Re: Response. Anguirus, I'll get to yours later. -- Debating... Shouldn't you have something better to do?

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

Subject: Re: Response. Anguirus, I'll get to yours later.

Author:
Checkerpaw

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 08:17:28 04/09/01 Mon
In reply to: Ali 's message, "Inside again. Grrrrr..." on 09:30:50 04/06/01 Fri

>>Checks, that meat was taken from cows that were raised
>>for that purpose. The only reason those things lived
>>was to give meat. If there are people out there that
>>actually eat what they kill, then props to them. But
>>sport killing is still wrong and wasteful.
>
>Oh yeah, about the whole "killing is rampant in
>cities". It might seem that way, but hundreds of
>thousands of people can live in one city. So, that's,
>what, 3 murders a week? Not a drastic decrease in
>population.

The attitude you are showing here is really incredible. I would like for you to say that in front of those who have had family members or close friends killed. You are acting like a human life is worthless here.
>
>As to what Thomas Jefferson said, I could care less.
>He was also the president that decided to decrease
>military funding so that our army was officially 7000
>untrained soldiers and 16 ships. No wonder citizens
>needed their own guns. If we couldn't even beat a band
>of puny pirates in the Meditteranean Sea, then how are
>we going to defend ourself against Britain's navy?
>With a lot of luck and guns in every household.

This is actually irrelevent to gun control, you know that?

Also, do you mind being more specific when saying "puny pirates in the Meditteranean sea"?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]