E4 No More

25% for me, but considering some of the questions were N/A I'd guess 0% is more realistic.

So should Voldemort be allowed to own a gun?

Thanks, boys. I paid because $35 is worth it to me, but it still doesn't make my opinion more valued than another's. P.S. I swear that I looked, but couldn't find it before.

Put the posts together, please. I interpreted the implication from the first post as to mean that if I, (or anyone else for that matter), do not pay to be on a forum then I don't have a right to complain. I see Mike.357 saying essentially the same thing, and comment as such to him. Certain limitations have been placed on the non-paying members as it is, but simply visiting the site where advertising is happening pays the way, (so to speak), so if anyone wants me to pay to give an opinion then you're piss'n up a rope. If David wants to require payment to participate on this forum, (which is his right), then I'll treat it just like any other purchase decision and decide if the benefits outweigh the costs, (which is my right). This brings up another question to David: what is the cost of benefactor status? I've sought but couldn't find.

That's what it sounds like to me.

Well since you're the OP and addressed judging others... Paul says in Romans 14:4 "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand." There is a difference between judging whether someone is lost or saved and judging another's sin(s). To me it all resides in judging what another does that personally affects you, your family, or the church. Clearly, what others do, (such as the mentally unstable shooting up a restaurant), effects your right to bear arms or perhaps your very safety: therefore, you are right to judge others in this context. In contrast the example of judging another for drinking is not up to you. It is between that person and God. And this comes from a Baptist. As far as jokes are concerned you have just as much right to crack one as any other person, and I'll judge whether or not I think it's funny regardless of your religion.

I disagree with a lot of members on this forum because I'm a centrist, but how can one say they respect another's 2A rights without respecting their 1A rights as well? If you don't like what someone says then use the "Ignore" function of the forum for it is your friend. You do have a penchant for using derogatory terms for those with whom you disagree, and this "Gooddbye" post is self-serving: therefore, don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out.

+1

Back in the day I considered anything under 10 MPH over the speed limit as a chicken:poop: ticket, and I was from an area of the country that was a heck of a lot more vigorous in regards to speed enforcement than middle Tennessee has been. EDIT: Yours is an example of pure revenue collection.

Forum rules prevent me from posting what I'd say to them if I got something like that.

Snopes says true, but then again, Snopes lies too.

Do you have proof that the information garnered from multiple foreign intelligence agencies AND an intelligence agency headed by a CLINTON appointee was cherry-picked, or are you making baseless accusations again? What I do believe is that if someone tried to assassinate my father I would be predisposed to believe negative information about the assassin, and in this case, would look to it to justify a war to destroy him. I've never heard of a "heard-like" mentality, but I have heard of a herd-like mentality, and I can assure you that I’ve never been accused of behaving as such. Considering foreign governments, (China, for one), contributed to Clinton’s campaign, I have mixed emotions about the ruling. I don’t believe legal entities have the same rights as a human: therefore, should not be contributing to campaigns. I also believe that foreign governments should not be allowed to contribute to campaigns as well. I also seeing the country getting screwed by a two-party system, but it would take the centrist majority banding together to change it.

Perhaps you should be more clear about what areas you want to discuss, because discussing a screaming liberal lying in a film, (Michael Moore), seems exactly on topic.

I'm tired of people saying people lied when they were in fact wrong. Being wrong does not make you a liar, and to claim so just makes you look foolish. Foreign intelligence agencies said Iraq had WMDs also, so knock it off with the "Bush Lied" claims. It is within the rhelm of possibilities that whatever WMDs there were are now in Syria. "Chemical Ali" didn't get his nickname for fertilizing flowers after all, and there were plenty of trucks driving into Syria before we got into Iraq. Sorry, but it pisses me off when people without knowledge call others liars.

Stop your liberal BS claims and PROVE they lied.

Did/do you have time to read the 2,000+ pages of the healthcare bill before forming an opinion? Do you have the background knowledge to make sense out of it and have the ability to determine the difference between a living will and killing off of seniors?

Let's see...it's his job to keep others informed whereas it others' jobs to do something else, and that makes us dumb. Nice.

No surprise to me. Lib Rule# 1: In the absence of facts, lie!

It's all relative: think Voldemort.

Which shop?

I seriously like the Ma-Deuce emoticon!

Like this?

DA's are all about the conviction rate; not justice. Having talked to various DA's as a policeman they develop the same guilty until proven innocent attitude some police fall into. I was strong about the death penalty until I saw how our system really works, and I'm not at all surprised to see many convicts getting their convictions overturned with DNA testing. Then add on that the lcoal governments use their courts for revenue generation, and you really don't stand a chance unless it's clear-cut: but you will pay out the nose and lose anyways.

When I realized that we have a legal system rather than a justice system it started my burn-out leading to a career change. The courts get away with what they do because they piss-off a small percentage of the population at a time. I hope the Duke case starts us on a change, but it will have to stay prevalent in our society's collective mind for it to truly happen.