Ok, so terrorism is "our" fault right? Whatever. I guess we are just going to have to disagree on that one. You would have just sent a "sorry for offending you" card to Osama, I guess. I'm more of a peace through superior firepower kind of guy.

As for the rest of it, "freedom" isn't really what you want, unless of course it is something that you agree with. If I own a bar, you don't think it's a problem that I can't allow a legal act. If you only want to play at non-smoking clubs I say more power to you that's your right, but telling me I can't smoke infringes on MY rights.

So, YOU don't see why I would want an "automatic weapon", okay, why would YOU want a car that exceeds the legal speed limit? BTW, it's NOT automatic weapons that are limited by the assault weapon ban, it's based on how they look. But you don't mind that infringement on the second amendment. I do.

The college issue is happening in Texas right now, I wonder how long it takes before it creeps over to CA? But I don't live in Texas, and I finished college more than ......... a long time ago, so it doesn't "affect" me.

Well, if being critical of the government about ANYTHING gets you blacklisted, I'm afraid I'm right after you on the "list", but my point was more about being able to tell a joke (as an example) anywhere it seems without "offending" someone. I happen to support EVERYBODY'S right to free speech even (especially) if I don't agree with it. Imagine the boredom if we all said the same thing.

BTW how do you get that "rolling the eyes" smiley face? I like that one.

Pete

Now hold on right there, buddy.

How am I supposed to release my frustration with Microsoft products if I can't own automatic weapons???

Seems like you are all for limiting people's personal freedom.

Aurel, your opinion is garbage just because you're French. It's just garbage all by itself.

I'm not going to tell you because you hurt my feelings :p

We'll agree to disagree. I could argue back each and every point (what the 2nd amendment actually meant, being able to do what you want as long as it doesn't harm others, etc), then you'd come back with counter arguments, etc. Hopeless morass.

btw, I'm pissed as Osama too, since he didn't send me a card for my b-day...

2nd hand smoke kills people. I should be able to be in a public place without having my health threatened. Just like I can't yell "fire" in a movie theater, or spray acid around because I like to and have "freedom."

There are limits to personal freedom, and a big fat gray area. You think automatic weapons, cigarettes, and the CIA tracking credit card data is OK. I don't. We agree to disagree.

Well, if you are ever interested in a spirited debate on any of the above topics, let me know. I will TRY not to hurt your feelings again.

BTW, is there any evidence of second hand smoke being dangerous, or is it still just speculation? And if you ever get the opportunity to fire off a couple of rounds out of an automatic weapon, you might get a kick out of it. Be carefiul though, it's kind of like skydiving, it's very addictive.

Pete

That is a great relief to hear that from you, Wackruse. At some point, I thought you did not like the french. But now, I know it is just because I am just plain dumb. I only the world could count more enlighters like yourself, it would be such a better place ! :D

Aurel

Nope...can't do it. I know you'd hurt my feelings...then I'd have to see my therapist more...then I'd have less money to keep my 911 running. Then I'd get depressed, and have to start on Zoloft, then find a support group...yada yada...

speaking as a ph.d. biochemist who has sorted through some of the data and has a number of colleagues who are involved in major public health projects, I can say that the data indicates that 2nd hand smoke is indeed a real threat.

As for guns, I'm sure it is fun, but I'll pass. I was almost shot way back when, and since then I have this problem with firearms. Oh now, there you go...you made me dredge up my past, and now I'll have to go back on my meds and see my therapist...

Regarding second hand smoke, it is actually more dangerous than for the smoker, because the second-hander does not benefit from a filter (assuming same exposure for both).

Aurel

By buying a Mac ;)

Although that perhaps doesn't vent much frustration. I vote a special dispensation for WMD as related to MS products.

..........except, if I am inhaling "your" smoke, it has theoretically been filtered twice, once by the filter and once by you. I am of course not allowing for the smoke coming off of the end of the cig. I asked about some factual information, not to dispute it, but because I have never seen anything official. The concept of "second hand smoke" makes sense, I just haven't ever seen it proven.

I am, for the record NOT a smoker. I occaisionally smoke a pack when I am out drinking as I enjoy it, but I don't smoke regularly. I, like most people don't want smoke blown in my face while I am eating a steak (or tofu, whatever you "healthy" guys eat) and if a place is too smoky, I just don't go there. My ex-wife was VERY allergic to smoke, so we had to be careful about where we went, but even she was against outlawing it. It should be up to the individual, be it the customer or the proprietor.

Petehttp://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/uzi.gif

fwiw my wife and I bbq'd up a very nice NY cut Saturday night...not a bit of tofu in sight.

There is some leeway...owner operated bars can allow smoking (I play regularly in one). Something to do with not exposing other employees to smoke...not sure on the details.

After living in California all my life, I"m always taken aback when going to other parts of the country where smoking is allowed in public places. As an ex-smoker, I'm actually pretty militant about not having someone around me smoking...especially if food is involved. But that's one reason I like living in the republik of Kalifornia...all these crazy liberal laws and such.

Don't worry Aurel, I still hate the French.

Nostatic -- I agree that we disagree. The Patriot Act is a law passed by both houses of congress, signed by the President of the U.S. and overseen by the Supreme court of the US. Can you honestly name another process on this planet that can safeguard your freedom better than that?

yes...the imperial republic of Freedonia. Clearly superior. And funnier.

Opportunistic legislation passed by nervous politicians during a fearful public state of panic. Not the ideal environment for a good law now matter what the system. But, now we work within the system to change it if we don't like it.

http://www.whyaduck.com/cards/harpo4.jpg

Bingo. With the balance of power about as even as ever, abuses of power (if that's how you'd care to describe it), will not last long. And actually, the Patriotic Act has an expiration date. How long do the batteries in those brain implants last?

I forgot how much you liberals love a good monarchy....:D

A MAC?

http://www.mac10.org/macsonly.html

That was almost too easy. ;)

Weren't the McCarthy hearings sanctioned by all entities? I believe in retrospect that was a rather black period in our "free" society. I believe this could be another such scenario, but I could be wrong. Time will tell...

one of my ex...umm...."colleagues" had a mac10. He loved it. Lots of "muhahahahaha".

Hearings are just hearings, they are not law. Neither the judicial nor the executive branch have any say over legislative hearings.

(You're not going to say that there weren't any communists either.... are you?)

IMHO the only "black" part of thet era was how deeply the communist party had infiltrated our own government. As it turns out, McCarthy's only mistake was that he didn't know it went as deep as it really did. To look back on that situation with the impression that McCarthy was somehow out of line is really too bad. Extraortinary times require extraordinary measures.