5,460 Forum Posts by "HighlyIllogical"
It makes smoking inconvenient, so perhaps you cause less people to smoke that way. Of course, that's the best case. In the not as good case, but still quite good, there's less secondhand smoke, and secondhand smoke is damaging: "Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke," for one (http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O 0E&b=35422).
Anyone ever seen "Dr. Strangelove: Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb?"
I just watched it last night. It's absolutely shockingly hilarious. In a morbid way.
Totally worth seeing!
2.5 years? That's a pettance!
You can call that felony aggravated sexual battery.
That should guarantee at least 10 years, no?
Student was outside.
Done.
The student should have won the case on those grounds alone. Kids have the same rights under the first amendment as those who have reached the age of majority, but only outside school.
At 6/24/07 08:24 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:
It listed two things, and at the end said both are required by that amendment.
No. It says that arms can be posessed when you're a member of the ORGANIZED militia.
Therefore, by increasing gun control which targets LAW ABIDING citizens
Gun control is best when it comes before purchase. Restricting weapon sales is the primary goal.
Seriously, you keep fucking ignoring reality and it just makes you look like a retard.
Trying to prevent deaths of one kind is not retarded. By this logic you would call those who try to prevent cancer deaths retarded.
SPARTAAAA!
I've been in NYC for a bit (still here).
Then off to Providence.
Once again, I shall lawl.
How did you come up with that hilarious photo...?
At 6/23/07 10:58 PM, SkunkyFluffy wrote:
Don't mind me, I'm a crazy English major.
I shall lawl at this.
And the UK has less gun crime per capita than we do...they have very few gun murders as is.
You're entirely right, though.
Gun control means less gun crime, that's a fact.
Don't moralize.
Having sex with anyone – hell, the first time you have coitus with a spouse – can give you HPV or another STD...You just don't get it, do you!?
At 6/23/07 10:17 PM, Memorize wrote: Oh well, their deaths = greater progress.
Right...Ok.
The deaths of individuals is a good thing, now, memorize?
You've got to be kidding.....
At 6/23/07 12:56 AM, fahrenheit wrote: The only thing I could think of is what did she think was going to happen when her son signed up during a war?
That he would live....That the war, which was sold to the public under false pretenses and was advertised as being a quick win, would be over quickly...
Dali is pretty cool.
Surreal art is pretty cool, but, I dunno about it: I can't help but to think that he was a big fan of the shrooms, though.
I just get so sad when I hear about old people getting, well, pwned by the things like the Nigerian e-mail scam.
:'(
Support is different from in favor of the idea.
The idea of preventing cancer is a good one. At this point, mandating the vaccine would be quite silly, but once there are positive empirical studies, then, hey, it sounds good to me.
At 6/23/07 01:50 PM, Proteas wrote:
Logically speaking, no. But when you look at the facts, much of the United Kingdom "doesn't have guns" and yet they do have gun violence there, which runs counter to the whole ideology that if you get rid of guns then gun crime will in fact disappear into the ether...
Gun violence is inevitable in a society where any guns exist. However, they've got less gun violence per 100,000 than we do, and that's not due to cultural factors, but to their gun control. After all, if it was cultural factors that allowed for gun posessison, the UK would be up there, for their Bill of Rights of 1689 made weapons ownership legal to the same extent that our constitution did, allowing for their bill made it legal for protestant males, while ours, originally, only made it legal for white males.
Then, generally speaking, the Veep would be a member of the executive branch, and unless he's involved in actions that relate to his power as President of the Senate, he is subject to the rules of the executive branch, I would think.
If you can cut 'em off a bull, a cat should be no problem, I presume.
Driving the car was scary, though, I must say, I didn't hit anything, but I very well could have. 2,000 pound weapon and so forth, I guess.
At 6/22/07 07:44 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:
That doesn't prove them wrong. There are MANY factors that cause violence, gun laws are only a small part of it.
Question:
Can you have gun violence without guns?
He neutered a cat? Did he use anesthesia?
In other breaking news:
I drove a car today. For about half an hour, I drove the Saab (actually, it's more like a Saabaru) 9-2X four door station wagon around a school parking lot and a road with more people on it than I thought. Didn't hit anything, and I didn't go over 20 mph, but still.
The thing that surprised me most was the fact that even at idle, the car moves without my foot on the gas. That was really, really scary. Otherwise, not so bad.
Cheney is responsible to the executive branch rules as well as the legislative ones.
He's just being a typical Dick.
At 6/22/07 10:58 PM, EvilerBowser1001 wrote: No, It's gulit, dumbass
The "dumbass-ness" is self evident.
maybe having a country actually on our side in the middle east.
Iran was on our side...............we had the Shah from 1953 to 1979.
the British gave Israel to them because they wanted to protect their interests, and to assuage the gulit of WW2.
The British thought that the Arab states would win the inevitable war. Of course, the Arabs were defeated.
At 6/22/07 10:45 PM, Tal-con wrote:
Also, most gun deaths are committed with the hand gun, amirite?
"During the offense that brought them to prison, 15% of State inmates and 13% of Federal inmates carried a handgun, and about 2%, a military-style semiautomatic gun." (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm)
And
"In 2005, about 68% of all murders, 42% of all robberies, and 21% of all aggravated assaults that were reported to the police were committed with a firearm." (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/guncrime .htm)
Hooray for the tri-state area!!!
NJ, NY and CT.
Blargh. Just spent $129 on a new laptop battery. Damn you, Apple and your monopoly on parts
Just kidding, Apple. You're the best-est.
Extentions of the gov't that aren't needed?
I can think of very, very few agencies by name. Appropriations and subsidies and tax breaks are other stories.
1. This thread is too intelligent for NG, lawl.
2. All fundamentalists have "issues."
3. I am all in favor of this vaccination. Preventing cancer is an inherently good thing...
At 6/22/07 09:48 PM, SevenSeize wrote: Another day, :)
Another dollar.
Holler!
i hate myself for saying that :P
What is the "mod meet" anyway?
I should pwn myself for asking.
There is no such thing as an airtight execution -- you can't kill someone as punishment, IMHO
And as Elfer said, there's really no justification to spend all this money on executions.
