KCitons
Footballguy
Maybe......Maybe America has just gotten dumber and has resorted to using fewer words because they're lazy?
...Nah.
Maybe......Maybe America has just gotten dumber and has resorted to using fewer words because they're lazy?
Will be interesting to hear if yiddish is somehow thought of as elitist. Can the language of the ghettos evolve to elitist? No question it has been evolving, at least in this country.He's a mensch.
I bet it did not hurt you one bit to do so.Have to admit I had to look that one up.
"It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words."Maybe America has just gotten dumber and has resorted to using fewer words because they're lazy?
Here's one of which you may not fully appreciate the meaning.Not the word I was thinking of.
Imagine walking around using 10 words when 5 will do. Using words that nobody understands. And then complaining that everyone you meet thinks you're a pretentious jerk.
If it was me, I'd take it out on strangers on a random message board too.
My mistake. Thank you for correcting me.Here's one of which you may not fully appreciate the meaning.
It did result in some subconscious process that my brain filed away "fulminating" somewhere in the neighborhood of "frumious" which in turn caused me to wonder if I still knew all of the words to Jabberwocky. Turns out I do. So it did waste quite a bit more time than I expected.I bet it did not hurt you one bit to do so.
If you are going to take the trouble perhaps you would consider changing pretentious jerk to boorish mooncalf.My mistake. Thank you for correcting me.
I will edit my post.
No, I'm good with that part of my post. Pretentious jerk is a term that I, as well as others, are familiar with. Boorish mooncalf may be mistaken for a compliment by those that don't understand it's meaning. I'm trying to reach a larger audience.If you are going to take the trouble perhaps you would consider changing pretentious jerk to boorish mooncalf.
How about woolly-headed weisenheimer? More alliterative.If you are going to take the trouble perhaps you would consider changing pretentious jerk to boorish mooncalf.
Guns good. Booze bad. Big words hurt head.I wish you all would stop using 3 big words and talk down to my level. This is why people voted for Trump!
Don't worry, Fish will help you with the big words.I wish you all would stop using 3 big words and talk down to my level. This is why people voted for Trump!
I think this has a bit to do with it. Look back at the books written 50+ years ago, the language used, and the age we were reading them.Maybe America has just gotten dumber and has resorted to using fewer words because they're lazy?
No worries. I have been a bit truculent the past few days. I have no problem with you being you, as I think you know. Also, I am often in agreement with your points, if not the manner of delivery of the points. Keep performing the valuable service of raising issues, though I would encourage considering some new analogies, my reason being it is difficult to hear the reasoning behind analogies that may have grown overly familiar.No, I'm good with that part of my post. Pretentious jerk is a term that I, as well as others, are familiar with. Boorish mooncalf may be mistaken for a compliment by those that don't understand it's meaning. I'm trying to reach a larger audience.
Books? Look at movies, TV, news (written or television). It's all gone downhill.I think this has a bit to do with it. Look back at the books written 50+ years ago, the language used, and the age we were reading them.
People are going to be the way they are going to be. I can't change that. I either accept them for who they are, or move on. I, unlike others, do not have a long list of people on ignore. (it stands at 1 person currently) I may not agree with people 99 out of 100 times. But, that one time I may learn something. I think that tolerance holds a greater value than the ability to create a post that looks like a thesaurus.No worries. I have been a bit truculent the past few days. I have no problem with you being you, s I think you know. Also, I am often in agreement with your points, with not the manner of delivery of the points. Keep performing the valuable service of raising issues though I would encourage considering some new analogies, my reason being it is difficult to hear the reasoning behind analogies that may have grown overly familiar.
You are good people in my book. Hell I was poking at you a bit and you kept it in good humor, not something everyone manages.
Unicuique sua.People are going to be the way they are going to be. I can't change that. I either accept them for who they are, or move on. I, unlike others, do not have a long list of people on ignore. (it stands at 1 person currently) I may not agree with people 99 out of 100 times. But, that one time I may learn something. I think that tolerance holds a greater value than the ability to create a post that looks like a thesaurus.
As to my analogies. They too, are what they are. I've posted many times about the tragedies of alcohol in this country. I've posted about the effects alcohol have on violence and families. If one person on this board altered their plan, and perhaps it saved one life, then being the butt of the joke is fine with me. If others find it pointless, because of the comparison, then that's something their conscience will have to carry.
Never said alone - you will never get a few million people and honestly I'm not sure if you did that you wouldn't have just as many rise up on the other side. It's never happening - so yes, a well armed militia to throw over the tyrannic government is nonsense.Him alone? No, of course not.
Him and a few million others? Yes.
The notion that the entire point of the 2nd amendment is moot because no one person can't defend against the US Army is ridiculous.
A few million with AR15s might be able to take out a few thousand drones before the drones take them all out completely.Never said alone - you will never get a few million people and honestly I'm not sure if you did that you wouldn't have just as many rise up on the other side. It's never happening - so yes, a well armed militia to throw over the tyrannic government is nonsense.
Standing in a pitched battle with the U.S. military is madness. Preventing occupation of territory by the military for ongoing purposes would certainly be severely complicated by the number of armed citizens that would have to be policed, or at least it theoretically would. I say theoretically because most would turn over their firearms to an occupying military quite expeditiously rather than face the consequences for having not done so, super patriots like Tom Brady aside.A few million with AR15s might be able to take out a few thousand drones before the drones take them all out completely.
Would be entertaining to watch at least.
And even if they do succeed at beating the drones, they would be so weakened by the end that whatever the US military wanted to send in next would be the end of them.
The only way the US military would be beaten is if the rebellion has support from many other countries militaries. At that point all the AR15s the people brought to the arsenal would be utilized as much as the US military uses them.... which is to say, they don't.Standing in a pitched battle with the U.S. military is madness. Preventing occupation of territory by the military for ongoing purposes would certainly be severely complicated by the number of armed citizens that would have to be policed, or at least it theoretically would. I say theoretically because most would turn over their firearms to an occupying military quite expeditiously rather than face the consequences for having not done so, super patriots like Tom Brady aside.
Re: AR15A few million with AR15s might be able to take out a few thousand drones before the drones take them all out completely.
Would be entertaining to watch at least.
And even if they do succeed at beating the drones, they would be so weakened by the end that whatever the US military wanted to send in next would be the end of them.
They might also relinquish their stance on occupying the homeland and fighting against their fellow Americans. Then again, they may not. I was playing Devil's advocate, looking for any semblance of relationship, no matter how distant to the original intent and purpose. As a practical matter I am probably 99% in agreement with you on this issue and most permutations of it, as you already know.The only way the US military would be beaten is if the rebellion has support from many other countries militaries. At that point all the AR15s the people brought to the arsenal would be utilized as much as the US military uses them.... which is to say, they don't.
I think I may have an exception that proves the rule.I'll never get a million years how the solution is always more guns.
Problem
You have cancer
Solution
More cancer
Problem
Your house is on fire
Solution
More fire
Problem
Too much debt
Solution
More debt
Problem
Too many kids
Solution
More kids
On and on you could go.
I knew I was forgetting something.I think I may have an exception that proves the rule.
Problem
I am way too high!
Solution
Here, drink this, it will chill you out.
Playing the oldiesbicycle_seat_sniffer said:so video games huh?
What next Dungeons and Dragons plus heavy metal = satanic cult....
GOP!!!
The only way the US military is beaten in an armed insurrection is if the US military lays down their weapons and stands down instead of massacring the populace.The only way the US military would be beaten is if the rebellion has support from many other countries militaries. At that point all the AR15s the people brought to the arsenal would be utilized as much as the US military uses them.... which is to say, they don't.
So criminals can have a shoot out in their house with other criminals?
That article doesn't really explain why another gun wouldn't have worked in that situation.
I agree. With multiple people in a room a shotgun would not have worked unless you were using slugs which are not near as accurate as an AR-15. A handgun could have worked, but again an AR-15 is more accurate and easier to control than a handgun.That article doesn't really explain why another gun wouldn't have worked in that situation.
Can you expand on the bolded and why that would be the case?I agree. With multiple people in a room a shotgun would not have worked unless you were using slugs which are not near as accurate as an AR-15. A handgun could have worked, but again an AR-15 is more accurate and easier to control than a handgun.
Inside a house and at short distances I don't feel the accuracy of the AR vs handgun round or a slug would matter much (assuming 30' or less). But the low weight, low recoil, smaller grip and lighter trigger pull of an AR I could see being very beneficial to the woman shooter from a stability and control aspect.Can you expand on the bolded and why that would be the case?
This is a good example. Many times I wonder when one would be needed, after seeing the brutal beating of business owners last night I guess these sad circumstances would apply. Sad times.My buddy used a couple to peacefully deter potential looters at his business in downtown Fayetteville, NC. The protests there weren't too bad, but they did damage several businesses in the area before they headed over to the mall.
I wanted to illustrate a responsible use of these weapons.