Discussion:
Three reasons why Virginia Tech Shooter guy did it
(too old to reply)
Modemac
2007-04-20 11:15:52 UTC
Permalink
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...

Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
lack of religion in the science classroom:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php

And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
video games:

http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/

Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
was possessed by Satan:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html

--
The High Weirdness Project
http://www.modemac.com
Phin
2007-04-20 11:30:29 UTC
Permalink
You know, it's an enormous amount of ridiculous bullshit because
everyone wants to put it off onto everything else but the individual.
And it's exactly THAT TYPE OF THINKING that allowed that guy to do
what he did. If you look at his tapes, all he was talking about was
'you all made me do it, the blood is on your hands. I didn't do this'
blahblahblahblahlbah. Same rationalization bullshit that Manson and so
many others have made. Or a 'voice' in my head or whatnot. And
everyone like in the links below that want to relieve the guy of any
responsibility.

Well I guess I'm becoming more, uh, conservative in my ahem age. Of
course it's frustrating for us cuz you can't really get any payback on
the sumbitch right? Can't execute, can't prosecute, can't convict and
can't psychoanalyze. Shit. Just some tapes and dumb photographs and
some anecdotes about him being teased in school for us to paw over and
get ratings with.

Okay so, I guess I'm discovering 'free will' and preaching to the
choir... I'm always the last to know. Well, maybe not the last, but,
you know.

Ahem.

Phin
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
Lord Cyclohexane
2007-04-20 13:45:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phin
Well I guess I'm becoming more, uh, conservative in my ahem age.
Doesn't sound like it. If you were blaming violent music, Hollywood,
violent video games, lack of religion in science classes, lack of
prayer in schools, Satan's direct influence in the world, the gay
culture causing God to revoke his protection from America, bleeding
hearts wanting there to still be immigration in this country, and
topped it all off by saying that this should not be a question of gun
control but immediately afterwards ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?), then you'd be conservative.

Sounds instead like you've become WISE in your, ahem, age and rejected
both the liberal and the conservative nonsense.
h***@aol.com
2007-04-20 14:18:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
Server 13
2007-04-20 15:15:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
In a good number of states, they do.
Post by h***@aol.com
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
unknown
2007-04-20 16:49:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Server 13
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
In a good number of states, they do.
Actually what happened in this case: Cho had been declared a "danger
to self or others" at one point. The judge was going to have him kept
for observation/head shrinking, and had the choice to make it
mandatory or voluntary. He made it voluntary. Apparently, if he had
made it mandatory, that would have showed up in Cho's background check
for the gun purchase, and he wouldn't have been able to do it.

So there was a mechanism in place there, anyway.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
`He knows in that moment more than he has ever known in his life and more than he will know in five minutes.' -- Marge Piercy, Body of Glass
Phin
2007-04-20 17:04:10 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:49:01 -0700, Zapanaz
Post by unknown
Post by Server 13
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
In a good number of states, they do.
Actually what happened in this case: Cho had been declared a "danger
to self or others" at one point. The judge was going to have him kept
for observation/head shrinking, and had the choice to make it
mandatory or voluntary. He made it voluntary. Apparently, if he had
made it mandatory, that would have showed up in Cho's background check
for the gun purchase, and he wouldn't have been able to do it.
So there was a mechanism in place there, anyway.
I.... smell a lawsuit.

I.... smell several lawsuits.

Phin
sibu SODDI
2007-04-20 17:41:17 UTC
Permalink
"Phin" <***@somewhere.net> wrote:

(snip)
Post by Phin
I.... smell a lawsuit.
I.... smell several lawsuits.
I smell dead preppies.
Truth-monger
2007-04-20 20:27:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Server 13
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
In a good number of states, they do.
Post by h***@aol.com
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
What states do, Server 13? If you make a point, back up your shit.
h***@aol.com
2007-04-21 01:04:54 UTC
Permalink
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in the
country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged with
a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Douglas Berry
2007-04-21 16:24:59 UTC
Permalink
On 20 Apr 2007 18:04:54 -0700 there was an Ancient ***@aol.com
who stoppeth one in alt.conspiracy
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in the
country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged with
a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population density
of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from crowding more
dense states get.

Also, I would suspect your smaller class sizes in all grades make it
easier to notice and intervene when a child starts showing signs of
withdrawing and turning inward (early signs of mental illness.) From
everything I've read about Cho, he stopped talking to anyone shortly
after he came to the US. It went downhill from there.
--

Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail

"Where is the prince who can afford so to cover
his country with troops for its defense, as that
ten thousand men descending from the clouds, might
not,in many places, do an infinite deal of mischief
before a force could be brought together to repel
them?" - BENJAMIN FRANKLIN-1784
Floyd L. Davidson
2007-04-21 21:31:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Douglas Berry
who stoppeth one in alt.conspiracy
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in the
country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged with
a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population density
of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from crowding more
dense states get.
Interesting, but very mistaken concept. Alaska's population is
not spread out evenly over the huge geographical land mass.
While it is true that there are no population centers with
multi-millions of people, Anchorage's meager 300,000 has all the
attributes of urban life that are available anywhere (gangs,
freeways, malls, whatever).

But the other point is that even in most of "rural" Alaska there
is also a relatively high population density in the areas where
people do live. In Bush Alaska people don't live on homesteads
every 1/2 a mile along the Yukon river... they live in very
small (physically as well as population) villages, often in
houses that are far more tightly packed with people than those
in cities, and usually almost as closely positioned next to each
other.
Post by Douglas Berry
Also, I would suspect your smaller class sizes in all grades make it
Where are these smaller class sizes??? :-)
Post by Douglas Berry
easier to notice and intervene when a child starts showing signs of
What kind of intervention is likely to be available in a village 500
miles from the nearest State Trooper, with a total local medical staff
consisting of two village health aides? Oh, some villages do have
a Village Police Officer... who is not armed and has little training
other than knowing when to call the Troopers.

Often most villages are lucky if they can get a Trooper to even
begin a response if no shots have been fired.
Post by Douglas Berry
withdrawing and turning inward (early signs of mental illness.) From
Not a good description, because most introverts withdraw and
turn inward. Plus that is typically the culturally appropriate
response in many Native villages.
Post by Douglas Berry
everything I've read about Cho, he stopped talking to anyone shortly
after he came to the US. It went downhill from there.
He came here at what, age 8? And apparently was quite strange
before that. Regardless, he was a psychopath who did indeed
display many obvious signs. But not many psychopaths become
mass murders...
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@apaflo.com
Vandar
2007-04-22 20:47:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Douglas Berry
who stoppeth one in alt.conspiracy
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in the
country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged with
a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population density
of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from crowding more
dense states get.
Interesting, but very mistaken concept. Alaska's population is
not spread out evenly over the huge geographical land mass.
While it is true that there are no population centers with
multi-millions of people, Anchorage's meager 300,000
Over half of the state's entire population.
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
has all the
attributes of urban life that are available anywhere (gangs,
freeways, malls, whatever).
But the other point is that even in most of "rural" Alaska there
is also a relatively high population density in the areas where
people do live.
Anchorage has a density of about 160/sq mi, which is very low.
User
2007-04-22 22:08:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Douglas Berry
On 20 Apr 2007 18:04:54 -0700 there was an Ancient
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in
the country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged
with a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population
density of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from
crowding more dense states get.
Interesting, but very mistaken concept. Alaska's population is
not spread out evenly over the huge geographical land mass.
While it is true that there are no population centers with
multi-millions of people, Anchorage's meager 300,000
Over half of the state's entire population.
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
has all the
attributes of urban life that are available anywhere (gangs,
freeways, malls, whatever).
But the other point is that even in most of "rural" Alaska there
is also a relatively high population density in the areas where
people do live.
Anchorage has a density of about 160/sq mi, which is very low.
Man you are smarter than the people that live there.WOW.
Vandar
2007-04-23 03:48:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by User
Post by Vandar
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Douglas Berry
On 20 Apr 2007 18:04:54 -0700 there was an Ancient
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in
the country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged
with a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population
density of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from
crowding more dense states get.
Interesting, but very mistaken concept. Alaska's population is
not spread out evenly over the huge geographical land mass.
While it is true that there are no population centers with
multi-millions of people, Anchorage's meager 300,000
Over half of the state's entire population.
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
has all the
attributes of urban life that are available anywhere (gangs,
freeways, malls, whatever).
But the other point is that even in most of "rural" Alaska there
is also a relatively high population density in the areas where
people do live.
Anchorage has a density of about 160/sq mi, which is very low.
Man you are smarter than the people that live there.WOW.
Google is my friend.
Don Stockbauer
2007-04-23 03:54:00 UTC
Permalink
Three reasons why Virginia Tech Shooter guy did it:

1. He liked shooting the fuck outta people.

2. He liked shooting the fuck outta people.

3. He liked shooting the fuck outta people.
Floyd L. Davidson
2007-04-23 04:18:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by User
Post by Vandar
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Douglas Berry
On 20 Apr 2007 18:04:54 -0700 there was an Ancient
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in
the country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue. It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged
with a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population
density of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from
crowding more dense states get.
Interesting, but very mistaken concept. Alaska's population is
not spread out evenly over the huge geographical land mass.
While it is true that there are no population centers with
multi-millions of people, Anchorage's meager 300,000
Over half of the state's entire population.
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
has all the
attributes of urban life that are available anywhere (gangs,
freeways, malls, whatever).
But the other point is that even in most of "rural" Alaska there
is also a relatively high population density in the areas where
people do live.
Anchorage has a density of about 160/sq mi, which is very low.
Man you are smarter than the people that live there.WOW.
Google is my friend.
It didn't seem to help you much though! :-)

I don't know how you missed on the population numbers, but the
density is an honest error that only someone living in Alaska is
likely to know. The fact that the "Anchorage" census area is
not limited to the urban city of Anchorage and includes (mostly
for tax purposes) more unpopulated wilderness area than not just
isn't obvious from what is found using google, unless of course
a person just happens to know about it before hand.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@apaflo.com
Floyd L. Davidson
2007-04-23 00:48:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Douglas Berry
Population density. Alaska has, by far, the lowest population density
of any of the states. Y'all don't get the stress from crowding more
dense states get.
Interesting, but very mistaken concept. Alaska's population is
not spread out evenly over the huge geographical land mass.
While it is true that there are no population centers with
multi-millions of people, Anchorage's meager 300,000
Over half of the state's entire population.
Actually less than half. In 2006, 282,813 of the State's
670,053 people, which is merely 42.2 percent.

Here are some comparative numbers though, from around the
state. These came from the 2000 census data, so they are
a bit out of date but still quite indicative.

City: Anchorage Barrow Kipnuk Chuathbaluk

Population: 282,813 4,026 668 95

Avg household size: 2.67 3.27 4.70 3.61

Percent lacking plumbing 0.5 11.1 95.8 75.7
(sink, shower/bath, or toilet)

Percent lacking kitchen 0.6 9.3 94.4 70.3
(running water, stove or refer.)

Those are typical figures. Barrow is the seat of the wealthy
North Slope Borough. Kipnuk is a thriving Yupi'k Eskimo village
on the Bering Sea coast, and Chuathbaluk is one of several very
small upriver villages on the Kuskokwim River. None of the
numbers stand out as unusual for bush villages of that size.
Anchorage numbers are comparable with Fairbanks (which has a
lower household size and higher percentages that lack
facilities).

I don't know what sort of figure like that would be found for
urban or rural areas on the Lower-48, which might be interesting
for comparison. It would also be *very* interesting to see
a study like the one reference below...
Post by Vandar
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
has all the
attributes of urban life that are available anywhere (gangs,
freeways, malls, whatever).
But the other point is that even in most of "rural" Alaska
there
is also a relatively high population density in the areas where
people do live.
Anchorage has a density of about 160/sq mi, which is very low.
But that is not the *city*, or urban part of Anchorage. It is
the "Municipality of Anchorage" which includes, for example all
of Fort Richardson, all of Elmendorf AFB, Eagle River, Kincaid
Park, Girdwood and Glen Alps. It has far more non-urban area
than it does urban area, as evidenced by the large populations
of moose, black bears, brown bears, and even wolverines. Much
of it is just plain wilderness!

Inside the city of Anchorage there is one area that exceeds
15,000 people per square mile (a couple of blocks in Mountain
View), and several areas sprinkled around town are between
10,000 and 15,000, with many areas of 5-10,000 per square mile.

justice.uaa.alaska.edu/indicators/series03/aci03a2.population.pdf

And of course, the social pressures referenced above do exist in
those areas. In fact, the above figures come from a report that
correlates "Population Density" with "Social Deviance" in
Anchorage. However, they found no correlation between
population density and social deviance; instead they say the
data clearly shows that illegal behavior loves company!
Anywhere they found high rates of deviance for one criteria they
found it for others too.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@apaflo.com
unknown
2007-04-23 02:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Vandar
Over half of the state's entire population.
Actually less than half. In 2006, 282,813 of the State's
670,053 people, which is merely 42.2 percent.
WHY THANK YOU, MISTER PRECISION-MAN!


WHY IF ERRORS OF 7.8 % WERE ALLOWED TO GO UNCHALLENGED, WHERE WOULD WE
BE? 57.8 % OF THE WAY TO HELL, THAT'S WHERE!
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
THE WORLD WILL END TOMORROW!, eventually
Floyd L. Davidson
2007-04-23 02:35:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Vandar
Over half of the state's entire population.
Actually less than half. In 2006, 282,813 of the State's
670,053 people, which is merely 42.2 percent.
WHY THANK YOU, MISTER PRECISION-MAN!
WHY IF ERRORS OF 7.8 % WERE ALLOWED TO GO UNCHALLENGED, WHERE WOULD WE
BE? 57.8 % OF THE WAY TO HELL, THAT'S WHERE!
The fact is that Anchorage does not have "over half" of Alaska's
population. That it happens to be 42.2 percent is merely
absolute proof positive of that.

If those percentages were the numbers from an election, the side
with 57.8 percent would be labeled a "landslide". Hence yes it
is of considerable significance.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@apaflo.com
unknown
2007-04-23 02:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by unknown
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Vandar
Over half of the state's entire population.
Actually less than half. In 2006, 282,813 of the State's
670,053 people, which is merely 42.2 percent.
WHY THANK YOU, MISTER PRECISION-MAN!
WHY IF ERRORS OF 7.8 % WERE ALLOWED TO GO UNCHALLENGED, WHERE WOULD WE
BE? 57.8 % OF THE WAY TO HELL, THAT'S WHERE!
The fact is that Anchorage does not have "over half" of Alaska's
population. That it happens to be 42.2 percent is merely
absolute proof positive of that.
If those percentages were the numbers from an election, the side
with 57.8 percent would be labeled a "landslide". Hence yes it
is of considerable significance.
If they represented the number of carrots stuffed up Mr. Ed's ass,
they would represent a HORRIFIC ABUSE OF NATURE.

Loading Image...


Only YOU stand against such nightmarish errors! THANK GOD FOR YOU,
SIR!
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"It's like the Roman Empire. Wasn't everybody
running around just covered with syphilis?
And then it was destroyed by the volcano."
--Joan Collins
Floyd L. Davidson
2007-04-23 03:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by unknown
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Vandar
Over half of the state's entire population.
Actually less than half. In 2006, 282,813 of the State's
670,053 people, which is merely 42.2 percent.
WHY THANK YOU, MISTER PRECISION-MAN!
WHY IF ERRORS OF 7.8 % WERE ALLOWED TO GO UNCHALLENGED, WHERE WOULD WE
BE? 57.8 % OF THE WAY TO HELL, THAT'S WHERE!
The fact is that Anchorage does not have "over half" of Alaska's
population. That it happens to be 42.2 percent is merely
absolute proof positive of that.
If those percentages were the numbers from an election, the side
with 57.8 percent would be labeled a "landslide". Hence yes it
is of considerable significance.
If they represented the number of carrots stuffed up Mr. Ed's ass,
they would represent a HORRIFIC ABUSE OF NATURE.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2006/20060201h.jpg
Only YOU stand against such nightmarish errors! THANK GOD FOR YOU,
SIR!
Oh, my. A total idiot.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@apaflo.com
unknown
2007-04-23 04:05:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by unknown
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by unknown
Post by Floyd L. Davidson
Post by Vandar
Over half of the state's entire population.
Actually less than half. In 2006, 282,813 of the State's
670,053 people, which is merely 42.2 percent.
WHY THANK YOU, MISTER PRECISION-MAN!
WHY IF ERRORS OF 7.8 % WERE ALLOWED TO GO UNCHALLENGED, WHERE WOULD WE
BE? 57.8 % OF THE WAY TO HELL, THAT'S WHERE!
The fact is that Anchorage does not have "over half" of Alaska's
population. That it happens to be 42.2 percent is merely
absolute proof positive of that.
If those percentages were the numbers from an election, the side
with 57.8 percent would be labeled a "landslide". Hence yes it
is of considerable significance.
If they represented the number of carrots stuffed up Mr. Ed's ass,
they would represent a HORRIFIC ABUSE OF NATURE.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2006/20060201h.jpg
Only YOU stand against such nightmarish errors! THANK GOD FOR YOU,
SIR!
Oh, my. A total idiot.
so you mean, 100.00% a total idiot?
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"The ability to cut ahead in line
is what separates us from the animals."
~ Peggy Hill
Floyd L. Davidson
2007-04-21 21:15:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@aol.com
I know I'm playing "pin the tail on the donkey" here, but I will
continue anyway. Alaska has some of the most liberal gun laws in the
country; how come they never have any of these school house
massacres? I mean, its not even an issue.
A significantly less than astute observation.

In 1997 a 16 year old student named Evan Ramsey brought multiple
weapons to school in Bethel Alaska and killed the principal and
one other student, while wounding two others. He is currently
serving a 198 year prison sentence.

Likewise some years before that, in 1984, a deranged individual
named Michael Silka killed nine people in the village of Manley
Hot Springs. Eight individuals were killed and dumped into the
river when they happened to show up at a boat ramp during the
three/four hour killing spree. When the community became aware,
troopers were called and Silka escaped in his boat. Troopers
tracked him down with a helicopter, and in an exchange of shots
one trooper died and Silka was killed.

Alaska is a *huge* place geographically, but we are also a very
small community. For example, my children were born in Bethel
and we consider that to be "home", even though none of my
immediate family currently lives there. You can imagine that
from a town of 5000 people, it isn't that we knew of some of the
people involved, but more a case of we personally knew *most* of
them.

At the time of the Manley Hot Springs incident I had been living
near Fairbanks for 5 years. The Alaska State Trooper sitting
next the one who died was a friend of mine at the time.

I don't mean to say that those personal circumstances are
unusual, I mean that in our community these things have a
tremendous personal effect on all Alaskans. We have a high rate
of airplane accidents, and while 4-5 people dying in a crash
outside means almost nothing to anyone in particular, in Alaska
such accidents almost always are very close to home for almost
the entire population. Each of us either knows one of the
victims, or we are close friends to someone who does. It is
*never* just another name on the 6 o'clock news...
Post by h***@aol.com
It is like everybody in
Alaska knows that trying any of this shit might get you plugged with
a .44 Magnum slug (insert unhappy thought here).
Very few Alaskans carry .44 magnums around. We did have on
idiot bible thumping pastor down in Palmer not too many years
ago who was so deathly afraid of Native people that he had one,
and used it to kill two men steeling food from his church's
shelves (where they stored food to be given to the needy).

I wouldn't worry about who is armed or not in Alaska. But if
somebody says they are going to get a gun... it is an
exceedingly good bet that they do have one and know how to use
it.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@apaflo.com
Truth-monger
2007-04-23 02:42:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Server 13
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
In a good number of states, they do.
Post by h***@aol.com
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Server 13 as usual has a comment spanning the states, but no link. A
good number of states? Wow do I need to research your claim, or,
since you didn't leave one single link, discard your claim as shit
under my foot?
Notan
2007-04-20 15:43:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
I think that's one of the, if not *the*, biggest problems in this case...

The idea that someone who was deemed "mentally defective," which happens
quite often, wasn't documented in "the system" as such.

In our efforts to be politically correct, or whatever, we're afraid to
call a spade a spade.
--
Notan
Rev. Richard Skull
2007-04-20 18:13:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Notan
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
I think that's one of the, if not *the*, biggest problems in this case...
The idea that someone who was deemed "mentally defective," which happens
quite often, wasn't documented in "the system" as such.
In our efforts to be politically correct, or whatever, we're afraid to
call a spade a spade.
--
Notan
Big deal, even if he was declared 'metally Ill", based upon the heath
care system in this nation, we would still eventually ended up on teh
street expected to take his meds, and show up for voluntary follow-up.

If he failed to show up or take his meds, the "system" is so
overlaoded and undefunded, that by the time they realized this, he
would have moved on to anotehr State where there are no background
checks and still have bought a gun.
Truth-monger
2007-04-23 02:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rev. Richard Skull
Post by Notan
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
I think that's one of the, if not *the*, biggest problems in this case...
The idea that someone who was deemed "mentally defective," which happens
quite often, wasn't documented in "the system" as such.
In our efforts to be politically correct, or whatever, we're afraid to
call a spade a spade.
--
Notan
Big deal, even if he was declared 'metally Ill", based upon the heath
care system in this nation, we would still eventually ended up on teh
street expected to take his meds, and show up for voluntary follow-up.
If he failed to show up or take his meds, the "system" is so
overlaoded and undefunded, that by the time they realized this, he
would have moved on to anotehr State where there are no background
checks and still have bought a gun.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Slack is dopey, perfect cult for goldfish and dustmites. Watch em.
sibu SODDI
2007-04-20 17:39:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
Well, you know it costs $25 and you have to wait for hours in long lines to get your
Official State-Issued Mental Defective ID Card. Some people just don't have that kind of
patience.
Server 13
2007-04-20 17:51:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by sibu SODDI
Post by h***@aol.com
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?)
As a bona fide gun freak I feel I must point out that the gun laws
didn't fail in this situation. In fact, everybody followed the gun
laws to the letter, well everybody except Cho. It already is illegal
for a mentally unstable person to purchase a gun, but there is no way
for a gun shop owner to know somebody is crazy because the laws that
govern the privacy rights of mentally unstable people won't allow it.
Don't you understand? If we take away those rights, people might
discriminate against psychopaths.
Well, you know it costs $25 and you have to wait for hours in long lines
to get your Official State-Issued Mental Defective ID Card. Some people
just don't have that kind of patience.
I thought they overturned that.

http://tinyurl.com/e3q5p
Vandar
2007-04-22 20:33:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
violent music
Tipper Gore
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
video games
Hillary Clinton
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
lack of religion in science classes, lack of
prayer in schools,
There's a lack of science in church.
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
Satan's direct influence in the world, the gay
culture causing God to revoke his protection from America, bleeding
hearts wanting there to still be immigration in this country, and
topped it all off by saying that this should not be a question of gun
control but immediately afterwards ask how a mentally unstable
individual was able to purchase a gun (ummm, because without gun
control, they can't check that?), then you'd be conservative.
Sounds instead like you've become WISE in your, ahem, age and rejected
both the liberal and the conservative nonsense.
Partisanship is the biggest problem in American society, bar none.
ctyguy
2007-04-20 14:27:47 UTC
Permalink
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung Lung. :-)
Post by Phin
You know, it's an enormous amount of ridiculous bullshit because
everyone wants to put it off onto everything else but the individual.
And it's exactly THAT TYPE OF THINKING that allowed that guy to do
what he did. If you look at his tapes, all he was talking about was
'you all made me do it, the blood is on your hands. I didn't do this'
blahblahblahblahlbah. Same rationalization bullshit that Manson and so
many others have made. Or a 'voice' in my head or whatnot. And
everyone like in the links below that want to relieve the guy of any
responsibility.
Well I guess I'm becoming more, uh, conservative in my ahem age. Of
course it's frustrating for us cuz you can't really get any payback on
the sumbitch right? Can't execute, can't prosecute, can't convict and
can't psychoanalyze. Shit. Just some tapes and dumb photographs and
some anecdotes about him being teased in school for us to paw over and
get ratings with.
Okay so, I guess I'm discovering 'free will' and preaching to the
choir... I'm always the last to know. Well, maybe not the last, but,
you know.
Ahem.
Phin
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
Rev. Richard Skull
2007-04-20 18:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung Lung. :-)
Post by Phin
You know, it's an enormous amount of ridiculous bullshit because
everyone wants to put it off onto everything else but the individual.
And it's exactly THAT TYPE OF THINKING that allowed that guy to do
what he did. If you look at his tapes, all he was talking about was
'you all made me do it, the blood is on your hands. I didn't do this'
blahblahblahblahlbah. Same rationalization bullshit that Manson and so
many others have made. Or a 'voice' in my head or whatnot. And
everyone like in the links below that want to relieve the guy of any
responsibility.
Well I guess I'm becoming more, uh, conservative in my ahem age. Of
course it's frustrating for us cuz you can't really get any payback on
the sumbitch right? Can't execute, can't prosecute, can't convict and
can't psychoanalyze. Shit. Just some tapes and dumb photographs and
some anecdotes about him being teased in school for us to paw over and
get ratings with.
Okay so, I guess I'm discovering 'free will' and preaching to the
choir... I'm always the last to know. Well, maybe not the last, but,
you know.
Ahem.
Phin
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_M...
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No that was Suk Mi Dic
Artemia Salina
2007-04-21 07:18:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is considered
bad etiquette.
Post by ctyguy
Post by Phin
You know, it's an enormous amount of ridiculous bullshit because
everyone wants to put it off onto everything else but the individual.
And it's exactly THAT TYPE OF THINKING that allowed that guy to do what
he did. If you look at his tapes, all he was talking about was 'you all
made me do it, the blood is on your hands. I didn't do this'
blahblahblahblahlbah. Same rationalization bullshit that Manson and so
many others have made. Or a 'voice' in my head or whatnot. And everyone
like in the links below that want to relieve the guy of any
responsibility.
Well I guess I'm becoming more, uh, conservative in my ahem age. Of
course it's frustrating for us cuz you can't really get any payback on
the sumbitch right? Can't execute, can't prosecute, can't convict and
can't psychoanalyze. Shit. Just some tapes and dumb photographs and
some anecdotes about him being teased in school for us to paw over and
get ratings with.
Okay so, I guess I'm discovering 'free will' and preaching to the
choir... I'm always the last to know. Well, maybe not the last, but,
you know.
Ahem.
Phin
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
--
FARTNUCK teh POOT!! W00t w00T!
Schrodingers Hat
2007-04-21 15:10:46 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 02:18:24 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is considered
If you study my history
Post by Artemia Salina
bad etiquette.
Post by Phin
You know, it's an enormous amount of ridiculous bullshit because
everyone wants to put it off onto everything else but the individual.
And it's exactly THAT TYPE OF THINKING that allowed that guy to do what
he did. If you look at his tapes, all he was talking about was 'you all
made me do it, the blood is on your hands. I didn't do this'
blahblahblahblahlbah. Same rationalization bullshit that Manson and so
many others have made. Or a 'voice' in my head or whatnot. And everyone
like in the links below that want to relieve the guy of any
responsibility.
You will find
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Phin
Well I guess I'm becoming more, uh, conservative in my ahem age. Of
course it's frustrating for us cuz you can't really get any payback on
the sumbitch right? Can't execute, can't prosecute, can't convict and
can't psychoanalyze. Shit. Just some tapes and dumb photographs and
some anecdotes about him being teased in school for us to paw over and
get ratings with.
I really dont care where anyone posts
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Phin
Okay so, I guess I'm discovering 'free will' and preaching to the
choir... I'm always the last to know. Well, maybe not the last, but,
you know.
Ahem.
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Phin
Phin
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
Artemia Salina
2007-04-21 16:47:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
--
FARTNUCK teh POOT!! W00t w00T!
unknown
2007-04-21 19:08:47 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
BORN FREE, as free as the wind blows
As free as the grass grows
Born FREEEEE to follow your HEARRRRRT


LIVE FREE, and beauty SURRONDS YOU
The world still ASTOUNNNNNNDS YOU
Each time you LOOK at a STARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


*STAYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE free, where no walls divide you
You're free as a ROARING TIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDE
So there's no need to HAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDE


BORN FREE, AND LIFE IS WORTH LIVING
BUT ONLY WORTH LIVING
CAUSE YOU'RE BORN
FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
"The acid in human urine causes great damage. It sounds like a laughing matter but it really isn’t."

- Gert-Christian Jakobzik of the Berlin city senate
iDRMRSR
2007-04-21 19:31:02 UTC
Permalink
"Woke Up This Morning" Lyrics
by Alabama 3
You woke up this morning
Got yourself a gun,
Mama always said you'd be
The Chosen One.

She said: You're one in a million
You've got to burn to shine,
But you were born under a bad sign,
With a blue moon in your eyes.

You woke up this morning
All the love has gone,
Your Papa never told you
About right and wrong.

But you're looking good, baby,
I believe you're feeling fine, (shame about it),
Born under a bad sign
With a blue moon in your eyes.

You woke up this morning
The world turned upside down,
Thing's ain't been the same
Since the Blues walked into town.

But you're one in a million
You've got that shotgun shine.
Born under a bad sign,
With a blue moon in your eyes.

When you woke up this morning everything you had was gone. By half past ten
your head was going ding-dong.
Ringing like a bell from your head down to your toes,
like a voice telling you there was something you should
know. Last night you were flying but today you're so low
- ain't it times like these that make you wonder if
you'll ever know the meaning of things as they appear to
the others; wives, mothers, fathers, sisters and
brothers. Don't you wish you didn't function, wish you
didn't think beyond the next paycheck and the next little
drink' Well you do so make up your mind to go on, 'cos
when you woke up this morning everything you had was gone.

When you woke up this morning,
When you woke up this morning,
When you woke up this morning,
Mama said you'd be the Chosen One.

When you woke up this morning,
When you woke up this morning,
When you woke up this morning,
You got yourself a gun.



[*]

-----
Schrodingers Hat
2007-04-22 06:41:30 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
I'm on a mission.

No sleep till bedtime.
Phin
2007-04-22 06:52:58 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 01:41:30 -0500, Schrodingers Hat
Post by unknown
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
I'm on a mission.
No sleep till bedtime.
rebel without a clause
Don Stockbauer
2007-04-22 07:08:48 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 22, 12:41 am, Schrodingers Hat
Post by unknown
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
I'm on a mission.
No sleep till bedtime.
You do know that the paradox of Schrodinger's Hat is explained by the
fact that the microscopic and the macroscopic worlds cannot be
directly compared as far as the rules they obey?
unknown
2007-04-22 07:13:12 UTC
Permalink
On 22 Apr 2007 00:08:48 -0700, Don Stockbauer
Post by Don Stockbauer
On Apr 22, 12:41 am, Schrodingers Hat
Post by unknown
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
I'm on a mission.
No sleep till bedtime.
You do know that the paradox of Schrodinger's Hat is explained by the
fact that the microscopic and the macroscopic worlds cannot be
directly compared as far as the rules they obey?
This is the paradox of the "slackyon", the SubGenius particle. It can
be observed, and it can be working, but it cannot be observed working.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
Have u herd that grate pothead joke: "What did the Easter Pig
bring u for Christmess?
- Dryad
Schrodingers Hat
2007-04-22 09:10:41 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:13:12 -0700, Zapanaz
Post by unknown
On 22 Apr 2007 00:08:48 -0700, Don Stockbauer
Post by Don Stockbauer
On Apr 22, 12:41 am, Schrodingers Hat
Post by unknown
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
I'm on a mission.
No sleep till bedtime.
You do know that the paradox of Schrodinger's Hat is explained by the
fact that the microscopic and the macroscopic worlds cannot be
directly compared as far as the rules they obey?
This is the paradox of the "slackyon", the SubGenius particle. It can
be observed, and it can be working, but it cannot be observed working.
I exist in a superposition of rest states upon Erwins head because
Erwin exists in a total state of decoherance by refusing to come out
of his laboratory because he is suffering a bad hair day. I make him
happy.

I dont know what this has to do with anything but I would like to say
it anyway.
Schrodingers Hat
2007-04-22 08:41:04 UTC
Permalink
On 22 Apr 2007 00:08:48 -0700, Don Stockbauer
Post by Don Stockbauer
On Apr 22, 12:41 am, Schrodingers Hat
Post by unknown
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:47:14 -0500, Artemia Salina
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by Schrodingers Hat
and I will post any durn where I want coz I'm that kind of guy.
I will even split the sentence I am replying to in two or split my
infinitives with gay abandon, coz I am that kind of guy too.
You're a regular rebel without a cause.
I'm on a mission.
No sleep till bedtime.
You do know that the paradox of Schrodinger's Hat is explained by the
fact that the microscopic and the macroscopic worlds cannot be
directly compared as far as the rules they obey?
I'm just a hat. I dont know anything.

You do know you're talking to a hat?
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-22 08:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Stockbauer
You do know that the paradox of Schrodinger's Hat is explained by the
fact that the microscopic and the macroscopic worlds cannot be
directly compared as far as the rules they obey?
If you believe that,
there is no ice cream
for you any more.


YELLOW SNOW
is ALL you're ever getting
from now on.
ctyguy
2007-04-22 13:07:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung Lung.
:-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is considered
bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to top
post.

Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can handle
top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every post.
User
2007-04-22 13:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by ctyguy
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung
Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is
considered bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to
top post.
Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can
handle top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every
post.
This is the logic of bottom posting.

"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize
the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the
original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they
start to read your response."

From:
Netiquette Guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-22 20:25:00 UTC
Permalink
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
Post by User
Post by ctyguy
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung
Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is
considered bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to
top post.
Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can
handle top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every
post.
This is the logic of bottom posting.
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just enough
text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers
understand when they start to read your response."
Netiquette Guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
Notan
2007-04-22 20:30:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
<snip>

Probably because the conversation is usually between two people,
eliminating the need to "go back" to see various contributions.
--
Notan
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-22 21:31:16 UTC
Permalink
That's not true at all.

At work there are usually at least a dozen people
involved in the various email threads.

Having to wade through stuff people have already said
is a waste of time.

Not to mention how any given thread ends up being
indecipherable gibberish by the time it gets
polluted with inane 'commentary' scattered throughout.

If a person needs to catch-up on the thread,
they can start at the bottom and scroll up.

People that have been involved with the thread already
know what's going on, thus making top-posting
not only the polite thing to do, but making life easier
for all involved.

The best example is the blind reader that has to use
a screen text to speech application to read email/usenet.
Having to hear every thread's contributors over and
over and over again is a waste of time.
Post by Notan
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
<snip>
Probably because the conversation is usually between two people,
eliminating the need to "go back" to see various contributions.
--
Notan
Notan
2007-04-22 21:58:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
That's not true at all.
At work there are usually at least a dozen people
involved in the various email threads.
Having to wade through stuff people have already said
is a waste of time.
Not to mention how any given thread ends up being
indecipherable gibberish by the time it gets
polluted with inane 'commentary' scattered throughout.
If a person needs to catch-up on the thread,
they can start at the bottom and scroll up.
People that have been involved with the thread already
know what's going on, thus making top-posting
not only the polite thing to do, but making life easier
for all involved.
The best example is the blind reader that has to use
a screen text to speech application to read email/usenet.
Having to hear every thread's contributors over and
over and over again is a waste of time.
Point(s) taken.
--
Notan
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-22 22:01:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Notan
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
That's not true at all.
At work there are usually at least a dozen people
involved in the various email threads.
Having to wade through stuff people have already said
is a waste of time.
Not to mention how any given thread ends up being
indecipherable gibberish by the time it gets
polluted with inane 'commentary' scattered throughout.
If a person needs to catch-up on the thread,
they can start at the bottom and scroll up.
People that have been involved with the thread already
know what's going on, thus making top-posting
not only the polite thing to do, but making life easier
for all involved.
The best example is the blind reader that has to use
a screen text to speech application to read email/usenet.
Having to hear every thread's contributors over and
over and over again is a waste of time.
Point(s) taken.
I do bottom-post where it seems appropriate. :)
User
2007-04-22 22:19:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Post by Notan
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
<snip>
Probably because the conversation is usually between two people,
eliminating the need to "go back" to see various contributions.
--
Notan
That's not true at all.
At work there are usually at least a dozen people
involved in the various email threads.
Having to wade through stuff people have already said
is a waste of time.
Not to mention how any given thread ends up being
indecipherable gibberish by the time it gets
polluted with inane 'commentary' scattered throughout.
If a person needs to catch-up on the thread,
they can start at the bottom and scroll up.
People that have been involved with the thread already
know what's going on, thus making top-posting
not only the polite thing to do, but making life easier
for all involved.
The best example is the blind reader that has to use
a screen text to speech application to read email/usenet.
Having to hear every thread's contributors over and
over and over again is a waste of time.
I guess the you must be right then. Those numbers you produced sure makes
your point.

It still seems easier to read like a book. If someone wanted to start from
the top and read down to catch up it sure would seem natural than having to
unshuffle what you have mixed up.
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-22 23:14:24 UTC
Permalink
If Usenet was written in the form of a book, it wouldn't be as funny.
Post by User
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Post by Notan
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
<snip>
Probably because the conversation is usually between two people,
eliminating the need to "go back" to see various contributions.
--
Notan
That's not true at all.
At work there are usually at least a dozen people
involved in the various email threads.
Having to wade through stuff people have already said
is a waste of time.
Not to mention how any given thread ends up being
indecipherable gibberish by the time it gets
polluted with inane 'commentary' scattered throughout.
If a person needs to catch-up on the thread,
they can start at the bottom and scroll up.
People that have been involved with the thread already
know what's going on, thus making top-posting
not only the polite thing to do, but making life easier
for all involved.
The best example is the blind reader that has to use
a screen text to speech application to read email/usenet.
Having to hear every thread's contributors over and
over and over again is a waste of time.
I guess the you must be right then. Those numbers you produced sure makes
your point.
It still seems easier to read like a book. If someone wanted to start from
the top and read down to catch up it sure would seem natural than having
to unshuffle what you have mixed up.
User
2007-04-22 22:14:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
Post by User
Post by ctyguy
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung
Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is
considered bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to
top post.
Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can
handle top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every
post.
This is the logic of bottom posting.
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure
readers understand when they start to read your response."
Netiquette Guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
Only to the ones that are laughing at those of you that are incapable of
understanding what to do.
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-22 23:15:02 UTC
Permalink
http://www.zainea.com/socialconformity.htm
Post by User
Post by Rev. 11D Meow!
Funny how emails are regularly responded to with top-posting.
Post by User
Post by ctyguy
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung
Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is
considered bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to
top post.
Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can
handle top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every
post.
This is the logic of bottom posting.
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure
readers understand when they start to read your response."
Netiquette Guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
Only to the ones that are laughing at those of you that are incapable of
understanding what to do.
Phin
2007-04-22 23:14:41 UTC
Permalink
I agree with this statement.
Post by User
Post by ctyguy
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung
Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is
considered bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to
top post.
Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can
handle top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every
post.
This is the logic of bottom posting.
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize
the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the
original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they
start to read your response."
Netiquette Guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-23 00:02:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phin
I agree with this statement.
Post by User
Post by ctyguy
Post by Artemia Salina
Post by ctyguy
If you study history you will find Nostradamus spoke of Cho Hung
Lung. :-)
If you study usenet history you will find that top posting is
considered bad etiquette.
No way. My post is a comment unrelated. However it's far better to
top post.
Users who are slow need bottom posts to catch up, whereas most can
handle top posting that saves wear and tear on scrolling for every
post.
This is the logic of bottom posting.
"If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize
the original at the top of the message, or include just enough text of the
original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they
start to read your response."
Netiquette Guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting
THAT'S easy for you to say. ::)))

(four eyes, three grins)
nu-monet v8.0
2007-04-20 13:20:23 UTC
Permalink
Modemac wrote:
My theories:

1) Jesus made him do it:

http://tinyurl.com/38a4ro

2) A Verichip made him do it:

http://tinyurl.com/2orn6q

3) Television made him do it:

http://tinyurl.com/2l2mvu

4) Other theories:

http://tinyurl.com/2pv5qj

http://tinyurl.com/2naao7

http://tinyurl.com/3bdvg2
--
Be Sure To Visit the 'SubGenius Reverend' Blog:
http://slackoff.blogspot.com/
***********
"YOU BELONG TO US NOW!"
"GET DOWN WITH MY SICKNESS!!"

--Kino Beman, brand name
sibu SODDI
2007-04-20 17:45:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by nu-monet v8.0
http://tinyurl.com/38a4ro
http://tinyurl.com/2orn6q
http://tinyurl.com/2l2mvu
http://tinyurl.com/2pv5qj
http://tinyurl.com/2naao7
http://tinyurl.com/3bdvg2
ELVIS made him do it.

Loading Image...
Rev. Richard Skull
2007-04-20 18:15:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by sibu SODDI
Post by nu-monet v8.0
http://tinyurl.com/38a4ro
http://tinyurl.com/2orn6q
http://tinyurl.com/2l2mvu
http://tinyurl.com/2pv5qj
http://tinyurl.com/2naao7
http://tinyurl.com/3bdvg2
ELVIS made him do it.
http://www.yardwear.net/blog/content/binary/fat-elvis.jpg- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
He lsitened to a William Shatner LP at 45 rpm! That will drive anyone
off the deep end.
Lord Cyclohexane
2007-04-20 13:33:28 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 20, 7:15 am, Modemac <***@gmail.com> wrote:

Now all we need is a science class where they play video games on a
console directly possessed by Satan!

Hmmm... thinking of that, that would actually be really cool...
Wonder where I could get such a thing...
User
2007-04-20 16:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lord Cyclohexane
Now all we need is a science class where they play video games on a
console directly possessed by Satan!
Hmmm... thinking of that, that would actually be really cool...
Wonder where I could get such a thing...
You have to make your best deal with Bush's provider. It might cost you
your first born like the deal Bush's daddy made but it didn't bother him.
Rev. 11D Meow!
2007-04-20 17:51:03 UTC
Permalink
It's Bill Gates and Microsoft's fault.

http://tinyurl.com/36qn5d
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
--
The High Weirdness Project
http://www.modemac.com
Rev. Richard Skull
2007-04-20 18:08:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_M...
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
--
The High Weirdness Project
http://www.modemac.com
I think the Shooter had the right Idea, just never managed hear "the
word of "Bob""

I mean, July 5th is right around the corner! He had plenty of money to
buy guns, so $30 was not too much for him!

Thats why we need a serious Campus Crusade for "Bob". maybe the Office
of Faith Based inititives will give Stang a $30 Million grant to set
it up!
Giles
2007-04-20 18:39:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Modemac
Oh, please, do I really HAVE to mention his name? Anyways...
Answers in Genesis says the Virginia Tech shooting is the result of a
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php
And in another earthshaking revelation, Jack Thompson blames it on
http://www.gamealmighty.com/story-individual/story/Thompson_Targets_Microsoft_in_Latest_Crusade/
Meanwhile, the president of Oral Roberts University says the shooter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266860,00.html
Lakka-nooki made him do it.
Artemia Salina
2007-04-21 07:31:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Giles
Lakka-nooki made him do it.
So he was crackin' up from-uh lack-uh shackin' up?
--
FARTNUCK teh POOT!! W00t w00T!
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...