side, not to mention the army will probably come down on the citizens side. High tec arms would be gathered as the citizen army advances. So as you can see it is possible to stop a tyranny and that is the basis for the 2nd Amendment. The American people will only take so much.

Gun owners are aware of what can happen if we let our guard down and allow those who are not willing to protect our freedoms to legislate our firearms away. This is why we fight tooth and nail for our Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Pot is dispensed through storefronts just like drugstores.

Not exactly. If you think of a store like CVS pharmacy, people are able to freely walk in and get over the counter medication, as well as bring their Rx prescription to the pharmacist to fill. My friend was on medicinal MJ and he said even getting in the store was a little restrictive; since MJ was all they sold, they wouldn’t let someone without a medical MJ letter in.

Some of the problems are burglaries and armed robberies becoming common with these businesses. This is why I stated earlier the problems with making drugs legal. If someone who takes drugs need a fix, they are going to get one any way they can.

I would really think that it would work the same with stores such as CVS and Walgreen; they have controlled substances such as Vicodin and Percocet in their stash, but no one is talking about closing them down. It just seems strange to deny someone with a legitimate medical need—not to mention a doctor’s note—medical MJ just because once some teenagers broke into a medical MJ store. Besides, if that gets to be a big enough problem, I’m sure the stores will respond with increased measures like security cameras and alarm systems, if they haven’t already.

Everything works in stages. It starts small and then grows larger until there is no more control. Drugs will work the same way unless we stop it.

Isn’t this a slippery slope argument?

 
Flag Post

It’s not a slippery slope argument Twilight, this is exactly how things like this work. You can’t tell me you have never noticed how these things work.

 
Flag Post

Vika,

Certainly. Morphine is a very dangerous substance to take, and the side effects are the same. When it is given clinically, the patient is placed under 24h supervision, because of the risk of respitory failure, particularly with higher doses. Heroin users self-administer whatever they like. Which is a huge problem.

Yes there is a danger of overdose resulting in death, but that does not exactly constitute long term damage. Your first link also suggests that there is nothing beyond symptoms of dosage and potential addiction, and that abstinence is a solution for any problems.

Although, to be fair. I have seen some studies suggesting that the cardiovascular effects, especially in combination with the peristalsis, has been suggested to lead to potential intestinal problems. Also that it seems to have an inhibiting effect on the immune system, which if sustained over a duration can be a problem. Lastly, that the cardiovascular effects can have some lung tissue effects. But all of these are predicated under the assumption of very sustained periods of exposure and are not fully realized by data to my understanding.

There is a knee jerk reaction to assume all illicit drugs immediately cause long term irreparable harm. “Brain Damage” often being cited. These are fallacies that are perpetuated against no shortage of knowledge, they are simple propaganda statements deliberately misrepresenting issues.

Suppressed resperation if untreated causes oxygen depravation in the brain, which itself leads to all sorts of nasty problems.

Would we both agree that such a dosage would constitute an overdose? Again it is not any particular toxicity of the drug.

Jhco,

I don’t think you understand exactly what happened with medical marijuana. It is a state by state decision, not federal. When we passed this law, it was up to the state to set up how the law would work. State representatives had the job of figuring out regulations, licenses, etc. Pot is dispensed through storefronts just like drugstores. Some of the problems are burglaries and armed robberies becoming common with these businesses. This is why I stated earlier the problems with making drugs legal. If someone who takes drugs need a fix, they are going to get one any way they can. Everything works in stages. It starts small and then grows larger until there is no more control. Drugs will work the same way unless we stop it.

Except it is not really State by State as the Federal Law refuses to be superseded. There are Federal Raids on State operated Grow Ops. No one needs Marijuana as a “fix”, you need to brush up on the topic at hand if this is going to be a serious conversation. There is no proven Physical Addiction to marijuana use. Drugs never started small. Drugs have been a part of every cultural bastion. Cocaine and Heroin both predate the United States by a fair margin. Do you really think State control is in the least effective? Do you feel you have the moral authority to “stop it”? Again, what gives you the self righteous authority to control me through force? You refuse to recognize the possibility of individuals, let along of superseding individual rights.

It is the same thing with gun control. We allow one infringement and the anti-gun people run at it like we approve of everything they want…in steps. We screwed up when we allowed government to pass the 1934 legislation regulating machine guns and sawed off shotguns. Gun owners could see nothing wrong with controlling those items since the mob was well known for using them. Step by step, infringement on the 2nd Amendment began to progress. In 1968 the congress pushed through the 1968 gun control act and we woke up.

Those steps read pretty far apart to me. But really, I agree with you that things will happen incrementally. That is just gradual change. Would you prefer/expect for radical shifts in policy overnight? Any change, good/bad, what have you, especially in a democratic country, will likely be one of slow drift.

Members realized that unless there was someone with enough power to fight for our 2nd Amendment we would soon lose it and our Constitutional rights, all of them.

Jhco, there are plenty of countries with different gun rights and very similar rights outside of it. I don’t think guaranteeing the rights of a people through possession of arms is outrightly a bad idea. But let us pretend that it is the only manner to do things.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

Yes there is a danger of overdose resulting in death, but that does not exactly constitute long term damage. Your first link also suggests that there is nothing beyond symptoms of dosage and potential addiction

Its not overdosage, it’s regular dosage. Whenever you have to resort to morphine you experience the same problems. It is extremely difficult to regulate the dosage for each individual. That’s why its always done under the supervision of critical care.

Self-injectors don’t have that level of care, which is why brain damage occurs. The respitory system is suppressed, which lowers blood oxygen levels. As such thinking is immediately impaired beyond simple receptor-binding because oxygen is at a premium.

Would we both agree that such a dosage would constitute an overdose? Again it is not any particular toxicity of the drug.

No, we might have to agree to disagree. The drug is inherently harmful to the functioning of the lung system. It will cause reduced capability even on low doses. Long-term exposure to mid to high levels, without touching overdose levels, will cause long term problems with respiration. Blood oxygen levels remain critically low for too long, and hypoxemia sets in. Over extended usage, this will cause tissue degredation throughout the body, including most critically to the brain. Memory retrieval in particular, which is a notably complex process, will be impaired, as will problem solving abilities for the same reason.

If use carries on for extended periods of time without compensating by forcing pressurised oxygen down the throat, tissue damage becomes permanent. Self-users are not known for their tendency to regularly use nebulizers. This is where the problem really comes to the fore.

Unless you compensate medically for the effects on oxygen intake, you will see damage over time, to the brain in particular.

 
Flag Post

Self-injectors don’t have that level of care, which is why brain damage occurs. The respitory system is suppressed, which lowers blood oxygen levels. As such thinking is immediately impaired beyond simple receptor-binding because oxygen is at a premium.

The suggestion of the respitory system becoming so suppressed as to induce hypoxia is new to me. But is the natural extension of an overdose causing total respitory failure. What about conscious compensation? There has to be some marriage of dosage levels with it’s physical and mental effects and the wherewithal of the subject. I am not certain that typical recreational dosages incur the level of effect you are inferring. I haven’t heard of traditional indicators of low blood oxygen levels being observed in users either. Somewhere like a Methadone clinic would be a locus point for such no? It’s also symptomatic of other opiates, which are metabolized into morphine, and are relatively freely proscribed and self administered. Codeine perhaps being the most frequent.

Hrm, well looking further into it I dug up some studies. You certainly seem to be on to something. Very neat. Still not sure about the exact fit.
http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~grant/93.pdf
http://www.carefusion.com/pdf/Center_for_Safety/InvitedConferences/Pain_Management_and_PCA_Proceedings.pdf
(puts the number for Self Administering Patients (in ICU) inducing Opiate Respitory Depression at about 20-30%)

Curious about how comparative dosage levels stack up. Although tolerance build up can be massive for either party, I imagine without a real wide data set it would be all over the map.

 
Flag Post

I’m not a proponent of legalization for all “recreational” drugs.
Pot is the main one I’m pushing.
I see it as being far superior to booze.

NARCOTICES certainly isn’t something I’d want in the hands of SOME of the ppl I know.

“Though narcotics is a term thrown around referring drugs in general, it actually refers to drugs that are derived from opium which originates from the opium poppy plant, and is related to heroin, morphine, and other drugs common to opiate addiction. The confusion between the generic vs. specific terminology has gotten so bad, some experts have turned to calling narcotics “opioids” to help stifle the confusion."

“Common types of narcotics include barbiturates, benzodiazepines, heroin, opium in the form of morphine and codeine, oxycodone and Vicodin.”

“Narcotic drugs can affect the body in various ways. There are of course legitimate uses for them, like treating pain, anxiety, aggression and even diarrhea. However, they are highly addictive and what starts out as a prescribed medication can often turn into an illegal situation of prescription pill abuse.”

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

The suggestion of the respitory system becoming so suppressed as to induce hypoxia is new to me. But is the natural extension of an overdose causing total respitory failure. What about conscious compensation?

The problem is the user’s brain is affected when their levels are low, and so they are not in the best position to determine when they require an oxygen boost.

Curious about how comparative dosage levels stack up. Although tolerance build up can be massive for either party, I imagine without a real wide data set it would be all over the map.

Tolerance and addiction are equally problematic.

It’s also symptomatic of other opiates, which are metabolized into morphine, and are relatively freely proscribed and self administered. Codeine perhaps being the most frequent.

The problem here is one of over-simplification. Whilst all opiates have a similar molecular form, the individual differences translates to a different range of receptor bonds for each compound. As such different side effects are noted. For example, Tramadol will likely induce hemorhaging if an overdose of just 600mg is taken. 800mg or more, and you are definitely going to rupture some of the weaker blood vessels.

It is still an opiate, but the effects do vary.

 
Flag Post

Why are you people discussing drugs in a gun-control thread? Go start your own thread.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

Jhco,

Those steps read pretty far apart to me. But really, I agree with you that things will happen incrementally. That is just gradual change. Would you prefer/expect for radical shifts in policy overnight? Any change, good/bad, what have you, especially in a democratic country, will likely be one of slow drift.

Members realized that unless there was someone with enough power to fight for our 2nd Amendment we would soon lose it and our Constitutional rights, all of them.

Jhco, there are plenty of countries with different gun rights and very similar rights outside of it. I don’t think guaranteeing the rights of a people through possession of arms is outrightly a bad idea. But let us pretend that it is the only manner to do things.

Yes, there are plenty of countries with different rights and many of them don’t have the guarantees we have. And in many cases there government can change their countries documents quite a bit easier than our politicians can. This changes the definition of rights to privileges. Privileges can be given or taken at a whim.

Our politicians want control and they are gaining on us. A good example would be the ID chips required by students at one of the schools there. It is a pilot program to ingrain the idea for being monitored as normal. Parents were not notified of this and the students hve been intimidated into wearing these chipped badges, One little girl (an honor student) has gone against the school system and they are threatening to expel her, etc. She and her family are going to court on it. They are required to take them home at night. government control in it’s infancy.

So Ungeziefer, how many countries can you name that have the possession of arms without government red tape, if they are allowed to even have them.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Why are you people discussing drugs in a gun-control thread? Go start your own thread.

Soooooo much like YOU to say this…..when YOU aren’t getting YOUR way and everyone isn’t paying attention to YOU and isn’t talking about what YOU want and WHEN ya want ….etc., etc., etc.
Originally posted by jhco50:

I don’t think you understand exactly what happened with medical marijuana. It is a state by state decision, not federal. When we passed this law, it was up to the state to set up how the law would work. State representatives had the job of figuring out regulations, licenses, etc. Pot is dispensed through storefronts just like drugstores. Some of the problems are burglaries and armed robberies becoming common with these businesses. This is why I stated earlier the problems with making drugs legal. If someone who takes drugs need a fix, they are going to get one any way they can. Everything works in stages. It starts small and then grows larger until there is no more control. Drugs will work the same way unless we stop it.

jake-o, after 227 pages of “gun talk”….the topic is ABSOLUTELY BOUND to “stray” into other “loosely related” areas. It’s either that or we all take our clothes off and play twister.

 
Flag Post

Well, start another thread. You always wanted to start one that would go long term. This is your chance. Mine don’t go far either. :(

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Well, start another thread. You always wanted to start one that would go long term. This is your chance. Mine don’t go far either. :(

Allow me to rephrase, then: I suggest that YOU abstain from participation in a manner that YOU very soon deride others for also doing….all because YOU have lost interest OR (more likely) have lost your “footing” in the discussion.
 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Jhco,

So Ungeziefer, how many countries can you name that have the possession of arms without government red tape, if they are allowed to even have them.

None that I consider exemplary places off hand. I am not sure the total absence of red tape is even a good idea. It was a while back last time I said this, but I think the US’s real problem is with a culture of violence. The gun control laws, more or less, are beside the issue to the crime rate and will only ever have a superficial effect. With power comes responsibility, I am not sure if the US population (as a whole) is yet ready for the laws they have given themselves.

But, you did not address my question before Jhco, and it is one I am serious about. I truly feel the comparison is fair. Why is the blanket assumption that you will be a danger to yourself or others, not a valid reason to deny you firearms?

Also as a second. What would you see as an ideal level of gun control? Assume you could write the laws of the land, since you’re a super-wizard now. Any registration? Paper trail, identity and the like? Any limits on fire power? Small arms,long arms, automatic, explosive, vehicular, ect. Bombs? What do you see as the pro’s of your system, what would be the cons?

Well, start another thread. You always wanted to start one that would go long term. This is your chance. Mine don’t go far either. :(

To be honest I consider this thread to pretty much be your stomping grounds. One of the reasons I was interested in discussing it here was to maintain you as a participant.

Karma,

Soooooo much like YOU to say this…..when YOU aren’t getting YOUR way and everyone isn’t paying attention to YOU and isn’t talking about what YOU want and WHEN ya want

Come on now, when he is right he is right. We were pushing decorum with a side discussion. I’m pleased that everyone put up with it long enough.

Darear,

Why are you such a hate filled, obnoxious man?

Some of us tend to get pretty salty within banter. But you don’t even make a point in your post. Try to be polite, and at least participating.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

Karma,

Soooooo much like YOU to say this…..when YOU aren’t getting YOUR way and everyone isn’t paying attention to YOU and isn’t talking about what YOU want and WHEN ya want

Come on now, when he is right he is right. We were pushing decorum with a side discussion. I’m pleased that everyone put up with it long enough.

I challenge that w/:

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

jake-o, after 227 pages of “gun talk”….the topic is ABSOLUTELY BOUND to “stray” into other “loosely related” areas. It’s either that or we all take our clothes off and play twister.

AND,,,in particular:

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by jhco50:

Well, start another thread. You always wanted to start one that would go long term. This is your chance. Mine don’t go far either. :(

Allow me to rephrase, then: I suggest that YOU abstain from participation in a manner that YOU very soon deride others for also doing….all because YOU have lost interest OR (more likely) have lost your “footing” in the discussion.

So, from MY perspective….I don’t see him as being very “right” at all.