No favourite stories listed.
Not following any authors
From the press i have read it seems to suggest that Oprah actually asked how much the purse was, and was told in response that it was 38 thousand and that she could show her some other purses as well. It was not a refusal to show her only that there were more options available.nobody cares if she knew who Oprah was, a non issue, the store owner (who was also at Tina Turners wedding) said she did everything right and backed her up so to rebuff one above claim, then she probably did high five her. Its worth noting that these kind of shops especially in Switzerland or otherwise affluent eurpoean places that asking the price before inspection is usually a sign of not intending to purchase, i know Oprah went on about her "black"card and by that i mean bank card surely she should realise that in shops such as this 90+ percent of people have them. This clerk has worked there for years in another shop somewhere like san maritz or monaco and is fully aware how to deal with the customers. In the end it does seem like a publicity stunt, i feel the race card was pulled out immediately to cause controversy (when clearly its not a race issue) and to apologise to Switzerland itself straight after is another sign of this, its not like the nation itself was hurt by the claims, nor cared.other than that the original rant was a tad silly, let people who have money spend it like they want to the economy and people who work for them in great numbers will always benefit. if i could have that kind of money i know i wouldnt be frugal. but i do think Oprah was being overtly sensitive and saw an opportunity to plug her work by foolishly playing the race card, and thats not good in any way.And now after realing that i wasted time reading the story the other night and now doing this i am truly sorry and do promise never to read anything celebrity related ever!!
I have seen a good portion of them and the list is pretty good, i thought The West Wing was the best written of the lot myself, but Sopranos was great as was MASH , all in all a good list
Ha there are loads worldwide, in Nottingham UK you are permitted to shot a scot on sight, but only with a crossbow
allowing kids guns is lunacy they are not responsible, and they do not need to learn about guns till way later in life.How can it be deemed at all acceptable, when the child cannot vote for thirteen years or drink legally for another 16 years or are we saying that kids can vote if with an adult or drink with an adult or have sex supervised by an adult. If your going to have guns legally at least surely there should be an age restriction on them. Or is a 5 yr old childs right to bear arms more important than everything ever.
RIP Jeff,While not my fave of the big four bands they certainly had a few classic moments. I was lucky enough to have seen Slayer many times over the years and he was a fantastic live guitarist! he will be missed in the metal fraternity, and joins the likes of Dio, Cliff Burton and others in one hell of a jam band!!
My own summer (deftones)
I have absolutely no problem in using force to defend your home, however i think proportionality is important, as you say statistically i am unlikely to be a victim of crime especially at my home. However in our country Wales btw the person commiting the act is hugely unlikely to be carrying a gun also. Society wise we don't in this country have everyday stories of burglaries and multiple murders etc in the manor you report at your news stand, part of that obviously has nothing at all to do with guns, just the nature of the criminal. It would however be proportiate to if you did have a gun, and you rightly say cannot devine their intentions, then shooting to disarm or wound to prevent them commiting any such act. I have no issues in making your home safe as quickly as possible. I have no particualr issues with people having guns for sport/hunting, and anyone can still have a gun in the UK with a licence, what we cant have is handguns, which I fully support as there is no need to own themI think if analysed Libya and Syria the change of Government hasn't really come from the rebels from fighting more from pressure from outside governments and agencies to not put the rebels down with excessive force and chemical weapons etc. It is the news reporting forcing foreign governments like ours to act, It is that pressure not the rebels works that has caused the major breakthroughs.Unfortunately this issue is sadly in the news today, and i will say its not good responsible people like your good selves who commit these terrible things, unfortunately handguns are just too easily available to these people to do such things. It is a sad day.
I dont live in England, but thats a whole other point. With the Syrian and Lybian thing, the Syrians have 90% succeeded, even your government has recognised them as the "official" representatives. look at Egypt as well for further evidence, go back even further to Ghandi's India.Freedom means that i can pretty much do as i please without fear or recourse. Will my government do anything if i publicly damn them or protest- no will my government restrict what i can be- no. Do i have a choice of government- yes absolutely. however the flip side to that is that we all (america included) rely on law and order for a peaceable society to protect its citizens, ultimately freedom is relative, no-one is strictly free, but do i fear gun crime or violent crime- No. Can all say that?and the protect the castle thing still operates, but we have whats called relative force, ie if someone attacks you without a weapon is disproportiate to retailiate with an AK47. It is perfectly legal though to prevent someone breaking into your property with a gun if you had one. the cases you have probably heard have mitagating circumstances, i.e where the intruder has been shot in the back while retreating and without stealing anything. Therefore disproportionate response my thoughts are simple less guns less shootings
Hey Sprite. First and foremost you take away the guns from law abiding citizens and only criminals will have guns. 2. England and Australia did exactly that and the violent crime rate in both countries went up! England's by 300%. 3. to both your questions about pistols and automatic weapons refer to 1 and 2 and on top of that if you knew your history you would know that anytime in history any government has taken away the peoples right to bear weapons then the people became subservient to the government and no longer had any rights. Only a liberal Democrat can't understand that because they WANT to be controlled from birth to death by the Government and collect welfare and food stamps and suck off the system and believe they have a right to what I work my ass off for while they sat at home having more kids to get more of my tax dollars. You don't like our Constitution or bill of rights? then go somewhere else. I don't expect you to understand this. Only a real American would. Oh and BTW. Your wrong about the murder rate being up in places where there are more LEGAL guns. Its lower because the criminals don't know who's packing and who's not.I've seen what bullets can do. I've had a weapon pointed at me. I've been shot at. And I've shot at others. And I've killed. Im a Marine Corps Veteran and I have my weapons to protect my family and home. I'll tell you what. You put a sign in front of you house that says "This home protected by non gun-owner " and Ill put one in front of mine that says "This Home protected by a Gun Owner" and lets see who gets broken into first. Opps, wait, I already have that sign. Do you???[/quoteI cant even begin to start with where you have wrong, firstly look at the actual statistics here i will copy and paste a fragement for you. 300%while you are not happy to be controlled by government which is great, your content to live your life based on a parchment??? I really dont think the intention of the constitution is where you see it!!MYTH: The crime rate has been skyrocketing in the UK and Australia since stricter gun control laws were enacted in 1996-1997.TRUTH: The truth is that the UK police has changed its system for recording crime since implementing new gun control laws. This change in recording crime made it appear that the crime rate went up. The British Crime Survey, which was unaffected by this change, shows a decrease in crime. Go to the section under violent crime in the British Crime Survey. "The increase in violent crime recorded by police, in contrast to estimates provided from the BCS, appears to be largely due to increased recording by police forces. Taking into account recording changes, the real trend in violence against the person in 2001/02 is estimated to have been a reduction of around five percent." (from Chapter 6- "Violent Crime in England and Wales" of Crime in England and Wales 2001/2002- pdf file)Here is a graph from the British Crime Survey. You can see that the gun lobby's claim that violent crime skyrocketed in the England after their 1997 handgun ban is clearly false.Secondly to suggest that we have no rights is almost as silly as suggesting the earth if 5000 years old! i'd wager we are a freer county than any, without a constitution.There are huge reasons for America needing to rid itself of this "right to bear arms" nonsense as if you took as many western countries with gun laws as it takes to match the population of America, then the disparity of the figures on gun related deaths is absolutely ridiculous.Much of this is down to the reliance on the constitution, while no doubt the document is vastly important to america and Americans, the thought that it cannot be changed to suit the times is folly.Think of all the past laws, which we would all consider ridiculous now. Imagine if we could not alter them as we have done. Most countries do not need a constitution, and the government structure and laws evolve as the country does with its ever changing moralities. The build up of common law and the changes therein are vital. Like adultery for instance once a serious crime, second only to murder. How times have changed hey? this site would have been not exactly in keeping with that particular one??Governments play an important role in attempting to run the country as the voters dictate, but to suggest that your protecting yourselves from them is plain lunacy. With any government in today's society the main weapon is media, even in dictatorships and authoritarian states we have seen its power over the last two years, arm yourself with facts then you are much better off, its another reason bearing arms is sillyAmerica fascinating, brilliant country, but at the same time bloody stupid!
Yes to all three, its fun to be watched
Things can happen when you least expect them. This was very unexpected. This is a true short story, slightly altered by rose tinted glasses. It all takes place in Rock City in Nottingham, we ( a big group of friends) had travelled to this great venue to watch our one of our favourite bands, Megadeath, in the late 90’s. We were all excited and full of anticipation for the show we were about...
Added 11 Nov 2012 | Category Exhibitionism
| Votes 10 | Avg Score 4.6
| Views 3,308
| 2 Comments
First times are never what you expect them to be, mine certainly was not. I was 19, 5 10 blonde and with blue eyes. The newish world internet was but a dial-up away and I had learned of the joys of cybersex, but not the real thing. In many ways the ease of how you could meet people and be more honest was much easier than real life and looking back I probably got a little to immersed in...
Added 29 Apr 2012 | Category First Time
| Votes 4 | Avg Score 4.25
| Views 3,590
| 4 Comments
No images posted yet.
No videos posted yet.
No playlist added yet.
Attach a note to this member, which only you can see.
Please tell us why you think this profile page is inappropriate.
What would you like to do?