Mr VJP

One must be alert to the obese and homely females that prowl the bars where man like to over indulge. They're PREDATORS I tell you!! Out to snare you in their trap and cause you lasting harm. You have been warned!

I've already decided my response to this illegal legislation should it pass. "I WILL NOT COMPLY!" Where there is a will, there is a dead man. ;D

Well, you are obviously a glass half full kind of guy. That's good for you. It will lower your stress level and keep you healthier. Which is good, because if I am right about America's future, you will need all the strength you can muster in order to survive.

Unless the Nikon comes with a Full Lifetime Warranty, I'd get the Redfield for the couple extra bucks it costs. Redfield is made by Leupold in Oregon and has a Full Lifetime Warranty. I have a couple of them and love them. You can find them on Gunbroker.com for very good prices. I'd look at the 2x7 scope with the 4 Plex reticle. I see them on there for $125 quite often, but everything seems to be going up fast these days, so don't procrastinate.

There is a bill in NY State that has been proposed, but is most likely not going anywhere, that would force all gun owners to register every gun they have with model, serial # and lots of personal information. The bill calls for a $15 fee on every gun to register it, then $10 a year to keep it. Imagine the stupidity of the elected moron who proposed this legislation. Here's why. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Haynes v. U.S. (309 U.S. 85 (1968)) that since felons are prohibited from owning firearms, compelling them to register their guns would violate their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. In addition, this ill-conceived legislation would constitute a substantial state tax on gun ownership. Historically, these failed registration schemes have also been very costly for jurisdictions to maintain, and they have been completely ineffective. Registration is a dangerous step toward confiscation and an assault on the Second Amendment. How did this fool get elected in the first place? Perhaps he was supported by Bloomberg?

The Columbia University thread

If you look at the arenas the NRA is spending money to fight in, I think you will find it is money well spent. I believe without the NRA we would not have the 2nd Amendment in the Constitution anymore. But I'm not of the opinion we should stop fighting to see which of us is right about that. The NRA takes in about $250 Million a year. That means out of your $35 dues, about .14 cents goes to LaPierre. Wow!

Read my reply in the other forum regarding dangers that threaten America today.

Do you have any idea what heads of non-profits get paid?

A short list of grave dangers: Massive National Debt. Massive Budget Deficits. Massive Trade deficit. Massive Unemployment. Oil and gasoline prices climbing out of control. Crime on the rise nationwide. Gun control escalation nationwide. Two wars going and threats from Nuclear enemies like North Korea and Iran. Illegal immigration. Terrorist plots to kill us. Deflation. Jobs leaving the nation. Massive foreclosures. Corruption of the political system. Decay of the military's readiness. Open Borders. States going bankrupt. Major drug use. Attacks on the US Constitution by the Government. AIDS and other diseases on the rise. Potential for another Civil War. Rumors of institution of Martial Law. Each one of the above, being barely manageable on it's own, combine into a danger to this country, the likes of which have never been seen before. Do you not feel any anxiety over any of this at all? Are you on Prozac?

His compensation is based on his performance. Do you know what the average salary of a corporate CEO is these days? LaPierre can be removed from his job any day the board doesn't feel his is doing a good job. i guess they feel is doing a good job and so do I.

Nah, a buddy e-mailed it to me. Never had that problem after a night of drinking. But I did awake to some fuggly looking faces sometimes.

I'm never drinking again --- 10 AM [table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td] [table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td][table][tr][td] I'm never drinking again. I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again [/t][/t][/t][/t][/t][/t][/t][/t][/t][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table] I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again I'm never drinking again http://mail.aol.com/33298-111/aol-6/en-us/mail/get-attachment.aspx?uid=32003242&folder=OldMail&partId=3[/img] http://mail.aol.com/33298-111/aol-6/en-us/mail/get-attachment.aspx?uid=32003242&folder=OldMail&partId=4[/img] NEVER EVER again! [/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table][/td][/tr][/table]

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, R.I.P. The pro-life movement lost one of its icons this week when Dr. Bernard Nathanson died of cancer at the age of 84. The OB/GYN is best known for his radical conversion from abortionist to tireless champion of the unborn. Nathanson, a co-founder of the pro-abortion group NARAL Pro-Choice America, admitted that he was responsible for 75,000 abortions and had personally performed 5,000 -- including one on a girlfriend he had gotten pregnant. He also revealed that he and other abortionists exaggerated the number of women who had died from illegal abortions. Those numbers had been key in winning people over to the pro-"choice" side. Nathanson's renunciation of abortion began with the arrival of new sonogram technology in the 1970s; this technology also inspired his work on "The Silent Scream," a 1985 film that exposed the realities of abortion and changed the face of the debate. Later, he produced the documentary "Eclipse of Reason," which showed various abortion procedures, and he wrote several books about his experiences on both sides of the issue. His conversion was also a religious one; Nathanson, who had grown up in a secular Jewish home, became a devout Catholic in his later years. He will be missed.

Do you have any data to back up your statement or are you just too tired to go on now? Anyway, I appreciate your opinions. Thank You For Playing!

Shortly before leaving office, President George W. Bush instituted regulations designed to protect health care providers who refuse to perform abortions and other medical procedures on moral or religious grounds. This week, the Health and Human Services Department (HHS) took a hatchet to these "conscience" regulations. This includes axing the critical requirement that health care institutions certify their intention to comply or risk losing their federal funding. HHS's reasoning for doing away with this provision? Too much paperwork -- seriously. The administration has also announced that it will enforce them on a case-by-case basis. That means that while they're waiting for their case to be adjudicated, medical professionals could either be forced into participating in abortions and sterilizations, or be penalized for refusing to do so. In addition, medical school applicants can now be denied admission to the school of their choice based on their moral or religious convictions. This puts them at risk of suffering irreparable mental and financial harm. Yet as bad as this is, it could have been even worse. In 2009, Obama had suspended the regulations, making sure everyone knew of his plans to trash them all together. Perhaps the public comment period had something to do with the administration's decision to back off; of the 300,000 comments submitted, 187,000 people were in favor of keeping the conscience regulations, while only 97,000 wrote to abort them.

The Obama Justice Department dropped all pretenses this week and announced that it won't defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in federal court. DOMA, the Clinton-era law that was passed by huge bipartisan majorities in both houses, defines marriage as between one man and one woman, and it says that no state is required to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state. The administration has long held that it would defend the law in court, but that defense has been extremely lackluster. At least they're being honest now, though we wonder if anyone -- even his supporters -- actually believed that Obama opposed same-sex marriage. To the poor saps who did believe him we say: Welcome to politics. The problem is that the administration is making policy preference its sole justification for this non-defense, not whether the law is deemed constitutional. That is an entirely new standard for the Justice Department, though it's certainly in keeping with this administration's blatant disregard for Rule of Law. The administration is now required to present Congress with a report detailing its reasons within 30 days, and the court of appeals will have to appoint counsel to defend the law. The latter could actually prove beneficial given that the administration's defense was so half-hearted.

I'm glad you see it too Localqdm. I was starting to think every one else was hypnotized from drinking the Kool Aid.

I appreciate your concern NY, but I'm just typing replies. I'm not breathing hard. I'm not even breaking a sweat. ;D I have this emergency lifesaving training that kicks in when I see someone in danger, and always hope there is some hope of rescue. Heck, even bridge jumpers will try and attack you if you try to talk them down. People will attack you when you try to push them out of the way of a speeding bus. But when they realize you probably saved their life, they (sometimes) will appreciate it. I just wish more Americans would realize this country is in grave danger and we need to address it now. The future will be too late.

I had both Earth Science and Biology. Keep in mind, I graduated H.S. in 1973 http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf

Chemistry, Physics, Statistics, Algebra I & II, Geometry and Trig. Calc was not in my curriculum, but was taught to others. Arrow, how many of today's students graduate having studied any of the above?

Arrow, Can you provide any link to back up that claim? I'll locate one to the contrary. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4029

"The Justice Department wants the largest cigarette manufacturers to admit that they lied to the public about the dangers of smoking," reports the Associated Press, "forcing the industry to set up and pay for an advertising campaign of self-criticism for past behavior." The DOJ, as part of a 12-year-old lawsuit against the tobacco industry, wants companies to make 14 "corrective statements," which it released on Wednesday. For example, the government aims to force tobacco companies to say, "A federal court is requiring tobacco companies to tell the truth about cigarette smoking. Here's the truth: ... Smoking kills 1,200 Americans. Every day." Also, "We falsely marketed low tar and light cigarettes as less harmful than regular cigarettes to keep people smoking and sustain our profits." Another one reads, "For decades, we denied that we controlled the level of nicotine delivered in cigarettes." A third statement says, "Here's the truth. ... We control nicotine delivery to create and sustain smokers' addiction, because that's how we keep customers coming back." Regardless of one's position on smoking or "Big Tobacco," the strong-arm tactics on display here and the negative implications for liberty and Rule of Law are alarming. Substitute any other industry for tobacco producers -- say, gun manufacturers -- and the problem becomes a bit clearer.

I did sir. But I didn't take advantage of the opportunity as I entered the labor force for 2 years prior to starting college. Coming from a family of 7 children, certain sacrifices must be made.

I do sir!