• 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

  • Days Won


A guy in the Chesapeake last won the day on March 16

A guy in the Chesapeake had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

193 F'n Saint

About A guy in the Chesapeake

  • Rank
  • Birthday 12/04/2006

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

10,798 profile views
  1. Drip Drip Drip

    Yup - I think that the attitudes you shared are exactly what we should expect and demand from those who've been elected to the highest office in the nation.
  2. Pompeo confirmation thread

    I don't think that Trump's nomination of these two, as distasteful as it may be to some, constitutes an "indication of eroding human rights". That was my point. The Patriot Act came about because we collectively felt a need to increase our awareness of the activities of people who were actively engaged in trying to cause harm to the US and its citizens. It wasn't a perfect law, and I won't defend it being used beyond the scope for which it was intended - but, while many decry the Patriot Act - I sincerely question whether anyone here has been adversely impacted by it, and it IS the law now. If you think that the Patriot Act provisions equate to human rights violations? Then I'd suggest you haven't seen any *real* violations of human rights. I have, and I don't want to have that here. I don't like much of what I've read of Pompeo's attitude and priorities - I think that he considers the mission his personal agenda, and thus feels emboldened to make decisions based upon his personal perspective, rather than the law and established precedent. His comments and actions warrant close scurtiny, but as I mentioned in the 1st sentence? I don't agree with the supposition that the nominations indicate the "continued erosion of human rights".
  3. Have a good weekend you sorry sots.....

    Everyone's irish on St Patrick's day - but, that doesn't mean you should drink a quart of green food coloring thinking nobody will catch you pissin' in the punch. Have a good weekend, and if anyone gets locked up - hope it comes w/a good story. I'll be foregoing festivities to finish cutting up the trees that fell during the wind storms a couple weekends ago, and firing up my Egg for the first time of the season. Y'all take care - and if ya gotta bite someone's head off? at least offer 'em a tourniquet after....
  4. irresponsible gun owners?

    I've got to think that that was an uncomfortable, disconcerting experience on many levels. As you mentioned, someone who's having an episode like that often behaves uncontrollably and violently, is legitimately frightened, and adding a gun to that mix must've made you question whether or not you were safe trying to help. I hope that simply telling him he was reaching for his gun whether he intended to or not, and the danger that that put he and everyone else in will be enough to cause him to change his mind. I doubt he thinks he's being irresponsible - but, if his medical condition makes him unable to control himself? He needs to put the keys and guns away.
  5. Pompeo confirmation thread

    I'm having a hard time getting past the opening paragraph: "President Donald Trump’s nominations of Gina Haspel to lead the CIA and Mike Pompeo to be America’s top diplomat are the latest indications of steadily eroding human rights standards in the United States and the rollback of the rule of law that has characterized U.S. counterterrorism policies since Sept. 11, 2001" But - I'll keep reading...
  6. The more guns in the room the greater the probability of a shooting.

    Sadly - it's what it seems to have become, and that simply stinks.
  7. Russia cyberattacks on US nuclear power stations

    Yup - just like the annoying little gnats that hover around under the docklights as night falls.
  8. Russia cyberattacks on US nuclear power stations

    My imagination? Or your intentional Myopia? either way - it's not important enough to me to continue this particular conversation. Have fun with it - your contributions are here, as are mine. I don't feel compelled to convince anyone of anything - they can see it for themselves.
  9. irresponsible gun owners?

    I'd try to talk sense into your acquaintance, and in all sincerity, if you think he's unwilling to adjust his behavior on his own? Telling him that you feel compelled to share his situation w/the authorities may be enough to convince him of the need to change. Tell him to give the pistol to his wife - and let HER keep it in her purse, at least. W/R/T the last paragraph? yeah man - I'm with ya on every bit of that, especially the imperative to enforce what's on the books. I honestly think that many of the things that we consider "stupid laws" are there because we haven't been successful in enforcing the reasonable laws, and in our need to constrain LCD behavior, have to write increasingly onerous statute to address constantly decreasing standards of behavior.
  10. The more guns in the room the greater the probability of a shooting.

    Yeah? Whyzzat? Truth hurt? Or am I incapable of understanding the witty subtlety of your finely honed wit? Look - I think you did what you felt was best for yourself, and I think that that's perfectly acceptable - I've said that several times. You may not intend to come off as sanctimonious, but, you DO - and from where I'm sitting? You don't have any reason to be that way, and that's what I'm commenting on. Sloops - I understand your point - and it can stop the moment the folks who are advocating increased restrictions accept that the .22s shouldn't be included in any kind of proposed assault weapons bans - and that the language as it currently stands DOES include them. If you're not willing to accept that, then why should any of US be willing to accept the infringement? The words matter - and as pedantic as Tom is in constantly repeating himself, I have yet to hear anyone advocating restrictions accept that he's right. edited to add: OR demonstrate the inaccuracy of his position.
  11. The more guns in the room the greater the probability of a shooting.

    Kick the record player - your needle's stuck.
  12. Russia cyberattacks on US nuclear power stations

    W/R/T Philly's OP - I do indeed believe that foreign agents are actively engaged in attempts to influence, interrupt and disrupt civil and government processes. Many of the individual "attacks" - such as phishing attempts, identity theft, etc are intended more to foment distrust and anxiety than they are to try to steal the $500 or so someone may get away with. Unlike Philly - I'm not going to place blame for this anywhere except where it belongs, and that's with the perpetrators. Should we expect our government to treat these intrusions seriously? Absolutely, and when they don't we should hold *everyone* who didn't responsible for their decisions. Likewise - we all have individual responsibilities to behave in a manner by which the influence of these attempts is minimized. Recognizing them for what they are, rather than using their existence as a means to increase division and rancor among ourselves is one opportunity for us to exercise that personal responsibility. I'm not demonizing Pres Obama or the Republican congress for not being omnipotent and failing to prevent the intrusion attempts - it's the response to those intrusions that's important. Whether we want it or not, we ARE the big kid on the block, and there are state entities that will try to benefit from causing us turmoil here and abroad. They are doing that for their own selfish interests, not in response to who's occupying the whitehouse, or holding the majority in congress.
  13. Russia cyberattacks on US nuclear power stations

    I'm talking about your "larger body of work" - by virtue of which any attempt you may make at objectivity is diminished.
  14. The more guns in the room the greater the probability of a shooting.

    There ya go again - conflating and twisting what was plainly said to provide you an opportunity to proceed with your own, baseless, personal narrative. I *clearly* stated that I *do not* think that your rifle, (nor Tom's, or my .22s) were dangerous, if handled responsibly. The counter is your conflation - and not at all based in anything Tom or I have said on the topic. Pointing out that your position is disingenuous given YOUR personal (but incorrect) claims of the danger posed by the object's mere existence was my point. You have fun saying/doing what you want, BL - you've demonstrated on multiple occasions that you are willing to conflate, twist, deflect and obfuscate in your attempts to demean those who call you on your BS.
  15. Pompeo confirmation thread

    Your supposition is based upon exactly what? Your personal, intense dislike? BTL - do you actually have a credible basis for this supposition? If so - I'd enjoy seeing it. If not - and this is just another expression of your personal exasperation? That's OK too - just wanted to ask.