Open Thread
Need a Hand?
Your Next Project Starts with BrownstonerMost Recent Articles
Need a Hand?
Your Next Project Starts with Brownstoner
This OT is downright schizo…Palin…Porn…dogs…sluts….gun rights….healthcare plan.
I give up!
As for Chows, I’ve heard that they have bad reputations and are known to be mean dogs loyal to only one person. That said, my only experience with a Chow is CDog. As most of you have met and/or know CDog, you can attest that she is a very sweet dog and the polar opposite of the stereotype.
CGar- I would have told you but would you have still married me?
Akitas are among the most beautiful dogs when they’re all white.
By dittoburg on November 3, 2010 1:36 PM
ENY – do you think some exhibited traits are magically immune to selective breeding?
**
I believe dogs can be bred to have physical and social characteristics, some of which are particularly advantageous when the breeder desires an attack or guard dog. But for the most part, as I understand it, a dog must be trained to attack a designated person on command. Now, as with anything else in nature, there are variations, and some dogs just do attack people without provocation or direction. But I believe this to be the exception.
>Bearing in mind the era in which the second amendment was written, nearly 300 years later some things need changing
Not having been brought up to believe the Founding Fathers are next only to God, I agree. Nothing is less productive and less rational than people arguing about what the ‘intent’ of the FF’s was. Get this…centuries later it matters not; their writings should be a guide, not cast in stone.
That said…the answer to the question about restrictions on gun ownership: everyone. Civilized countries have civilized laws, and having strong gun restrictions is one of them. I must say I’m appalled at some of the liberals here being for easy gun ownership. Nobody I’ve ever known keeps a gun, or at least owns up to it.
dibs- if you knew how many that estimation would go up even further. Puritanical was not a word in my vocabulary.And that’s all I’m saying.
“Since I have , um….experience with several races, I can say my fondness is based on experience. 🙂
SLUT!!!!!”
Thank you, dave. Everyone is always wondering why I cheat, but now you see what I’ve had to live with all these years.
“By slopefarm on November 3, 2010 12:40 PM
So jackal,
Who, in your analysis, is regulating the well-regulated militia?”
No one, as long as they are engaging in the lawful preparation for, and excercise of, violence. (cue: what is “lawful”? Answer: Arming and training)
“Do you really think the framers thought everyone needed to be free to own guns to protect themselves in an unregualted fashion against the system of government the framers were forming?”
Yes, that’s pretty much exactly it. A well organized militia protects the people against the potential tyranny of the state. Don’t forget that the founding fathers were a bunch of revolutionaries. The people’s sovereign right to revolt against a tyrannical state was fundamental to them. I just quickly scanned comments and saw that someone noted we are “not a tyranny”: well no, not yet.
“The amendment’s framers had something in mind that doesn’t quite map onto our 20th century polarized fight over its meaning.”
Also correct. But careful. If you map the original meaning to the 21st century (don’t forget to change your clock, btw) I get a stealth bomber (if I can afford one). Perhaps you should just be happy with my having a sawed off shottie?