[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

"consuming" the hash instead of just fetching from it

Balint Erdi

5/22/2009 11:08:00 AM

Hi,

Deleting (vs. just fetching) the hash key from an options hash that
was passed in as an argument to the method seems prevalent. I saw it
in several high-quality OS projects (e.g DataMapper, Rails)

For example:

unless options.delete(:only_path)
url << (options.delete(:protocol) || 'http')
url << '://' unless url.match("://")
...
end

I wonder what advantage the above snippet has instead of writing:

unless options[:only_path]
url << (options[:protocol] || 'http')
url << '://' unless url.match("://")
...
end

Thank you,
Balint
88 Answers

Andrew Timberlake

5/22/2009 11:17:00 AM

0

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Balint Erdi <balint.erdi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Deleting (vs. just fetching) the hash key from an options hash that
> was passed in as an argument to the method seems prevalent. I saw it
> in several high-quality OS projects (e.g DataMapper, Rails)
>
> For example:
>
> unless options.delete(:only_path)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0url << (options.delete(:protocol) || 'http')
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0url << '://' unless url.match("://")
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0...
> end
>
> I wonder what advantage the above snippet has instead of writing:
>
> unless options[:only_path]
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0url << (options[:protocol] || 'http')
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0url << '://' unless url.match("://")
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0...
> end
>
> Thank you,
> Balint
>
>

It's usually a good idea to consume the option if you are receiving
options that any methods you will subsequently call, won't need (or
may break when receiving) them.
i.e. options specific for the particular method.

If you are not going to pass the options onto other methods, then
there is nothing wrong with just referencing them.

Andrew Timberlake
http://ramblingso...

http://MyM... - The SIMPLE way to manage your savings

Robert Dober

5/22/2009 11:42:00 AM

0

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Balint Erdi <balint.erdi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Deleting (vs. just fetching) the hash key from an options hash that
> was passed in as an argument to the method seems prevalent.
I strongly disagree.
> I saw it
> in several high-quality OS projects (e.g DataMapper, Rails)
Rails high-quality? On what basis?
Please do not take this as a provocation, it is just the first time I
have heard this claim (well maybe DHH said something similar once, but
do not quote me, please;)
>
> For example:
>
> unless options.delete(:only_path)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0url << (options.delete(:protocol) || 'http')
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0url << '://' unless url.match("://")
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0...
> end
>
> I wonder what advantage the above snippet has instead of writing:
I would say that context is king. If the author of the above snippet
deletes values from the hash she has probably a (good) reason.
It is not very difficult to imagine some reasons, e.g. checking later
for the same values again (but please see below).
I would however take another look at the whole setup of the thing, if
I were e.g. a code reviewer. This seems not a case I would mute
objects a priori, thus I too would be intrigued by the rationale
behind this.
If you are too, which I have understood from your post, than you might
just want to follow the lifetime of options in the code to
understand/approve/disapprove about this code.

HTH
Robert

Markus Schirp

5/22/2009 5:47:00 PM

0

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 08:10:09PM +0900, Balint Erdi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Deleting (vs. just fetching) the hash key from an options hash that
> was passed in as an argument to the method seems prevalent. I saw it
> in several high-quality OS projects (e.g DataMapper, Rails)
>
> For example:
>
> unless options.delete(:only_path)
> url << (options.delete(:protocol) || 'http')
> url << '://' unless url.match("://")
> ...
> end

This snippset let you test on "mispelled" or "extra" opts:

Example:

def initialize(opts)
@a = opts.delete(:a) || raise("missing :a")
@b = opts.delete(:b) || "b"
raise "unkown options: %s" % opts.keys.inspect unless opts.empty?
end


>
> I wonder what advantage the above snippet has instead of writing:
>
> unless options[:only_path]
> url << (options[:protocol] || 'http')
> url << '://' unless url.match("://")
> ...
> end
>
> Thank you,
> Balint

Markus

Robert Klemme

5/25/2009 8:39:00 AM

0

2009/5/22 Markus Schirp <mbj@seonic.net>:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 08:10:09PM +0900, Balint Erdi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Deleting (vs. just fetching) the hash key from an options hash that
>> was passed in as an argument to the method seems prevalent. I saw it
>> in several high-quality OS projects (e.g DataMapper, Rails)
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> unless options.delete(:only_path)
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 url << (options.delete(:protocol) || 'http')
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 url << '://' unless url.match("://")
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ...
>> end
>
> This snippset let you test on "mispelled" or "extra" opts:
>
> Example:
>
> def initialize(opts)
> =A0@a =3D opts.delete(:a) || raise("missing :a")
> =A0@b =3D opts.delete(:b) || "b"
> =A0raise "unkown options: %s" % opts.keys.inspect unless opts.empty?
> end

You can have that with the non deletion approach as well.

I agree to what Robert said: this should be carefully inspected.
Generally I would refrain from changing an argument, especially if it
is some global options object. These options might be needed in other
places as well and if they are modified by code other than the option
parsing (or reading) process then chances are that something will
break. For example, consider two places in code which need to react
on the same option value then only one of them gets the value with the
"delete pattern" and even worse, things may accidentally work
initially but break if initialization order is changed.

Also, if the options instance is frozen after being filled by option
parsing or reading process the delete approach won't work any more.
As a general rule of thumb it is safer to not modify option arguments.

Kind regards

robert

--=20
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestprac...

tirebiter

2/5/2013 1:04:00 AM

0

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
news:Jason-0202132351020001@66-53-219-166.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:

> In article
> <c1ee143d-ddca-413b-b721-08eb1accf19f@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 31, 10:18=A0pm, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> > In article <hlwdjsd2-6A216B.14582331012...@news.giganews.com>,
>> > Jeanne
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> > > In article
>> > > <Jason-3101131259010...@67-150-127-123.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>> > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-F0E17C.23505430012...@news.giganews.com>,
>> > > > Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > In article
>> > > > > <Jason-3001132304570...@66-53-215-235.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>> > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-21E137.18410930012...@news.giganews.com>, Je=
>> anne
>> > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > > <Jason-3001131625340...@66-53-211-6.lsan.mdsg-pacwes=
>> t.com>,
>> > > > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > > > <1oajg8p7t7nf0etfavrqmvu37rg5uhn...@4ax.com>, Alan=
>> Ferris
>> > > > > > > > <hairy.fer...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:15 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com
>> > > > > > > > > (Jason=
>> )
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > >> > I have never violated that law. However, if the
>> > > > > > > > > >> > federa=
>> l
>> > gov't
>> > > > > > > > > >> > or
>> > > > > > > > > >> > the
>> > > > > > > > > >> > California gov't made it illegal for me to own a
>> > > > > > > > > >> > handg=
>> un, I
>> > > > > > > > > >> > would
>> > > > > > > > consider
>> > > > > > > > > >> > buying a handgun on the black market.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > >> And there's the confession that =A0you're a
>> > > > > > > > > >> criminal aga=
>> in.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > >I would be following the constitution.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > Please provide chapter and verse where it states you
>> > > > > > > > > can co=
>> mmit a
>> > > > > > > > > crime.
>> > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > Ferrit
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > =A0()'.'.'()
>> > > > > > > > > =A0( (T) )
>> > > > > > > > > =A0( ) . ( )
>> > > > > > > > > =A0(")_(")
>> > > > > > > > > Atheist #1211
>> > > > > > > > > EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > SERV:
>> > > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DW...
>> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD...
>> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D6...
>> >
>> > > > > > > > Amendment 2
>> > > > > > > > the last portion of it states:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall
>> > > > > > > > not b=
>> e
>> > > > infringed.
>> >
>> > > > > > > Wow. Jason quote-mines the Constitution.
>> >
>> > > > > > Do I have to post the entire Constitution to satisfy you?
>> >
>> > > > > The entire 2nd amendment would be sufficient.
>> >
>> > > > Good news--the constitution is in my 2013 World Almanac:
>> >
>> > > > Amendment 2
>> > > > Right to keep and bear arms
>> >
>> > > > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
>> > > > free s=
>> tate,
>> > > > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>> > > > infringed=
>> .
>> >
>> > > Exactly.
>> >
>> > > What "well regulated Militia" did you belong to when you owned
>> > > guns?
>> >
>> > The MIlitia of millions of fellow gun owners.
>>
>> The fact that millions of gun owners exist does *not* constitute a
>> "militia." Militias, to exist, must be formally organized. They
>> must meet. They must drill. Just owning a gun doesn't make you a
>> member of a member of one.
>>
>> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
>> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
>
> If America is invaded, the Americans that already have AR-15 rifles or
> Mini-14 rifles will be able to respond ASAP. After some basic
> training, we can go to war against the invaders.
>
>
>

Jason. Didn't you claim to have taken statistics at that imaginary
college?

What are the chances that ANYBODY will invade the United States?

Consider all the military spending by all countries as being 100
percent. The U.S. share of that is 49%.

The U.S. military isn't going to let the muslims you hate, or the
Russians that you're paranoid of, invade your little bedroom community.
There won't be a need for all the crazies with their semi-auto assult
weapons to go running off into the night, screaming their heads off.

---
a.a. #2273

Jason

2/5/2013 4:43:00 AM

0

In article <XnsA15DCC160DD1Adontspammebigfootcom@74.209.131.10>, tirebiter
<dontspamme@bigfoot.com> wrote:

> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
> news:Jason-0202132351020001@66-53-219-166.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
>
> > In article
> > <c1ee143d-ddca-413b-b721-08eb1accf19f@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> > SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Jan 31, 10:18=A0pm, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> >> > In article <hlwdjsd2-6A216B.14582331012...@news.giganews.com>,
> >> > Jeanne
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > In article
> >> > > <Jason-3101131259010...@67-150-127-123.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> >> > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-F0E17C.23505430012...@news.giganews.com>,
> >> > > > Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > In article
> >> > > > > <Jason-3001132304570...@66-53-215-235.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> >> > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > In article
> >> > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-21E137.18410930012...@news.giganews.com>, Je=
> >> anne
> >> > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > In article
> >> > > > > > > <Jason-3001131625340...@66-53-211-6.lsan.mdsg-pacwes=
> >> t.com>,
> >> > > > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > In article
> >> > > > > > > > <1oajg8p7t7nf0etfavrqmvu37rg5uhn...@4ax.com>, Alan=
> >> Ferris
> >> > > > > > > > <hairy.fer...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:15 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com
> >> > > > > > > > > (Jason=
> >> )
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > I have never violated that law. However, if the
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > federa=
> >> l
> >> > gov't
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > or
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > California gov't made it illegal for me to own a
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > handg=
> >> un, I
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > would
> >> > > > > > > > consider
> >> > > > > > > > > >> > buying a handgun on the black market.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > >> And there's the confession that =A0you're a
> >> > > > > > > > > >> criminal aga=
> >> in.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > >I would be following the constitution.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > Please provide chapter and verse where it states you
> >> > > > > > > > > can co=
> >> mmit a
> >> > > > > > > > > crime.
> >> > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > Ferrit
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > =A0()'.'.'()
> >> > > > > > > > > =A0( (T) )
> >> > > > > > > > > =A0( ) . ( )
> >> > > > > > > > > =A0(")_(")
> >> > > > > > > > > Atheist #1211
> >> > > > > > > > > EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > > SERV:
> >> > > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DW...
> >> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD...
> >> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D6...
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > Amendment 2
> >> > > > > > > > the last portion of it states:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > > ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall
> >> > > > > > > > not b=
> >> e
> >> > > > infringed.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > Wow. Jason quote-mines the Constitution.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > Do I have to post the entire Constitution to satisfy you?
> >> >
> >> > > > > The entire 2nd amendment would be sufficient.
> >> >
> >> > > > Good news--the constitution is in my 2013 World Almanac:
> >> >
> >> > > > Amendment 2
> >> > > > Right to keep and bear arms
> >> >
> >> > > > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
> >> > > > free s=
> >> tate,
> >> > > > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
> >> > > > infringed=
> >> .
> >> >
> >> > > Exactly.
> >> >
> >> > > What "well regulated Militia" did you belong to when you owned
> >> > > guns?
> >> >
> >> > The MIlitia of millions of fellow gun owners.
> >>
> >> The fact that millions of gun owners exist does *not* constitute a
> >> "militia." Militias, to exist, must be formally organized. They
> >> must meet. They must drill. Just owning a gun doesn't make you a
> >> member of a member of one.
> >>
> >> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
> >> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
> >> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> >> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
> >> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
> >
> > If America is invaded, the Americans that already have AR-15 rifles or
> > Mini-14 rifles will be able to respond ASAP. After some basic
> > training, we can go to war against the invaders.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Jason. Didn't you claim to have taken statistics at that imaginary
> college?
>
> What are the chances that ANYBODY will invade the United States?
>
> Consider all the military spending by all countries as being 100
> percent. The U.S. share of that is 49%.
>
> The U.S. military isn't going to let the muslims you hate, or the
> Russians that you're paranoid of, invade your little bedroom community.
> There won't be a need for all the crazies with their semi-auto assult
> weapons to go running off into the night, screaming their heads off.
>
> ---
> a.a. #2273

You may want to google Goleta, California. Mary took a California History
Course and learned in that course that a Japanese submarine shelled an oil
field in Goleta, California in 1942.

That means that the US has already been attacked by a foreign country. Of
course, England also has attacked the USA.


Results 1 - 10 of about 8,560,000 for Japan attacked Goleta, California.

When the Japanese Attacked Santa Barbara - School for Champions
A little known fact is that the Japanese also made another attack on the
mainland
of ... 1930s when a Japanese ship docked in the small city of Santa Barbara,
California, ... near an oil field pier just north of the Santa Barbara
suburb of Goleta
.
www.school-for-champions.com/.../japanese_attacked_santa_barbara.htm - 19k
- Cached - Similar pages

Goleta, California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Location in Santa Barbara County and the state of California .... airfield
? became
more apparent after a Japanese submarine shelled the Ellwood Oil Field in 1942.
This was one of the only direct-fire attacks on the US mainland during WW II.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goleta,_California - 106k - Cached - Similar pages

Goleta, CA - Where the Japanese Attacked California
Apr 22, 2012 ... Visit reports, news, maps, directions and info on Where
the Japanese Attacked
California in Goleta, CA.
www.roadsideamerica.com/tip/33100 - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

? Japanese Attack on Goleta - YouTube
Segment on the shelling of the California coast at Goleta by a Japanese
sub during WWII ...
5 min -
http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dd...

Japanese attack on Goleta beach remembered ? Ventura County Star
Feb 23, 2012 ... The attack also was used to justify the internment of
tens of thousands of
Japanese Americans, he said. The attack in Goleta came as California ...
www.vcstar.com/.../japanese-attack-on-goleta-beach-remembered/ - 155k -
Cached - Similar pages

Goleta Valley Historical Society Opens 'Avenge Ellwood!' Exhibition
Feb 21, 2012 ... The Goleta Valley Historical Society is elated to
announce the opening of ?'
Avenge Ellwood!': The Japanese Attack on California,? a special ...
www.noozhawk.com/.../022112_goleta_valley_historical_society_opens_
avenge_ellwood_exhibition/ - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

Santa Barbara Japanese Attack Sign and Photos
Japanese Attack of Santa Barbara Beach Marker and Photos ... As you drive up
and down the coast of California, the signs of a war are still evident,
and ... In
addition to the shelling of this Goleta/ Santa Barbara County location, several
other ...
www.beachcalifornia.com/beach/santa-barbara-japanese-attack.html - 32k -
Cached - Similar pages

California in World War II: The Shelling of Ellwood
The California State Military Museum ... Preserving California's Military
Heritage
.... The first Japanese attack on the U.S. mainland, in 1942, was triggered
by ...
www.militarymuseum.org/Ellwood.html - 9k - Cached - Similar pages

A Beach the Japanese Shelled Japanese in 1942 - Los Angeles Times
Feb 20, 1988 ... The walk along Goleta Beach to Ellwood Oil Field is
interesting for more ...
Memorial Boulevard (California 217) for two miles to Goleta Beach County Park.
.... The same month the Japanese bombed Ellwood Beach, Santa ...
articles.latimes.com/1988-02-20/news/vw-11066_1_ellwood-beach - 83k -
Cached - Similar pages

City of Goleta : Events Calendar : "Avenge Ellwood!" The Japanese ...
Mar 11, 2012 ... Emergency Preparedness ? Goleta General Plan / Coastal
Land Use Plan ?
Goleta's Street Improvement ... The Japanese Attack on California ...
www.cityofgoleta.org/index.aspx?page=338&recordid=4339 - 50k

Jeanne Douglas

2/5/2013 6:42:00 AM

0

In article <Jason-0402132042460001@66-53-209-11.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <XnsA15DCC160DD1Adontspammebigfootcom@74.209.131.10>, tirebiter
> <dontspamme@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
> > news:Jason-0202132351020001@66-53-219-166.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <c1ee143d-ddca-413b-b721-08eb1accf19f@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Jan 31, 10:18=A0pm, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> > >> > In article <hlwdjsd2-6A216B.14582331012...@news.giganews.com>,
> > >> > Jeanne
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > In article
> > >> > > <Jason-3101131259010...@67-150-127-123.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> > >> > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-F0E17C.23505430012...@news.giganews.com>,
> > >> > > > Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > In article
> > >> > > > > <Jason-3001132304570...@66-53-215-235.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> > >> > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > In article
> > >> > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-21E137.18410930012...@news.giganews.com>, Je=
> > >> anne
> > >> > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > In article
> > >> > > > > > > <Jason-3001131625340...@66-53-211-6.lsan.mdsg-pacwes=
> > >> t.com>,
> > >> > > > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > In article
> > >> > > > > > > > <1oajg8p7t7nf0etfavrqmvu37rg5uhn...@4ax.com>, Alan=
> > >> Ferris
> > >> > > > > > > > <hairy.fer...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:15 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com
> > >> > > > > > > > > (Jason=
> > >> )
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > I have never violated that law. However, if the
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > federa=
> > >> l
> > >> > gov't
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > or
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > the
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > California gov't made it illegal for me to own a
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > handg=
> > >> un, I
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > would
> > >> > > > > > > > consider
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > buying a handgun on the black market.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> And there's the confession that =A0you're a
> > >> > > > > > > > > >> criminal aga=
> > >> in.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > >I would be following the constitution.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > Please provide chapter and verse where it states you
> > >> > > > > > > > > can co=
> > >> mmit a
> > >> > > > > > > > > crime.
> > >> > > > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > > > Ferrit
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > =A0()'.'.'()
> > >> > > > > > > > > =A0( (T) )
> > >> > > > > > > > > =A0( ) . ( )
> > >> > > > > > > > > =A0(")_(")
> > >> > > > > > > > > Atheist #1211
> > >> > > > > > > > > EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > > SERV:
> > >> > > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DW...
> > >> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD...
> > >> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D6...
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > Amendment 2
> > >> > > > > > > > the last portion of it states:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > > ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall
> > >> > > > > > > > not b=
> > >> e
> > >> > > > infringed.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > > Wow. Jason quote-mines the Constitution.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > > Do I have to post the entire Constitution to satisfy you?
> > >> >
> > >> > > > > The entire 2nd amendment would be sufficient.
> > >> >
> > >> > > > Good news--the constitution is in my 2013 World Almanac:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > Amendment 2
> > >> > > > Right to keep and bear arms
> > >> >
> > >> > > > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
> > >> > > > free s=
> > >> tate,
> > >> > > > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
> > >> > > > infringed=
> > >> .
> > >> >
> > >> > > Exactly.
> > >> >
> > >> > > What "well regulated Militia" did you belong to when you owned
> > >> > > guns?
> > >> >
> > >> > The MIlitia of millions of fellow gun owners.
> > >>
> > >> The fact that millions of gun owners exist does *not* constitute a
> > >> "militia." Militias, to exist, must be formally organized. They
> > >> must meet. They must drill. Just owning a gun doesn't make you a
> > >> member of a member of one.
> > >>
> > >> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
> > >> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
> > >> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> > >> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
> > >> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
> > >
> > > If America is invaded, the Americans that already have AR-15 rifles or
> > > Mini-14 rifles will be able to respond ASAP. After some basic
> > > training, we can go to war against the invaders.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Jason. Didn't you claim to have taken statistics at that imaginary
> > college?
> >
> > What are the chances that ANYBODY will invade the United States?
> >
> > Consider all the military spending by all countries as being 100
> > percent. The U.S. share of that is 49%.
> >
> > The U.S. military isn't going to let the muslims you hate, or the
> > Russians that you're paranoid of, invade your little bedroom community.
> > There won't be a need for all the crazies with their semi-auto assult
> > weapons to go running off into the night, screaming their heads off.
> >
> > ---
> > a.a. #2273
>
> You may want to google Goleta, California. Mary took a California History
> Course and learned in that course that a Japanese submarine shelled an oil
> field in Goleta, California in 1942.
>
> That means that the US has already been attacked by a foreign country. Of
> course, England also has attacked the USA.
>
>
> Results 1 - 10 of about 8,560,000 for Japan attacked Goleta, California.
>
> When the Japanese Attacked Santa Barbara - School for Champions
> A little known fact is that the Japanese also made another attack on the
> mainland
> of ... 1930s when a Japanese ship docked in the small city of Santa Barbara,
> California, ... near an oil field pier just north of the Santa Barbara
> suburb of Goleta

Care to tell us what the hell a minor 1930s incident has to do with
2013?

--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

Alex W.

2/5/2013 10:46:00 AM

0

On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:42:46 -0800, Jason wrote:

> In article <XnsA15DCC160DD1Adontspammebigfootcom@74.209.131.10>, tirebiter
> <dontspamme@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
>> news:Jason-0202132351020001@66-53-219-166.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <c1ee143d-ddca-413b-b721-08eb1accf19f@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 31, 10:18=A0pm, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>>> > In article <hlwdjsd2-6A216B.14582331012...@news.giganews.com>,
>>>> > Jeanne
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > In article
>>>> > > <Jason-3101131259010...@67-150-127-123.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>>>> > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-F0E17C.23505430012...@news.giganews.com>,
>>>> > > > Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > In article
>>>> > > > > <Jason-3001132304570...@66-53-215-235.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>>>> > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > In article
>>>> > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-21E137.18410930012...@news.giganews.com>, Je=
>>>> anne
>>>> > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > In article
>>>> > > > > > > <Jason-3001131625340...@66-53-211-6.lsan.mdsg-pacwes=
>>>> t.com>,
>>>> > > > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > In article
>>>> > > > > > > > <1oajg8p7t7nf0etfavrqmvu37rg5uhn...@4ax.com>, Alan=
>>>> Ferris
>>>> > > > > > > > <hairy.fer...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:15 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com
>>>> > > > > > > > > (Jason=
>>>> )
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > I have never violated that law. However, if the
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > federa=
>>>> l
>>>> > gov't
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > or
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > the
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > California gov't made it illegal for me to own a
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > handg=
>>>> un, I
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > would
>>>> > > > > > > > consider
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> > buying a handgun on the black market.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> And there's the confession that =A0you're a
>>>> > > > > > > > > >> criminal aga=
>>>> in.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > >I would be following the constitution.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > Please provide chapter and verse where it states you
>>>> > > > > > > > > can co=
>>>> mmit a
>>>> > > > > > > > > crime.
>>>> > > > > > > > > --
>>>> > > > > > > > > Ferrit
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > =A0()'.'.'()
>>>> > > > > > > > > =A0( (T) )
>>>> > > > > > > > > =A0( ) . ( )
>>>> > > > > > > > > =A0(")_(")
>>>> > > > > > > > > Atheist #1211
>>>> > > > > > > > > EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > > SERV:
>>>> > > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DW...
>>>> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD...
>>>> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D6...
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > Amendment 2
>>>> > > > > > > > the last portion of it states:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > > ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall
>>>> > > > > > > > not b=
>>>> e
>>>> > > > infringed.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > > Wow. Jason quote-mines the Constitution.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > > Do I have to post the entire Constitution to satisfy you?
>>>> >
>>>> > > > > The entire 2nd amendment would be sufficient.
>>>> >
>>>> > > > Good news--the constitution is in my 2013 World Almanac:
>>>> >
>>>> > > > Amendment 2
>>>> > > > Right to keep and bear arms
>>>> >
>>>> > > > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
>>>> > > > free s=
>>>> tate,
>>>> > > > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>>>> > > > infringed=
>>>> .
>>>> >
>>>> > > Exactly.
>>>> >
>>>> > > What "well regulated Militia" did you belong to when you owned
>>>> > > guns?
>>>> >
>>>> > The MIlitia of millions of fellow gun owners.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that millions of gun owners exist does *not* constitute a
>>>> "militia." Militias, to exist, must be formally organized. They
>>>> must meet. They must drill. Just owning a gun doesn't make you a
>>>> member of a member of one.
>>>>
>>>> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
>>>> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>>>> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>>>> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>>>> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
>>>
>>> If America is invaded, the Americans that already have AR-15 rifles or
>>> Mini-14 rifles will be able to respond ASAP. After some basic
>>> training, we can go to war against the invaders.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Jason. Didn't you claim to have taken statistics at that imaginary
>> college?
>>
>> What are the chances that ANYBODY will invade the United States?
>>
>> Consider all the military spending by all countries as being 100
>> percent. The U.S. share of that is 49%.
>>
>> The U.S. military isn't going to let the muslims you hate, or the
>> Russians that you're paranoid of, invade your little bedroom community.
>> There won't be a need for all the crazies with their semi-auto assult
>> weapons to go running off into the night, screaming their heads off.
>>
>> ---
>> a.a. #2273
>
> You may want to google Goleta, California. Mary took a California History
> Course and learned in that course that a Japanese submarine shelled an oil
> field in Goleta, California in 1942.

One submarine.
12-25 shells fired.
Minor damage to property, no casualties.
Is that what you call an invasion?
We get more damage than that after a football match, you wimp!


>
> That means that the US has already been attacked by a foreign country. Of
> course, England also has attacked the USA.

Yep, and we're still waiting for a thank-you for burning down
that cesspit you call "Washington DC".

duke

2/5/2013 1:26:00 PM

0

On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 01:04:22 GMT, tirebiter <dontspamme@bigfoot.com> wrote:

>Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
>news:Jason-0202132351020001@66-53-219-166.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:
>
>> In article
>> <c1ee143d-ddca-413b-b721-08eb1accf19f@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
>> SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 31, 10:18=A0pm, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>> > In article <hlwdjsd2-6A216B.14582331012...@news.giganews.com>,
>>> > Jeanne
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > In article
>>> > > <Jason-3101131259010...@67-150-127-123.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>>> > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-F0E17C.23505430012...@news.giganews.com>,
>>> > > > Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > In article
>>> > > > > <Jason-3001132304570...@66-53-215-235.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
>>> > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > In article
>>> > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-21E137.18410930012...@news.giganews.com>, Je=
>>> anne
>>> > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > In article
>>> > > > > > > <Jason-3001131625340...@66-53-211-6.lsan.mdsg-pacwes=
>>> t.com>,
>>> > > > > > > =A0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > In article
>>> > > > > > > > <1oajg8p7t7nf0etfavrqmvu37rg5uhn...@4ax.com>, Alan=
>>> Ferris
>>> > > > > > > > <hairy.fer...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:15 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com
>>> > > > > > > > > (Jason=
>>> )
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > I have never violated that law. However, if the
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > federa=
>>> l
>>> > gov't
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > or
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > the
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > California gov't made it illegal for me to own a
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > handg=
>>> un, I
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > would
>>> > > > > > > > consider
>>> > > > > > > > > >> > buying a handgun on the black market.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > >> And there's the confession that =A0you're a
>>> > > > > > > > > >> criminal aga=
>>> in.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > >I would be following the constitution.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > Please provide chapter and verse where it states you
>>> > > > > > > > > can co=
>>> mmit a
>>> > > > > > > > > crime.
>>> > > > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > > > > Ferrit
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > =A0()'.'.'()
>>> > > > > > > > > =A0( (T) )
>>> > > > > > > > > =A0( ) . ( )
>>> > > > > > > > > =A0(")_(")
>>> > > > > > > > > Atheist #1211
>>> > > > > > > > > EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > SERV:
>>> > > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DW...
>>> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD...
>>> > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D6...
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > Amendment 2
>>> > > > > > > > the last portion of it states:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall
>>> > > > > > > > not b=
>>> e
>>> > > > infringed.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > Wow. Jason quote-mines the Constitution.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > Do I have to post the entire Constitution to satisfy you?
>>> >
>>> > > > > The entire 2nd amendment would be sufficient.
>>> >
>>> > > > Good news--the constitution is in my 2013 World Almanac:
>>> >
>>> > > > Amendment 2
>>> > > > Right to keep and bear arms
>>> >
>>> > > > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
>>> > > > free s=
>>> tate,
>>> > > > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>>> > > > infringed=
>>> .
>>> >
>>> > > Exactly.
>>> >
>>> > > What "well regulated Militia" did you belong to when you owned
>>> > > guns?
>>> >
>>> > The MIlitia of millions of fellow gun owners.
>>>
>>> The fact that millions of gun owners exist does *not* constitute a
>>> "militia." Militias, to exist, must be formally organized. They
>>> must meet. They must drill. Just owning a gun doesn't make you a
>>> member of a member of one.
>>>
>>> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
>>> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>>> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>>> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>>> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
>>
>> If America is invaded, the Americans that already have AR-15 rifles or
>> Mini-14 rifles will be able to respond ASAP. After some basic
>> training, we can go to war against the invaders.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Jason. Didn't you claim to have taken statistics at that imaginary
>college?

>What are the chances that ANYBODY will invade the United States?

A gun behind a tree is 2013 guarantees no one will. And honest gun owners,
99.999% of the US did not shoot at gun at Newtown.

>Consider all the military spending by all countries as being 100
>percent. The U.S. share of that is 49%.
>
>The U.S. military isn't going to let the muslims you hate, or the
>Russians that you're paranoid of, invade your little bedroom community.
>There won't be a need for all the crazies with their semi-auto assult
>weapons to go running off into the night, screaming their heads off.

Carzies. Now you know who the shooters are.

The dukester, American - American
********************************************
You can't fix stupid.
********************************************

tirebiter

2/5/2013 2:18:00 PM

0

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
news:Jason-0302131507400001@66-53-210-113.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:

> In article
> <1a09ebdb-b931-4a16-b393-6a5ecb3595e6@d8g2000pbm.googlegroups.com>,
> SkyEyes <skyeyes9@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 3, 12:51=A0am, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <c1ee143d-ddca-413b-b721-08eb1accf...
@qi8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > > On Jan 31, 10:18=3DA0pm, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-6A216B.14582331012...@news.giganews.com>,
>> > > > Jeanne
>> >
>> > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > In article
>> > > > > <Jason-3101131259010...@67-150-127-123.lsan.mdsg-
pacwest.com>,
>> > > > > =3DA0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-F0E17C.23505430012...@news.giganews.com>, Je=
>> anne
>> > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > > <Jason-3001132304570...@66-53-215-235.lsan.mdsg-
pacwest.co
>> > > > > > > m>, =3DA0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-21E137.18410930012...@news.giganews.com>=
>> , Je=3D
>> > > anne
>> > > > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > > > > <Jason-3001131625340...@66-53-211-6.lsan.mdsg-pa=
>> cwes=3D
>> > > t.com>,
>> > > > > > > > > =3DA0Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > In article
>> > > > > > > > > > <1oajg8p7t7nf0etfavrqmvu37rg5uhn...@4ax.com>, =
>> Alan=3D
>> > > =A0Ferris
>> > > > > > > > > > <hairy.fer...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:28:15 -0800,
>> > > > > > > > > > > Ja...@nospam.com (J=
>> ason=3D
>> > > )
>> > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > I have never violated that law. However, if
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > the fe=
>> dera=3D
>> > > l
>> > > > gov't
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > or
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > the
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > California gov't made it illegal for me to
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > own a h=
>> andg=3D
>> > > un, I
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > would
>> > > > > > > > > > consider
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> > buying a handgun on the black market.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> And there's the confession that =3DA0you're a
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> crimin=
>> al aga=3D
>> > > in.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > >I would be following the constitution.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Please provide chapter and verse where it states
>> > > > > > > > > > > you ca=
>> n co=3D
>> > > mmit a
>> > > > > > > > > > > crime.
>> > > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > > > Ferrit
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > =3DA0()'.'.'()
>> > > > > > > > > > > =3DA0( (T) )
>> > > > > > > > > > > =3DA0( ) . ( )
>> > > > > > > > > > > =3DA0(")_(")
>> > > > > > > > > > > Atheist #1211
>> > > > > > > > > > > EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > SERV:
>> > > > > > > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3DW...
>> > > > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3DD...
>> > > > > > > > > > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D3D6...
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > Amendment 2
>> > > > > > > > > > the last portion of it states:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > ...the right of the people to keep and bear arms,
>> > > > > > > > > > shall n=
>> ot b=3D
>> > > e
>> > > > > > infringed.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > Wow. Jason quote-mines the Constitution.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > Do I have to post the entire Constitution to satisfy
>> > > > > > > > you?
>> >
>> > > > > > > The entire 2nd amendment would be sufficient.
>> >
>> > > > > > Good news--the constitution is in my 2013 World Almanac:
>> >
>> > > > > > Amendment 2
>> > > > > > Right to keep and bear arms
>> >
>> > > > > > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
>> > > > > > of a fr=
>> ee s=3D
>> > > tate,
>> > > > > > the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>> > > > > > infri=
>> nged=3D
>> > > .
>> >
>> > > > > Exactly.
>> >
>> > > > > What "well regulated Militia" did you belong to when you
>> > > > > owned guns=
>> ?
>> >
>> > > > The MIlitia of millions of fellow gun owners.
>> >
>> > > The fact that millions of gun owners exist does *not* constitute
>> > > a "militia." =A0Militias, to exist, must be formally organized.
>> > > =A0They m=
>> ust
>> > > meet. =A0They must drill. =A0Just owning a gun doesn't make you a
>> > > membe=
>> r
>> > > of a member of one.
>> >
>> > > Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
>> > > BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>> > > EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>> > > skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>> > > skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
>> >
>> > If America is invaded, the Americans that already have AR-15 rifles
>> > or Mini-14 rifles will be able to respond ASAP. After some basic
>> > training, w=
>> e
>> > can go to war against the invaders.
>>
>> And just *who* the fuck is going to invade the U.S., huh? <Taps foot
>> impatiently> We've got the most massive military in existence. Who
>> is going to be dumb enough to go up against that?
>>
>> You're delusional. Do these "Red Dawn" fantasies make your dick
>> hard?
>>
>> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
>> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
>> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
>> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
>> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
>
> China and/or Muslim terrorists. Please stop tapping your foot. You are
> waking up the cats.
>
>

Background checks should certainly include review of Usenet posting
history, so you can never legally own a gun. Your hatred of all muslims
is delusional. And now you think the Chinese would have any valid
reason to invade militarily?

And your gunnuts with their assault rifles are going to be the deciding
factor?

You are clearly insane.

---
a.a. #2273