Casting Disaster

wrote...
On Tue, 11 May 2004 12:45:04 -0600, Warren wrote:


On a serious note, I think the reason why you dismiss and make fun
of such examples is that you are afraid to examine the logic and
rationale behind them.


The reason I dismiss it is very, very simple:
I can take a gun, point it at your head, and
with a simple twitch of a finger I can kill
you with it. On the other hand, no matter
what I did I would not be able to get a Golden
to do any worse than lick your hand. And that
is the long and short of it.

Once again, you are arguing the wrong thing. I thought I explained
it rather well, but here it is ONCE AGAIN for YOU.

" I am not making the
comparison that golden retrievers are as dangerous as firearms, I am
comparing perceptions of usefulness. I am saying that just because
you or Willi view concealed weapons as being useless, that doesn't
make them so for everybody else. I am saying that it is just as
wrong as the notion that you should be able to tell others what to
drive, eat, etc."

Are you getting it yet?
--
Warren
(use troutbum_mt on either yahoo or earthlink to respond via email)

Warren wrote:


On a serious note, I think the reason why you dismiss and make fun
of such examples is that you are afraid to examine the logic and
rationale behind them. Doing so may shatter your beliefs in things
that you have long accepted as being right, proper or even factual.
I think that scares you and is why that it is such a problem for you
do anything but criticize or make fun of them. I am not making the
comparison that golden retrievers are as dangerous as firearms, I am
comparing perceptions of usefulness. I am saying that just because
you or Willi view concealed weapons as being useless, that doesn't
make them so for everybody else. I am saying that it is just as
wrong as the notion that you should be able to tell others what to
drive, eat, etc.


I never said that concealed weapons are useless or that they shouldn't
be allowed (but I do feel that the requirements to obtain a permit
should be VERY rigorous). What I said was:

"I share some of Greg's concerns about carrying handguns. Some of that
has to do with my unfamiliarity with them and some of it has to do with
the irresponsible way I've seen handguns handled - like bringing a
handgun out from a tent to "show" it to a group of guys around a
campfire after that person had been drinking a considerable amount of
liquor."


The only reason I replied at all to this thread is that you're
"championing" the right for the carrying of arms when your behavior with
them just increases my unease when I'm around someone with a firearm
that I don't know well, or even with a couple of people I do.


Willi

wrote...
On Tue, 11 May 2004 17:41:20 -0600, Warren wrote:


Once again, you are arguing the wrong thing. I thought I explained
it rather well, but here it is ONCE AGAIN for YOU.

From your point of view I'm arguing the wrong thing,
but from my point of view I'm arguing what I want
and should be arguing: that I don't give a damn whether
or not Goldens are useless because, except for Bongo,
maybe, I have never met or heard of one that is likely
to do me much physical harm, is not likely to cause much
air pollution, is not likely to burn up gas like a pig
SUV, or otherwise diminish my quality of life, while an
idiot with a gun in his hands can most certainly leave
me with a hell of a lot of damage (and before you go off
on another jag, I am not saying, nor have I ever said,
that all people with guns are idiots).

If am I talking about one thing and you are talking about another,
what's the point of even talking?

Buhbye.
--
Warren
(use troutbum_mt on either yahoo or earthlink to respond via email)

Carl Nisarel wrote:

Attempting Eddaic Poetry for the first time

damn... alluding to icelandic myth poems. i've gotta get out more.

jeff (of course, i originally thought it had something to do with eddie
haskell attempting rhymes)

wrote...
I never said that concealed weapons are useless or that they shouldn't
be allowed (but I do feel that the requirements to obtain a permit
should be VERY rigorous). What I said was:

Perhaps I read more into your "sharing" with Greg based upon having
been around you before and listening to you carry on about how guns
make you nervous.

"I share some of Greg's concerns about carrying handguns. Some of that
has to do with my unfamiliarity with them and some of it has to do with
the irresponsible way I've seen handguns handled - like bringing a
handgun out from a tent to "show" it to a group of guys around a
campfire after that person had been drinking a considerable amount of
liquor."

That's fair enough, Willi. I see it a bit differently. An unloaded
handgun is nothing more than a club to me. It is probably my
familiarity with them that causes me to not be as uneasy or nervous
around them as you are when I know they are unloaded. Treating
every firearm as if it were loaded is a good practice and you seem
to follow that *extremely* well. There is nothing wrong with that.

The only reason I replied at all to this thread is that you're
"championing" the right for the carrying of arms when your behavior with
them just increases my unease when I'm around someone with a firearm
that I don't know well, or even with a couple of people I do.

Fair enough. I'll be sure to warm you in the future so that you can
remove yourself from the area if I have one around.
--
Warren
(use troutbum_mt on either yahoo or earthlink to respond via email)

Warren wrote:



Fair enough. I'll be sure to warm you in the future so that you can
remove yourself from the area if I have one around.


So you think it's cool to handle handguns when you're drunk because you
"know" it's not loaded?


Willi

"Warren" wrote in message
...
wrote...
On Tue, 11 May 2004 12:45:04 -0600, Warren wrote:


On a serious note, I think the reason why you dismiss and make fun
of such examples is that you are afraid to examine the logic and
rationale behind them.


The reason I dismiss it is very, very simple:
I can take a gun, point it at your head, and
with a simple twitch of a finger I can kill
you with it. On the other hand, no matter
what I did I would not be able to get a Golden
to do any worse than lick your hand. And that
is the long and short of it.

Once again, you are arguing the wrong thing. I thought I explained
it rather well, but here it is ONCE AGAIN for YOU.

" I am not making the
comparison that golden retrievers are as dangerous as firearms, I am
comparing perceptions of usefulness. I am saying that just because
you or Willi view concealed weapons as being useless, that doesn't
make them so for everybody else. I am saying that it is just as
wrong as the notion that you should be able to tell others what to
drive, eat, etc."

Are you getting it yet?
--
Warren
(use troutbum_mt on either yahoo or earthlink to respond via email)

You should make a file folder on your computer and save copies of all the
messages you post to ROFF in it. You should re-read all of them some day
when you become an adult¹. You might find this useful........or at least
amusing.

Wolfgang
¹you should live so long.

Wolfgang wrote:

do not allow
juveniles to handle firearms except under the direct supervision of a
responsible adult.



You should re-read all of them some day
when you become an adult¹. You might find this useful........or at least
amusing.


WTF is up with that?

Are you trying to make yourself older than you already are?

Willi

wrote...


Warren wrote:



Fair enough. I'll be sure to warm you in the future so that you can
remove yourself from the area if I have one around.


So you think it's cool to handle handguns when you're drunk because you
"know" it's not loaded?

Well, that isn't exactly how I remember it going but, I'll play
along.
#1 I wasn't drunk
#2 I wasn't the only one involved and there was more than one
handgun, which you failed to mention so that you can imply that I am
some drunk lunatic brandishing a firearm.
#3 YOU are the only person that had a problem with it (or at least
that has EVER mentioned it) because of your extreme phobia of all
firearms. You are very vocal about your views on firearms and
everyone that has ever had one at a conclave since has done
everything they could do and bent over backwards just to please you.
#4 The guns weren't being waved around, etc. It was basically just
a show and tell session.
#5 After showing our handguns and a pic or two being taken, the guns
were put away and that was that.
#6 There were no laws broken in regards to firearms.
--
Warren
(use troutbum_mt on either yahoo or earthlink to respond via email)

wrote...
WTF is up with that?

Just more typical Wolfgang crap. He thinks people really care about
what he says or maybe he just thrives on the friction he generates
here on ROFF, those who don't are a threat to his ego. He probably
leads a pretty uneventful, pathetic and lacking life and his only
outlet is trying to lower others to his pitiful level of existence.
His notion that I and others try and make ROFF all about him was
very entertaining though. Having not responded to a single "reply"
of his in several months has only further angered him in his
desperate quest to get attention. The fact that I do not place much
stock in anything he says probably disturbs him even more because he
views himself as being worthy of much more respect and influence
than he will ever actually have. Not sharing his view of himself is
likely insulting to him and he tries to bolster his own self-image
by waging "cyber-war" with those that oppose or challenge him. Have
you seen how many times he has responded to me lately? He can't
debate ideas or explain why anyone should share his views because he
doesn't want anything like that to happen. He is just interested in
creating as much conflict as he possibly can with the people he
views as enemies and so won't state an opinion, belief or anything
else that may be constructive so as to not limit his options for
future opposition. Such an attitude and behavior may lead him to a
very unfortunate conclusion down the road, but I doubt that will
discourage him in the least because he will just run back to his
keyboard and hide in the virtual world of cyber space where personal
relationships are as mythical as his worth to others.

There, there Wolfgang. Do you feel better now? That's more
attention than I have given you in six months!

Are you trying to make yourself older than you already are?

Gnomes allegedly have a very long life expectancy.
--
Warren
(use troutbum_mt on either yahoo or earthlink to respond via email)