Jump to content

Pertinacious Tom

Members
  • Content Count

    63,450
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Pertinacious Tom

  1. I bought a bunch of 16 foot rough cut 2 x 6's recently. Hundred bucks a board after tax and delivery. Yipes. They're nothing fancy, just regular PT wood.
  2. Heh. Austere fields. Sounds so nice. I used to fly the tow plane at Kendall Gliderport off grass. My first job was to run the bush hog up and down the center of the strip at least once. In winter, when it hadn't grown much since the week before, we'd sometimes leave it unmowed. It's amazing how much difference a bit of grass can make in how fast you can build up speed. The tow plane would leap off the ground and climb almost vertically without a glider but with a glider it would climb 200 fpm if the glider pilot was good, less if not. The tow plane could really only slowly struggle f
  3. I missed your transition. You've been saying they're basically harmless for years. Missed it? You replied to it in this thread. Admittedly, I used to post that .22's are not military weapons. I was wrong and have repeatedly admitted it. That's why I call them battlefield .22's: to make it clear to people that I understand that these are suitable militia weapons and deserving of the highest level of second amendment protection. My view is that any gun that is subject to an assault weapon ban is very likely a military weapon, suitable for militia use, and should get the hi
  4. Pretty sure that's debatable. Well, OK. My position is that past and ongoing confiscation programs have an abysmally low compliance rate. Past and ongoing prohibition programs have failed to solve the targeted problem and have instead exacerbated it and caused other problems. So they work on almost no one. Things that work on almost no one are least likely to work on those most motivated to overcome them. The sliver of nutjobs whose actions you want to rule us all are those "most motivated" people. Prohibition programs affect them not at all. Now tell me why you think prohibit
  5. I do. Even if the decree is not from an idiot. Glad to at least have one fellow Obama supporter here in the sea of Trumpaloons.
  6. So not a single member of TeamR has been adversely impacted by gun violence and switched sides? If TeamD are the only group taking this clear problem seriously then of course that's where the sensible voices will be coming from. Wow. I knew that Black Lives Matter a whole lot less than gun grabbing, but they matter so little that they have to be cut out of the question as if they didn't exist? Merely ignoring them wouldn't make the point?
  7. Now that might be a change in your thinking that i may have missed. A new trick for an old dog. Congratulations! Da fuk? You've been saying it's disinformation for days when I refer to battlefield .22's as weapons of war, now it's OK? Great, not sure why it took you so long. Hah! I was fucking with Doug and that sarcastic comment is hardly support for the nincomcoup, which I have never supported. I've posted a lot about it, none of it legitimizing the riots, much less the scarier acts by people like Eastman. "Small liberties" doesn't include completely reversing my pos
  8. I hear you. I'm no lawyer, but I'm with Obama on this. That's beside the point though. I'm an Obama guy on bump stocka. I'm unaware of his position on the Caetano case but suspect he would be a Massachusetts fan just because all of his supporters here seem to be. Not really beside the point at all, as it bears on the question of whether the government can restrict The People to 18th century technology in any effort to limit the effectiveness of the militia. Or the "killing efficiency of civilians" as you put it. As to the killing efficiency of that tiny subset of civ
  9. Pardon, I counterspammed for the same reason. But to answer your questions, I'm going to need at least the answer to this one: Do you agree that anything we might do should be via the rule of law, not dictatorial decree from an idiot?
  10. This should really make the rounds of all the gun issues. One answer that won in the Massachusetts Supreme Court was to restrict the Bill of Rights to apply it only to technology invented when it was ratified. Of course, they didn't say do it to the whole Bill of Rights yet, just the second amendment, but we've seen where those kinds of precedents go. Apply it to one right and soon it applies to others. Anyway, the US Supreme Court struck that down, deciding that restricting The People to 18th century tech was not a correct reading of the second amendment. So one answer I'd offe
  11. NY did something and now have 44,000 registered assault weapons. And about 950,000 of them in the hands of people who were not all that persuaded by "you must like dead kids so now must sign up to surrender your property." Faced with failures like this, prohibitionists double down, infringe on more liberties, spend more money, and, of course, loot like crazy. Are you really asking me how tired I am of that kind of winning?
  12. I don't think this has appeared in enough threads, so decided to help. One of my answers would be: within the rule of law. Meaning: the President doesn't get to reinterpret the law to say something it plainly does not say. Obama looked three times to see whether he had the authority to ban bump stocka. He found he did not. Trump looked once and found what Obama missed: he could just say the law meant something completely different and as long as it was gungrabby, TeamD types would not disagree for that reason and TeamR types would not disagree because Trump. Really, I
  13. Those are indeed military characteristics so I'm not sure why you object to my agreement that these are battlefield weapons. Well, no, I've said nothing like that at all but I'm used to grabbers lying about me and never actually quoting what I have said, so carry on with the rest of the cult.
  14. We could try taking hundreds of millions of guns from tens of millions of peaceful people in the hope that holding peaceful people responsible for the actions of criminals might work. Seems to be the point of Olsonist's post about the responsibility of gun and car owners for the actions of criminals, doesn't it?
  15. I hope I don't need the bottle jacks OR tips on using them.
  16. Well, no, in that thread I generally talk about how the evil Paul duo tries to undo your boy Joe's drug war looting legacy. But you're right once again that I'll be along shortly, just wrong again about the reason. Same reason as ever. I want to know what your point is about the responsibility of gun and car owners for the actions of criminals. Go!
  17. Hmm... I always had a bottle jack just because it's easier than whatever came with the car/truck. My latest vehicle is so darn modern that it doesn't have a spare at all, not even one of those tiny ones. They threw in a 12 volt compressor and a can of fixaflat. I put the bottle jack back in the shop. No spare, don't need it. Now I think I'll put it in the car and go get a bigger one for my wife's car. And HOPE I don't need them. Thanks.
  18. Biden Is Right: We Shouldn't Restrict Americans in the Name of Liberating Cuba I'm not so sure I agree. I considered Menedez's arguments at length and they weren't worth it. I should have spent the time wiping down the sink or something. Menendez is wrong, Flake was right in 2011.
  19. The nuttiest don't seem so bad to me on the stupid drug war. I think he's right, but then he is So I can see why you would have problems with it.
  20. Michigan Looters Attempt Drug War Shakedown Some of the most blatant extortion I've seen from drug war looters. Well, until WXYZ turned on the lights. The answer to Deldin's last question: most can't afford to fight to get their property back and only a few get free representation from people like the nutjobs at IJ.
  21. 30%, Bullshit. When it comes to buying into odious replacement rhetoric, it appears the number is 17%. Not 30 but not tiny either.
  22. Why laugh? It did happen. The Massachusetts Supreme Court already did rule that way and brought that argument to SCOTUS, but it was rejected. However, applying the Bill of Rights only to 18th century tech is an idea that has supporters here on this forum and in high courts, so I suppose with some SCOTUS packing we could see that argument prevail across the country.
  23. Illegal immigrants are the People to some of us, not to others, but in some places they're at least the drivers. Until ICE gets hold of them. That's a pretty rough way to learn that placing a significant amount of trust in the state is a good path to disappointment. And back home.
  24. I don't know about that. We just saw a heavily armed mob of nincomcoop worked up into a murderous rage by fake news and they occupied the Capitol and chased congresscritters but never fired one shot. That's serious fire discipline.
  25. This bobcat was very close to my camera the other day. It was 7:17 and sunset is after 8 this time of year, but it's a shady area and the camera had already switched to night/IR mode. The bobcat alerts to something and then walks off in that direction. That little structure in the distance is my chicken tractor. Still haven't ever had a bobcat figure out how to get them. About ten minutes later, the camera took a pic of me driving by, so I just missed seeing it in person.
×
×
  • Create New...