• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

A guy in the Chesapeake

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Whiner

About A guy in the Chesapeake

  • Rank
  • Birthday 12/04/2006

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

10,638 profile views
  1. Bowling Green Massacre part two

    Yeah - what we're on to is your speciousness. You'd ignore the most applicable reminder - "Be Nice".
  2. Pachyderm disaster (poll)

    Yup - I'm not. I'll wait to ensure a good shot - tracking a blood trail after dark is something I'd rather avoid.
  3. Spectacular Accumulation of Lies

    Myopic partisan much?
  4. Bowling Green Massacre part two

    You don't need to post a sign for illegal activity to be prohibited. Do we have to have "no murder zones"? "no cocaine zones"?
  5. Pachyderm disaster (poll)

    The nature of the rifle makes you pump a buncha shots, just like when you're flinging #9 shot at pigeons - ;-)
  6. Terror in New York truck runs down bikers

    I understand, and didn't intend to minimize the myriad systems that contributed to the kid having nothing more than a scare. Still - I hated watching that.
  7. Pachyderm disaster (poll)

    Just the legal terms - nothing poetic about it. BTW - if you ever do go hunting? Don't shoot anything in the ass - that's where lots of good meat is, and no vital organs. Don't go dressed like Sheba, either - you'll be very uncomfortable, and most likely frighten away anything you might have wanted to reduce to possession.
  8. Pachyderm disaster (poll)

    She doesn't realize that the # of animals NOT reduced to possession due to missed/poor shots is pretty minuscule, and is suggesting that the deer that does get injured doesn't care about the increased habitat for the others. Meli - I actually prefer to bowhunt. The last thing I want to do is to shoot and wound and lose an animal. It can happen - but, when I'm bowhunting, I practice a LOT. I can hit a 4" ring @ 35yds with consistency. When bowhunting, I won't take a risky shot, nor will most other bowhunters that I know. A single arrow w/a broadhead is about $18 - most of us don't make enough that we'd casually throw that away on a risky shot - you hit anything hard? The arrow's ruined. I explain this not to suggest that your concerns are unfounded, but, that approach and cautions taken by bowhunters means that the # of incidents that you are concerned about are so small as to be almost insignificant.
  9. This is An Example of Why We Don't Trust Gun Nutterz

    Sorry JoCal - you're simply wrong on this. I don't rely on personal violence to sort out anything - violence is *always* the last resort, BUT - If someone threatens to harm me, or someone around me? I am perfectly comfortable reacting to that threat in the most expedient manner possible. Does that mean I'm going to shoot someone for getting mad and yelling? Of course not. But - if someone attacks me or someone else, I'll use whatever method is at my disposal to neutralize the attacker, and the attacker's well being will be of absolutely NO concern to me until the threat they present is eliminated. Of even less concern is what someone like you would think about my actions.
  10. Terror in New York truck runs down bikers

    I was squirming in my seat watching that - thank God for good brakes on the truck.
  11. Pachyderm disaster (poll)

    Explain yourself, please. Specifically w/r/t "methodology that causes more suffering than necessary".
  12. firefox v57 quantum

    Is this browser compatible with the iPad OS? I hate the Safari browser that's on my iPad.
  13. This is An Example of Why We Don't Trust Gun Nutterz

    Nope - though I didn't explicitly spell out "violence" - this sentence " We need to stop thinking that every disappointment in life is a result of someone's intentional slight, warranting a repercussion. " meant exactly that, and more.
  14. This is An Example of Why We Don't Trust Gun Nutterz

    What needs to happen has nothing to do with the "pro firearms" side of anything, Bent. I'm very hesitant to surrender any of our enumerated rights to the federal authority, as once surrendered, they won't come back and the next infringement will be easier for its proponents to justify as we'll now have a precedent. Slippery slope? yeah - but, it's how stuff happens. More importantly - such an approach isn't addressing the root cause, and until we do - the problems will continue to grow and fester. The pro-rights folks already support better enforcement of the laws that are already on the books, which IMHO already address almost everything I have seen proposed as a "new law". If current enforcement is ineffective, perhaps gaining an understanding of why that is and addressing THAT would be helpful. I understand your perspective, and I agree that if there were no guns, nobody would get shot. There ARE guns, and we here DO treasure our freedoms, perhaps moreso than other societies do. The incidents of misuse in comparison to the # of firearms in circulation points to the existence of the guns not being the causal factor. Contributing? yeah - see what I said above. The causal factor is society's attitude that it's OK for certain people to act out if they've had a less than optimum background, and that we can't and shouldn't constrain the behaviors that lead up to incidents like we're seeing all to frequently.
  15. Voltage regulator blues

    Thanks again, Lefty - I'd enjoy pics if you've got the time and inclination to share them.