Chilly

cuz wut u say isn't worth discussing most of the time?

Thank god. I looked at the first post, saw 171 days, and was about to kill something until I realized that theres no way in hell its that long. ;p

Except that splitting the country up would just cause more war. Look at the regions surrounding Iraq, and look at where you'd be drawing the lines, and it doesn't solve anything. Quite frankly, it doesn't matter if you don't think that their grievance is legitimate or not. Hell, it more or less doesn't matter if America does. Until they are convinced of that, it won't stop.

I meant it more as to make them think that the government isn't working (through fear) because they can't protect anything, more or less on the lines of what CTM was saying.

Thats what I see.

Cruise missles designed to look like planes do too!

lol you can't tell a plane from a cruise missle stupid!

You mean they aren't Moses' 15, I mean 10 commandments? (<3 Mel Brooks)

I'd think the intent would be to scare other Iraqi's into being on their side, not to scare us away. CTM said it better than I did. Damn!

I already admitted that I don't know what I'm talking about. Personally, I think making gun laws isn't going to do sh-- until technology gets better. Yeah, I will be long dead as well. Which is why gun control through any other means then future technology beyond what we have is pointless. Technology does suck at times.

I don't think the rules on the book are adaquate to do anything, which is one of the reasons a different law is needed. I'm not referring to technology available today. As I said previously, it will take decades and decades to get afordable, yet strong, security, as technology matures. I agree, today's security "solutions" are pointless adn not needed. However, the technology will be different in the future, and I mean way off in the future, and possibly make what I'm talking about achieveable. What, exactly, is the root of the problem? How do you go after it? How do you do this in the future, as technology improves? This is what I'm trying to get at. Bash today's laws all you want, but as technology improves and evolves, its going to influence the way gun control works. Decades in the future. Thats what I'm referring to here.

Politicians and non-politicians are two different things. I agree with you that politicans will go overboard, and outlawing guns won't do anything. At the same time I do feel that there is a need for increased gun control. My feeling is that we should have stricter controls over tracking guns. Make it easier to identify and prosecute people who misuse them. I also do think that technology will allow us to individualize them: perhaps biometrically, perhaps some other way. If you aren't the person who owns the gun, then you can't fire it. This is going to take generations to do, but I believe its the future of realistic gun control One of the main problems is that anytime a gun control law goes into effect, its going to take generations before the full effect is felt for safety purposes, and its never going to be 100%. Think of the whole freon ban, and how some people are still using it decades later, and you can still buy it if you talk to the right people. However the supply IS getting smaller, but the effects take decades to be felt. I think that gun control would take much, much longer, but the same ripple effect would be felt.

Your assumption, that gun control = no guns, is a false one sir.

Then why are both Universal Studios and SeaWorld Orlando there?

Without a doubt Universal is the shiznit, not surprised it made the list. I was a bit surprised Dollywood was so high, I like Disney World better than it. SeaWorld Orlando has improved a TON over recent years which is why its so high up on the list.

I'm more or less thinking of decades at the very minimum in the future, not the present, after such technology would drop big time in price as well as just the ability to do so. Most likely after I'm dead before such things would be realized, but interesting to think about nonetheless. Thanks for the info. :-) Imagine a scene in which both sides have to stop before shooting to type in their password, and the person who does it quickest wins, lol.

I'm referring to this article: http://www.newscientist.com/blog/invention...ed-bullets.html Can everyone just agree that making guns illegal won't solve anything? I've always thought that Chris Rock's comedy on gun control, making the bullets cost $10,000 each, was funny, but had some truth to it. I've always thought bullets and guns in the future should have some sort of key. Password protecting them is not the answer, but registering the bullets is something that should be done better and this is a step in that direction. What if bullets were fine-tuned for their guns, where each bullet is designed to only go off in a specific gun? Technology is obviously not secure enough to be able to provide this type of solution yet - it would be easily hacked into. But I do believe this is where the future of gun control will be headed. I know nothing about bullets though or the feasibility of this. Some questions that I have: How hard is it to make bullets? Would it be easy for bullets to show up on the black market for older guns, effectively eliminating the safeguards for anyone except law abiding citizens? I'd imagine it wouldn't be too hard, but I don't know.

Crazier stuff has happened. Maybe Teddy Nolan had a kid with Mrs. Hasek? By the way, my favorite quote about goaltender wives has to come from my roommate's dad, who was watching a hockey game and once said: "Damn, that Mrs. Brodeur's got some nice Brodeurs".

I'll be there.

Hmm, so the NYT reports something that was public knowledge already, and they are the evil ones here? I truly don't get it.

YAC. It mostly depends on where the DB is on the field at the time of reception. In a dink-and-dunk style offense, or versus a team with good DBs, you could protentially have 0 YAC but still have a strong offensive showing.

Congrats Beavers.

Thats not Bush's. His is "Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, well, well, you aint gonna fool me twice."

When all else fails, blame the media...

Because Jesus hates you.