You know, one of the things I admire about Ed is that he never not once resorts to insults when he's on the unpopular side of an opinion. Nor does he try to distort what others have written- he can defend his position calmly and with solid fact.
You, Gunner, and McCracken don't seem to posess those qualities: if you can't defend your argument you either make something up or start slingin' the mud.
PLONK!
-Carl
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 20:52:46 GMT, Sunworshiper wrote something ......and in reply I say!:
Cops have stolen them? ANd the other stuff you shouldn't mention?
Well, it sure concerns ME! You sound like about the best anit-gun argument I have ever heard allowed out.
**************************************************** sorry remove ns from my header address to reply via emailImagine a _world_ where Nature's lights are obscured by man's. There would be nowhere to go. Or wait a while. Then you won't have to imagine.
Dang, I didn't think anyone would catch me trying to "technical" my way through it. Don't I feel silly for placing any credence in definitions from a fancy store-bought dictionary! After all, those are written by people who devote their careers to studying words and how they're used and their meanings and how they evolve and other useless stuff like that. What do they know? Next time I'll know better than to trust those yahoos; instead I'll put my faith in Gunner's and Richard's definitions.
Incidentally, I happened to be in a library today and just for grins looked in a half-dozen different dictionaries. They all contained definitions similar to those I posted before for arsenal and armory. According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, the "core sense" of arsenal is a collection of weapons held by a state, army, or individual [paraphrased since I don't have the book in front of me]; the definition that associates arsenal with the manufacturing of weapons is considered a "sub sense" of the word. The core sense of armory is a place where arms are stored.
It's really quite sad: all those lexicographers, along with the linguists, etymologists, and technical experts they consult (not to mention that darned liberal press and most of the English-speaking world), don't have any idea what "arsenal" and "armory" truly mean and instead they all try to "technical" their way through it. Thank goodness we here in rcm have access to those ultimate arbiters of meaning, Richard and Gunner, so we can know the true definitions of words.
Bert
"JTMcC" wrote
Why do you gunners keep using that irrelevant and idiotic appeal to emotion fallacy?
You're just demonstrating that you are not intelligent enough to figure out how to deal with life without a gun.
Your moronic, and unoriginal, retort does not have anything to do with Lott's invalidated research.
There you go again accusing me of "distorting facts" when all I ever do is address the exact point that you raised, idiot.
Do you somehow, in your infinite wisdom, interpret "yeah, you said he's a liar and he can't refute it" to be other than an agreement on the statement?
Don't lump me in with anyone, idiot. Gunner et al will always have more patience than I in dealing with your pathetic, idiotic arguments. If you keep the discussion sane and rational, so will I....but I have no regard for idiots and asses who have to resort to semantics to try to cover their ass.
Now feel free to f*ck off and go whine somewhere out of my sight.
ral
I don't really care what definition you go by, Bert. You don't reflect on me in any way because I sure as hell didn't instruct you.
An "arsenal" is a place where firearms are constructed or maintained and an "armory" is a place where they are stored. Doesn't matter what the public has come to believe. While "armory" may be somewhat confusing, "arsenal" actually means "house of manufacturing". A building where arms were stored, at one time, would have been called a "magazine", but I won't fault you if you pick up your copy of Boy's Life and hope to argue that one.
ral
Idiotic? It happens hundreds of thousands of times a year. If you don't see that as enough of a reason to answer the question, there's no hope for you.
ral
That was very well put and I agree with it.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 11:50:23 +0800, Old Nick wrote:
Yes & yes.
Well thanks alot . Just because you don't see the world as dangerous as I do doesn't mean I should feel safe.
I have people approach me at least 2 times a week and sometimes twice a day 7 days in a row mostly for $ and alot of times I have $1500+ on me. A couple of months ago this huge black guy comes running across a parking lot real fast and right up to me as I getting up to the truck. All bloody , all frantic , and trying to get right up to me to show me the blood on his hands and arms. I could already see it on his face , shirt , and pants. He was saying his dog was just run over intentionally infront of him . All I could think of was to back away from this guy. Got him to back up and sit down and gave him a cig. saying yeah yeah yeah and left. Driving away I was thinking of all the things I should have done differently and then thought of how someone was jumping on Gunner for training for situations like this.
About 2 weeks ago this mexican drives up to me at a gas station and askes for money with his wife and two kids in the back seat. I told him no , and he kept on and on and then asked for a cig. I gave him one to just go away and then he asked for a light. I gave him my only lighter and he started to drive away so I snapped the cig. from his lip and through it on the ground. While he was freaking on that I got MY lighter from his hand. And then he jumped out of the car after me. Again I could only back up away from him. I really don't want to get into it with anyone , I could have hurt this guy bad with my bare hands, but not that huge black dude.
One would say I should move away from this , but that's not going to stop the crap from happening in the area. Say I did move , then I have to worry about say the middle of no where and the local rouge cops.
In the early '80's I drove 2,000 miles up to Yopper country and just after the last big town a cop cruses up and hangs on my bumper for a good 15 mins. and pulls me over. He's like why does someone like you own a car like this and your going 63 mph in a 55mph with me behind you , I told him I was at 58 on this old car. He didn't give me a ticket and then told me close face to face that he will throw me in jail if he sees me driving around with my out of state plates even though I told him I would only be in his state about 2 or 3 weeks tops. I made the mistake of telling my mom that I couldn't stay long cause I couldn't get near this cops area and she made me change plates on her. Within 2 weeks I was back in my home state and pulled over again cause I had a valid inspection sticker with out of state plates. I told the cop that you can have two but not three different state tags. I sat there for 1.5 hours and then pulled out my "old" still up to date plates to match the inspection sticker so that he could find out who I was and let me on my way. OH, BTW that cop also asked me how I got a car like that. He freaks that I have my valid plates ( I already told him why I had to change plates) and then another cop car comes up. The two whisper to each other and the new cop walks up and asks "Who are you ? Are you a local Judge's son or something? " I said "What is it if I am?" That cop spun on his leather soles and got in his car and left his buddy flat. I got 5 tickets ! The Judge on the third trip to court cause the cop wouldn't show up on these bogas charges told me to shut up or I would be thrown in jail and dismissed it all. I was just uttering a sound when he cut me off. I tossed the Yopper plates and still had 6 months on my plates.
Robbin Willums put it best as where the cops wear the mirror on the inside of their glasses.
I know first hand that bad cops are real and not Holly Wood. What about cops that get BJ's for tickets , code of silence, and many many others . These are all make believe ? Last week a cop here in town so anxious to join a chace which was miles away with others on his tail lost control on a nice highway and slammed into a Merc. and totaled both cars going way over 120 mph from the looks of it. Yrs. ago a cop in about the same mode ran a stop sign with no lights or sirens on killed a chick in a Merc. and ya know they said it was justifiable... Out of all the shootings that cops do don't you think its a little weird that almost none are unjustifiable. Even the cop in SA TX that killed his partner cause he was gonna kill the mayor or the chief he said (can't remember) was let go.
I can't count the times I've seen cops go through my car like its a shopping spree. What are you going to do with the law out on the highway that is stealing from you? Call the cops or shut up and get out of there? I've had a number of cops tell me that exact story out on the road ! Maybe if you have a CCW they won't get away with your gun. Everything else , but not the gun cause they know they will be caught.
Ignorance is bliss ? Maybe, until reality kicks you in the face.
Dang, might have tripped gunner up on something, regarding firearms. A first.
The dial indicator that I use on my lathe for carriage travel was obtained in a junk shop in the boston area, and on the face of it, in red letters, are the words
"Springfield Armory."
FWIW.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
Well, here's a start to your requested stats. At age 52 I have not had any gun injuries. During this half-century of time I at times owned no guns, and most of the time several. No injuries. Never threatened to kill my spouse(s), my kids, grandkids, aunts, uncles, or even a couple of very forgettable relatives, though it could be a blessing I'm thinking.... The closest anyone around me when I was in possession of a firearm was the dumbass trying to steal the Blaupunkt for my bud's car, outside the shop at 0330, and his 2 pals. But, alas, I did not excercise my vile bloodlust that most certainly lurks within, just made him sit in the car I found him in as the sirens summoned drew closer. Let the other 2 run off as they were not an immediate threat. They did get to be interviewed a couple hours later, and got some "hotel" time to boot. So, apply this bit of data toward your hunch.
mj
Not at all, JT. Those are words I've used in relation to the idiot formerly known as "ed"....
The above poster said that the idiot *hadn't* used them in regards to you.
ral
"The point was, thee was no logical connection between the true part of the statement and the conclusion drawn, which is standard technique for Gunner and Rush Limbaugh, to name but two practitioners or the art."
Add your own name to that list there, Dan'l
Back to ignoring you. Sorry.
ral
Cites?
And you still are pissed that the original Ford Statement is true but contrary to your mindset.
Gunner
The methodology of the left has always been:
I never would have guessed you were so old, Michael. :>)
Yes, but you have not met the Usual Suspects (copyright Vic Mimoni) yet. Probably a good thing. ;>) Much better to want to reach through your screen and choke the living shit out of two of them than spend time in the big house for actually doing it. ;>)
jon
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 18:22:42 -0800, "Dan" brought forth from the murky depths:
The CDC shows your hunch to be right, but don't rule out the Darwin theory.
I don't have the stats handy, but alcoholics are injured less often (flying miles) than the weekend warriors who just tie one on and jump in the car, then try to drive home. The drunks are used to driving impaired and more aware of it (amazingly) than the occasional drunks. (As an ex-drunk, I know this to be true.) But you get a bunch of drunk teens together with guns and the odds swap ends quickly. The CDC report below would probably show that if they had tracked it.
This came up with a google search: "risk of injury gun owner"
Fatalities:
Non-fatal Injuries:
G'nite.
----------------------------------------------------------- --This post conscientiously crafted from 100% Recycled Pixels--
From , web site for the Springfield Armory National Historic Site:
"From 1794 to 1968 the Springfield Armory was a center for the manufacture of U.S. Military small arms and the site of many important technological advances. A large weapons museum is now housed in the original Main Arsenal Building. "The Armory site was selected by President George Washington as the most strategic place to build the arsenal. Due to its position atop the area's tallest hill, potential intruders could be seen from miles away."
So contrary to Gunner's assertions that "Springfield rifles were manufactured in Springfield Arsenal", it appears that the rifles were actually manufactured at the Springfield *Armory* (possibly in the Main Arsenal Building, though that isn't specified). Of course, this could just be a case of egregious historical and lexicographical errors by the liberal National Park Service. Likewise, the liberal publishers of the American Heritage Dictionary could have erred when writing that the Springfield rifle was "first made at the former U.S. Armory at Springfield, Massachusetts."
As for definitions, there's this from the Houghton Mifflin "Reader's Companion to Military History" :
"Arsenals. Places for the centralized manufacture and storage of the tools of war, arsenals appeared in Europe late in the middle ages. The fact that arsenal comes from Arabic words meaning "house of manufacture" bears witness to the Mediterranean origins of the institution. Today the word has been generalized so that it can mean the total assemblage of arms held by a state or even by an individual. In Europe, but not in the United States, the term applies to naval yards as well as to weapons plants and depots." [Various dictionaries note that the English word arsenal comes from the Italian arsenale (itself derived from an Arabic term), which originally referred to naval shipyards.]
The same article refers to arms production at the "Springfield arsenal" (with lower-case "a").
In addition to these references, I ran across the website for Springfield Armory , which apparently is a present-day private gun manufacturer in Illinois. (I imagine Richard will chime in here to tell us that it's run by a bunch of idiots who don't know the difference between an armory and an arsenal.)
Bert
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.