Bad news for the AWB supporters

[Peikko 1,575]

We? Ah yes, the king in his castle and the use of the Royal We

Carry on with the gun debate, that was fun though, thanks Shooter.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'd use "we" too if I had as many split personalities as Shooter seems to.

[Danno 1,228]

I'd use "we" too if I had as many split personalities as Shooter seems to.

Says Private Pike... or is it Paul Daniels?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'd use "we" too if I had as many split personalities as Shooter seems to.

Says Private Pike... or is it Paul Daniels?

You need some better comebacks.

[natty bumppo 297]

I'd use "we" too if I had as many split personalities as Shooter seems to.

Says Private Pike... or is it Paul Daniels?

You need some better comebacks.

the shoe must have fit ...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'd use "we" too if I had as many split personalities as Shooter seems to.

Says Private Pike... or is it Paul Daniels?

You need some better comebacks.

the shoe must have fit ...

In the sense that a shoe is indistinguishable from a hat - sure.

[natty bumppo 297]

I'd use "we" too if I had as many split personalities as Shooter seems to.

Says Private Pike... or is it Paul Daniels?

You need some better comebacks.

the shoe must have fit ...

In the sense that a shoe is indistinguishable from a hat - sure.

your hat also has stinky stuff on the bottom?

[Peikko 1,575]

Guess someone can't distinguish linear from parallel. Really there are an awful lot of poor mathematicians in class today.

[natty bumppo 297]

Guess someone can't distinguish linear from parallel. Really there are an awful lot of poor mathematicians in class today.

you going to share that bottle or keep it all to yourself?

back to topic ....

Edited April 1, 2009 by Natty Bumppo

[Peikko 1,575]

Changing avatars = linear

Multiple personalities = parallel.

Edited April 1, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[*Robert* 2]

Since this topic has to do with the 2nd amendment, I wonder if we can't steer it back to the original topic. The points made about the 2^nd amendment and the Constitution as to how it applies today, as opposed to when it was written, makes no difference. The writers of the Constitution were very wise beyond their years, and the Constitution still applies under today’s technology, as it did then. I would really like to see the debate turn towards “inalienable rights”, which under the Constitution, cannot (and should not) be taken away, even if convicted of a felony or a violent crime, as there is nothing in the Constitution that allows for that. If a person has served their time, and is released back into society, then they should continue to have the same rights as any other citizen, or they shouldn’t be back out on the streets. By being incarcerated, their rights are merely suspended due to the circumstance. The real reform needs to be with our prisons and criminal system, so that the penalties for committing violent crimes are more severe and more deterrent. The “three strike rule” is preposterous, and should be changed to “any repeat offender”, as they have already clearly demonstrated a lack of regard for our laws.

Thoughts?

[stangguy 0]

Stangguy - can you even tell the difference between politics and academia?

Sure,

Academia- a bunch of stuck up suits that live in an ivory tower and use numbers, theories, etc. to justify their beliefs.

Politics- a bunch of stuck up suits that live in an ivory tower but claim to be "regular" people in order to justify their beliefs.

But it in all seriousness in this situation it is irrelevant because the actions undertaken by John Lott regarding the fake persona were political in nature. While he may have committed academic fraud in the instance of the "missing" survey, posing as a different person to praise his own work for political and economic reasons is not academic fraud.

[natty bumppo 297]

Changing avatars = Multiple personalities

so you can easily be someone you aren't or want to become while being the original self

now back to topic ....

Edited April 1, 2009 by Natty Bumppo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Stangguy - can you even tell the difference between politics and academia?

Sure,

Academia- a bunch of stuck up suits that live in an ivory tower and use numbers, theories, etc. to justify their beliefs.

Politics- a bunch of stuck up suits that live in an ivory tower but claim to be "regular" people in order to justify their beliefs.

But it in all seriousness in this situation it is irrelevant because the actions undertaken by John Lott regarding the fake persona were political in nature. While he may have committed academic fraud in the instance of the "missing" survey, posing as a different person to praise his own work for political and economic reasons is not academic fraud.

Its only irrelevant if you think that the fake persona is more damning than the missing survey.

Changing avatars = Multiple personalities

so you can easily be someone you aren't or want to become while being the original self

Erm No. Not really.

[natty bumppo 297]

Since this topic has to do with the 2nd amendment, I wonder if we can't steer it back to the original topic. The points made about the 2^nd amendment and the Constitution as to how it applies today, as opposed to when it was written, makes no difference. The writers of the Constitution were very wise beyond their years, and the Constitution still applies under today’s technology, as it did then. I would really like to see the debate turn towards “inalienable rights”, which under the Constitution, cannot (and should not) be taken away, even if convicted of a felony or a violent crime, as there is nothing in the Constitution that allows for that. If a person has served their time, and is released back into society, then they should continue to have the same rights as any other citizen, or they shouldn’t be back out on the streets. By being incarcerated, their rights are merely suspended due to the circumstance. The real reform needs to be with our prisons and criminal system, so that the penalties for committing violent crimes are more severe and more deterrent. The “three strike rule” is preposterous, and should be changed to “any repeat offender”, as they have already clearly demonstrated a lack of regard for our laws.

Thoughts?

what other rights are taken due to incarceration? 1st? 4th? 9th?