JamesSavik

Hell no. The little b@stards shoot up schools.

Sounds more like a good reason to contain 14 year olds until they are in control of themselves. I suppose that is why the archictecture of middle schools looks a lot like prisons.

SO the use of violence/force never works? Hummm... I wonder what the Nazi Germans think about that... Oh that's right. They are all dead from the use of force by the Allies. Force does work and it is applied all the time. Whether it is used sucessfully or not depends on how it is applied. The reason that Americans aren't so good at the use of force is that Americans don't have the stomach for the terror behind that force. Without it you might as well be playing games like dropping bombs and food at the same time. Oh that's right. We do that too.

Germany has Draconian gun control laws and the dubious distinction of having the single most lethal school shooting rampage on record. 18 dead in German school shooting (BBC 4/26/2002) I believe that the problem with this phenomenon in the US is the percieved disconnect between the crime and the punishment. When a school shooting happens, it's wall-to-wall coverage for days. Perp and victims alike are profiled. The perp has instant celeberity status. The trial will probably take about a year or longer when the shootings have become very old news and rarely get any media coverage. Some stupid individuals, and we've got plenty of them, seem to interpret this as there is no punishment. I suggested a very public and brutal punishment for these incident: This eliminates the apparent disconnect between the crime and punishment. It also prevents the romanticism of shooter as a heroic figure that is fighting for something and shows them as they truly are: sniveling little cowards. Do it this way and I guarantee that it will be the end of school shootings. Continuing to treat school shootings as media events is a sure way to inspire more of them.

For a school shooting to happen, laws have already been broken. Minors aren't supposed to have guns at all or under a very narrow range of circumstances. In most past shooting incidents, guns were taken from the home or the home of a relative which is at least negligence on the part of parents or grandparents. The Columbine shooters purchased their weapons on the street. In all of these cases laws were broken and/or guns were not secured by their owners as required by law. No laws, other than a complete ban would have prevented any of the shooting incidents because once someone has made up their mind to pull the trigger (or commit murder), a bunch of class A misdemeanors don't mean squat. If a person is intent on committing murder there are plenty of other "legal" weapons or makeshift weapons that will do the job just fine. Ice picks, razors, garrotes, knives, machetes, axes can be purchased anytime, anywhere by anyone with no waiting period no questions asked. If you want to do something legally to prevent these crimes, I would suggest an expedited trial and very public and televised execution. Put the bastard into a giant blender feet first so the public can watch their expression. Most of these damned things are media driven. Instead of making the little sh*ts famous, show them lead to their death crying and wetting themselves like the little b*tches that they really are. Deal with it with absolute brutality instead of a media circus and it will end. period.

My sense of humor can sometimes run a little dark. Benji has the right idea- we need an icon for "just kidding". On the other hand, it really would be cool to take out the trash every year between January and March...

Other: supplied by bellsouth. two tin cups and a long string.

Here's an angry baboon and John McCain. Scary huh? Here is a startled Baboon and Hillary... Here is Huckabee and a baboon making a point. You can't see Huckabee's teeth simply because they are too short but the body language is a dead on match.

OK we've all seen this picture but George's ears make chimp jokes passe'. Let's take a look at the major candidates and other in the news side by side with their closest biological relatives... Here is Phred Phelps and a baboon. Can you tell which is which? Here is Phred again and an baboon... which looks more evil?

Here's the key to this piece. No, I don't like HATE per see but I believe it is honest. Understanding that its emotional roots come from fear is the key to understanding and gives us important clues in how to deal with it. I suggest an experiment: Watch a politician who is really wound up about something: doesn't matter what-- gays, immigration, terrorism, take your pick. Watch their body language and their hand gestures. Then go to the zoo and watch baboons pay particular attention to the angry and/or frightened ones. The answer reveals itself.

Hate has a bad rap. For generations the Christian church have sought to discourage it. Lately it has become politically incorrect. Hate is one of the most basic and powerful emotions. It's also one of the most honest if you understand where it comes from. In studying apes, our closest biological relatives, they have two basic emotions: yikes and goody. All the rest of their emotional states are somewhere in between. Goody we can all understand. It's the reaction to spending time with our mate, sex, our favorite food, physical comfort, etc. Yikes is a response to a threat- either real or perceived. It is how apes respond to something that is unfamiliar or not understood. It evokes in apes a fight or flight reaction. Apes will either run from or confront something that frightens them. So we have Yikes changing into Anger. Does this sound at all familiar? Human emotion is a lot more complex than apes. Apes don't know how to lie. Humans are adept at dishonesty- so much so that they often end up lying to themselves. What has happening in society is that social pressure is discouraging people from showing or voicing hate. On the surface this sounds like a good thing and I suppose that it is. Those that openly preach hate are viewed with suspicion and disgust. The problem is that that hate doesn't really go away. It is internalized and carried around, political correctness be damned. It comes out in small doses while looking at employment applications, performance reviews, and a thousand other little ways where internalized hate can replace judgment. Is this really better? I don't know. When we hear a hate preacher like Phelps, Hucklebee or Dobson carrying on like a baboon, at least its honest and we know where we stand-- even if we won't turn our back on them. Where things get really dangerous is when that internalized hate is concealed behind a smile and a warm handshake. To me it is easier when the haters rave. You can protect yourself from the danger that you see. I takes a politically correct bigot that professes to love everybody to really hurt you. IMHO: let the haters hate. I'll buy them t-shirts. It's never the snake that you see that bites you. It's always the snake in the grass.

Love is a transient emotion but hate lasts for decades.

They are correct. The sad fact is that while overt bigotry is out of fashion, attitudes haven't changed that much.

I don't like breeders. They are boring and one dimensional.... barely sentient. I am wary of them they tend to think gay people are weak, stupid and/or easy to take advantage of. It gets tiresome showing them the error in their thinking. We should be allowed to get a hunting license and kill a couple of dozen of them every year just to thin out the heard- you know the stupid ones, the ugly ones, any named Bubba or Skeeter... They would definitly benefit from some eugenics as they apparently don't care which cows they impregnate. Sometimes it seems they look for the worst match possible.

Swedish, English and just for the alcoholism gene, Irish. hic.

V for Vendetta nuff said.

I've got four cats but only one BF. It's way less complicated that way.

Never could stand Lou Perlman's boy bands. They weren't hot enough to unbalance the bad muzak. However- it didn't matter how Leif Garrett sounded.

We are indeed kindred spirits Menzo. I too enjoy watch hyper liberals sputter when they hit the wall. Rand's thesis was that the greatest good is served when people serve their own interests first and its darned hard to argue with that. Generations of capitalism, while not perfect, has been a dynamic engine that has propelled progress in all fields of human endevor.

I think therefore I yam? Ah.. now we're getting somewhere. Rand has a better definition: 1) Reality exists as an objective absolute

I think my philosophy can best be summed up as a pragmatist. The dictionary definition of pragmatism is: the doctrine that practical consequences are the criteria of knowledge and meaning and value. To be pragmatic is defined as: the attribute of accepting the facts of life and favoring practicality and literal truth.

I noticed that too Benji! Apparently it is less obscene in print than it is on a poster. When you prosecute a case, especially for something as subjective as obscenity, you have to have a smoking gun to put in front of the jury. That poster ain't it. You CAN NOT prosecute an entity like A&F or anyone else for residual lewdness which is what I feel like is going on here. If the city's D.A. is smart he'll drop this case as soon as possible. Otherwise it will simply be a long ugly court fight that the city will lose and be stuck with several million dollars in court costs.

These guys would stroke out if they saw Michelangelo's David's junk...

You means the same a-holes that have the nerve to look surprised when their girls get pregnant and their boys become known as "Baby-daddy"?

Let it go to court. A&F will send lawyers that will destroy the local DA. When the police hand this over to the DA, if he's a good one, he'll dismiss it. If he is a grandstander, he'll drag it out as long as it's possible to get face time on the news. Either way, it's a a dog of a case. By these standards the old Coppertone girl adds are obscene. What make the A&F adds obscene? They don't show as much tush as the Coppertone girl and she sure ain't 18!