winsor

If you try to make something idiot-proof, they will build a better idiot. The goal of doing so is fundamentally flawed. The lowest-common-denominator mentality is repellant. I prefer to limit the effect that stupidity has on my life, rather than treating it as a driving force. You can live in a Nerf world if you choose. I try to avoid people who seek to do so, and do not grant them voice in my affairs. Blue skies, Winsor

Half a dozen of each. I prefer the .45 for social purposes, but they're both fun for recreation. Blue skies, Winsor

I don't. It didn't agree with me.

Based on the stance you took and your explanation for why you did so, it seemed a waste of time trying to convince you of anything. I have given you the benefit of the doubt in that your misconceptions were the result of ignorance,which is correctable with education, instead of stupidity, which is inherent. It is not my job to set you straight for free. As I said, if you want to attend the course you are welcome to do so. If you do, check everything you think you know at the door, since it is all wrong. You somehow expected to be taken seriously after demonstrating repeatedly that you know less than nothing about the subject. I can't bring myself to humor you in that wish. Blue skies, Winsor

Would that you had maintained your silence before completely obliterating your credibility. I wish I was left with some basis for respect, but I can think of none. Blue skies, Winsor

Wouldn't that be the Beretta "M9"? Trivia: the Italian gun manufacturer Beretta, is the oldest continually operational business in the entire world. What's that? Do you mean the M1 Garand, the WWII service rifle? Gen. Patton called the Garand "the greatest battlefield implement ever devised." When all the other armies of WWII were still using bolt-action rifles for their standard issue, only the Americans had a semi-auto - the M1 Garand. yup the Beretta M9 and yup again. it is the garand. the damn thing has such a kick that i refuse to fire more than 10 rounds with the thing because i don't want to risk a dislocated shoulder. You should try a range session with my .460 Weatherby (the .458 Ruger No. 1 Tropical is also none too shabby in the recoil department). I have a Browning BPS 10 gauge that I use for skeet and trap upon occasion. 2 1/4 oz. of shot really powders targets. Any of these make my Garand seem like a popgun. 200 rounds of .30-06 through the M-1 in a range session is no big deal by comparison. With a National Match barrel, the M-1 is a joy to shoot. Shooting apples at 100 meters is no challenge at all. Yeah, it does kick, but it's easy to put into perspective. Blue skies, Winsor

Fuckin' A, that's esoteric shit. Ok, I'm not that much of a gun wonk . . . can somebody explain to me in plain english why the fuck anyone would even want such a weapon? I mean, I can certainly understand it from a criminal's perspective -- easily modified to accept high capacity magazines (and I'm pretty sure that's why they were banned -- no fuckin' duh!), but if you're using this thing for hunting . . . WTF? I can explain it in plain English, but "if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand," as the saying goes. Again, a little education is all that is required to alleviate all kinds of ignorance. Blue skies, Winsor

1) If it isn't worse than alcohol or tobacco, legalize it. 2) Nothing is worse than alcohol or tobacco. Blue skies, Winsor

Really? Since you seem to have pointed out these states in particular, maybe you know of something written by these states you can point me to stating that the ultimate goal of regulation is the eventual prohibition. I think it's a paranoid assumption. You are, as usual, wrong. Even if you are playing devil's advocate, your adherence to a standpoint that is beneath contempt is wearing thin. If you seriously think your arguments have merit, do your own homework and discover how baseless are your statements. In the meantime, speak not of what you know not. Blue skies, Winsor

I suppose you support a two-week waiting period to buy gasoline. How about a 5-gallon limit? Ignorance and cowardice are powerful forces. Blue skies, Winsor

I totally understand your thoughts. No further elaboration is required, but consider that for most other devices that have the potential for the instant lethality that guns do, we regulate them fairly heavily -- often requiring education and licensing. Cars, motorcycles, airplanes . . . just to name a few. Would you support that? If not, then why not? I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would be against this -- Winsor included. In fact, since he made such a big deal out of the education issues earlier, I'd be very interested in his comments. I'm entirely against it, because it is simply a tool to effect prohibition. If you hadn't picked up on that, you're not paying attention. If you are unfit to possess firearms, you are unfit to populate a free society. I do not wish to be around anyone I could not trust with a loaded gun. If you want to get to the root cause of the problem, regulate idiots. Stupid people shouldn't breed. With our touchy-feely safety-based society, we have geared our standards to the lowest common denominator - and worked long and hard to ensure that it becomes lower yet. Though specific implementations have given Eugenics a bad rap, we have effected proof by contradiction. I am appalled by those who embrace the dumbing-down of our society, and the anti-gunners are at the top of the list. To those who can't envision why making the world idiot-proof should not be a priority, I respond that I do not consider it to be admirable goal since I do not feel that idiocy is a lofty standard. Again, if you can't imagine a society that can shoulder the responsibility of firearm ownership without Government-assigned babysitters, that says a lot more about you than it does about the subject of firearm ownership in and of itself. Blue skies Winsor

Unfortunately personal attendance is required, both for the classroom and range phases. The focus is upon responsibility rather than rights, and everything students have "learned" from Hollywood is checked at the door. Responsible firearm ownership gets little press, since it is usually a non-issue. Like a seat belt, the goal is to have it available and never, ever need it. If you ever really need either, you have other problems that won't go away. In 25 years of being a Certified Pistol Instructor, I've never heard of one of my students abusing their responsibilities with a firearm. A couple have followed my advice (and example) by running like hell to avoid armed confrontation. I contend that lawful firearm ownership and use is anything but a panacea, but abolition of armament in the populace is fundamental to tyranny. If you do wish to take a Basic Pistol class, I can find a good instructor near you (shotgun and rifle are just as informative and challenging). I think you may be surprised by how different is your perspective after a thorough treatment of the fundamentals. Blue skies, Winsor

I see, it's far easier to elevate yourself to some lofty position above it all. Ok. Us swine will do just fine without you. BTW, if it's unworth of debate, then why did you even respond in the first place? Just to take the cheap shot and run away? Tsk, tsk. If you want to come up to speed on the subject, you are welcome to enroll in my next class.

Emoticons are often used in atypical fashions - yours was sanctimonious. You were neither joking nor in the right.

Your stance is unworthy of debate. I would no sooner attempt to sway your conviction than I would engage in a serious theological discussion with a Moonie. I find the propensity of ovine personalities to inflict their insecurities upon others to be roundly repellent, and will not lower myself to dissuade them of such. I do not presume to impose limitations upon you. You support limitations upon my freedom consistent with your ignorance. Shame on you.

Bull shit. Thus speaks the voice of ignorance. You have the basis for a standpoint regarding parachutes, and none at all for firearms. If you are unfit to own firearms, that's your problem - so long as you eschew any contact with them. I do, however, begrudge you the right to inflict your limitations upon me. Speak not of what you know not. Blue skies, Winsor

Margo Timmons has it all over Lou Reed as a singer, genius though Lou is. Blue skies, Winsor

Toronto

A truncation of weblogging, where someone uses a site to post a web log. It appears to be all the rage. Blue skies, Winsor

My last cigarette was on 25 May 1990. Nicotine is a tougher addiction to kick than narcotics (uh, according to something I read somewhere). Alcohol, barbiturates and some tranq's are the worst addictions to kick in the sense that cold-turkey withdrawal can prove fatal. Blue skies, Winsor

Wonder if he'll use that in his campaign "It's like a thousand points of light." "More like billions and billions, sir." "Whatever."

If you need them, you can't fly. Blue skies, Winsor - I feel much the same about my canopy. Of course - you, like I, have an airplane....

I can drive my van just fine, but the power steering makes it easier. So why not make skydiving easier? Let's not make the newbies have to suffer like we did learning I didn't say they weren't worthwhile, nor did I say that one shouldn't use them. I'm pretty sure I have two or three jumpsuits with booties. I would, however, suggest making enough skydives with a minimum of accessories (say T-shirt, shorts and footgear) to make any of the nifty features of your jumpsuit nothing more than icing on the cake. Just because someone has them doesn't mean they NEED them. Semantics rears its ugly head.... Blue skies, Winsor

So long as the weather is good and you can get on enough loads, it should be no problem. I banged out 28 at one of Mike Mullins' Boogie 'til ya Puke events (thanks Mike!) with my own pack jobs (I pack kinda fast), so I can guarantee it's possible. Blue skies, Winsor

If you need them, you can't fly. Blue skies, Winsor