Shotgun

Thanks for the info. I was wanting to bake something and send it myself, but my husband didn't think I could mail something like that to Australia. Though I'm looking at the USPS website now, and I don't see any restrictions about baked goods. His mom used to send us home-baked cookies from over there, but at some point she was told it wasn't allowed anymore, so we just assumed it wasn't allowed from here either. Anyhow, I might just go with interflora. It looks more expensive than similar stuff over here, but I guess that's just how it is. Thanks, y'all.

Wodonga, Victoria. And thanks for the links, strife.

I'm wanting to have a gift sent to my Australian in-laws - a plant or gourmet food, or something like that. Something like FTD or Harry & David in the U.S., but those companies don't ship overseas. Does anyone know of a good company to order from down there?

I'm not a lawyer, but here is a case from CA where the court decided that the DUI could apply to private property: http://www.lawlink.com/research/caselevel3/70040 Probably only applies to CA though.

No fear, he's unlikely to take the Shotguns away... I recall that Joe Biden said Obama was going to have a serious problem if he tried to take Joe's Shotgun away. It's so hot when Joe stands up for me like that.

I thought DD at first too, but it's absolutely JR.

Oh, and thanks, Wendy. The T.W.I.N.K.I.E.S. Project is pretty funny.

Not wrong, but I don't remember them being very good anyway. A long time ago, I used to like the Zingers, which were basically Twinkies with icing on them, but now they just seem gross. For years I have seen the raspberry Zingers in stores and felt somewhat tempted to buy them, but I don't think I've actually had one in over 20 years.

Ouch! By hit do you mean hard enough to cause damage, or mere contact? I've been rear ended at relatively mild speeds by the inattentive, but fortunately nothing that I'd think about more than a couple days. Two wrecks that caused major damage. The damage was about equal, but one of them put me in the hospital for a few days because of my own stupidity in not wearing a seatbelt. I don't think the driver in that one was drunk (never talked to her because I was knocked unconscious). She was speeding and ran a red light while I was turning left. (Lesson in being aware of everything and not expecting other drivers to do what they're supposed to - but hey, I was only 15.) In the other major wreck, I'm pretty sure the driver was drunk. He was acting drunk, and he smelled like alcohol, but for some reason the cops didn't even ask him if he had been drinking. (They seemed like they just wanted to get the hell out of there.) From what we could piece together, he was driving at night without his lights on and veered onto my side of the road, hitting me nearly head-on. I never even saw him and suddenly Boom, I was knocked off the road. The other two, I was rear ended. One caused no damage - I don't think that driver was impaired. The other one caused a little bit of damage, enough that it had to be repaired. And I know the driver was drunk because he got out of the car and started asking me to please not tell the police that he was drunk. It took the police about an hour to get there anyway, so he had probably sobered up by then, but I don't think they even asked him about it.

The people who want to crack open six beers and drive are probably going to drive drunk whether open container laws exist or not. And if a person's judgement is so clouded by one beer that he thinks getting drunk behind the wheel is a good idea, then he probably shouldn't be drinking anyway. Drinking at home or in a bar, his judgement probably gets so clouded that getting in the car and driving doesn't seem like a bad idea. I think a majority of drinkers can drink responsibly, so not allowing them a beer while driving is punishing them for others' irresponsible behavior. Sort of like banning booze altogether just because some people can't handle it. Anyhow, I'm just thinking out loud here. I understand what a problem drunk driving is, and it's of much more concern to me than gun violence is, because it seems to be much more prevalent. Hmm, I started to point out that I've been hit twice by drunk drivers. But then it occurred to me that I've been hit just as many times by sober drivers, so that's sort of meaningless.

Funny, we were just talking about this the other day - that pizza places don't seem to offer anchovies any more. I don't think I've every tried them, but salty fish on my pizza doesn't sound very appealing.

You have a good point. While I think most people would agree that driving drunk should be against the law, some of the open container laws might be overkill.

Thanks for the info. I can see that there are some legitimate reasons to have concern over losing some access to guns. Obama does seem to be anti-gun, but I don't get the impression that any kind of extreme gun regulation is at the top of his agenda (as some of my paranoid facebook friends seem to think). And even if he actually does want to take everyone's guns away (which I doubt), I don't think he could get very far with that. Anyhow, I'm sure the gun industry is loving having four more years of Obama.

People who kill with vehicles do so accidentally. People who kill with guns do so intentionally. So perhaps we should be a little more strict on the guns. I think we are a little more strict with the guns. I have no problem with having certain regulations, but I see no reason why capable, law-abiding citizens should not be allowed to own guns. And, while your statements are mostly true, death by vehicle is not always an accident, and death by gun is not always intentional. If a person intends to kill someone else, they'll probably find a way to do it whether they have a gun or not.

That's certainly a form of gun control, but it doesn't equate to taking everyone's guns away. And it seems to me that Romney agreed with him during that debate??? (I don't recall exactly what was said.) Most of my friends and family who are freaking about "Obama taking their guns away" - I don't think they even own assault weapons. And most of them are right-wingers (or at least rather loud about hating Obama). A lot of my friends and family who are not right-wingers own just as many guns as the others, but they don't seem to be worrying about having their guns taken away.

I've got things all over my house I could use to kill people if I were so inclined. My truck would probably work pretty good, though it wouldn't be much help to protect myself from a home intruder. And, no surprise, people in vehicles kill WAY more people than people with guns do.

Still hope for what?

What exactly did Obama say about taking guns away?

That would be bad news for the cat. And now I'm picturing Curiosity roving around Mars, killing kittens.

Well, one thing's for sure..... She knows how to sell a book. I wonder if it was her husband's idea.....?

Yes, please.

Oops, Bill beat me.

Having Puerto Rico as the 51st state won't be so bad. Or are you talking about something else that happened last night? Just where is that star going to go on the flag? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_flag_51_stars.svg

Having Puerto Rico as the 51st state won't be so bad. Or are you talking about something else that happened last night?

Who knows, maybe Obama's ideas on marijuana prohibition are about to rapidly "evolve."