Prove there's a god.
Pat

Granby, CT

#587395 Jan 13, 2013
Mylan wrote:
<quoted text>Not trying to help the fundies but... there was a time before it was possible to see an atom, so "seeing" really has nothing to do with it. NASA scientist have a saying "Just because you can't see something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist." Imagine that..
In other words your claim of IQ tests being biased is without merit if you can't point to the bias or create an IQ test you will admit is not biased. Like I said racial equality nonsense is dogma and excuse making.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#587396 Jan 13, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
so if I leave a loaded gun on the front stoop and its stolen, I shouldn't be liable???
how about dynamite, if I leave a couple of cases of TNT out in the front yard and some Middle Eastern terrorists steal it then blow up a building killing hundreds of Americans, I shouldn't be liable...at least according to you.
tell me where does personal responsibility come into play???
Front stoop? Lol, that's negligence. We're talking about a thief stealing a gun from a nightstand drawer, not a front stoop.

Ya, if you leave TNT on your front yard & it's used in a crime, you'd be partly liable. BUT if you had it in your basement, in a box & those terrorists broke in, found it & stole it, you shouldn't be liable.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#587397 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Wouldn't that be nuts?!
I can't grasp why these anti-gun freaks want to NOT blame the thief....
Show me where any one said the thief who used a stolen gun is not responsible for that crime.

Just because they say the gun owner may have some responsibility, doesn't mean they advocate letting the criminal off. Geesh, talk about your limited mind set, its binary logic for you, isn't it. Either the criminal is guilty or the gunner owner is, but it can't be both. 1 or 0.

I believe that their point is that the gun owner who didn't properly secure his firearms also has some culpability. as with everything, there are different degrees of responsibility. People who own guns have to admit that they are in possession of a deadly tool and need to take the proper precautions to secure that tool. A bat doesn't fall into that category.

I am a gun owner/collector. Its people like you, who refuse to admit that the primary purpose of a gun is to kill. That in order to own a gun, people should be required to undergo a background check. I go even further, that you should be required to take a gun safety course, at least an 8 hour course.

Tell me, do you think Adam Lanza's mother shares some cupability in what happened in Newtown Cn? She knew her son was a little off, and dangerous (according to a man who used to baby sit him ). She took him to the range and taught him to shoot. she obviously didn't secure the guns from him.
So is she completely innocent of the massacre?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#587398 Jan 13, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
was the gun locked up? as I said before, its primary purpose is to kill.
a bat's primary purpose is to strike a ball.
Dude you are seriously reaching here.
It doesn't matter what the bat or guns "primary purpose" is.

The point is that they were stolen from you & used in a crime.

It also doesn't matter if they were locked up or not, they were STOLEN from you.

Your exterior doors are locked, so YES they were locked up...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#587399 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? You know that pot is highly addictive too, doncha?
Pot addiction is dependent on the personality type, just as alcohol addiction is.

The vast majority of people who have smoked pot do not become addicted to it. Just like alcohol, the vast majority of people who drink alcohol do not become addicted to it

with cigarette smoking, its a physical addiction, independent of the personality.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#587400 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Why?
Did you force the kid to steal?
Did you help him run over people?
Did your keys seduce him?
It was foreseeable by a reasonable person.

Under those circumstances, the law places responsibility on you.

Go ahead, ignore the law.

Sometime, you'll have to face the consequences.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#587401 Jan 13, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
As far as private property, I think owners should be allowed to dictate whether patrons should be allowed to smoke or not.
For most types of businesses, it wouldn't be smart to allow smoking, but for bars, I think they would do alright to allow smoking. The business they would lose from non-smokers would probably be made up by smokers who like to drink while they smoke, and do a lot of each.
I don't know about strip clubs. That's a HARD one.
HA!

I get it...

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#587402 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I didn't say or imply that it defeated their arguments.
Why bring it up?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
All I'm saying is hypocritical it is that people who are indulging in deadly or unhealthy practices have the nerve to say that cigarettes are bad.
The nerve? The nerve to tell the truth?

My diet sucks. It is not healthy. I should improve my diet.

Your turn...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#587403 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ain't been to a concert lately, have ya?
yes I have, and its nothing like the concerts I went to in the 70's and 80's

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#587404 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that.
I don't understand why you'd favor the criminal...
I don't understand why you won't acknowledge that a burglar can steal anything in your home and use it as a weapon....
It has nothing to do with "favoring" a criminal.

You're dense today.

Hangover?

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#587405 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Front stoop? Lol, that's negligence. We're talking about a thief stealing a gun from a nightstand drawer, not a front stoop.
Ya, if you leave TNT on your front yard & it's used in a crime, you'd be partly liable. BUT if you had it in your basement, in a box & those terrorists broke in, found it & stole it, you shouldn't be liable.
back to the original subject then

If you leave your keys in the car, either in your driveway or street, and some teenager steals your car then kills someone, do you share some culpability in the death

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#587406 Jan 13, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. Teflon could be very bad for one's health ..
OK then, cast iron pot.

From Humboldt County.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#587407 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh? You know that pot is highly addictive too, doncha?
Not nearly as addictive as nicotine.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#587408 Jan 13, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It was foreseeable by a reasonable person.
Under those circumstances, the law places responsibility on you.
Go ahead, ignore the law.
Sometime, you'll have to face the consequences.
You'll have to excuse me, sometimes I forget that the law doesn't follow common sense.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#587409 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Smoking a single marijuana joint is equivalent to smoking 2.5 to 5 cigarettes in terms of damage to the lungs, mostly because of the differences in how pot and cigarette users smoke.
yes, because joints don't have filters and you hold it in. a large portion of that damage comes from the heat, so use a bong and you significant reduce the amount of damage caused by smoking pot.

“Rising”

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#587411 Jan 13, 2013
Mylan wrote:
<quoted text>HUH? I posted one example. You're talking out your azz again.

You posted 1 time? OK Cinderella whatever you say!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#587412 Jan 13, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
Show me where any one said the thief who used a stolen gun is not responsible for that crime.
Just because they say the gun owner may have some responsibility, doesn't mean they advocate letting the criminal off. Geesh, talk about your limited mind set, its binary logic for you, isn't it. Either the criminal is guilty or the gunner owner is, but it can't be both. 1 or 0.
Mylan says it all the time...
I believe that their point is that the gun owner who didn't properly secure his firearms also has some culpability. as with everything, there are different degrees of responsibility. People who own guns have to admit that they are in possession of a deadly tool and need to take the proper precautions to secure that tool. A bat doesn't fall into that category.
I have a gun leaning behind my bedroom door. I keep it there for home security. IF a burglar steals it, that's not my fault. He broke the law by breaking into my home, I'm not breaking the law by not having my gun locked up.

What good does a locked up gun do in time of emergency?
I am a gun owner/collector. Its people like you, who refuse to admit that the primary purpose of a gun is to kill. That in order to own a gun, people should be required to undergo a background check. I go even further, that you should be required to take a gun safety course, at least an 8 hour course.
Nice assumption. I'm all for gun registry & background checks. CA has a ten day wait period to buy a gun, I'm all for it!
Tell me, do you think Adam Lanza's mother shares some cupability in what happened in Newtown Cn? She knew her son was a little off, and dangerous (according to a man who used to baby sit him ). She took him to the range and taught him to shoot. she obviously didn't secure the guns from him.


Did she know he was "off" and "dangerous"? I haven't read that anywhere.
So is she completely innocent of the massacre?
Yes. Her guns were stolen from her. It doesn't matter that it was her son or a total stranger, they were still stolen.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#587413 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Huh? You know that pot is highly addictive too, doncha?
As far as I can tell, it's about the same as caffeine, maybe less.

Nicotine is right up there with opiates.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#587414 Jan 13, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You'll have to excuse me, sometimes I forget that the law doesn't follow common sense.
From where I sit, it looks different.

It's people who don't use common sense and get themselves in trouble with the law.

Then they appreciate those lawyers they hate so much.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#587415 Jan 13, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
Why bring it up?
It's fun to expose hypocrisy.
The nerve? The nerve to tell the truth?
No, the nerve to be so outright hypocritical.
My diet sucks. It is not healthy. I should improve my diet.
Your turn...
My diet is great. I'm fit.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min karl44 600,247
Poll Are Mexicans Taking Over America (May '13) 9 min Johnny 5
Pakistani cuckold needs help!!! (Dec '13) 23 min Paki Cuck 5
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 37 min who 272,470
The Christian Atheist debate 43 min ChristineM 2,137
Best Health Insurance in India 1 hr crizjohn 1
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 2 hr MUQ2 40,926
Sleeping with mother (Oct '13) 4 hr imr 48
White Lives MATTER 5 hr Johnny 133
More from around the web