Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out People Photography section of our forum.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
6,000 rounds
Page <<first <prev 15 of 18 next> last>>
Jul 26, 2012 13:12:41   #
Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire
 
Let us take a look at the Govenor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindel. So far he has closed the New Orleans Adolestent Hospital, which treated mentally impared teens. Recently, he closed the States largest Mental Hospital, in Mandiville, La. He has also witheld funding for Tulane Medical for treating mental illness. He did make money available for a new hospital complex in downtown New Orleans, but fell short in funding mental health. This guy just does not recongize mental illness as a actual illness, or in his eleatist view everyone is mentally Ok. Bobby Jindel is working to be on the short list with Mitt Romney, for V.P. Jindel has also refused to allow Louisiana to Particpate in the Federal Healthcare Law, and has refused Medicare, and Medicade money. Jindel has also stopped the rehab, of the old Charity Hospital, on Tulane Ave, which was at one time the place to go for trama, birthing, serious illness, and modern up to date treatments. He also takes the cake for gutting the Louisiana, Public Health System, and closed the Heuy Long Hospital in Baton Rouge. He also championed tax credits, and incentives for a poultry processing plant in North Louisiana, which only has 25 jobs, that were never in danger. Avondale Shipyard, which employed 1000s of employees was allowed to flounder, and is now all but closed. No effort was made to preserve those jobs. The rumor mill says Sen. Vitter will run for Govenor, and Jindel will run for Senate. God help us in Louisiana, if these guys plan plays out. Of course, if Romney chooses Jindel for VP, and for some chance Romney gets elected, we'll be rid of Jindel, and he will become Americas problem, not just Louisianas. I'm sure other "Red" states are going through the same type of mess. Time to get rid of the elete Republicans, and get a Government that will not cut basic human services for the public, but embrace the notion that Government is to help the people in which it serves, not just the elete.

Reply
Jul 26, 2012 13:59:12   #
john vance Loc: Granbury,Texas
 
By all means elect a dem. they just steal all your money and property and give it to someone just sitting on their but with their hands out !!!
as I said by all means elect a dem. you will get what you deserve, unfortunetly every one else will get what they don't deserve. by the way have you concidered that the money is not available to keep these facilites open due to illegals and those sitting on their buts

Reply
Jul 26, 2012 17:10:46   #
Reddog Loc: Southern Calif
 
Why the switch? he was talking about Jindel! Ive noticed no one wants to talk about Romney either. They switch to Obama.Lots of threads on Obama, lets talk about Romney or Jindel without switching topics!Kind of hard HUH?
john vance wrote:
By all means elect a dem. they just steal all your money and property and give it to someone just sitting on their but with their hands out !!!
as I said by all means elect a dem. you will get what you deserve, unfortunetly every one else will get what they don't deserve. by the way have you concidered that the money is not available to keep these facilites open due to illegals and those sitting on their buts

Reply
Check out The Dynamics of Photographic Lighting section of our forum.
Jul 26, 2012 19:37:20   #
rocar7 Loc: Alton, England
 
Michael O' wrote:
Mike629 wrote:
How can an individual purchase all this ammo in 2 or 3 months, especially post 9-11, and it does not raise a red flag? Have your guns but limit ammo and 100 round clips ? No way. How many more times will we see tragedies like this in Aurora before we come to our collective senses and take action?


There are over 20,000 gun laws in these United States; they only control the lawful. The insane usually commit these acts of
public group assassination to attain the "glory" of notoriety. The most effective protection against such acts of utter insanity is ensuring that individual citizens can carry arms. States that enact concealed carry law inevitably have a huge drop (20 to 50 %)in crime committed with guns, simply because the cowardly criminals don't know which of their potential victims might be armed and thus ready and able to resist. To absolutely disarm the public is to invite unstoppable rises in violent gun crime, as has resulted in England, Australia, and Toronto, Canada. The "toughest" gun laws in the USA are in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Philidelphia -- which has resulted in the highest gun violence crimes constantly also being in those same cities. Only the lawful obey the laws, and while killing can happen in seconds, the police (who by Supreme Court affirmative ruling have zero responsibility to protect citizens) are a "mere" 10 to 20 minutes away, too late to assist. They can only report the deaths and carnage.

Any location where guns are prohibited acts as a magnet to those gun criminals seeking a free and unprotected "killing field" -- areas such as any college or other school campus where gun possession is "outlawed" by the school. So-called "Peaceniks" blindly refuse to accept the facts of criminal mindsets, thus dooming those there to the greatly heightened probability that the "gun free" zone will draw a crazy, but not dumb killer. Blind anti-gun philosophy buries common sense and reality.

Our ever more perverted, irresponsible and closed-mind society will continue to enable and encourage the "acting out" of those who used to be recognized as misfits dangerous to society. As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Guns are not the problem, anymore than are cars or bathtubs. Our societal degradation of morality IS our major fallacy and problem -- which we refuse to face; it is easier to blame the gun than the killer we enable -- and even encourage -- by our blind "political correctness" judgments and actions.
quote=Mike629 How can an individual purchase all ... (show quote)


Can't entirely agree with the highlighted statement. According to Wikipedia:

In the United Kingdom in 2009 there were 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants; for comparison, the figure for the United States was 3.0, about 40 times higher, and for Germany 0.2.

So, which is the safer place to be?

Reply
Jul 27, 2012 16:18:02   #
Donaldaq
 
rocar7 wrote:
Michael O' wrote:
Mike629 wrote:
How can an individual purchase all this ammo in 2 or 3 months, especially post 9-11, and it does not raise a red flag? Have your guns but limit ammo and 100 round clips ? No way. How many more times will we see tragedies like this in Aurora before we come to our collective senses and take action?


There are over 20,000 gun laws in these United States; they only control the lawful. The insane usually commit these acts of
public group assassination to attain the "glory" of notoriety. The most effective protection against such acts of utter insanity is ensuring that individual citizens can carry arms. States that enact concealed carry law inevitably have a huge drop (20 to 50 %)in crime committed with guns, simply because the cowardly criminals don't know which of their potential victims might be armed and thus ready and able to resist. To absolutely disarm the public is to invite unstoppable rises in violent gun crime, as has resulted in England, Australia, and Toronto, Canada. The "toughest" gun laws in the USA are in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Philidelphia -- which has resulted in the highest gun violence crimes constantly also being in those same cities. Only the lawful obey the laws, and while killing can happen in seconds, the police (who by Supreme Court affirmative ruling have zero responsibility to protect citizens) are a "mere" 10 to 20 minutes away, too late to assist. They can only report the deaths and carnage.

Any location where guns are prohibited acts as a magnet to those gun criminals seeking a free and unprotected "killing field" -- areas such as any college or other school campus where gun possession is "outlawed" by the school. So-called "Peaceniks" blindly refuse to accept the facts of criminal mindsets, thus dooming those there to the greatly heightened probability that the "gun free" zone will draw a crazy, but not dumb killer. Blind anti-gun philosophy buries common sense and reality.

Our ever more perverted, irresponsible and closed-mind society will continue to enable and encourage the "acting out" of those who used to be recognized as misfits dangerous to society. As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Guns are not the problem, anymore than are cars or bathtubs. Our societal degradation of morality IS our major fallacy and problem -- which we refuse to face; it is easier to blame the gun than the killer we enable -- and even encourage -- by our blind "political correctness" judgments and actions.
quote=Mike629 How can an individual purchase all ... (show quote)


Can't entirely agree with the highlighted statement. According to Wikipedia:

In the United Kingdom in 2009 there were 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants; for comparison, the figure for the United States was 3.0, about 40 times higher, and for Germany 0.2.

So, which is the safer place to be?
quote=Michael O' quote=Mike629 How can an indivi... (show quote)


I submit the criminals of England are of a different mindset, generally, than those in America.

Reply
Jul 27, 2012 18:34:52   #
RMM Loc: Suburban New York
 
Donaldaq wrote:
I submit the criminals of England are of a different mindset, generally, than those in America.

Robin Hoods one and all.

Reply
Jul 27, 2012 18:53:33   #
Donaldaq
 
RMM wrote:
Donaldaq wrote:
I submit the criminals of England are of a different mindset, generally, than those in America.

Robin Hoods one and all.


LOL,,nice

Reply
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Jul 27, 2012 21:50:42   #
jolly1
 
Donaldaq wrote:
rocar7 wrote:
Michael O' wrote:
Mike629 wrote:
How can an individual purchase all this ammo in 2 or 3 months, especially post 9-11, and it does not raise a red flag? Have your guns but limit ammo and 100 round clips ? No way. How many more times will we see tragedies like this in Aurora before we come to our collective senses and take action?


There are over 20,000 gun laws in these United States; they only control the lawful. The insane usually commit these acts of
public group assassination to attain the "glory" of notoriety. The most effective protection against such acts of utter insanity is ensuring that individual citizens can carry arms. States that enact concealed carry law inevitably have a huge drop (20 to 50 %)in crime committed with guns, simply because the cowardly criminals don't know which of their potential victims might be armed and thus ready and able to resist. To absolutely disarm the public is to invite unstoppable rises in violent gun crime, as has resulted in England, Australia, and Toronto, Canada. The "toughest" gun laws in the USA are in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Philidelphia -- which has resulted in the highest gun violence crimes constantly also being in those same cities. Only the lawful obey the laws, and while killing can happen in seconds, the police (who by Supreme Court affirmative ruling have zero responsibility to protect citizens) are a "mere" 10 to 20 minutes away, too late to assist. They can only report the deaths and carnage.

Any location where guns are prohibited acts as a magnet to those gun criminals seeking a free and unprotected "killing field" -- areas such as any college or other school campus where gun possession is "outlawed" by the school. So-called "Peaceniks" blindly refuse to accept the facts of criminal mindsets, thus dooming those there to the greatly heightened probability that the "gun free" zone will draw a crazy, but not dumb killer. Blind anti-gun philosophy buries common sense and reality.

Our ever more perverted, irresponsible and closed-mind society will continue to enable and encourage the "acting out" of those who used to be recognized as misfits dangerous to society. As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." Guns are not the problem, anymore than are cars or bathtubs. Our societal degradation of morality IS our major fallacy and problem -- which we refuse to face; it is easier to blame the gun than the killer we enable -- and even encourage -- by our blind "political correctness" judgments and actions.
quote=Mike629 How can an individual purchase all ... (show quote)


Can't entirely agree with the highlighted statement. According to Wikipedia:

In the United Kingdom in 2009 there were 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants; for comparison, the figure for the United States was 3.0, about 40 times higher, and for Germany 0.2.

So, which is the safer place to be?
quote=Michael O' quote=Mike629 How can an indivi... (show quote)


Tombstone, Arizona were everybody is armed. Hasn't been a serous crime, not even a shooting, since the Earps were run out of town.

I submit the criminals of England are of a different mindset, generally, than those in America.
quote=rocar7 quote=Michael O' quote=Mike629 How... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 29, 2012 05:06:05   #
pioneer Loc: Oregon
 
rocar7 wrote: Can't entirely agree with the highlighted statement. According to Wikipedia:

In the United Kingdom in 2009 there were 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants; for comparison, the figure for the United States was 3.0, about 40 times higher, and for Germany 0.2.

So, which is the safer place to be?[/quote]


Yep, ANY other industrialized country is many times safer than the U.S. when you consider the number of firearm injuries and deaths. A few years ago an emergency room doctor in Portland, OR, said that during a year-long residency in a hospital in a low-income section of London (UK) she saw just one gunshot wound. In Portland, she sees one every week. In this country we face the deadly combination of essentially unlimited access to guns — including those that have no purpose except to kill people and that can mow down dozens in a matter of minutes — and pathetically limited training in how to use them safely. And no, the Obama administration is not going to take away your guns. Except for a few courageous individuals, Democrats are just as scared of the NRA as Republicans are.

Reply
Jul 29, 2012 13:01:44   #
Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire
 
Hello Everyone, I have been reading this Forum since the Thread came up. It seems all the responses from Conservitive center upon "people sitting on their butts, with their hands out." By electing Democrats, they "steal your money." When we look at the population of the U.S. we see 100% that are Americans, this includes even the Liberals, and the Conservitives. It is true both are pulling in different directions. Liberals have always pulled for the "common man" who ever he may be. Now, the difination of the "common man" has changed dramaticly. Now, he is living on the brink of poverty, or is impoverished. Poverity in the U. S. of A. is now at its higest point since the 60s. The "homeless" population has skyrocketed, not because the homeless want to become homeless, but because our Government sold them out in Congress. Making and repealing laws that protected the "common man" from the unchecked greed that has manifested itself in the banking industry. Many of these people sitting on their butts are there because Conservitives, who gutted the banking regulations, allowing unscruples lenders to invent lending practices that misrepresented rate hikes, and never intended to mention how mortgages were sold on the markets as Drivitives. Now I would like address all the conservitives who think they can judge the situation of the guy on his butt. You are part of the problem, evidently you have not read the Constution of the U.S. It simply starts, "We the People.." This means all of us, not just conservitives, or Librals. This document goes for the "common good". So, when you see a guy, sitting on his butt. You have to accept some responsability for his being there. You voted for the Represintives in the House, and Senate. You are responsable for the Conservitives, and ultra conservitives that have hindered legislation in both the House, and Senate. You and your cohorts have conspired to ruin any chance of any legislation that could help the "common good" Hopefully, you and your cohorts will finally conclude, that you cannot save, or cut spending your way to fiscal health. If the economy was based on a household, you would need to increase your income, you would do this by getting a part-time job, selling the family car, dog, or children ito slavery. I think the part-time job would increase the income, and allow you pay the bills. The others would not add income, but only extend the problem. This will be done nationally by rasing taxes. The President only wants this raise on the tax base to citizens who have incomes above $250,000. People who make this magic figure usually have most of it, or considerable amount in investments, where the taxes are only 15% far less than the "common man" pays. When you see the guy on the curb, sitting on his butt, and his hand out, he may not be looking for a hand out, but a hand up. Its time the conservitive House, start doing something for the "common man" for the "common good." Lets have a truce on this class warfare, and bring it back up during a time of properairity.

Reply
Jul 29, 2012 13:18:34   #
RMM Loc: Suburban New York
 
Just one significant typo, where you wrote: "Poverity in the U. S. of A. is now at its higest point since the 60s."

I think you meant the '30s.

Reply
Check out Underwater Photography Forum section of our forum.
Jul 29, 2012 13:51:55   #
Reddog Loc: Southern Calif
 
Too much sense for the Fox news Bubble! We are our brothers keeper! Read that somewhere, Hmmmm
Bill Emmett wrote:
Hello Everyone, I have been reading this Forum since the Thread came up. It seems all the responses from Conservitive center upon "people sitting on their butts, with their hands out." By electing Democrats, they "steal your money." When we look at the population of the U.S. we see 100% that are Americans, this includes even the Liberals, and the Conservitives. It is true both are pulling in different directions. Liberals have always pulled for the "common man" who ever he may be. Now, the difination of the "common man" has changed dramaticly. Now, he is living on the brink of poverty, or is impoverished. Poverity in the U. S. of A. is now at its higest point since the 60s. The "homeless" population has skyrocketed, not because the homeless want to become homeless, but because our Government sold them out in Congress. Making and repealing laws that protected the "common man" from the unchecked greed that has manifested itself in the banking industry. Many of these people sitting on their butts are there because Conservitives, who gutted the banking regulations, allowing unscruples lenders to invent lending practices that misrepresented rate hikes, and never intended to mention how mortgages were sold on the markets as Drivitives. Now I would like address all the conservitives who think they can judge the situation of the guy on his butt. You are part of the problem, evidently you have not read the Constution of the U.S. It simply starts, "We the People.." This means all of us, not just conservitives, or Librals. This document goes for the "common good". So, when you see a guy, sitting on his butt. You have to accept some responsability for his being there. You voted for the Represintives in the House, and Senate. You are responsable for the Conservitives, and ultra conservitives that have hindered legislation in both the House, and Senate. You and your cohorts have conspired to ruin any chance of any legislation that could help the "common good" Hopefully, you and your cohorts will finally conclude, that you cannot save, or cut spending your way to fiscal health. If the economy was based on a household, you would need to increase your income, you would do this by getting a part-time job, selling the family car, dog, or children ito slavery. I think the part-time job would increase the income, and allow you pay the bills. The others would not add income, but only extend the problem. This will be done nationally by rasing taxes. The President only wants this raise on the tax base to citizens who have incomes above $250,000. People who make this magic figure usually have most of it, or considerable amount in investments, where the taxes are only 15% far less than the "common man" pays. When you see the guy on the curb, sitting on his butt, and his hand out, he may not be looking for a hand out, but a hand up. Its time the conservitive House, start doing something for the "common man" for the "common good." Lets have a truce on this class warfare, and bring it back up during a time of properairity.
Hello Everyone, I have been reading this Forum si... (show quote)

Reply
Jul 29, 2012 17:03:28   #
jolly1
 
Bill Emmett wrote that "When we look at the population of the U.S. we see 100% that are Americans." Boy, you sure don't live in a "Border State"!

Pull your head out of that swamp, Bill. Ten to twelve million of your so-called Americans are Illegals,criminals,
wetbacks, whatever they are called, but they are sure not Americans That's the first of several mistakes in your article. One more is that thousands of those people sitting on their butts with their hands out have a daily, weekly, or monthly greater income than you and I. I've read, for years, about how many of the bums (another name for them) prefer living in the open. They panhandle all day and then drive home in their BMW's, Lincolns,and Lexis.
Then the little wife puts on her jewels and fur coat, and they are off for an evening of fine wine and dinner.

Reply
Jul 30, 2012 00:27:08   #
Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire
 
I am not speaking of "Illegals, criminals, wetbacks nor any other group of people not in the U.S. and able to vote. I'm talking about Vets, people put out by the banking scandle, Americans with mental problems, Americans that cannot find any type of job, they are known as the long term unemployed. If you are insinuating that the large majority are actually well off, you are living and breathing all the Conservitive propaganda. You are a embarassment not only to every church group, Mission, every citizen to donates time, money or even old clothing to the homeless. Your statements don't go to me, but to every good American, in every State. Your total lack of compassion illistrates the Republican Party Platform. You need to work in a homeless shelter, take the time, and energy, and tell those people at the shelter what you think about them. If you think being homeless, not knowing where your next meal is coming from, smelling like 21 day old sweat is a con job, go to a shelter. Take all your thoughts about the American "bumms" and start a rant to some mental patient, who has been put on the street by one of your Conservitive Republican politicans, who suffers for bi polar disorder, schivophrenia, and possibly could become violent. There are thousands of homeless veterans, who suffer from mental, physical problems, these men fought for the America we all love, and enjoy. You have included these brave American Citizens in your insensative remarks about "bums" I'm sure you have never served in anything, or maybe KKK orgization in your home town. Maybe you should start a movement for Romneys VP, a popular Louisiana Repulican, David Duke, your Grand Wizard.

Reply
Jul 30, 2012 00:52:33   #
Reddog Loc: Southern Calif
 
I Think you said it all Bill! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Page <<first <prev 15 of 18 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out People Photography section of our forum.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.