JoeWeber

It's the only way.

Derek, You might be right but there are many firearms cheaper than AR-15's and Glocks. I believe that it isn't so much the caliber as it is the image. I sincerely doubt that maniacs parse the .44 vs. .45 vs. 9MM debate prior to committing mass murder. AR-15's and Glocks are military/police type firearms. They are also high capacity and fast to reload. Unfortunately, what is good for cops and soldiers is also good for crazed fantasy role playing by lunatics who are willing to trade the lives and futures of innocents for their 15 minutes of fame.

Derek, Why is the AR-15 becoming the weapon of choice for mass murder by firearm in the US? Why are the back-up weapons often .44 cal or 9MM pistols? I think the pistols were often Glocks or Sig Sauers, that type. Why those particular weapons do you think? Joe

Bill, Googling answers answers and explanations is what Marc does. Please stop validating him by responding. In time he will go away.

I like the bro'fest twist to this but it doesn't change the main thing one iota: there are real differences of opinion here and, for the most part, those differences concern science, honesty, truthfulness and fundamental fairness. I think SkyDekker and jakee are making great points. I'd like to read a Trump supporters point by point refutation of SkyDekkers list: * Advocates assaulting women. * On average lies or tells a mistruth multiple times a day. * Attacks a gold star family. * Attacks Mexican Immigrants. * Makes fun of a disabled person. * Hires foreign agents after being told they are. * Advocates for the jailing of his political opponent. * Has public outbursts about the size of his button. * Calls his opponents names. * refuses to read his national intelligence briefing, but allows those without clearance to read it instead. * Calls his opponents Traitors. * Actively undermines a free press. * Supports white supremacists. * Is a racist. I'd also like to read why it's not hypocritical for the right to have bashed Obama for 8 years, and running, with the stated goal of negating his presidency but it's just peachy keen to give Trump a pass now.

Just say NO to Marc.

I concede your point. Not to mention that were Bill to stop posting the average IQ behind SC posts would fall considerably. But he is wasted on Marc, that's sure.

Now that you mention it, and at the risk of my second banning or third (fourth?) warning, I think Bill should choose between being the most prolific poster on SC or the most active moderator. Clearly they are conflicting positions. Alternatively, the rules against personal attacks could be relaxed and we can just let nature rule.

Ron is a mystery because he is not stupid. The problem seems to be that he is affected by faith delusion more so than others. Marc, I'm pretty sure, is no spring chicken. My understanding is that he is a retired project manager from a utility. So while I won't call it a blessing, I do think he's been around a while. Unfortunately, at least so far as I can discern, it's been to no positive effect.

I've posted it publicly and said it privately that there is nothing to be gained by responding to Marc or Ron. Worse, by doing so, it actually turns the conversation puerile in Marc's case or validates a nonsense world view in Ron's. It simply does not matter what anyone says to them and, no matter how fervently you may hope it, you are not on the cusp of a breakthrough. If no one responds to them they may not go away but at least the conversation won't immediately go swanchwise or angly-dangly. Until then, I'm happier on different thread talking about hamsters and toilets.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, Bill, I sneaked over here to get away from him. Please, Brother. No mas.

How is anyone not appalled by Trumps demand for a military parade? That he seeks a triumph to aggrandize himself, not our soldiers or a crucial military victory, should cause his most blindered supporters to reel. As a nation we need to reset our views on what the words "support the troops" really mean. I say so because it is now to where anything less than jingoism is considered unpatriotic. That's not right. We are not Sparta. We have other values beyond martial values. Also, European military history or the military history of banana republics is not our history. This is all because, like a crow who is easily distracted by shiny things or a child who wants the other kids toys, our President went to France and saw a military parade and now he wants one, too. There is no more to it. It is just that absurd.

Of course, that's the point entirely. With any number of humane or clever solutions on offer she chose cruelty. Faced with personal inconvenience, and perhaps recognizing that her 15 minutes of fame were nigh, she simply disposed of it like any other inanimate object with small value. Now I get it that it was just a goddamn hamster. And if you've ever been bitten by one, as I have, you might not be fully opposed to giving it a demo of the coriolis effect. Here, however, it appears to be a simple case of selfish, immature cruelty and she should not be coddled. She should be charged.

The hamster person needs help, seriously. Cruelty to animals is an indicator. While we're at it, if you want to let your imagination roam delve into the mindset of those who "en-childrenate" their pet/kids. Certainly these poor folks are a large percentage of the scofflaws who abuse the system. But why? More importantly, why is it an escalating thing? Are there simply more lonely people these days? Or is it that we are, by nature, selfish assholes and this is just another way to express ourselves?

You have to wonder if she said: "Bye, Buddy", emotionally of course, before she hit the flush handle. Me, I'd have given the poor furry fellow friend to the shoe shine guy before swirling him down the closest shitter. Seriously, what will it take to cause everyone to see how absurd the emotional support animal nonsense has become?

I think it's important to stay focused on the selfishness and self centeredness of those who abuse the ADA and the Air Carrier Access Act. Both laws were intended to provide mobility, security and freedom to our fellow citizens who have real disabilities. It is difficult to clamp down on the abuses because no one wants to harm those who truly need service animals to live fuller lives. However, as the new law in Colorado and the Peacock story show the clamp down is surely coming. And when it does it will very likely harm the innocent. Consider the disabled veteran with PTSD, a real disability that can not be easily seen. I ask anyone who abuses these laws, is it really worth risking a heavier burden for that disabled person just so you can sneak your dog onto an airplane or into a restaurant or hotel? Surely, not one disabled person would refuse giving up their service dog and their disability to anyone so that person could take their animal friend wherever they want to go. The bottom line is that if taking your dog or cat with you wherever you go, irrespective of whether it is an inconvenience for others, a health (allergies etc.) or safety issue (exiting an aircraft in an emergency), and that is how you believe the world should work then get to work and change the laws. Until then show some humanity and bit of consideration for others and leave your pets at home.

I post again only to bring this thread forward. Iago, bravely in my view, asked an important question worthy of serious discussion. Any takers?

Bill, Surely you can find a more interesting foil than rushmc. If not then consider choosing between prolific posting and moderating just to level the playing field.

Sudo, While a fair bit of what is posted in Speakers Corner is stultifying, to put it mildly, there is also a fair bit of incisive, original thinking. The problem, in my opinion, is that too much good thinking is wasted by letting a few real petunias troll the conversations again and again. Then it becomes boring and a total waste of time, for sure. I am most certainly not opposed to drunk posting so I personally think no apology is necessary. However, it does seem reasonable to expect that strong opinions that question the character and intelligence of others (again, no objection here) should be made in the open. Otherwise it comes off as just another sock puppet whining and moaning from the safety of secrecy.

Who gives a rats ass what Marc or Ron think? Seriously, outside of SC does anyone have these conversations with anyone? I am saying this straight out: if you cannot avoid responding to those guys after a zillion posts then they are not the problem.

Easy. Take it out of your overhead, set it in the aisle making a show of trying to find space for it, and put your bag in your space. Let the flight attendants (who have already taken some other poor bastards space with their carry on) sort it out. If it was someone just putting it in your space on their way back to their seat then just be a decent fellow traveler and check it for them.

I fly a lot, both domestically and internationally. US domestic flights, especially in First, are getting ridiculous. My last flight, Delta PDX-ATL, had two cats meowing in the seats in front of me and a dog with a ribbon hair-do wanting attention in the seat next to me. If you are allergic to the damn things it's your tough luck: take the next flight. More importantly, what the holy hell would happen in an emergency? Let's not forget for a single second that the people doing this just to take their pet are taking advantage of a law that was intended to protect the disabled who truly need their animals and deserve to have them aboard. Anyone playing the game to get their pets on board are being selfish, inconsiderate and would be putting others at risk in an emergency and, so consequently, could not care less that they are doing so. If you know someone who does it do the right thing and call them out.

*** But don't feel bad. Apparently Trump is no smarter than you are*** Your one warning Bill. Address what he say's not if he is not smart.

Thank you, I will. But I'm through with Ron and Marc. I'd rather listen to an old Tiny Tim album skip for a few hours than hear their same songs again and again. I'd ask a favor of you, however. Would you please tell Ron I have no clue who Stu Weber might be. Same church, different pew is my best guess.

I do too. Ron, I am not vested in you or this forum. I get it that you feel certain about what you believe but we are here, too. I'm sure you are a decent guy but you are simply unable to see beyond your beliefs. The consequence is that your persistent solipsism makes any two way conversation impossible. You're the better man. I concede defeat and the field. I'll leave your offered opportunities to self flagellate to others.