On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:44:26 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...

On 6/12/13 6:20 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...

On 6/12/13 4:57 PM, jps wrote:


I don't mind those who own guns responsibly and I suspect the gun
nuts
in rec.boats are responsible. What irks the **** out of me is when
responsible owners start talking about gun rights. As if they were
more important than any other right, including safety of the
general
population from an over abundance of guns that make it out into the
streets and promote violence and easy answers to hard problems.

These jerks would give up all their rights to privacy, search and
seizure, free speech and whatever else as long as they can keep
there
little dick extensions.

Meanwhile, the country's kids are at risk from idiots who can't
manage
to keep their guns locked up.


There's no question that discussions about guns brings some really
crazy
people out of the woodwork. To be involved on an issue where the
others
on your side include the likes of Wayne LaPierre, the new crazyman
who
is the head of the NRA and, of course, Ted Nugent, would make many
rational people get themselves "uninvolved."

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

I recently heard about a proposal in some California location to add
a
"gun safety" course to the curriculum in a charter school system.
My
knee jerk reaction was that it was a stupid idea but then I thought
about it some more. It seems that school systems in general have
had
to take on the responsibility of educating youth in all types of
subjects that are not related directly to academics and that in past
generations were handled by parents. Since firearms and their use
are
so prevalent in our society, why shouldn't educating youth on their
dangers and safe handling not be included?

I took driver's education in Connecticut in 1964. One of the
classroom
instruction periods was conducted by a trooper from the CT State
Police. He presented a movie (old fashioned projector back then)
with
some of the most horrific and gory images of people dismembered or
having sustained horrible injuries or deaths due to car crashes,
mostly
due to speeding. I don't remember much of anything else
specifically
that was taught in classroom instruction of driver's ed but the
images
contained in that presentation remain fresh in my mind 47 years
later.

My conclusion was that as much as some would like, guns are not
going
to go away in our society. A little education never hurt anybody.






I agree that it would be a good idea to have firearm safety offered,
but
not in the public schools and not by a political organization like the
NRA. I think organizations like the Boy Scouts could do it, and even
put
on programs *in* the public schools, as a community service.

Public school assets are already stretched very thin. Diverting any
funds to pay for firearms safety courses means the teaching of basic
educational skills and course in phys ed and the arts will suffer
further.

I don't recall a driver's ed program in high school, but that doesn't
mean there wasn't one. I do remember a rather forward-thinking sex ed
class and film in the 7th grade, taught by a nurse.

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

Good points regarding the stretching of school assets and I agree the
NRA should not be involved although promoting gun safety *was* the
original and primary purpose of the NRA before guns became such a
political issue.

When I was a kid ... maybe 8 or 9 years old, I wanted a Daisy BB gun
so bad I constantly bugged the heck out of my parents for one.
Finally one Christmas morning, there it was. But my father spent
hours with me on it's use, treating it like it was a Swedish Mauser or
something. It was the type that you could load up the whole barrel
with BBs that were sold in a little cardboard tube with a blue
cardboard cap that converted into a funnel. The BBs were loaded
through a little hole in the barrel. When full, the rifle was muzzle
heavy as hell, and off into the woods I'd go to "hunt". (never shot
anything)
But it seems to me that I remember a Boy Scout meeting at which some
representative gave a presentation on BB gun safety and also
demonstrated some "real" rifles. I don't know who he was or what
group he represented but it he could have very well been a
representative of the NRA. This would be in the late 50's.

See above.

John H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

On 6/13/2013 7:21 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:57:41 -0700, jps wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:55:23 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article
,
says...

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 22:23:56 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:58:23 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:19:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:02:21 -0700, jps wrote:


Ten people were hurt

You understand you are the only troll here for about a week.

Take it somewhere else.

And miss out on all the fine posts about trailers and trucks?

**** no, this is my home sweet home.

====

Trailers and trucks are at least related to towing boats which is a
common and on-topic issue.

Your anti gun screeds however are not, and this is most definitely not
your home.

Oh but it is Wayne. Just as much as it is yours.

Boats and guns go together like beans and rice. I need a gun to
protect my boat.

Maybe lay off until the gun nuts start talking
about their guns again. I suspect their gun
talk offends you, and I'll tell you it
offends me.
I find all guns offensive unless it's mine.
Talking about them in a public forum not meant
for that sort of discussion is akin to talking
about your masturbation habits. Gun nuts
don't understand that, because they're gun
nuts.
An exception here would be an anti-pirate gun
kept on the boat, for those who travel in
pirate waters. Those bringing that up will be
quickly told that pirates have more and bigger
guns, so you'll probably just increase your
chance of getting yourself killed.
Of course the NRA would contest that, and say
that simply having more guns aboard to equip
everybody in your family/crew/squad is how it
should be done to ward off the "bad guys."
Maybe another "exception" would be an anti-
shark gun kept on the boat, to which the
answer would be don't swim with sharks, and
don't shoot at sharks circling a swimmer.
You might kill the swimmer, and if you blood
the shark, you'll just attract more....sharks.
I have no real problem ignoring the gun
threads too often started here. I usually
only respond when I feel like calling gun nuts
trash, which is as it should be. They fully
deserve it.
I don't know why these guys get on your case
for reporting news. They can ignore your
posts. They don't. Their problem.
But you might lay off until they start another
of their gun jack off sessions, to see how
long that lasts.
Hypocrisy and faulty logic should be called
out. So give them a chance to show it again.
Makes for a more balanced circle of nonsense.
If they want to talk about boats, nobody's
stopping them.

The news makes 'em feel bad about their love of guns.

I don't mind those who own guns responsibly and I suspect the gun nuts
in rec.boats are responsible. What irks the **** out of me is when
responsible owners start talking about gun rights. As if they were
more important than any other right, including safety of the general
population from an over abundance of guns that make it out into the
streets and promote violence and easy answers to hard problems.

These jerks would give up all their rights to privacy, search and
seizure, free speech and whatever else as long as they can keep there
little dick extensions.

Meanwhile, the country's kids are at risk from idiots who can't manage
to keep their guns locked up.

Are all gun owners 'gun nuts'? Why should not responsible owners have a desire to own their guns?

As to 'privacy, search and seizure, free speech and whatever else', it seems the folks currently in
power are doing their best to stomp on those rights also - or have you not noticed?

Do female gun owners also worry about 'there' (sic) dick extensions?

Meanwhile the country's kids are at risk from assholes who can't resist texting while driving.

John H.

At least one person here is seeing the light that JPS is shining. He's
offloading his guns and ammo. Whatever floats your boat.

On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:28:52 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

On Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:55:23 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article
,
says...

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 22:23:56 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:58:23 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:19:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:02:21 -0700, jps wrote:


Ten people were hurt

You understand you are the only troll here for about a week.

Take it somewhere else.

And miss out on all the fine posts about trailers and trucks?

**** no, this is my home sweet home.

====

Trailers and trucks are at least related to towing boats which is a
common and on-topic issue.

Your anti gun screeds however are not, and this is most definitely not
your home.

Oh but it is Wayne. Just as much as it is yours.

Boats and guns go together like beans and rice. I need a gun to
protect my boat.

Maybe lay off until the gun nuts start talking
about their guns again. I suspect their gun
talk offends you, and I'll tell you it
offends me.
I find all guns offensive unless it's mine.
Talking about them in a public forum not meant
for that sort of discussion is akin to talking
about your masturbation habits. Gun nuts
don't understand that, because they're gun
nuts.
An exception here would be an anti-pirate gun
kept on the boat, for those who travel in
pirate waters. Those bringing that up will be
quickly told that pirates have more and bigger
guns, so you'll probably just increase your
chance of getting yourself killed.
Of course the NRA would contest that, and say
that simply having more guns aboard to equip
everybody in your family/crew/squad is how it
should be done to ward off the "bad guys."
Maybe another "exception" would be an anti-
shark gun kept on the boat, to which the
answer would be don't swim with sharks, and
don't shoot at sharks circling a swimmer.
You might kill the swimmer, and if you blood
the shark, you'll just attract more....sharks.
I have no real problem ignoring the gun
threads too often started here. I usually
only respond when I feel like calling gun nuts
trash, which is as it should be. They fully
deserve it.
I don't know why these guys get on your case
for reporting news. They can ignore your
posts. They don't. Their problem.
But you might lay off until they start another
of their gun jack off sessions, to see how
long that lasts.
Hypocrisy and faulty logic should be called
out. So give them a chance to show it again.
Makes for a more balanced circle of nonsense.
If they want to talk about boats, nobody's
stopping them.

The news makes 'em feel bad about their love of guns.

I don't mind those who own guns responsibly and I suspect the gun nuts
in rec.boats are responsible. What irks the **** out of me is when
responsible owners start talking about gun rights. As if they were
more important than any other right, including safety of the general
population from an over abundance of guns that make it out into the
streets and promote violence and easy answers to hard problems.

These jerks would give up all their rights to privacy, search and
seizure, free speech and whatever else as long as they can keep there
little dick extensions.

Meanwhile, the country's kids are at risk from idiots who can't manage
to keep their guns locked up.

More people have died riding in a car with Ted Kennedy than have died from any firearms I may
own. A responsible person doesn't kill, or cause the death of, an innocent young lady by
leaving them to drown in a submerged car.

If you want to talk about responsibility then talk about responsibility and not just aboue
firearms.

The "gun rights" are enshrined in the US Constitution. The police are not available to
protect you and if you depend upon them to assist you, you may be dead before they ever get
to your house.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/06/...s-to-new-york-
citys-new-911-system/


Not even worth responding to. Your attempt at moral equivalents is
lost. Ted Kennedy doesn't leave girls to drown 30,000 times a year.

In article m,
says...

On 6/13/2013 7:21 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:57:41 -0700, jps wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:55:23 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article
,
says...

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 22:23:56 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:58:23 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:19:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:02:21 -0700, jps wrote:


Ten people were hurt

You understand you are the only troll here for about a week.

Take it somewhere else.

And miss out on all the fine posts about trailers and trucks?

**** no, this is my home sweet home.

====

Trailers and trucks are at least related to towing boats which is a
common and on-topic issue.

Your anti gun screeds however are not, and this is most definitely not
your home.

Oh but it is Wayne. Just as much as it is yours.

Boats and guns go together like beans and rice. I need a gun to
protect my boat.

Maybe lay off until the gun nuts start talking
about their guns again. I suspect their gun
talk offends you, and I'll tell you it
offends me.
I find all guns offensive unless it's mine.
Talking about them in a public forum not meant
for that sort of discussion is akin to talking
about your masturbation habits. Gun nuts
don't understand that, because they're gun
nuts.
An exception here would be an anti-pirate gun
kept on the boat, for those who travel in
pirate waters. Those bringing that up will be
quickly told that pirates have more and bigger
guns, so you'll probably just increase your
chance of getting yourself killed.
Of course the NRA would contest that, and say
that simply having more guns aboard to equip
everybody in your family/crew/squad is how it
should be done to ward off the "bad guys."
Maybe another "exception" would be an anti-
shark gun kept on the boat, to which the
answer would be don't swim with sharks, and
don't shoot at sharks circling a swimmer.
You might kill the swimmer, and if you blood
the shark, you'll just attract more....sharks.
I have no real problem ignoring the gun
threads too often started here. I usually
only respond when I feel like calling gun nuts
trash, which is as it should be. They fully
deserve it.
I don't know why these guys get on your case
for reporting news. They can ignore your
posts. They don't. Their problem.
But you might lay off until they start another
of their gun jack off sessions, to see how
long that lasts.
Hypocrisy and faulty logic should be called
out. So give them a chance to show it again.
Makes for a more balanced circle of nonsense.
If they want to talk about boats, nobody's
stopping them.

The news makes 'em feel bad about their love of guns.

I don't mind those who own guns responsibly and I suspect the gun nuts
in rec.boats are responsible. What irks the **** out of me is when
responsible owners start talking about gun rights. As if they were
more important than any other right, including safety of the general
population from an over abundance of guns that make it out into the
streets and promote violence and easy answers to hard problems.

These jerks would give up all their rights to privacy, search and
seizure, free speech and whatever else as long as they can keep there
little dick extensions.

Meanwhile, the country's kids are at risk from idiots who can't manage
to keep their guns locked up.

Are all gun owners 'gun nuts'? Why should not responsible owners have a desire to own their guns?

As to 'privacy, search and seizure, free speech and whatever else', it seems the folks currently in
power are doing their best to stomp on those rights also - or have you not noticed?

Do female gun owners also worry about 'there' (sic) dick extensions?

Meanwhile the country's kids are at risk from assholes who can't resist texting while driving.

John H.

At least one person here is seeing the light that JPS is shining. He's
offloading his guns and ammo. Whatever floats your boat.

Oops! He just upgraded to a bigger caliber and a carry your brass out of the area option
rather than having it fly all over the place.

On 6/13/2013 6:41 PM, BAR wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 6/13/2013 7:21 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:57:41 -0700, jps wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:55:23 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article
,
says...

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 22:23:56 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 18:58:23 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:19:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:02:21 -0700, jps wrote:


Ten people were hurt

You understand you are the only troll here for about a week.

Take it somewhere else.

And miss out on all the fine posts about trailers and trucks?

**** no, this is my home sweet home.

====

Trailers and trucks are at least related to towing boats which is a
common and on-topic issue.

Your anti gun screeds however are not, and this is most definitely not
your home.

Oh but it is Wayne. Just as much as it is yours.

Boats and guns go together like beans and rice. I need a gun to
protect my boat.

Maybe lay off until the gun nuts start talking
about their guns again. I suspect their gun
talk offends you, and I'll tell you it
offends me.
I find all guns offensive unless it's mine.
Talking about them in a public forum not meant
for that sort of discussion is akin to talking
about your masturbation habits. Gun nuts
don't understand that, because they're gun
nuts.
An exception here would be an anti-pirate gun
kept on the boat, for those who travel in
pirate waters. Those bringing that up will be
quickly told that pirates have more and bigger
guns, so you'll probably just increase your
chance of getting yourself killed.
Of course the NRA would contest that, and say
that simply having more guns aboard to equip
everybody in your family/crew/squad is how it
should be done to ward off the "bad guys."
Maybe another "exception" would be an anti-
shark gun kept on the boat, to which the
answer would be don't swim with sharks, and
don't shoot at sharks circling a swimmer.
You might kill the swimmer, and if you blood
the shark, you'll just attract more....sharks.
I have no real problem ignoring the gun
threads too often started here. I usually
only respond when I feel like calling gun nuts
trash, which is as it should be. They fully
deserve it.
I don't know why these guys get on your case
for reporting news. They can ignore your
posts. They don't. Their problem.
But you might lay off until they start another
of their gun jack off sessions, to see how
long that lasts.
Hypocrisy and faulty logic should be called
out. So give them a chance to show it again.
Makes for a more balanced circle of nonsense.
If they want to talk about boats, nobody's
stopping them.

The news makes 'em feel bad about their love of guns.

I don't mind those who own guns responsibly and I suspect the gun nuts
in rec.boats are responsible. What irks the **** out of me is when
responsible owners start talking about gun rights. As if they were
more important than any other right, including safety of the general
population from an over abundance of guns that make it out into the
streets and promote violence and easy answers to hard problems.

These jerks would give up all their rights to privacy, search and
seizure, free speech and whatever else as long as they can keep there
little dick extensions.

Meanwhile, the country's kids are at risk from idiots who can't manage
to keep their guns locked up.

Are all gun owners 'gun nuts'? Why should not responsible owners have a desire to own their guns?

As to 'privacy, search and seizure, free speech and whatever else', it seems the folks currently in
power are doing their best to stomp on those rights also - or have you not noticed?

Do female gun owners also worry about 'there' (sic) dick extensions?

Meanwhile the country's kids are at risk from assholes who can't resist texting while driving.

John H.

At least one person here is seeing the light that JPS is shining. He's
offloading his guns and ammo. Whatever floats your boat.

Oops! He just upgraded to a bigger caliber and a carry your brass out of the area option
rather than having it fly all over the place.

More of a big game gun if you ask me. I doubt if many people would
consider it a legitimate target pistol.

In article qbGdnQ3xu8y1aSXMnZ2dnUVZ_t-
, says...


I recently heard about a proposal in some California location to add a
"gun safety" course to the curriculum in a charter school system.
My knee jerk reaction was that it was a stupid idea but then I thought
about it some more. It seems that school systems in general have had
to take on the responsibility of educating youth in all types of
subjects that are not related directly to academics and that in past
generations were handled by parents. Since firearms and their use are
so prevalent in our society, why shouldn't educating youth on their
dangers and safe handling not be included?


What does "firearms and their use are so prevalent in our
society" mean?
Hope you realize that the great majority of people in the
U.S. never shoot a gun, handle a gun, or hardly ever see
a gun except on the hip of a LEO.
This all sounds like an NRA wet dream to increase gun
sales. Akin to pot-smoking and coke-sniffing drug
dealers thinking it's a good idea to teach proper drug
consumption in school.
I mean, drug use is "so prevalent," right?
Same with sado-masochists. Because they hang with other
sado-masochists they think the world is chock full of
them and it's perfectly normal. Hell, let's put it in the
school curriculum for the kids.
Learn to know when your knee is truthful.


I took driver's education in Connecticut in 1964. One of the
classroom instruction periods was conducted by a trooper from the CT
State Police. He presented a movie (old fashioned projector back
then) with some of the most horrific and gory images of people
dismembered or having sustained horrible injuries or deaths due to car
crashes, mostly due to speeding. I don't remember much of anything
else specifically that was taught in classroom instruction of driver's
ed but the images contained in that presentation remain fresh in my
mind 47 years later.

My conclusion was that as much as some would like, guns are not going
to go away in our society. A little education never hurt anybody.


Same goes for safe "recreational" drug consumption and
safe sado-masochism.
Get some perspective.
You'll find that people who want to live their lives
without guns, "recreational" drugs, and sado-masochism
will just tell you that your idea of teaching what they
consider perversions to their children is plain wacko.
And that's the great majority of people.
Most of whom do drive a car more often than they put on
their pants, so they consider driver's ed valuable.
But the Amish will tell you to shove your driver's ed up
your ass too.

"Boating All Out" wrote in message
...

In article qbGdnQ3xu8y1aSXMnZ2dnUVZ_t-
, says...


I recently heard about a proposal in some California location to add
a
"gun safety" course to the curriculum in a charter school system.
My knee jerk reaction was that it was a stupid idea but then I
thought
about it some more. It seems that school systems in general have
had
to take on the responsibility of educating youth in all types of
subjects that are not related directly to academics and that in past
generations were handled by parents. Since firearms and their use
are
so prevalent in our society, why shouldn't educating youth on their
dangers and safe handling not be included?


What does "firearms and their use are so prevalent in our
society" mean?
Hope you realize that the great majority of people in the
U.S. never shoot a gun, handle a gun, or hardly ever see
a gun except on the hip of a LEO.
This all sounds like an NRA wet dream to increase gun
sales. Akin to pot-smoking and coke-sniffing drug
dealers thinking it's a good idea to teach proper drug
consumption in school.
I mean, drug use is "so prevalent," right?
Same with sado-masochists. Because they hang with other
sado-masochists they think the world is chock full of
them and it's perfectly normal. Hell, let's put it in the
school curriculum for the kids.
Learn to know when your knee is truthful.


I took driver's education in Connecticut in 1964. One of the
classroom instruction periods was conducted by a trooper from the CT
State Police. He presented a movie (old fashioned projector back
then) with some of the most horrific and gory images of people
dismembered or having sustained horrible injuries or deaths due to
car
crashes, mostly due to speeding. I don't remember much of
anything
else specifically that was taught in classroom instruction of
driver's
ed but the images contained in that presentation remain fresh in my
mind 47 years later.

My conclusion was that as much as some would like, guns are not
going
to go away in our society. A little education never hurt anybody.


Same goes for safe "recreational" drug consumption and
safe sado-masochism.
Get some perspective.
You'll find that people who want to live their lives
without guns, "recreational" drugs, and sado-masochism
will just tell you that your idea of teaching what they
consider perversions to their children is plain wacko.
And that's the great majority of people.
Most of whom do drive a car more often than they put on
their pants, so they consider driver's ed valuable.
But the Amish will tell you to shove your driver's ed up
your ass too.

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

I see. There is rarely a day that goes by without some news
regarding gun control issues or coverage of a gun related accident in
the media. That's what I am referring to in the statement "firearms
and their use are so prevalent in our society"

But it appears your solution is to stick your head in the sand and
pretend it doesn't exist. Apparently in your mind "It doesn't apply
or affect me, so there's no need to be involved in the solution".
Sounds like a typical response of the "Me" generation.

I don't think guns and their ownership by private citizens will ever
be, nor should it ever be prohibited. Like it or not, they are part
of your life, whether you choose to own one or not. So what's wrong
with some general education in the safe handling and dangers
associated with them so people are better informed overall? If the
only input young people receive is in Hollywood movies or some video
game I don't think they are getting a realistic or helpful image of
what firearm ownership is all about.

In article sKudnS4
,
says...


I see. There is rarely a day that goes by without some news
regarding gun control issues or coverage of a gun related accident in
the media. That's what I am referring to in the statement "firearms
and their use are so prevalent in our society"

But it appears your solution is to stick your head in the sand and
pretend it doesn't exist. Apparently in your mind "It doesn't apply
or affect me, so there's no need to be involved in the solution".
Sounds like a typical response of the "Me" generation.


No, guns haven't affected me at all. And I'll do my best
to keep it that way. I'm here saying me and countless
others will resist any attempt to foist guns on our kids
in school in the guise of teaching "gun safety." You can
teach your kids about guns all you want and I couldn't
care less. Or about safe "drug use" for all I care.
If you think me stating MY view about public education is
"sticking my head in the sand" you're not very logical.
Keeping guns from criminals and psychos is an entirely
different issue than foisting guns into public education.
The law part interests me because it's entertaining
hearing all the illogical bull****, lying and hypocrisy.

I don't think guns and their ownership by private citizens will ever
be, nor should it ever be prohibited. Like it or not, they are part
of your life, whether you choose to own one or not.

What the **** did I just tell you!? You hard of hearing?
Guns play NO ****ING ROLE IN MY LIFE. NADA! The only
time I even think about them is when I feel like
discussing them in a forum full of gun nuts. You just
can't understand that I guess. But it's true for me and
for the great majority of people.
IF YOU DON'T OWN A GUN YOU DON'T NEED "GUN SAFETY."
Most people DON'T own a gun, and even fewer kids.
Hey, why don't you suggest "safe fishing" courses for
schools. Makes more sense. Abu-Garcia will love you.

So what's wrong
with some general education in the safe handling and dangers
associated with them so people are better informed overall? If the
only input young people receive is in Hollywood movies or some video
game I don't think they are getting a realistic or helpful image of
what firearm ownership is all about.

What's wrong with it? I don't ****ing want my kids
exposed to guns. THAT'S WHAT WRONG WITH IT. When
they're adults, they can make their own choices.
Take it up with your local school board if you like.
I don't give a **** how many guns you buy, or how you
want to educate your kids.
You're talking about public schooling, and when I express
my view of what's a no-go for my kids, you accuse me of
"head in sand" and "me generation."
Well, thanks for the childish insults. Good luck with the
school board. You'll find plenty like me at the
meetings, but the moms will give you even more hell for
your idea, which your knee correctly informed you was
stupid.
You ain't gonna have any fun at all with it. It's a
bull**** idea only entertained by gun nuts.

In article ,
says...


I can't figure out if you are a Bible thumping Christian hating any
sexual mores or recreational drugs that you don't find appropriate to
you or a left wing-nut gun-hater. Either way, you are just wrong.


Wrong about what? Saying "you're wrong" means nothing.
If you think "gun safety' should be taught in public
school, go for it. Get it taught in your locality.
Otherwise you may as well just shut your trap about me
being "wrong." Get the "gun safety" course taught.
Until then, you're the one who is wrong.
I'll always be right because I won't tolerate it wherever
I live.
What's really funny is I have no problem with legal gun
ownership. Live and let live.
But gun nuts want to dictate that my children be exposed
to guns, despite my wishes.
**** them and the horse they rode in on. Ain't gonna
happen.

On 6/14/2013 9:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


I can't figure out if you are a Bible thumping Christian hating any
sexual mores or recreational drugs that you don't find appropriate to
you or a left wing-nut gun-hater. Either way, you are just wrong.


Wrong about what? Saying "you're wrong" means nothing.
If you think "gun safety' should be taught in public
school, go for it. Get it taught in your locality.
Otherwise you may as well just shut your trap about me
being "wrong." Get the "gun safety" course taught.
Until then, you're the one who is wrong.
I'll always be right because I won't tolerate it wherever
I live.
What's really funny is I have no problem with legal gun
ownership. Live and let live.
But gun nuts want to dictate that my children be exposed
to guns, despite my wishes.
**** them and the horse they rode in on. Ain't gonna
happen.


You two need to sort out your differences. May I suggest a duel?