I'm not sure "coddled" is the right word. I believe there are very deep reasons why bob is the way he is. One reason is I believe he loves his family and his friends. I also believe he is looking for real answers for the conflict in his life.

He wants something but he doesn't know what it is. This becomes a problem for him for which he has no answer. In his effort to find the answer to his problem, the only thing he can do is pass his problem onto others and see if they can give him the answers he is looking for.

My comment to bob that started this conversation was to illustrate the hypocrisy in his quote. My comment to him were HIS own words. Although the quote is a good one it can be looked at in two ways. Was it a light that just turned on for him or was it a message to the people who give him shit for his beliefs?

I don't hate bob. I also know he is in a deep hole where there seems to be no way out. I think bob also knows, deep down, that I would never hold anything against him because he is in tough spot.

He knows what good is but, he has to protect those he loves. He can't turn on his friends and family.

I think the real reason bob sticks around here is because he may find the answer he's been looking for. I think that day may come for him.

As far as lowering myself, sometimes you really need to reach deep.

----------------------------------

Thank you @StukaFox. For me, Christmas is every day.

Where you at man? I got ten $100 bills burning a hole in my pocket. I'm trying to give them to you here. You know what's going to happen in the election.

Well... anyone with the expectation of getting a golf ball skipping across the pond and get a hole-in-one but NOT be surprised (or at least ACT surprised) of it all must've an ego as large as Trump...albeit NONE of Trump's incompetence and chronic cheating habits.

Drone footage of another sink hole.



Google Earth View - 28°12'12.33" N 82°27'18.98" W

Street view shows before scene.

We'll never be certain, but that hole may just be a hero.

230-page book called Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, published in 1977 by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Highlights:


Called for the sex-integration of prisons and reformatories so that conditions of imprisonment, security and housing could be equal. She explained, “If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.” (Page 101)





>Called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are “less than 12 years old.” (Page 102)


>Asserted that laws against “bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist” are unconstitutional. (Page 195)


>Objected to laws against prostitution because “prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” (Page 97)
>Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive.” Such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.” (Page 98)


>Demanded that we “firmly reject draft or combat exemption for women,” stating “women must be subject to the draft if men are.” But, she added, “the need for affirmative action and for transition measures is particularly strong in the uniformed services.” (Page 218)


>An indefatigable censor, Ginsburg listed hundreds of “sexist” words that must be eliminated from all statutes. Among words she found offensive were: man, woman, manmade, mankind, husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter, serviceman, longshoreman, postmaster, watchman, seamanship, and “to man” (a vessel). (Pages 15-16)


>Wanted he, she, him, her, his, and hers to be dropped down the memory hole. They must be replaced by he/she, her/him, and hers/his, and federal statutes must use the bad grammar of “plural constructions to avoid third person singular pronouns.” (Page 52-53)

>Condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling in Harris v. McRae and claimed that taxpayer-funded abortions should be a constitutional right.
http://humanevents.com/2005

The professional forest managers have led to this mess.

Quit blaming Trump. Not his issue. Just Shit hole Democrat cites
are not his fault.

Rioting looking killings are also not his fault but encouraged by the left.

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

Silly, just a ban on selling one style of rifle, not a type. Are they still actually working on that, or are you talking about past attempts? I thought that has gone nowhere since Jan 2019 when it was introduced and shelved. New bill number please.

Supressors/silencers, not a firearm but an accessory, like bump stocks. That's not anti gun.

D I Y, good luck. Who's actually trying any such thing? They would have to ban each design, because they can't ban the method. I've not heard of any actual legislation, just moaning. Bill number please.
Ghost guns, pre manufactured kits but requiring assembly, should be treated like any gun imo. That means serial numbers and background checks, that's not anti gun legislation.

Private sales loophole, exactly what I mentioned, and in no way anti gun. They aren't trying to ban private sales, just require background checks.
I think you're making that up, where did you get the idea most illegal guns are bought by girlfriends?
I bought a new gun from a dealer at a show in Florida with no check myself once, so nope. You're just wrong.

I feel like you are almost certainly just parroting right wing claims without actually seeing if they're true. Give me current bill numbers in the house or Senate please.

Banning modifications is not anti gun, it's anti modification.

You can buy guns online, just not safely or legally. You can buy prostitutes and fentenal online. You can buy kits that require you to make one drill hole to make a functioning unlicensed unregistered unidentifiable gun online legally.

Crazy people can certainly buy guns, in private sales with no background checks. That's why the loopholes should be eradicated, or do you support giving terrorists a method to secretly buy guns legally? That's the outcome of fighting closing loopholes.

DeuceDouche. F these like hungry a-holes. Please downvote this crap.

Peaceful support?

They sank each other's boats and refused to stop doing donuts and whizzing by while others were going down.

Yep, Biden isn't a moron who invites large crowds to a rally while an airborne deadly pandemic is in full effect, Trump is, and he tells you to not wear masks even though you now know for certain even he knew from day one it was airborne, far more deadly than the worst flu, and preventable with simple measures like masks in public and avoiding large gatherings. Fuck. Talking to you is like arguing with a brick that's deep on "the spectrum".

This was Trumpness at it's finest. It's his MO, and yours. If your life is endangered by my enjoyment, you're fucked, because my right to make a huge wake outweighs your life. Total lack of consideration for others, the Trump way.

What morons hold a cheering event about nothing during a pandemic, have unqualified people arrange it so there's no direction or coordination, invite as many braying morons as possible with any boat you like, safety and reason be damned, get them riled up, make sure they're in close contact without any ppe, then send them off wound up and hopping mad to trip over each other racing to take over the lake before heading to the nearest Mexican restaurant to Karen out on people in masks.

I'm still wondering how the liberals caused this. Were Obama and Clinton on personal submarines poking holes in those freedom boats?

Landslides don't happen on the water. Red Tsunami....or is that term too painful after your massive sweeping wins in 2018?

Moved this to profile pages, better late than never.

I'll try to be brief....and fail miserably I expect.
I accept the fact that some theories I hold will be wrong, and cause failure. At least theories can be tested and discarded when proven false. Yes, some are so engrained it would take TNT to dislodge them, but they aren't unchangeable, beliefs are immutable.

No morality in that claim. Moral excuses might be 1) I minimize any suffering by buying mostly family farmed meats and 2) those lives only exist for human pleasure and substance. If no one ate cows and pigs, they would be extinct nuisance animals. (And chickens rare) If the animal has a nice, pain and stress free life, but in trade that life ends early, as long as the end is humane I'm not bothered. That's life it otherwise wouldn't enjoy at all.
Factory farms don't meet those requirements.
They're tasty is why I eat meat. It might be snide, but it's honest. Yes, I'm obstinate, I like meat, I'm not claiming it the most moral, ethical, ecological, or empathetic thing to do, but if done thoughtfully it's not the worst either.

My meaning with "it's not the worst t thing people do" was to reply to " I believe (assuming humans survive) humans will look upon this time of killing billions of animals for nothing but human pleasure with disgusting disgrace." with a few other examples of things worse that we will be judged for, not to distract or excuse. I'm not sure how that's a logical falicy. Tens of Billions of animals are killed horrifically for pure greed and not even used as food, that's a disgusting disgrace I could denounce.

I read the WHO study he was referencing and it said no such thing, I told him, showed him, he kept repeating the bullshit lies. I'm not receptive to people who blatantly misrepresent science. I don't rely on any industry produced studies for any decisions, that would be dumb. The study said certain highly processed and preserved red meats had some carcinogens, not any meat at any level is equivalent to two packs a day. My degree is general science, I can read a study.

Oh shit, nutritionfacts.org is Dr Gregor, the one who outright lies about scientific studies, and the one who made the false equivalency between tiny amounts of meat and constant chain smoking, he also loved to misuse "plant based" to mean vegan and claim the studies on plant based (not plant exclusive) diets proved vegan benefits when they really proved a mixed diets benefits. I've been deep down his rabbit hole, and found him incredibly unscientific and dishonest. I don't trust him one bit, sorry.

I've only known a hand full, including the one who introduced me to Dr Gregor, my aunt, uncle, and cousins, and a few here in hippy central where I live. Not one was honest, they acted like it was religion and took statements as gospel with no investigation and were forceful in their insistence that everyone agree.

I once ate fish and thought it was fine. Three years of marine biology cured me of that, so my theories are changed by facts. I promised myself to never learn too much about chicken, pork, or beef because I don't want to know what's in them unless it's broken glass. That's a conscious decision. There is no hell hot enough to scare me away from good bacon. That said, I do care that they have a good life before being harvested.

I'm willing to change behavior and thinking. I previously thought the fda was good at protecting us, I decided I couldn't trust that.

I make some decisions based on MY morality, some on self interest, some on group/global interest, etc. I'm not willing to make any based on someone else's morality, especially if they're pushy.

I have no clue who visits, but this is where I come, so it's where I speak up.

I always make the mistake of thinking people will be logical.

Your video, Visualisation of a black hole accretion disk, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Subscribe to what you want, my birth lottery included trees and butterflies, I was raised in a forest in a glass house in a forest. (We had an atrium inside with a forest of trees growing through the roof, and the house was in the middle of a forest)

If I were born black, that person would be me, but I would be different. Besides, I was born a poor black child, sir. ;-)

If my starting line is 50 meters ahead of yours in a 100 yard dash through nothing but luck, that's pretty lucky for me.

I feel pretty successful having made little effort to get there, that's luck.

I don't feel shame because I'm not a normal American that thinks anything they want is something they deserve and need. Best lesson my dad ever taught me was know the difference between want and need and you'll be far happier in life. It's true.

I don't have too much, I have enough, but I still share with those who i feel don't. I've housed multiple friends for free, and even let one live in my yard for 7 years, which in retrospect was at least 5 years too many. My wife and I live comfortably on <$30000 a year. Most Americans can't live on that for one person. Newts do just fine, we take a vacation every year, pay our bills, and eat well.
Maybe that's why I'm so different. I was allowed to roam the wild woods and bayou alone at just over 3, to the point where the neighbors told my parents they were going to call the cops. This was in the middle of Houston, literally a wilderness of (or at least in) modern civilization. ;-)

I did go to school for 24 years (preschool -the ten year plan at Jr college) but never tried hard or practiced, to the point where my trig teacher insisted I was cheating because I didn't pay attention or do homework so she separated me for a big test, the class average dropped a full grade but not me, my neighbors were cheating off me. She left me alone after that. That might be preparations, but it wasn't hard work. It was boring busy work.

I did that, read encyclopedias and dictionaries. That was punishment at my school through 7th grade....but my grandmother read her set through twice for fun. My mother was called "the encyclopedia" in school, with good reason.

I definitely let opportunities pass often. Sometimes because I don't need them and others might, sometimes I'm just lazy and happy so see no need to expend effort, usually because I see opportunities as traps, the bait being some modest short term gain, the cage being large long term obligations. I'm always prepared for opportunities that are for me without preparation. I'm not Trumpian, I understand I have limitations, and don't tend to obligate myself beyond them.

Who said I waited. I've been lucky enough that I didn't have to wait for, nor do I expect luck. Through luck, forethought, and decent planning things have worked out well with minimal effort or sacrifice. I don't rely on luck to dig me out of holes, I tend to watch my step and not fall in them often. You might call that preparation, I call it paying attention. It's working so far.