"jps" wrote in message ...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:11:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 10, 4:31 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:35:45 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:









On Oct 9, 9:35 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 18:16:50 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...=3598647ebfe79...

On Oct 9, 3:56 pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 19:05:03 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 8, 6:40 pm, jps wrote:

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're designed
to
do, kill things.

I know, I use them around the farm for varmint control. They're
very
efficient.

I'm assuming you wouldn't go out there to kill varmints with a
sword,
a knife or a bludgeon as long as you have an efficient weapon like
a
gun.

If it would be more to your satisfaction, I'll bag the next groundhog
with a compound bow. They work pretty good too!

That'd be cool, it'd give the varmint a fighting chance and several of
his brethren may have time to tackle you while you're reloading.

Ok, so now I'm getting the picture. You're wishing harm on me because
I don't fit your views.

Interesting.....

Hey, if those varmints can mount an attack on the guy who's trying to
kill 'em, I give 'em a lot of credit. I bet it'd supply the media
with a fantastic story to cover for however much time it'd take to
pick your bones clean.

Too bad the guy in Cupertino didn't bring his bow and arrow instead.

This Canadian did.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/ar...hot-dead-with-...

You're making my point for me, thanks.

1 person dead, not 2, not 3 and 7 are not wounded.

Reloading a crossbow is not equal to pulling a trigger however many
times a second your auto or semi-auto weapon can fire.

No I didn't make your point.

I did make a point that you dont' need a gun to prove someones
mortality. and if one isn't available, you run what you brung. But
then again, cross bows aren't illegal to own nor do they need special
licensing. And have proven to be quite stealth. Maybe a weapon of
choice by ganstahs and assassins, depending on circumstances.

But anyhow, i do see that you still wish me harm. But Groundhogs are
herbivores.

That doesn't mean they don't get ****ed off when you blow away their
family members or close friends.

Yeah, haven't heard about gangstahs using crossbows a whole lot but I
do hear about a crazy bunch of handguns being out there and available
cheap.

Probably pick up several handguns and a bunch of ammo for the price of
a decent crossbow.


Decent crossbow is maybe $250. Hell to find any handgun that cheap these
days. Cost you $25-50 just for the government paperwork on each purchase.

On Oct 10, 11:48*pm, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:11:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:









On Oct 10, 4:31 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:35:45 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 9, 9:35 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 18:16:50 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...=3598647ebfe79...

On Oct 9, 3:56 pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 19:05:03 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 8, 6:40 pm, jps wrote:

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're designed to
do, kill things.

I know, I use them around the farm for varmint control. They're very
efficient.

I'm assuming you wouldn't go out there to kill varmints with a sword,
a knife or a bludgeon as long as you have an efficient weapon like a
gun.

If it would be more to your satisfaction, I'll bag the next groundhog
with a compound bow. They work pretty good too!

That'd be cool, it'd give the varmint a fighting chance and several of
his brethren may have time to tackle you while you're reloading.

Ok, so now I'm getting the picture. You're wishing harm on me because
I don't fit your views.

Interesting.....

Hey, if those varmints can mount an attack on the guy who's trying to
kill 'em, I give 'em a lot of credit. I bet it'd supply the media
with a fantastic story to cover for however much time it'd take to
pick your bones clean.

Too bad the guy in Cupertino didn't bring his bow and arrow instead..

This Canadian did.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/ar...hot-dead-with-....

You're making my point for me, thanks.

1 person dead, not 2, not 3 and 7 are not wounded.

Reloading a crossbow is not equal to pulling a trigger however many
times a second your auto or semi-auto weapon can fire.

No I didn't make your point.

I did make a point that you dont' need a gun to prove someones
mortality. and if one isn't available, you run what you brung. But
then again, cross bows aren't illegal to own nor do they need special
licensing. And have proven to be quite stealth. Maybe a weapon of
choice by ganstahs and assassins, depending on circumstances.

But anyhow, i do see that you still wish me harm. But Groundhogs are
herbivores.

That doesn't mean they don't get ****ed off when you blow away their
family members or close friends.

Yeah, haven't heard about gangstahs using crossbows a whole lot but I
do hear about a crazy bunch of handguns being out there and available
cheap.

Probably pick up several handguns and a bunch of ammo for the price of
a decent crossbow.

keep dreaming

On 10/10/2011 5:33 PM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 08:30:25 -0400, wrote:

On 10/9/2011 4:56 PM, jps wrote:
You think wider distribution and availability of weapons is a good
development?

Not to criminals.

Why did the Obama administration send weapons to Mexican criminals?

Right, it was Biden, Jay Carney and Hilary that packed those guns up
for sale to Mexico. Not a bunch of yahoos at the ATF who are probably
selling drugs for the cartels, like Oliver North did.

Why did the Obama administration send weapons to Mexican criminals?

On 10/11/2011 12:48 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:11:58 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 10, 4:31 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:35:45 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:









On Oct 9, 9:35 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 18:16:50 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...=3598647ebfe79...

On Oct 9, 3:56 pm, wrote:
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 19:05:03 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 8, 6:40 pm, wrote:

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're designed to
do, kill things.

I know, I use them around the farm for varmint control. They're very
efficient.

I'm assuming you wouldn't go out there to kill varmints with a sword,
a knife or a bludgeon as long as you have an efficient weapon like a
gun.

If it would be more to your satisfaction, I'll bag the next groundhog
with a compound bow. They work pretty good too!

That'd be cool, it'd give the varmint a fighting chance and several of
his brethren may have time to tackle you while you're reloading.

Ok, so now I'm getting the picture. You're wishing harm on me because
I don't fit your views.

Interesting.....

Hey, if those varmints can mount an attack on the guy who's trying to
kill 'em, I give 'em a lot of credit. I bet it'd supply the media
with a fantastic story to cover for however much time it'd take to
pick your bones clean.

Too bad the guy in Cupertino didn't bring his bow and arrow instead.

This Canadian did.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/ar...hot-dead-with-...

You're making my point for me, thanks.

1 person dead, not 2, not 3 and 7 are not wounded.

Reloading a crossbow is not equal to pulling a trigger however many
times a second your auto or semi-auto weapon can fire.

No I didn't make your point.

I did make a point that you dont' need a gun to prove someones
mortality. and if one isn't available, you run what you brung. But
then again, cross bows aren't illegal to own nor do they need special
licensing. And have proven to be quite stealth. Maybe a weapon of
choice by ganstahs and assassins, depending on circumstances.

But anyhow, i do see that you still wish me harm. But Groundhogs are
herbivores.

That doesn't mean they don't get ****ed off when you blow away their
family members or close friends.

LOL, you are funny...

Yeah, haven't heard about gangstahs using crossbows a whole lot but I
do hear about a crazy bunch of handguns being out there and available
cheap.

If you would get informed to watch the news for a change instead of
cartoons, you would have seen a bunch of compound bows and crossbows in
the videos of the Holder guns found in a major crime syndicate
storehouse just the other day. Man, you should really try a little harder.

Probably pick up several handguns and a bunch of ammo for the price of
a decent crossbow.

Wow, cause I can get a three hundred pound crossbow for about 90 bucks
on ebay...

On 10/11/2011 2:41 AM, Califbill wrote:
"jps" wrote in message ...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:11:58 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 10, 4:31 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:35:45 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:









On Oct 9, 9:35 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 18:16:50 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...=3598647ebfe79...


On Oct 9, 3:56 pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 19:05:03 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 8, 6:40 pm, jps wrote:

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're
designed to
do, kill things.

I know, I use them around the farm for varmint control.
They're very
efficient.

I'm assuming you wouldn't go out there to kill varmints with a
sword,
a knife or a bludgeon as long as you have an efficient weapon
like a
gun.

If it would be more to your satisfaction, I'll bag the next
groundhog
with a compound bow. They work pretty good too!

That'd be cool, it'd give the varmint a fighting chance and
several of
his brethren may have time to tackle you while you're reloading.

Ok, so now I'm getting the picture. You're wishing harm on me because
I don't fit your views.

Interesting.....

Hey, if those varmints can mount an attack on the guy who's trying to
kill 'em, I give 'em a lot of credit. I bet it'd supply the media
with a fantastic story to cover for however much time it'd take to
pick your bones clean.

Too bad the guy in Cupertino didn't bring his bow and arrow instead.

This Canadian did.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/ar...hot-dead-with-...


You're making my point for me, thanks.

1 person dead, not 2, not 3 and 7 are not wounded.

Reloading a crossbow is not equal to pulling a trigger however many
times a second your auto or semi-auto weapon can fire.

No I didn't make your point.

I did make a point that you dont' need a gun to prove someones
mortality. and if one isn't available, you run what you brung. But
then again, cross bows aren't illegal to own nor do they need special
licensing. And have proven to be quite stealth. Maybe a weapon of
choice by ganstahs and assassins, depending on circumstances.

But anyhow, i do see that you still wish me harm. But Groundhogs are
herbivores.

That doesn't mean they don't get ****ed off when you blow away their
family members or close friends.

Yeah, haven't heard about gangstahs using crossbows a whole lot but I
do hear about a crazy bunch of handguns being out there and available
cheap.

Probably pick up several handguns and a bunch of ammo for the price of
a decent crossbow.


Decent crossbow is maybe $250. Hell to find any handgun that cheap these
days. Cost you $25-50 just for the government paperwork on each purchase.


Well, when was the last time JPS actually checked a fact before spewing
it here to support his latest lies??

On 10/11/2011 7:58 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 10, 11:48 pm, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:11:58 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:









On Oct 10, 4:31 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:35:45 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 9, 9:35 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 18:16:50 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...=3598647ebfe79...

On Oct 9, 3:56 pm, wrote:
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 19:05:03 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 8, 6:40 pm, wrote:

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're designed to
do, kill things.

I know, I use them around the farm for varmint control. They're very
efficient.

I'm assuming you wouldn't go out there to kill varmints with a sword,
a knife or a bludgeon as long as you have an efficient weapon like a
gun.

If it would be more to your satisfaction, I'll bag the next groundhog
with a compound bow. They work pretty good too!

That'd be cool, it'd give the varmint a fighting chance and several of
his brethren may have time to tackle you while you're reloading.

Ok, so now I'm getting the picture. You're wishing harm on me because
I don't fit your views.

Interesting.....

Hey, if those varmints can mount an attack on the guy who's trying to
kill 'em, I give 'em a lot of credit. I bet it'd supply the media
with a fantastic story to cover for however much time it'd take to
pick your bones clean.

Too bad the guy in Cupertino didn't bring his bow and arrow instead.

This Canadian did.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/ar...hot-dead-with-...

You're making my point for me, thanks.

1 person dead, not 2, not 3 and 7 are not wounded.

Reloading a crossbow is not equal to pulling a trigger however many
times a second your auto or semi-auto weapon can fire.

No I didn't make your point.

I did make a point that you dont' need a gun to prove someones
mortality. and if one isn't available, you run what you brung. But
then again, cross bows aren't illegal to own nor do they need special
licensing. And have proven to be quite stealth. Maybe a weapon of
choice by ganstahs and assassins, depending on circumstances.

But anyhow, i do see that you still wish me harm. But Groundhogs are
herbivores.

That doesn't mean they don't get ****ed off when you blow away their
family members or close friends.

Yeah, haven't heard about gangstahs using crossbows a whole lot but I
do hear about a crazy bunch of handguns being out there and available
cheap.

Probably pick up several handguns and a bunch of ammo for the price of
a decent crossbow.

keep dreaming

The guy is totally full of ****.. Wonder when he will call "us" all liars

On 10/11/2011 8:36 AM, Jimmy wrote:
On 10/10/2011 5:33 PM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 08:30:25 -0400, wrote:

On 10/9/2011 4:56 PM, jps wrote:
You think wider distribution and availability of weapons is a good
development?

Not to criminals.

Why did the Obama administration send weapons to Mexican criminals?

Right, it was Biden, Jay Carney and Hilary that packed those guns up
for sale to Mexico. Not a bunch of yahoos at the ATF who are probably
selling drugs for the cartels, like Oliver North did.

Why did the Obama administration send weapons to Mexican criminals?

To support the destruction of Democracy they are pushing around the world...

On 10/11/2011 12:56 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:44:22 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message ...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:54:43 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message ...

On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 21:16:11 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 06:07:44 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:50 am, wrote:
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:13:15 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 6, 9:59 am, wrote:

The more guns that are in people's hands, the higher the potential
for
their use. Period.

... and maybe more innocent people could be spared.

Good thing the kid had a shotgun...

http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=242322

It's a bad idea, Tim. More guns will mean more people ending up dead
or maimed. Our society simply doesn't mix well with guns.

Canada has just as many guns per capita but 1/10th of the incidents.

Simply put, we're not a good match for guns.

Obviously most murders are because of guns because, let's be honest,
before guns no one was murdered, no one was hurt, and there were no
wars. Yeah, that's it. Let's close our eyes, say "Ommm" over and over
again and beleive crap like what Maher is spewing here. The
intelligence oozes from him like puss from a zit.

People who want to kill, will simply do that, and all you are doing
by making stricter gun control laws is either forcing them to go on
the black market (because who ever said…"gee i better not rob this
7-11 cause my gun ain't legal"), or use an alternate method to commit
their crime (a knife, perhaps?) Or should we just legislate away
anything that could possibly be used as an instrument of harm? Cars?
butter knives? chalupas? Let's look at some of the great massacre's in
human history. 9-11? No guns. Pearl Harbor? No Guns. Jonestown? 907 of
the 909 dead via poison.

If you don't want to own a gun, no one is forcing you, but it sure
seems like there are a lot of ways to kill or hurt someone not
involving guns.

Tired, specious argument. The guy in Cupertino could not have
dispatched and harmed as many people... if he didn't have a gun.

If he had a knife, someone could have stopped him with a broomstick.

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're designed to
do, kill things.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumped poison in the coffee pot. Would most likely killed all or most
all.
Yours in the specious argument.

Yeah, that's what folks do when they get real ****ed off, they poison
people. I've been hearing a lot of examples of that recently, not.

I don't think Jim Jones or the Hale Bopp guys had the stomach to kill
themselves with guns.

================================
He was nuts. He was going to kill the coworkers somehow. Maybe a propane
bomb like the Columbine shooters had. Guns were just a tool. Best would
have been poison and got all of them. Sort of like Jim Jones. Killing to
a
real excess. Guns are not the problem, upbringing and attitude are the
problem. You are more likely to die by shooting in Detroit and you are to
die by violence in Afghanistan or Iraq. And a whole lot more guns per
capita there than in Detroit.

I suppose you can back that up with data, eh?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. Just google number of murders in Detroit and the number of soldiers
killed in the middle east.

We don't have soldiers in the middle east. Nice try.

What the **** kind of bat**** crazy **** is that. Tell that to the guys
who have had their lives blown to pieces over there.. You are a total
****ing asshole, just make sure you stay under a desk cause you wouldn't
want even your pussy friends to know how stupid you are...

On 10/11/2011 8:59 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/11/2011 12:56 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:44:22 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:54:43 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 21:16:11 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 06:07:44 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:50 am, wrote:
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:13:15 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 6, 9:59 am, wrote:

The more guns that are in people's hands, the higher the potential
for
their use. Period.

... and maybe more innocent people could be spared.

Good thing the kid had a shotgun...

http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=242322

It's a bad idea, Tim. More guns will mean more people ending up dead
or maimed. Our society simply doesn't mix well with guns.

Canada has just as many guns per capita but 1/10th of the incidents.

Simply put, we're not a good match for guns.

Obviously most murders are because of guns because, let's be honest,
before guns no one was murdered, no one was hurt, and there were no
wars. Yeah, that's it. Let's close our eyes, say "Ommm" over and over
again and beleive crap like what Maher is spewing here. The
intelligence oozes from him like puss from a zit.

People who want to kill, will simply do that, and all you are doing
by making stricter gun control laws is either forcing them to go on
the black market (because who ever said…"gee i better not rob this
7-11 cause my gun ain't legal"), or use an alternate method to commit
their crime (a knife, perhaps?) Or should we just legislate away
anything that could possibly be used as an instrument of harm? Cars?
butter knives? chalupas? Let's look at some of the great
massacre's in
human history. 9-11? No guns. Pearl Harbor? No Guns. Jonestown?
907 of
the 909 dead via poison.

If you don't want to own a gun, no one is forcing you, but it sure
seems like there are a lot of ways to kill or hurt someone not
involving guns.

Tired, specious argument. The guy in Cupertino could not have
dispatched and harmed as many people... if he didn't have a gun.

If he had a knife, someone could have stopped him with a broomstick.

Let's get real, Tim. Guns are very good at what they're designed to
do, kill things.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dumped poison in the coffee pot. Would most likely killed all or most
all.
Yours in the specious argument.

Yeah, that's what folks do when they get real ****ed off, they poison
people. I've been hearing a lot of examples of that recently, not.

I don't think Jim Jones or the Hale Bopp guys had the stomach to kill
themselves with guns.

================================
He was nuts. He was going to kill the coworkers somehow. Maybe a
propane
bomb like the Columbine shooters had. Guns were just a tool. Best would
have been poison and got all of them. Sort of like Jim Jones.
Killing to
a
real excess. Guns are not the problem, upbringing and attitude are the
problem. You are more likely to die by shooting in Detroit and you
are to
die by violence in Afghanistan or Iraq. And a whole lot more guns per
capita there than in Detroit.

I suppose you can back that up with data, eh?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. Just google number of murders in Detroit and the number of soldiers
killed in the middle east.

We don't have soldiers in the middle east. Nice try.

What the **** kind of bat**** crazy **** is that. Tell that to the guys
who have had their lives blown to pieces over there.. You are a total
****ing asshole, just make sure you stay under a desk cause you wouldn't
want even your pussy friends to know how stupid you are...

JPS is into fire water. That explains his lunacy.

On 11/10/2011 6:36 AM, Jimmy wrote:
On 10/10/2011 5:33 PM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 08:30:25 -0400, wrote:

On 10/9/2011 4:56 PM, jps wrote:
You think wider distribution and availability of weapons is a good
development?

Not to criminals.

Why did the Obama administration send weapons to Mexican criminals?

Right, it was Biden, Jay Carney and Hilary that packed those guns up
for sale to Mexico. Not a bunch of yahoos at the ATF who are probably
selling drugs for the cartels, like Oliver North did.

Why did the Obama administration send weapons to Mexican criminals?

Justifies bigger government. Create the problem, then fund the
perception of a solution.

Typical government inefficiency.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs. But
we have big huge government we can't afford...
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude