A handgun that folds up to look like a smartphone will be released later this year

I read several detailed sites disproving the crap the dail mail and others say about UK being 2nd most violent place in Europe but that can be found with an easy search by anyone:
Well, Great Britain has at least the equivalent of the US' yellow journalism corp. I think they pretty much say what they like, and it's up to each individual citizen to "exercise his right to dispute it". (Like any of us have the time for that crap). Unless of course, you're an "actor". Then the tears will flow in courtrooms across the land, netting multi-million dollar, (or Pounds Sterling, if you prefer), settlements for the "dummies" who put naked photos of themselves "accidentally" on their smart phones in the first place.

In the same way everyone in the US has access to what time Leonardo DiCaprio farted, I'm sure British subjects have the same info available about the Queen. (And perhaps Sir Elton John as well). This information is "thoughtfully" provided to us by the parasites, (oops, I meant "reporters"), in the "entertainment news industry".

As I said sensationalism, one minute one of the highest violent crime countries in Europe, next it's the police faking a spike in crime....
I am ever so reticent to point this out, but the more legislation you enact, the more laws will be broken. The UK can do so with the best of the 1st world countries. So, if you "want" higher crime statistics, simply lower the bar as to what constitutes "crime".

In example, it is now illegal in the UK to make "mixed tapes" from your own bought and paid for music library. I can't wait til they start enforcing that. Then we'll see a huge jump in your crime stats....:eek:
 
Last edited:
I am ever so reticent to point this out, but the more legislation you enact, the more laws will be broken. The UK can do so with the best of the 1st world countries. So, if you "want" higher crime statistics, simply lower the bar as to what constitutes "crime".
Exactly my counterpoint to what Davis was saying, because of the differences of what constitutes "crime" in different places in the world it's pretty hard to make any accurate comparisons regarding "violent" crime.
 
Last edited:
I am ever so reticent to point this out, but the more legislation you enact, the more laws will be broken. The UK can do so with the best of the 1st world countries. So, if you "want" higher crime statistics, simply lower the bar as to what constitutes "crime".
Exactly my counterpoint to what Davis was saying, because of the differences of what constitutes "crime" in different places in the world it's pretty hard to make any accurate comparisons regarding "violent" crime.
Fixed that for ya.(y)

That being said, the US has also drastically lowered the bar as to what constitutes crime. Other countries have as well, For example, "honor killings" are now"illegal" in Turkey, and the caste system is "illegal" in India.....;);););)

Other than that, I think you two might be on a mutually misunderstood syntactic rampage. Perhaps it's what we discussed earlier about the subtle dialectic difference between the queen's English, and our "colonist's" version of it.

To go briefly back to topic,(*) I sincerely hope ATF puts the big kibosh on this, "my cellphone is a gun", nonsense. Because if this lame idea is allowed to go forward, anyone, with any phone, will be able to rob the corner bodega at "gunpoint" whenever and wherever they so desire.

(*) WTF for, I haven't the foggiest idea.:confused:
 
Last edited:
Well, we need our guns, and have since 1776, (IIRC).
Very good, having a chuckle at that over my cup of tea. But in society today you really think it's necessary for Joe Blogs to have access to a lethal weapon that can be used to end a life in seconds without a second thought about the consequences. With people often quick to anger and slower to engage their brains I don't think it's a good idea but that's just my opinion.

I remember hearing about a fellow Scot that was shot dead in Houston after knocking on someones door : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scot-is-shot-dead-when-mistaken-for-prowler-1398645.html

This sort of thing to me is such a senseless waste of life, when a call to the police, better home security or non lethal weaponry would have prevented this accidental killing. Just so folks can carry a gun in case "the British are coming" back, the country continues to suffer loss of lives, to me it just isn't logical.

Since we've normally gotten along well over the years, I hope you'll react with a bit of restraint when I say, "stop spouting bulls***, nonsense, and propaganda. To hear people like you talk, you can walk into the corner "bodega" and grab a pistol with your lottery ticket.
What BS, nonsense and propoganda???? What are you on about? Unless it wasn't obvious the thing about factories filling off the serial numbers to make illegal guns was an attempt at humour.

In the US, I'm pretty sure a fairly high percentage of "illegal guns" are obtained by "illegal means".
I never said they weren't. But having guns around in the first place makes them accessible by both legal and illegal means. Perhaps if guns weren't so common place (and the ammunition too, which might not have to be illegally imported) do you not think illegal ones would be harder to actually circulate? Easier control over ones that aren't specifically illegally imported (and I'm sure Joe Bloggs robbing the local "bodegas" has all his guns imported)?
 
Very good, having a chuckle at that over my cup of tea. But in society today you really think it's necessary for Joe Blogs to have access to a lethal weapon that can be used to end a life in seconds without a second thought about the consequences. With people often quick to anger and slower to engage their brains I don't think it's a good idea but that's just my opinion.
Well, I'd much rather kill a human who was desperately asking for it, than march out into the woods and gun down a protected species with a scoped 30.06 for sport.
This sort of thing to me is such a senseless waste of life, when a call to the police, better home security or non lethal weaponry would have prevented this accidental killing. Just so folks can carry a gun in case "the British are coming" back, the country continues to suffer loss of lives, to me it just isn't logical.
"A senseless waste of life", is a rather arbitrary conclusion. Many of the people who are being gunned down, were a "waste of life", simply by virtue of not being eliminated by birth control measures in the first place.


What BS, nonsense and propoganda???? What are you on about? Unless it wasn't obvious the thing about factories filling off the serial numbers to make illegal guns was an attempt at humour.
Did you really need to use the italics there? First of all it's "humor", and second, the italics f***ed with my ability to close the quote.
I never said they weren't. But having guns around in the first place makes them accessible by both legal and illegal means. Perhaps if guns weren't so common place (and the ammunition too, which might not have to be illegally imported) do you not think illegal ones would be harder to actually circulate? Easier control over ones that aren't specifically illegally imported (and I'm sure Joe Bloggs robbing the local "bodegas" has all his guns imported)?
The only really effective "non lethal" weapons which come to mind are, "rubber bullets", (remember them and the IRA?), and Tasers. Tasers are a one shot deal. Don't miss or you're dead.

I honestly believe many of the people bemoaning "innocent loss of life", are detached from life in the hood. The
wild animals in mi barrio, won't screw with you if they think you're armed. I believe I've successfully addressed their very existence in prior paragraphs.

All these "right to life" crap holes, always fail to take into account that rearing these b**tards, will be done with their tax dollars. It's a very blurry line between, "Christian charity", and "overt stupidity" indeed.

Recently, a 68 year old man was walking his dog in the park when he was accosted by an 18 YO minority youth, attempting to rob him with a BB pistol. So, the old gentleman drew his own .38, and blew his head off with it. The Upper Darby police chief wanted to give ham a plaque declaring him, "man of the year". He sure had my vote..(y)

"And the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged", period. Final answer.

CODA: As far as "the British are coming back" is concerned, I'm still smarting from the brutal beating the British gave the poor Argentinian people during the Falkland Islands war. You people should have all your battleships and warplanes taken off you. (I eagerly await your response to this, RSVP).
 
Last edited:
Wow... had to figure this would spark a gun control argument.... I DID love the comparisons with the US and Pakistan and Brazil... good to see that they're still a bit safer than 3rd world countries....

But when we compare the US to other democratic "first world" countries, I don't think you get the same results... I'm a Canadian, and we had one of our first school "violence rampages", where a student came to school and stabbed numerous students and teachers... Had he had access to a gun, instead of just tons of seriously wounded people, we'd be talking Columbine...

The problem is, because you've had the right to bear arms for so long, you feel it's necessary... Might I ask why?!?! The purpose was SUPPOSED to be to keep Britain from retaking your nation - and we can extend that to any other hostile power like the Russians, Chinese, etc nowadays...

But technology has increased dramatically since the 18th century... You can arm a few million people with handguns, but if someone sends in a few tanks, they're toast....

The only purpose of a gun (not including a hunting rifle) is to shoot another person. WHY DO WE THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA FOR LOTS OF PEOPLE TO HAVE!?!?!?

It's a catch 22 now, though.... you need the gun for defense, cause the criminals all have guns... but if NO ONE had access to guns, noone would need them....
 
Last edited:
It's a catch 22 now, though.... you need the gun for defense, cause the criminals all have guns... but if NOONE had access to guns, noone would need them....
I never knew "noone" was a word. Or if it was, it might be the Old English spelling of "noon". (Which BTW, is a palindrome. And you thought I never paid attention in school).

As it turns out, Firefox' spell checker doesn't consider "noone" a word either. So, you can see I'm not simply being mean or trolling you.:cool:

In any event, by adding an "R" to noone, you get "nooner. Which again, might be a great name to tie into a medieval themed B & B. Perhaps, "Ye Olde Nooner", Lodging & Repast", as it were.

In the civilian arena, civilians, cops, and criminals all having guns, would be referred to as "M.A.D.", (Mutually Assured Destruction), if it were expressed in military parlance. But hey wait, that s*** is still going on. Who among you has the yarbles to try and take their atomic bombs off them? Let me see a show of hands. :p
 
Last edited:
Soon the company will released the specs of this device:
Snapdragon 820
3GB ram, 64 GB rom
21 MP rear camera with targeting crosshair
double-action gun with 5.2 inch display
2 rounds of cal .380 derringer with expandable storage
muzzle velocity: 1,250 Ghz ..errr 1,250 fps
the laser sight will use Sony Exmor with auto laser focus and dual LED flash
available in grey space color, gold color and rose pink color
 
Soon the company will released the specs of this device:
Snapdragon 820
3GB ram, 64 GB rom
21 MP rear camera with targeting crosshair
double-action gun with 5.2 inch display
2 rounds of cal .380 derringer with expandable storage
muzzle velocity: 1,250 Ghz ..errr 1,250 fps
the laser sight will use Sony Exmor with auto laser focus and dual LED flash
available in grey space color, gold color and rose pink color
It sounds like your undies might be a little gooey after after getting into daddy's stash of "specification porn" the way you did. I told your father not to leave "PC world" laying around the bathroom where you precocious techno-brats might get into it....:D

A Derringer is notoriously a women's weapon. Better grab yourself a pink one.(y)
 
Last edited:
Protection, bla bla bla.. Defense, bla bla bla.. This is just a blatant effort to further conceal firearms, which is only convenient for criminals.

If you are really so afraid that you need to wear a 40cal strap-on phallus all the time, at least have the guts to wear it openly. I feel I have just as much right to know someone is armed, as they have to be armed. Concealing, or hiding, a weapon is only useful for those who want to use it surreptitiously for nefarious purposes, or those with a borderline personality disorder causing them enough paranoia to exclude them from the right to own a gun.
 
"And the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged", period. Final answer.
If you are going to quote something, include the whole quote for the context..

"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."

I'm no rhetoric expert, but that pretty much states that the right to bear arms is limited to the confines of a well-regulated militia, basically what we refer to as state/county/local police and national guard nowadays. Outside if a few nutballs with self-advertised misinterpretations of the second amendment, pretty much the entire legal world is in consensus on this one.

It's like global climate change but with guns -- no matter what the facts show, some refuse to believe it just in the interest of stifling progress.
 
When you "forget" your passcode, the gun becomes unfirable unless you can get the company to customize its OS to bypass the security:)
Well, isn't that the kind of gun you'd tolerate being sold? Some crack head walks into a store, pulls out his phone and says, "gimme all your money". This is before he realizes he doesn't have the pass code to his stolen "Gu-hone". Panic sets in and he becomes desperate......

OK, at this point boyz & gurlz, it should be obvious the worst that could happen is the clerk has the defunct gun thrown at him, and he should be smart enough to duck, or face the consequences.

"And they all lived happily ever after".:p (Albeit in different places. Which assumes the police got there in time. Yeah I know, that's a foolish assumption).

You're another one who, when declared, "Supreme dictator of the US", appears able to solve all our problems. When your ascension to the throne occurs, (now located in the Pentagon), you can sit us down and scold us, both before, and after, our graham crackers & milk.

Be sure to stress you came here from a different place, so it should be obvious to all concerned, you know what's best for us. Or perhaps you might not bother to move here, but rather run the place from your Canadian, "dicta-blog". >> (y) << (*)

(*) "Amendment": That finger emoticon, in a similar manner to the US Constitution, may be interpreted in both "strict" and "liberal" manners.
If you are going to quote something, include the whole quote for the context..

"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."
Well, that amendment was written with the expectation that private citizens would immediately take up arms, voluntarily, against an invading body. The "regulator", might be the town mayor's call to arms.

(Before I continue, I did see you call me a nutball, did I not? Although you did try to obfuscate that by pluralizing, "nutball".
Sooo, hows my interpretation of the English language a doin' so far?

I'm no rhetoric expert(*), but that pretty much states that the right to bear arms is limited to the confines of a well-regulated militia, basically what we refer to as state/county/local police and national guard nowadays. Outside if a few nutballs with self-advertised misinterpretations of the second amendment, pretty much the entire legal world is in consensus on this one.
By "legal world" is that made up of the cowering little gurls who post here? You know, the ones who are too afraid to drive themselves to work, and too stupid to put down their cell phone when they do. Because I'm frankly astounded you're able to even have an opinion beyond, "everything on the web and the entire entertainment industry should be free to me", and "those big, bad, telecoms are throttling MY data, and overcharging me to do so"

It's like global climate change but with guns -- no matter what the facts show, some refuse to believe it just in the interest of stifling progress.
Right, and that's because you can say without a shadow of a doubt you know it all. When what you really mean, is you intend to hide under the skirts of people who agree with you, and mouth the words.

(*) At least we agree on something.(y) And here again, that emoticon is subject to multiple interpretations.

.
+
 
Last edited:
Ahh, Crankytroll, you haven't changed... Still the master of nonsensical rants when you have nothing useful to contribute.

Out of curiosity, can you tell us in plain words whether you are in favor or not of this gun?
 
"And the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged", period. Final answer.
If you are going to quote something, include the whole quote for the context..

"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."

I'm no rhetoric expert, but that pretty much states that the right to bear arms is limited to the confines of a well-regulated militia, basically what we refer to as state/county/local police and national guard nowadays. Outside if a few nutballs with self-advertised misinterpretations of the second amendment, pretty much the entire legal world is in consensus on this one.

It's like global climate change but with guns -- no matter what the facts show, some refuse to believe it just in the interest of stifling progress.
The makers of the constitution did not mean state law enforcement when they said well-regulated militia, they very much were for a civilian militia to balance the government army, it was meant as a check to that power. Remember, words change meaning over time and the way we use them now is not always how they were used hundreds of years ago.
 
Ahh, Crankytroll, you haven't changed... Still the master of nonsensical rants when you have nothing useful to contribute.

Out of curiosity, can you tell us in plain words whether you are in favor or not of this gun?
If you can't formulate a reasonable effective, "counter-rant" then maybe you shouldn't try to do the US' legislating for us.

If you could read, or bothered to read what I've said in this thread, I said I was not in favor of this gun, period.
...[ ]...To go briefly back to topic,(*) I sincerely hope ATF puts the big kibosh on this, "my cellphone is a gun", nonsense. Because if this lame idea is allowed to go forward, anyone, with any phone, will be able to rob the corner bodega at "gunpoint" whenever and wherever they so desire....[ ]...

Which I posted back at #53, for those who it seems, have only recently joined the fray.

I like how you summarily declare me "trolling". You would think this forum belongs to you, by virtue of being the only one with a valid opinion. If you can't handle the heat, go back to campaigning for Windows 10 and your precious DX-12.

BTW, you said I "didn't understand humor", but IIRC, I opened my responses to you with a bit of humor, which seems to have flown over your 1st grade head. Take some advice from your friendly Techspot amusement park, "you must be over 42" tall to get on this ride".
 
Last edited:
The makers of the constitution did not mean state law enforcement when they said well-regulated militia, they very much were for a civilian militia to balance the government army, it was meant as a check to that power. Remember, words change meaning over time and the way we use them now is not always how they were used hundreds of years ago.
Yeah well, in those terms, we should go ahead and summarily surrender all our weapons, since "the state" has thermonuclear weapons, and challenging it would be a senseless waste of life.:sarcasm:,(perhaps, but true nonetheless). I honestly do think, that this particular iteration of a "gun" should be banned altogether. (see my post #53) If anyone wants to campaign for "smart guns", fine, go ahead. If that gets floated past congress, I'm curious how many innocent people get shot dead trying to unlock the damned things. Panic does strange things to people's memory, usually the only thing which remains, is fight or flight. And if you're standing there with a weapon you can't unlock...., BANG you're dead.

(*) Because it's basically garbage from the mind of an internet yuppie millennial. It's basically a "new age women's derringer". What's next, should we go back to poison containing high school rings? Another notoriously female weapon.
 
Last edited:
Protection, bla bla bla.. Defense, bla bla bla.. This is just a blatant effort to further conceal firearms, which is only convenient for criminals.

If you are really so afraid that you need to wear a 40cal strap-on phallus all the time, at least have the guts to wear it openly. I feel I have just as much right to know someone is armed, as they have to be armed. Concealing, or hiding, a weapon is only useful for those who want to use it surreptitiously for nefarious purposes, or those with a borderline personality disorder causing them enough paranoia to exclude them from the right to own a gun.
Oh, given the current climate of men being "metro-sexuals"., you're probably would like to see that happen, so someone will put their "gun" in your behind...:)

Blah, blah.......ooh that feels nice..

BTW, I already SAID, in no uncertain terms that I was against this stupid Gu-hone. It looks like some tinker toy s*** you have to be stupid enough to pay real money for while you're, "playing", "Second Life"..:mad:
 
Last edited:
If you could read, or bothered to read what I've said in this thread, I said I was not in favor of this gun, period.
.

So scarily, we actually agree... yet you still decide to troll and rant against what I say....Yes, I can read.... my point, which you've obviously missed, is why are you giving nonsensical rants if you actually agree with the poster...

And in case you can't read, I'm also against this gun....
 
...[ ]...And in case you can't read, I'm also against this gun....
Yes we do, about this gun in particular. In the larger issue of gun control in general, we seem to differ.

Keep in mind guns didn't cause Columbine, social factors did. That was an event brought about by social alienation. "Children can be so cruel", and so it begins. This one lisps. That one wears ugly black clothing. To the flip side, we profess to teach "tolerance", but some members of the community may not want, accept, or tolerate it. Thus, nails, bolts, wood screws and fertilizer, become as deadly as hand guns, perhaps more so.

Accordingly, the most unfortunate thing about man, is his "humanity". We alone can transfer knowledge from generation to generation via the written word. This has been studied, and found to lack the most important transfer of all, moral knowledge. Morality. :eek: And that my friend is the root of a wide spectrum of social issues. After a 1,000+ years of advancement in lethal weaponry, we still haven't developed the moral restraint not to use it. That "restraint" goes untaught and unlearned to this day and beyond. What we have now, is 6 billion chimps, armed with nuclear weapons.

"Democracy", and how it attaches to "the rights of the individual", is a pivotal issue at stake. Try and "wrap your head around" this analog. AIDS "began", either by fact or rumour, in the gay community. Accordingly, the affliction was about to be named "GRIDS", (Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome). When one straight individual tuned up with the virus, that's when it would be no longer socially acceptable to call it that.

And so it goes with the sale of hand guns, if one person actually needs one, you can't ban the sale of them for every one. And carry permits are difficult to acquire, very difficult indeed.

If you trace this back to the root of its problem, you'd have to blame the US government for its inability to' "win the war on drugs", people bringing children into the world without much of an opportunity to do anything but sell crack & smack on the corner. When it comes to that, lack of moral virtue being transmitted produces individuals with an inbred unwillingness to grow up and do anything but sell drugs. So, it becomes very difficult, perhaps virtually impossible, to penalize law abiding citizens, with measures intended to control crime and punish criminals.

Nobody seems to think the US has any legislation on the books to control the distribution and sale of firearms. When the simple fact of the matter is, we have reams of it, along with a wing of government dedicated to overseeing it. "ATF" Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Now if people's greed, stupidity, and lack of moral fiber, puts guns in the hands of criminals, that's a social issue, not a legislative issue.

I've gotten a perverse pleasure out of listening to the stupidity of the wild, perhaps naive claims made in this thread like, "Pakistan is safer than the US". I'm not sure, but it might be illuminating for these individuals to book a tour of the terrorist camps in Pakistan, then go as a proud American, unarmed.

As for you personally, you continually seem to forget you're not from around here. You're from the "great white north". Thus, you grew up and were educated in a different country, under a different propaganda structure.

That's not a fault, but you have to bear in mind, (especially when spouting overly liberal generalizations), that we all drank different Kool-Aids. So, your perception of what "is", based upon your middle class take on morality, may be completely at odds with some petty, self important, completely ego driven, gang banger in the hood. Your perception of, "The Golden Rule", (treat others, blah, blah), will almost certainly be in diametric opposition to his. And if I may be so bold, I suggest if you invite him to one of your cocktail parties, you either search him at the door, or be "packin a gat" yourself.(*)

(*) OTOH, he might be the perfect guest, but with a hidden agenda. The more money he can talk people out of to, "benefit his community", the more "disposable income" the people in his hood will have to buy drugs from him.

CODA: While it makes no sense to you or I, people with no money, no hope of employment, or even a place to live, will end up making highly addictive drugs their "hideout of opportunity". You can't attach any rationality to it, because there is none. The drug trade really is a huge motivating factor for the explosion of issues with illegal firearms,. Thus, believe it or not, I'm still on topic. (more or less).
 
Last edited:
And now you haven't been reading what I've posted.... Columbine wasn't caused by guns - but if there weren't any guns available, it would have been like the incident that recently happened in Canada. Lots of stabbings - but since the kid didn't have access to guns, it "just" resulted in lots of serious injuries, not the body count of Columbine or other US school shootings.

The culture of "we're entitled to bear arms" is antiquated, stupid and just plain dangerous. I'm glad I don't live in America, as I would definitely not feel safe...
 
And now you haven't been reading what I've posted.... Columbine wasn't caused by guns - but if there weren't any guns available, it would have been like the incident that recently happened in Canada. Lots of stabbings - but since the kid didn't have access to guns, it "just" resulted in lots of serious injuries, not the body count of Columbine or other US school shootings.

The culture of "we're entitled to bear arms" is antiquated, stupid and just plain dangerous. I'm glad I don't live in America, as I would definitely not feel safe...
And again, I'm likely going to be accused of "trolling", since I disagree with your statement comprehensively.

IIRC, some elitist snot bags managed to get their heads blown off at Columbine,which was precipitated by the massive amounts of hyperbolic condescension creeps like that sometimes give off. It was a cause and effect event. Supposedly, in our "free country", you should be able to dress up like a Goth and listen to "death metal" music, while worshiping Satan, should that be in line with your desire for, "freedom of expression", or, "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Witchcraft and devil worship has been practiced for ages. OK, so it's not for everybody. But the fact remains, did those Goth teens really kill your cattle with it? No, they did not. Or are you just steamed because they didn't come to your football game and fail to cheer for wonderful Y-O-U? They didn't dress like you? They didn't sing the same songs you did? Use the same slang? After a horrific event such as Columbine occurs, the provocation which led up to it, is conveniently forgotten. The viable outrage, (IMHO), springs from the miscarriage of justice which occurred in that, "the punishment was out of proportion to the crime".

Honestly, and without a bit of judgment or confrontation, you don't even live in the real world, and certainly not the version of it with which I am confronted.

If you would be afraid to live here, by all means, stay where you are, and be happy with your own ends, means, motivations, and purposes. It's just I have no intention of being silent as might a well behaved schoolchild, while being lectured by you as to "what's best for me and my country". Which is after all, a place where you've never been (*), and fear to go.

(*) Can't research that statement. Correct me if you must.

Epilogue: All kidding aside, I test in the high 130's in IQ, and >recently< got A's in college level English courses, So all this crap you peddle about, "my nonsensical rants", might simply be indicative of the fact you're not anywhere near as smart as you think you are.
 
Last edited:
Well, I'd much rather kill a human who was desperately asking for it, than march out into the woods and gun down a protected species with a scoped 30.06 for sport.


Recently, a 68 year old man was walking his dog in the park when he was accosted by an 18 YO minority youth, attempting to rob him with a BB pistol. So, the old gentleman drew his own .38, and blew his head off with it. The Upper Darby police chief wanted to give ham a plaque declaring him, "man of the year". He sure had my vote..(y)
2 lines that prove that you are insane and that you should get near a gun. you clearly have the makings of a serial killer.

PS: I can't believe the mods defend this guy from insults. it's sad
 
2 lines that prove that you are insane and that you should get near a gun. you clearly have the makings of a serial killer.

PS: I can't believe the mods defend this guy from insults. it's sad
You just really needed an opportunity to run your mouth, now didn't you? First off, I'm 67 years old. That speaks to the fact if I were going to be a serial killer, I probably would have done so, gotten it over with, and retired to Boca Raton by now. (*)

And second, you seem to have as much to complain about with regard to the Upper Darby Police Chief as you do with me. I could provide with a phone number where he could be reached. Tell him he's insane. Tell him he's a potential serial killer. But a word to the wise, do it from you are now, under your bed sucking your thumb.

Would you like to go back to accusing me of stealing my copies of Windows, while you're there? (Or "while you're here", a semantic point).

As far as the mods defending me, I can't believe they let you come here and spout your bizarre ramblings either. So I guess we're both lucky.

(*) That process is known as "aging out". The reason I know that, is because I had a semester of "criminology", with the man, (rather "doctor"), who actually did write the course textbook on it.

And by the way, everybody here seems to think they can do a better job than our existing moderators. Which is a big part of the reason I'm fairly certain, you can't.

I grew up with game shows where, "the decision of the judges is final". Words to live by. Especially when as you do, think you know it all.

This should explain the first line that you quoted of mine, even to someone as boldly ignorant as yourself: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...who-killed-cecil-the-lion-escapes-prosecution


bqcebh3ulono2sk9wncz.jpg


Now, I'll quote myself, thank you very much. "Well, I'd much rather kill a human who was desperately asking for it, than march out into the woods and gun down a protected species with a scoped 30.06 for sport"

I think that photo should put my post into context for the mods. It's doubtful you'll catch on though.
 
Last edited:
Back