Forum posts made by byronlord

Topic Can "gun people" and "anti-gun people" ever come to the table together and talk
Posted 09 May 2013 13:28

Come to the table and talk?


Just leave the guns outside the room yes?

Oh... guess well stick to email.

Topic Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again
Posted 08 May 2013 15:16

Fully automatic guns are illegal, unless you have a special license. That means that the police are well aware that you own and use that particular gun. The license is mostly used for commercial use. You pay the owner at the gunrange to shoot the weapon at targets, under their supervision.

Guns designed to look like toys or marketed to children, well, I don't like that at all. I don't even like the pink handguns marketed for women. I think that a gun should look very serious and intimidating so that people will fully understand how careful they need to be around them and how serious they are.

I truly get disgusted at anyone not taking gun safety seriously and especially leaving unsecure loaded guns where children can get at them. I want to see anyone who does that prosecuted, because it is illegal. If someone is injured or killed because of that, there is a host of other felonious charges that they can face.

I actually would like to see tougher standards required to get hunting licenses, There are just a few complete idiots in the woods. It only takes one unsafe stupid idiot to ruin something for everyone else by not following proper safety and etiquette.

Truthfully my favorite hunting is done with old-fashioned black powder rifles or bows. The best challenge is hunting with a non-compound bow. Just my skill and arm strength. I love it!

Fully automatic weapons are illegal but also pretty pointless. It takes only slightly longer to empty the magazine of a semi-auto AK-47 or Armalite than a full auto. They don't take all that many bullets so spray and pray is a good way to use up all your ammo to no point.

What I find ridiculous is the people who claim that they need such things for hunting. It is not like there is so much game that people need to make the task easier. People don't want those weapons to go hunting, they want to have them to play at being soldiers or act out scenes from first person shooter video games.

The NRA has been going round telling people that the answer is to ban sales of first person shooter video games. Only they sell those all over the world and only the US has a sudden increase in spree shootings. Its not the games, it is the guns. And the minute the NRA decided that it was OK to make other people's hobby subject to government regulation they lost any claim to stop regulation of their own hobby.

It is only a hobby .

If hunters can't find a way to make their hobby safe then all the guns are going to be going bye-byes sooner or later. Take a look at the opinion polling on the senators who voted the NRA line on the background checks bill - it is in the toilet. Blocking background checks is quite likely to cost the GOP the house in 2014.

Right now the NRA has their sheeple thinking that if they lose any battle, however small they are going to find themselves on a slippery slope to a total weapons ban. They have it the wrong way round. If the NRA and the even more whacko Gun Owners of America are allowed to dictate the terms of the debate then they will stave off any change for maybe a few years longer but not forever and when change comes it will be far more than the baby steps being proposed now.

Topic Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again
Posted 04 May 2013 20:03

The main problem with your theory Byron is the timeline. The 2nd Amendment was ratified in 1791. That predates the era you are talking about.

It is very unfortunate that an amendment abolishing slavery was not also created by 1791.

There were runaway slaves from the first time settlers came ashore and enslaved the indians.

Abolition of slavery was one of the causes of the civil war. The taxes thing is just a fable told to hide the ugly truth. It was the Mansfield declaration and the Canada act that led to the Boston Tea Party. The colonists were witholding their taxes because they wanted their interests to be represented in London. They were afraid that the Mansfield declaration would be applied in the colonies, abolishing slavery at a stroke and that the Canada act would block westward expansion.

The tipping point came when the crown managed to alienate the colonial abolitionists, most importantly Franklin and his allies.

The Federal constitution was written with the primary goal of avoiding a war between the slave and free colonies. The aim was to kick the can far enough down the road that they could avoid a civil war. They failed.

Topic Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again
Posted 04 May 2013 17:20

Well so be it. I would be a rebel, a revolutionary. There was a time when the majority in the USA believed that slavery should be legal. That was the law of the land. IT WAS WRONG & EVIL! I in fact have an ancestor who was lynched for helping slaves escape to freedom. He was considered an evil criminal. I consider him a hero & martyr. The Nazis made wrong laws the legal law of the land in Germany.

The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to stop the northern states from ending slavery by stopping the states from organizing the slave patrols necessary to catch runaway slaves.

The purpose was to maintain a police state and keep people in slavery. That is your second amendment.

I used to have to listen to Margaret Thatcher bleating on about freedom and how bad communism was. Then when it came to actually ending communism in Europe she was off begging Gorbachev to put down the demonstrations with tanks.

I have learned that the more people talk about freedom the less they mean it.

The NRA and its supporters have blood on their hands.

Topic Guantanamo... still open?
Posted 03 May 2013 13:37

How the fuck did he win the Nobel Peace Prize? (same way Yasser Arafat won it, I guess...) What a worthless award that is.

He got it for the same reason that Henry Kissenger did. For being a slightly less murderous bastard than previously.

Topic Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again
Posted 03 May 2013 13:34

I guess my deranged paranoia stems from the fact that the GOVERNMENTS of the 20th century killed more people in mass than all other centuries combined. I prefer to have the ability to defend my freedoms against an oppressive government than to be led to slaughter like many Jews, Russians, Chinese, turning, and and countless other people's.

As for the comments about how the government owns bigger and badder weapons; The taliban and it's subsidiaries have success held off the might of our military for the better part of 12 years. That is a country with a 1st grade education and weapons that are by in large substandard to what we have.

It's amazing that people think that just because this is America, we are immune to such possible events. We are always just one generation from loosing all of our freedoms.

The problem with that line of argument is that as far as most Jews are concerned, the people waving the guns about look much more like the folks wearing the jackboots in Germany than the government they claim to be saving them from.

When people wave a gun in my face as the NRA supporters keep doing when they are losing the argument, it only makes me more certain that they are the enemy of freedom.

Wayne LaPierre and every member of the NRA murdered that little girl just as surely as they pulled the trigger themselves.

And yes, I do want to take every gun away from you all. They are the tools of satan. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill people. Buying or owning a hand gun is the moral equivalent of murder.

Topic Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again
Posted 03 May 2013 10:56

'" I mean if the terrorists that bombed the Boston marathon had AR-15s instead of bombs they might have killed more people than with a bomb... Why is it that bombs are illegal then? If it's not the weapon we need to focus on but the people like you say why are other weapons that kill a lot of people banned?."'

had they used rifles , every time they pulled the trigger someone may have looked in there direction, they may have taken more lives , but they probably would have been captured sooner.if one thinks about this the bomb s failure was probably do to where they placed it..or the construction of it.

No matter what we say or how condescending we as a whole punish the parents of that child. it will never be as harsh or painful as to what they themselves are now going through..

The Boston Bombers would have almost certainly have killed a lot more people if they had used automatic weapons. Four people were killed, Harris and Klebold murdered 13 in the Columbine massacre. And that was before the body armor tactic.

There are two possible reasons that they did not try that tactic. One is that spree shooters almost invariably end up dead or captured. They don't seem to have planned for a suicide mission. The second is that assault weapons are banned under state law and the pair would have to have travelled out of state to get them. That is trickier than it might seem as a firearms dealer in NH who accepts a MA license to sell a gun is knowingly abetting a crime in MA, a fact that will quickly be discovered when the background check is run.

There are no reporting requirements for fireworks, even though those are also illegal in MA.

Gun control reduced the deaths to a third of what they might have been if automatic weapons were used.

Topic Guantanamo... still open?
Posted 03 May 2013 10:16

Have to add in all the assholes in Congress who put language in the 2009 budget act prohibiting the use of any money to shut down guantanamo.

It passed with a veto-proof majority because the congress is scared to do anything that might be demagogued against them.

Topic Biggest Faceplam story I heard this week.
Posted 03 May 2013 10:15

These hysterical outbursts are driven by politics, not religion. And there is no shortage of US christian fundies making the same sort of claims.

The whole 'Satanic verses' episode was fabricated as a means of mobilizing UK Muslims in support of the Iranian regime that announced the fatwa. The religious Reich was up to the same game when they organized against the Beatles and Soap.

Telling people that they are under attack is a great way to attract simple minded folk to your banner. Take a look at all the simpleton's living off social security who watch Fox News and were persuaded to go out and tell the government to keep itself out of their lives.

It used to be a lot worse in the US. The trick wears thin after a while. It will wear thin for the Islamic fundies as well.

Topic Dying Iraq War Veteran, writes 'Last Letter' To Bush.
Posted 02 May 2013 19:07

Very little has changed during the Obama administration, as if he is still following the Bush play book. I think President Obama adheres to WWBD (What Would Bush Do).

The shut down Bush's torture chambers, closed the secret prisons and ended one of his wars. The other is currently being wound down.

They also withdrew US support from the dictatorships in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya which Bush had supported. Particularly disgusting in the case of Libya which was genuinely a state sponsor of terror which Bush supported in return for Libyan support for the trumped up case for the failed invasion of Iraq.

It is possible the US might be dragged into Syria but if Bush was still in charge it is certain that the US would be in there already and making the situation worse in every way.

It isn't even a matter of GOP vs Democrat. Obama is competent, George W. Bush was not. Even if you agreed with Bush's goals, the fact is that he was an incompetent boob and so was everyone else he hired. That includes Rumsfeld, Rice and Cheney.

Topic Delta Gamma sorority member threatens to "cunt punt". Haha
Posted 24 Apr 2013 18:47

In case you are wondering, here is what the sorroririority in question looks like:!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/meangirl25n-1-web.jpg

Topic If you could... would you swap gender for a day and why?
Posted 23 Apr 2013 17:44

Double Penetration.

Topic Electoral fraud!
Posted 15 Apr 2013 14:29

A month ago our "President" died, so after 14 years of a totalitarism government we saw a little light at the end of the tunnel, yesterday we had our presidential elections, and after a very dirty, unfair, extortion and horrible use of our countries money, we the opposition still won the elections. But the CNE the ones in charge of the elections, said that we didnt and lied about the numbers. Yesterday it was asked for a recount and both candidates agreed to it. Today we learned that that is not going to happen and that Maduro (Chavez successor) is gonna be recognize as the president of Venezuela, even though people is asking for a recount.

Same thing happened in another American country to the North of you in 2000. Only there the Governor of the state where the election was disputed was the brother of one of the candidates and he made sure that there would not be the recount required by law, aided and abetted by five corrupt judges on the Supreme court.

The problem in Venezuela is linked. The US attempt to mount a coup against Chavez during the Bush regime when Chavez clearly had democratic legitimacy has become the pretext for some extremely un-democratic moves. It has also delegitimized much of the opposition which was implicated in an act of treason.

George W. Bush could make a muck of things pretty much everywhere he acted.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 12 Apr 2013 13:37

Thatcher would have loved the fact that people are celebrating her death

So it's a win win

Topic Lush Matching Photo Game:
Posted 12 Apr 2013 06:23

Tied for use

Topic Dying Iraq War Veteran, writes 'Last Letter' To Bush.
Posted 12 Apr 2013 05:16

Bush has collected $500 million for his self aggrandizing 'Presidential Library'

It would be nice if the place had a fitting statue in front. I suggest a 50 foot tall statue of 'Abu Ghraib man', the one being electrocuted on Bush/Cheney's orders in a cruciform pose. Surrounding the base fountain would be a churning fountain of blood.

Nothing complicated or garish you understand, just a fair commentary on the man's actions in office.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 11 Apr 2013 06:50

Look, I know that this is a topical debate.... which I have had over the past couple of days but my feeling is this: She was a strong woman who believed in what she did, didn't sway like the wind, like other politicians, probably didn't take advice either, which was apparently her downfall, however, she had more conviction then 99% of the crowd that are there now and will bend to whatever tune they think will benefit them. In fairness, how many people will talk about the politicians that are in power now after they are dead? They don't have any conviction... Right or wrong! Just my opinion, and I know won't suti a lot of people. The woman is gone now and what will be will be.

I was happy to criticize Thatcher while she was alive, just as happy to criticize her now she is dead.

I criticized her to her face while she was still in office. I told her that there was no way that I was going to consider her party to be the defender of freedom and liberty while their student wing was engaged in the Stalinist/McCarthyite practice of drawing up enemies lists and circulating them to employers.

Now to be fair, in that particular instance she did act but only after the same Tory students accused former Prime Minister Macmillan of being a war criminal due to his involvement in the repatriation of Kosack POWs to be murdered by Stalin.

If the right wing was not spending so much time saying how wonderful she was there would be no need to point out what a horrid, nasty piece of work the woman was.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 09 Apr 2013 20:25

she and RR did great thing for our world. I thank her for what she did for England and in long run helped us here in the US. The vilification of this lady is very sad for she only did what she thought was right for her country and it was the right thing. "limp dicks" in both our country are screwing us over today
R.I.P Lady Thatcher

George W. Bush was only doing what he thought was right for the US. But he still crashed the economy, added five trillion to the deficit, ran a network of gulags, sanctioned torture and caused the death of half a million Iraqis.

Good intentions are not enough. As she used to tell me.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 09 Apr 2013 20:22

She was Prime Minister when I was young. But from what I have studied about her...the only positive thing that she did for the common person was acknowledge the deterioration of the ozone layer and what devastating effects that would have on mankind. She talked RR into following her on that and he did in spite of arguments to the contrary from his Republican Party. HOWEVER...her political position was sided with the wealthy and never addressed the common man. ALL of her policies were at the EXPENSE of the middle and lower classes. And she didn't bat an eyelash. She really didn't care. This was a period of time when the left in both the U.K. and the U.S. over extended their liberal agenda. So, she was able to get away with it. I would call her a shill for the rich and an enemy of the left.

She was also the first world leader to take a 100% action stance against AIDS. The Tory anti-AIDS ads were totally no-nonsense.

But she was totally full of herself and totally convinced of her rightness when she was wrong.

I remember people dancing in the street when the Tories got fed up of her and sacked her. What is rather amusing about the canonization of St Margaret is that she was sacked by her own party that is now lionizing her.

Topic Over 100 Shooting Deaths (U.S.) and counting Since Sandy Hook. Updated to 12/21/2012 @7 pm EST
Posted 08 Apr 2013 21:27

Here's a challenge for you:

Find us any jurisdiction in America that passed more lenient gun use laws where the passage of those laws resulted in any kind of dramatic upswing in the crime rate. Any jurisdiction at all. You made the statement that more guns equals more deaths. Back that up with facts, not wishful thinking. Fact is, people will be people, no matter how you arm them (or disarm them).

Here is a challenge for you:

Why does the US have a gun murder rate over a hundred times that of the UK where all guns other than actual sporting guns (shotguns) are now completely banned?

Why is the US non-gun murder rate almost exactly that of Europe?

It turns out that the US is not actually a more violent society than Europe. It is just the ready access to guns that means far more tense situations end up as murders.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 08 Apr 2013 17:33

I meant Britain as a whole, rather than Scotland as an independent country, but yes - I believe that she polarized the Scots...

I think she polarized pretty much everything she touched. And she never won more than 44% of the vote. She had a minority mandate.

It was the way that she seemed to take such glee from the consequences of her decisions.

Now I would like to say something in a very confidential manner, and I would ask you not to record this part of the conversation.

As you would like.

MT: We are very concerned with the processes that are underway in East Germany. It is on the verge of big changes, which are caused by the situation in the society and to some extent by Erich Honecker's illness. The thousands of people escape from the GDR to the FRG are the primary example. All that is the external side things, and it is important for us, but another issue is even more important.

Britain and Western Europe are not interested in the unification of Germany. The words written in the NATO communiqu��½��½ may sound different, but disregard them. We do not want the unification of Germany. It would lead to changes in the post-war borders, and we cannot allow that because such a development would undermine the stability of the entire international situation, and could lead to threats to our security.

We are not interested in the destabilization of Eastern Europe or the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact either. Of course, the internal changes are ripe in all the countries of Eastern Europe, but in some countries they are more pronounced, in some countries not yet. However, we are in favour of those processes remaining strictly internal, we will not interfere in them and spur the decommunization of Eastern Europe. I can tell you that this is also the position of the US President. He sent a telegram to me in Tokyo, in which he asked me to tell you that the United States would not undertake anything that could threaten the security interests of the Soviet Union, or that could be perceived by the Soviet society as a threat. I am fulfilling his request.

History has proved that she was completely and utterly wrong. We do not know if she was telling the truth when she claimed to speak for Bush I and the other NATO leaders but it seems unlikely she would have said something that would quickly be found to be untrue.

Fortunately others thought differently.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 08 Apr 2013 15:49

In Scotland, the news reports are somewhat different. She was incredibly unpopular north of the border... We even had riots!!

I was a bit too young to understand much about her at the time and I can see why she was so detested, however, I do think that she was a force to be reckoned with and I'd rather have her than the limp dicks who are in power now...

Our country is a fucking shambles...

Thatcher did more for the cause of Scottish independence than anyone else in the 20th Century.

The 1986 Commonwealth games were held in Edinburgh. Just ahead of the games Thatcher came out in support of apartheid in no uncertain terms prompting a boycott by half the countries due to attend. The speech was totally gratuitous and unnecessary and everyone knew that Thatcher would never have sabotaged a London event the same way.

Tories became an endangered species north of the border as a result and their place was taken by the 'Tartan Tories' aka the SNP.

She did a lot of stuff like that. When Pinochet came over and was arrested for war crimes, Thatcher decided to make a public show of support for the mass murderer who committed treason against a democratically elected government had his opponents dropped out of helicopters as a friend of freedom.

Topic RIP Margaret Thatcher
Posted 08 Apr 2013 12:44

Condolences to her family. Particularly the Grandchildren.

I'm not sure she did that much for women. I could write a lot about what I think to her policies, but today is not the day for polemical writing.

She wasn't much of a force for Britain either. We lost two thirds of out manufacturing base in 18 months under her government. She was a lion for the interests of the powerful against the powerless. She stood up for apartheid and for murderous dictators like Pinochet. When the Berlin wall was about to fall her first instinct was to beg Gorbachev to send in the tanks and prop the communist system up.

Having watched what was done when St Ronnie Reagan was given a free pass after he died, I don't think we should make the same mistake again.

Topic Why do men tell you they love you when they don't have to, or mean it?
Posted 07 Apr 2013 18:01

Such a fantastic question!!! Super interested in this answer men
I think in this particular case the guy was two timing with two different women and did not want to choose between them. When one of them forced the issue he went for the other one.

I don't think working out the motives of this particular guy is very difficult: Some men are a-moral bastards and always will be.

What I find rather more mysterious is why women who otherwise seem to be quite sensible seem to fling themselves at such men against all the advice of their friends (both male and female) and stay with them long after their true nature is acknowledged.

Topic Why do men tell you they love you when they don't have to, or mean it?
Posted 05 Apr 2013 11:01

So that "in a relationship with" option has caused problems - wow, who'd have thought?

I've heard of similar problems about people asking stuff like "Why am i not on the top of your friend's list? lol" It's right up there on passive/aggressive lushisms with "wow. you have a lot of friends"

It happens in real life as well.

I watched the marriage of my wife's best friend fall apart after she told her husband she was going to start sleeping with other men. Then after the marriage broke up the man she was sleeping with walked off.

There are many of reasons that it happens and they are not always the same. Men are just as prone to engage in fantasy as women. Telling a woman you love them is easy. Knowing what love is, rather harder. Knowing what you mean by love is what the other person does, harder still.

If you don't believe defining love is hard, try this, describe what the colour red looks like to someone else. By which I don't mean tell me what something that is red looks like, I mean what is the sensation of redness like for you. It is completely impossible as there are no intersubjective frames of reference.

That is why telling someone that you are thinking about them, or that you hope something happens for them, or that you want to spend time with them means rather more than 'love'.

Another reason is that sometimes you thought you were in love with someone right up to the moment you tell them you love them. And that is the exact moment you suddenly realize that you don't. Hey, I was 16 at the time and we were Saddlebacking. Sue me.

Topic how would you react to a guy getting hard at a nude beach
Posted 04 Apr 2013 06:30

Finding all the negative responses to having an erection at a nude beach a little troubling. But it appears most are from people who have never gone. When answering please let us know if you have ever experienced public nudity or have seen a guy get hard in that type of setting. Thanks

??? I have to wonder about your candidness here since what you asked is discussed in EVERY nudist guide I have ever seen and the answer is ALWAYS the one you got here. So to fein surprise or dismiss the opinions in the way you do really does not give you much credibility.

The reaction you are likely to get on any of the beaches I have been to ranges from indifference to being kicked off the beach entirely. There are some beaches that I know of where something else might happen but they are strictly 18+ beaches and people go there to have public sex so your erection is not exactly out of place. But those are not what I would call a nude beach, they are beaches which permit public orgies.

Topic Do all Dominants want multiple submissives?
Posted 04 Apr 2013 06:19

i guess i just need too much personal attention to thrive in a situation like that. and being a Dom/me is hard work, doing that for more than one sub just seems like too much.

... you think there might be subs that are so demanding their Dom's need a rest from time to time? Should that surprise me?

One of the bad habits of the net is the way that everything seems to turn into what we call in the UK a dick size measuring contest. People assert that there is only one proper way to do something and if it isn't theirs then it does not count or is wrong or inadequate. The only real Lesbians are gold stars! Role play is not proper BDSM, got to live it 24/7! A/V double penetration is passe, got to be double anal or it s nothing!

Most people get on with two parents, so I can't see why having two Masters would be inconceivable. The main issue would be whether the Masters could agree on a consistent approach. Otherwise it is a recipe for, umm a sub plot for one of my novels.

Topic How Many Famous Stories?
Posted 03 Apr 2013 13:24

This was just brought to my attention by Peter_Pan.
I have 17 (seventeen) stories here that are "Famous"; that is, with more than 30,000 views each.
Is this very high? Do any other folks have more "Famous" stories than this?

Let me guess, how many of those are in the 'Incest' category?

Like peasants in Blackadder, those only count in the case of a tie.

Topic how would you react to a guy getting hard at a nude beach
Posted 03 Apr 2013 08:26

My only experience of nude beaches is the one at Brighton (UK South Coast). It's not really a family beach, but otherwise there are a real mixture of ages. I wish I could say most people go there for non sexual reasons, but a lot of gay men use it, and some of them don't seem to hide their erections as well as they should. Perhaps I'm just jealous because I'm not the cause lol. Mind you, that does give me the freedom to look without fear of being chatted up...

Which is I think one of the reasons I am skeptical about Trinket's position.

Yes there are some people who go to nude beaches without any sexual thoughts whatsoever. But there are rather obviously some who go with very sexual thoughts in mind and everyone is aware of that or why else would an erection be an issue at all?