Leaving the community

"Newps" wrote in message
...
So which is it? Is the poll a fact or nearly a fact?

I've already said. Please keep up. The poll is a fact. They are 100%
correct about the fact they represent. They are reasonably (and more
importantly, usefully) close to 100% correct about the facts that they ask
about.

If you're having trouble distinguishing between the two, I recommend you
find a decent statistics book.

"Bill Denton" wrote in message
...
"Homophobe"; the last refuge of the village idiot.

Ahh, yes. The ad hominem attack. The last refuge of the person without a
legitimate argument.

I've never heard an intelligent person use that term.

Not my fault. Plenty of intelligent people do.

Sorry Cecil, I won't argue the amendment. I let it stand on it's own as
interpreted by the SC. But when someone tries to misinterpret the meaning
in
order to further their agenda, I speak up.


But Jeff,,, I have no agenda... There is no 'plot' against you,,,, no
'secret conspiracy' that I'm trying to pull on you. jeesh "paranoia WILL
destroy ya" grin. I'm just trying to approach the issue, logically.
Also, the Supreme Court upheld the right to bear arms but in their decision
it was not stated that the reason for supporting the right was to assure
that the citizens of the U.S. could overthrow the government. Goodness,
Jeff!

Change the Constitution if you can, but trying to alter the original views
of Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, et al, by incorrectly using their words
is
a sure way to invalidate your argument and doom your cause to failure.

I'm not trying to change the Constitution (unlike Bush and Ashcroft who have
tried to strip away the most basic guarantees with the 'Patriot' Act). I
haven't altered any original views, at all.

But,,,, and I'm asking you to be rational here; do you REALLY think the
reason for the second amendment was that the founding fathers wanted to
assure that the citizenry would have the ability to overthrow the new
government that they were working SO hard to put into place? Jeff?
Really??? Isn't a more likely explanation that they recognized that their
new country didn't have a lot of money to fund purchasing weapons for a
formal army and that they wanted to insure that its' citizens had weaponry
so that they could be called up to fight in the event the new country was
attacked? .. "A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be
infringed"

--
If their intent was just that citizens had the right to bear arms, they
wouldn't have the line that comes before it. What is unreasonable about
that?

--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

I can send you a picture, of one, if you'd like?


--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"Newps" wrote in message
...


Cecil Chapman wrote:

I have the right to own and fire my Mauser, and, as far as I'm concerned,
that
includes the right to be allowed to buy ammunition for it. Kerry tried to
ban that,


I almost forgot,,,,what for goodness sake do you need to be firing
ammunition as large as the type that the Mauser uses?

Do you even know what a Mauser is?

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Newps" wrote in message
...

So which is it? Is the poll a fact or nearly a fact?


I've already said. Please keep up. The poll is a fact. They are 100%
correct about the fact they represent. They are reasonably (and more
importantly, usefully) close to 100% correct about the facts that they ask
about.

Exactly what is "useful" about exit polls taken on election day?
Exactly what is useful about other political polls for that matter,
unless you are a democratic who can't think on his/her own and needs a
poll to tell them what to do. :-)


Matt

Right,,, I got that joe-bob,,,, I was referring to the size of the
ammunition it fires.... Back in your pick-up and go back to your fortified
ground cellar and wait for 'the end'.

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

Cecil Chapman wrote:

Sorry Cecil, I won't argue the amendment. I let it stand on it's own as
interpreted by the SC. But when someone tries to misinterpret the meaning
in
order to further their agenda, I speak up.



But Jeff,,, I have no agenda... There is no 'plot' against you,,,, no
'secret conspiracy' that I'm trying to pull on you. jeesh "paranoia WILL
destroy ya" grin. I'm just trying to approach the issue, logically.
Also, the Supreme Court upheld the right to bear arms but in their decision
it was not stated that the reason for supporting the right was to assure
that the citizens of the U.S. could overthrow the government. Goodness,
Jeff!

No need to restate what is commonly known by anyone at all literate
about the Constitution and those who wrote it.


Change the Constitution if you can, but trying to alter the original views
of Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, et al, by incorrectly using their words
is
a sure way to invalidate your argument and doom your cause to failure.


I'm not trying to change the Constitution (unlike Bush and Ashcroft who have
tried to strip away the most basic guarantees with the 'Patriot' Act). I
haven't altered any original views, at all.

You seem to be trying to interpret the Constitution in ways that the
authors never intended, and that is just as bad as trying to change it
outright.


But,,,, and I'm asking you to be rational here; do you REALLY think the
reason for the second amendment was that the founding fathers wanted to
assure that the citizenry would have the ability to overthrow the new
government that they were working SO hard to put into place? Jeff?
Really??? Isn't a more likely explanation that they recognized that their
new country didn't have a lot of money to fund purchasing weapons for a
formal army and that they wanted to insure that its' citizens had weaponry
so that they could be called up to fight in the event the new country was
attacked? .. "A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be
infringed"

Yes, that is exactly what the founders had in mind. Can't you do a
little research on your own? The comments on the second amendment by
various folks involved with authoring the Constitution are easy to find,
assuming you really want to know the answer.


Matt

BINGO!!!
--
Jim in NC

Yep, Jim in NC, GOOD point!,,,, can YOU say WMD's?

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

"Cecil Chapman" wrote in message
om...
Sorry Cecil, I won't argue the amendment. I let it stand on it's own as
interpreted by the SC. But when someone tries to misinterpret the
meaning
in
order to further their agenda, I speak up.


But Jeff,,, I have no agenda... There is no 'plot' against you,,,, no
'secret conspiracy' that I'm trying to pull on you. jeesh "paranoia
WILL
destroy ya" grin. I'm just trying to approach the issue, logically.
Also, the Supreme Court upheld the right to bear arms but in their
decision
it was not stated that the reason for supporting the right was to assure
that the citizens of the U.S. could overthrow the government. Goodness,
Jeff!

Change the Constitution if you can, but trying to alter the original
views
of Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, et al, by incorrectly using their words
is
a sure way to invalidate your argument and doom your cause to failure.

I'm not trying to change the Constitution (unlike Bush and Ashcroft who
have
tried to strip away the most basic guarantees with the 'Patriot' Act). I
haven't altered any original views, at all.

But,,,, and I'm asking you to be rational here; do you REALLY think the
reason for the second amendment was that the founding fathers wanted to
assure that the citizenry would have the ability to overthrow the new
government that they were working SO hard to put into place?

Do you remember this little event in US history called the Revolution? Of
course the founding fathers would want to afford the citizens the
opportunity to overthrow the government if need be. THEY HAD JUST DONE IT
AND WERE INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO KNOW IT MIGHT NEED TO HAPPEN AGAIN! Consider
what was happening in other countries around that time. Sheesh, talk about
rational.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
Exactly what is "useful" about exit polls taken on election day? Exactly
what is useful about other political polls for that matter, unless you are
a democratic who can't think on his/her own and needs a poll to tell them
what to do. :-)


Matt


Democrats and Republicans will both heavily use the exit polls. In a couple
of months, a book about the size of a dictionary will come out with all the
exit poll data. Both sides will use the info to figure out why people voted
the way they did, and how they can use it to their advantage in the future.
Exit polls are very accurate when used properly.