Page 4 of 4 [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,128
Location: Vancouver, BC

10 May 2011, 1:20 pm

Quote:
The Gamemaster: You're going to backstab him with a ballista?
Nimble (the Thief): Uh huh.
The Gamemaster: With a f*****g seige weapon?!
Nimble (the Thief): Uh huh.

---The Gamers by Matt Vancil


_________________
--James


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

10 May 2011, 5:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
The only thing which really matters to such anti-gun politicians is whether or not they think what they say sounds good to the people who vote for them. Having actual knowledge of a subject is secondary to making themselves sound good to their target audience. If their audience were more knowledgeable, they might consider doing some actual research, like perhaps from a pocket dictionary... seriously, someone actually thought that the word incendiary is equivalent to the term "heat seeking"? I can see people confusing my usage of the word century in the opening post for the division of time rather than a Roman military division, but seriously what kind of idiot would be lacking enough knowledge of English to even think that incendiary, meaning able to set things on fire, would be the same as heat seeking, which is exactly as it sounds - namely aim correcting towards sources of infrared light.... - ... how can it be that these elected officials, who think they are so "elite", can seriously be so dumb?

Has anyone used 'heat-seeking' here besides me? I assure you, I know the difference, and 'heat-seeking' was what I meant.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

10 May 2011, 7:40 pm

People want guns to be illegal while catapults are not, for the same reason marijuana is illegal and champagne is not. Guns and Marijuana are way too practical.


_________________
.


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,257
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 May 2011, 9:27 pm

LKL wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
The only thing which really matters to such anti-gun politicians is whether or not they think what they say sounds good to the people who vote for them. Having actual knowledge of a subject is secondary to making themselves sound good to their target audience. If their audience were more knowledgeable, they might consider doing some actual research, like perhaps from a pocket dictionary... seriously, someone actually thought that the word incendiary is equivalent to the term "heat seeking"? I can see people confusing my usage of the word century in the opening post for the division of time rather than a Roman military division, but seriously what kind of idiot would be lacking enough knowledge of English to even think that incendiary, meaning able to set things on fire, would be the same as heat seeking, which is exactly as it sounds - namely aim correcting towards sources of infrared light.... - ... how can it be that these elected officials, who think they are so "elite", can seriously be so dumb?

Has anyone used 'heat-seeking' here besides me? I assure you, I know the difference, and 'heat-seeking' was what I meant.


It wasn't anyone here, but a reference to the statement of a politician that was on the last page.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,774
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

10 May 2011, 9:58 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
LKL wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
The only thing which really matters to such anti-gun politicians is whether or not they think what they say sounds good to the people who vote for them. Having actual knowledge of a subject is secondary to making themselves sound good to their target audience. If their audience were more knowledgeable, they might consider doing some actual research, like perhaps from a pocket dictionary... seriously, someone actually thought that the word incendiary is equivalent to the term "heat seeking"? I can see people confusing my usage of the word century in the opening post for the division of time rather than a Roman military division, but seriously what kind of idiot would be lacking enough knowledge of English to even think that incendiary, meaning able to set things on fire, would be the same as heat seeking, which is exactly as it sounds - namely aim correcting towards sources of infrared light.... - ... how can it be that these elected officials, who think they are so "elite", can seriously be so dumb?

Has anyone used 'heat-seeking' here besides me? I assure you, I know the difference, and 'heat-seeking' was what I meant.


It wasn't anyone here, but a reference to the statement of a politician that was on the last page.
Yeah we're talking about Carolyn McCarthy. And yes she is seriously that batshit. I recently found out her husband was a victim of gun violence which is probably responsible for this madness. It is really unfortunate that it happened, but she is in a high position of power and she needs to stop going about using her power so stupidly, especially when these gun control measures have resulted in people being harmed. The stores that didn't get burned to the ground were the ones with the owners on the rooftop with "assault weapons", and the stores that did get burned to the ground where the ones with the owners who couldn't get guns quick enough cuz of the waiting period. Plenty of women have gotten killed by their as*hole spouses since the waiting period didn't allow em to get their guns quickly enough to defend themselves from em. Oh and it's funny how gun control advocates tend to be all for supporting women and minorities, yet they wanna ban Saturday Night Specials which are affordable enough for minorities and small enough for women to carry and fire controllably. That's a double whammy right there.



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

10 May 2011, 10:20 pm

LKL wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
The only thing which really matters to such anti-gun politicians is whether or not they think what they say sounds good to the people who vote for them. Having actual knowledge of a subject is secondary to making themselves sound good to their target audience. If their audience were more knowledgeable, they might consider doing some actual research, like perhaps from a pocket dictionary... seriously, someone actually thought that the word incendiary is equivalent to the term "heat seeking"? I can see people confusing my usage of the word century in the opening post for the division of time rather than a Roman military division, but seriously what kind of idiot would be lacking enough knowledge of English to even think that incendiary, meaning able to set things on fire, would be the same as heat seeking, which is exactly as it sounds - namely aim correcting towards sources of infrared light.... - ... how can it be that these elected officials, who think they are so "elite", can seriously be so dumb?

Has anyone used 'heat-seeking' here besides me? I assure you, I know the difference, and 'heat-seeking' was what I meant.

If you have disproven Newton's laws of motion and found a way to make an object change path without any energy, you need to take your findings and your demonstration and catch the next flight to Stockholm!


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

10 May 2011, 11:51 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
LKL wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
The only thing which really matters to such anti-gun politicians is whether or not they think what they say sounds good to the people who vote for them. Having actual knowledge of a subject is secondary to making themselves sound good to their target audience. If their audience were more knowledgeable, they might consider doing some actual research, like perhaps from a pocket dictionary... seriously, someone actually thought that the word incendiary is equivalent to the term "heat seeking"? I can see people confusing my usage of the word century in the opening post for the division of time rather than a Roman military division, but seriously what kind of idiot would be lacking enough knowledge of English to even think that incendiary, meaning able to set things on fire, would be the same as heat seeking, which is exactly as it sounds - namely aim correcting towards sources of infrared light.... - ... how can it be that these elected officials, who think they are so "elite", can seriously be so dumb?

Has anyone used 'heat-seeking' here besides me? I assure you, I know the difference, and 'heat-seeking' was what I meant.


It wasn't anyone here, but a reference to the statement of a politician that was on the last page.

thanks for the clarification :)



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,257
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

11 May 2011, 2:53 am

LKL wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
LKL wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
The only thing which really matters to such anti-gun politicians is whether or not they think what they say sounds good to the people who vote for them. Having actual knowledge of a subject is secondary to making themselves sound good to their target audience. If their audience were more knowledgeable, they might consider doing some actual research, like perhaps from a pocket dictionary... seriously, someone actually thought that the word incendiary is equivalent to the term "heat seeking"? I can see people confusing my usage of the word century in the opening post for the division of time rather than a Roman military division, but seriously what kind of idiot would be lacking enough knowledge of English to even think that incendiary, meaning able to set things on fire, would be the same as heat seeking, which is exactly as it sounds - namely aim correcting towards sources of infrared light.... - ... how can it be that these elected officials, who think they are so "elite", can seriously be so dumb?

Has anyone used 'heat-seeking' here besides me? I assure you, I know the difference, and 'heat-seeking' was what I meant.


It wasn't anyone here, but a reference to the statement of a politician that was on the last page.

thanks for the clarification :)


No problem. Sorry that it may have sounded as though I were talking about you on the basis of keywords used, but I wasn't. I recognized the manner of humor you and others were speaking in, but it is truly strange the words that politicians sometimes utter and sound as though they mean them. I really hope they don't, I hope it's just a facade to impress anyone who is bored enough to read transcripts or watch the congresses and senates on television. If some of those politicians are actually serious it really casts some doubt into my mind as to the capability of those who attempt to lead us.