Axxman

In all seriousness..and don't hate me for this...but I was just trying to rile you up a bit. On the flip-side...I am not a constitutionalist. I don't believe in all these "rights" that so many people hold so dear. Now don't get me wrong...the "rights" are cool, and I don't necessarily want to live without them completely...but I don't really see them as God given or anything. I do believe that the American Constitution is a good document, although the Bill of Rights kinda screwed it up. Ultimately, the Bill of Rights gives people the "right" to disobey God...and I don't necessarily like that. Oh...and about Real ID...I don't mind them knowing about me, or my religion...I am not going to fall into the trap of "worry"...I cast all my cares upon my Father in Heaven. If I am to be a martyr for His name's sake, by putting my belief in Him on an ID card...then to God be the Glory!

I think this is MORE "save the earth" mythology. I think the whole thing is being overhyped in order to move along the entire earth first/global warming ideology. Some Bee's are flourishing "Even though thousands of honey bee colonies are dying, a small percentage of U.S. beekeepers are reporting significant colony losses. However, these beekeepers typically manage commercial operations with thousands of colonies. Therefore, the data represent a minority of beekeepers but a large number of colonies. For example, less than 2% of all Florida beekeepers as of April 2007 reported colony losses to a disorder with symptoms matching those of CCD. Yet collectively, these beekeepers lost thousands of colonies." -- Dr. Jamie Ellis, Head, Honey Bee Research and Extension Laboratory Department of Entomology and Nematology University of Florida Clearly, there is more going on here than meets the eye. Don't forget that these people will lie and misrepresent facts dutifully, in order to advance their agenda.

If democrats hate it...it must be a good thing. Where do I sign up?

Fair enough. You can't stop crazy...I agree. So are Americans basically saying that 300 million guns in America and an outstanding number of people injured and killed yearly is just part of the collateral damage? You can't blame countries that have FAR lower murder rates looking at the US and wondering about our gun culture. You simply can't blame them. Sure, their countries are jacked up, socialist, communist empires...but is it possible they were a little smarter than us when it came to putting 100 guns for every square mile of US soil? Germany is an outstanding example of how a complete ban is not possible...and yet they have less people killed during a crime with ANY weapon, than America does with ONLY guns. Its not about banning ANY weapon, for me. Its about enforcing the laws we do have, and doing everything we can to make sure that guys who are crazy don't buy them.

Can we get over the knee-jerking? Perhaps if some of you people actually read the whole thing you would have seen a little more insight into what the Germans actually said. BUT NO....you extremists gun nuts are so paranoid that somebody might try and take your beloved killing machine you resign yourselves to NEVER being able to be reasonable on this topic. Read it again... German daily Bild writes: "Now we will probably begin discussing the overly lax gun laws in the United States. There, buying a machine gun is often easier than getting a driver's license. And a new ban on violent games and killer videos will also be put back on the agenda. But in the end, nothing is likely to happen. And the next killer already lives somewhere among us. But we have little reason to point an accusing finger at the Americans. Despite strict gun legislation, we (in Germany) have experienced the school shootings in Erfurt and Emsdetten. We have to consider the problems in our society. And we have to take care of our fellow humans." Until the extremists on BOTH sides realize (and admit) that the gun population in this country is out of control...we will continue to kill people at an alarming rate.

hr.jr. I just wanna thank you for your responses, and for clearing up some misconceptions I had about your statements. Clearly, I have to agree with you that I have shaken my head in wonder at some of the things I have seen. LE is NOT infallible. I'm still pretty uncertain about the "armed citizenry" concept, but thats simply because I have a hard time with trusting people (You KNOW what I'm talking about.) I would feel FAR MORE comfortable with armed citizens if a proper lesson and licensing was required for owning a gun. As it is, any 'ol depressed college kid can buy a gun...that bothers me. I'm pretty die-hard conservative and have gotten quite used to being kicked off the bus everytime I mention any type of enforcement or change in gun laws. The sides are so polarized. I truly wish that some calmer heads could meet in the middle and discuss rational solutions to the mounting gun problem. I'm not a liberal (as some suggest). BTW...(as a parting shot)...the actual stat was that 5/6 didn't get shot...there was no indication as to whether they were effective in halting the crime. I still say that 10,000 people getting shot is a heck of a risk to take. Thanks...be safe!

I looked up the Bureau of Justice Stats. All they had was the results of a survey from 1987-1993 and in 6 years there was approx. 60,000 people who "tried" to defend their home with a gun...and approx. 10,000 (one-fifth) of those were shot. This is NOT a positive result...and is certainly not "hundreds of thousands"...so I'd like to see those stats. I would find them if I could. Really, its irrelevant because I am not advocating removing guns from homes. I am merely calling for a change from the status quo of assuming that the way things are done now is just fine. The extremists on BOTH SIDES of this issue are wrong.

ALright hr.jr...out of respect for your position...let me ask you a couple questions based on some things you've said on here. So far, when it comes to gun use, your opinion is just about the only one that matters to me based on your training. You know tactical gun use, and you certainly know a thing or two about how they work. We've both been in do-or-die situations and you gotta think fast, and be accurate. Knowing what you know about the average citizen (not some gun hobbyist who shoots every other day) do you really think its wise to have a bunch of college kids pulling out guns everytime they hear a popping sound? You know as well as I do that every single thing you do in a given situation is important and that simply having a gun in your pocket isn't gonna cut it. Also...I've never said a ban on guns, or a disarmament. What about the proper enforcement of gun laws? Do you have a problem with that? I have a problem with the idea that this kid was a nut-jub who was on meds, and seeing a psychology counselor..could buy two guns in two months, not to mention the gear to pull this off. Everytime something like this happens we find out that they were pretty much prime targets to snap. I take a bit of an issue with your "seeming" disrespect of your fellow officers and saying you'd rather have some citizen with a gun backing you up, cuz your fellow cops "can't hit the side of a barn." I don't know where you are from so maybe thats an accurate statement...but I certainly don't think its fair to paint all law enforcement with that brush. Do you really think a private citizen could back you up in a tactical situation? Maybe I'd pick some gun nerd if I was in a competition...but not in a life or death scenario. I'd pick you everytime over ANY citizen I know with a gun. If I'm in a life or death situation and shots are being fired...it'd be really stupid for a citizen to pull out a gun. Even an off-duty police officer knows how dangerous it is to pull his gun in a situation where he isn't readily identifiable as a cop. For me this isn't a "ban" issue...it is an enforcement issue.

LOL...I'm not going fishing for your red herring. If you can't site your sources for your outrageous claims...then we can all safely assume you made them up, or at least inflated them. I'm not going to debate your anarchy idiology right now either.

Slow down John Wayne... Where are the stats that prove the FACT that privately owned guns are used "hundreds of thousands of times" to prevent serious crimes. AS far as private citizens being far less likely to accidentally shoot...true...because most times they don't shoot...they get shot because they are not trained. Don't turn this into an anti-cop diatribe.

Do you really think that having a bunch of 18-21 yr old kids carrying guns to school is the answer? According to this philosophy, the gunman was within his constitutional rights to have the guns...until he used them. As someone in law enforcement...and I'm sure hr.jr would agree...the private use of firearms in these situations is RARELY effective, and usually causes more death. Dirty Harry is a movie...most people (even those who carry guns) are ill equipped to handle this type of situation. Gun laws need to be enforced. I am not pushing for a "ban"...I am pushing for laws to be enforced. I'll bet that once info comes out on this guy, there was some evidence of his instability...someone knew of the possibility this could happen...and no one did anything. Just like the girl who bought the guns used in the Columbine shooting...she was never arrested and never had any charges brought against her. Thats bogus! The two boys were only 17 so the gun show dealer wouldn't sell to them. They returned later with an 18 yr old girl friend, and she bought the guns and gave them to the boys. The gun dealer and the girl should both be held accountable...and they never were. Enforce the laws.

So I'm in league with the devil cuz I like Space Mountain??? Do I have to investigate the owners of the various supermarkets I shop at? Can I still go to Universal Studios? Oh...probably not cuz they make movies too. I will NEVER forget the look on my daughters face the first time she saw Cinderella's castle...She will remember that moment with me FOREVER. It was about family and I thank Disney for that opportunity with my kids.

Thank goodness we live in a society were this nutjob had the right to bear arms. Can you imagine the horror of living in a society in which he didn't have the right to own those guns. I totally agree that it is ludicrous to ban guns. I mean, how will the good people protect themselves. Its a good thing that all the victims in this case had the right to own guns so they could protect themselves from this madman. BTW...more Americans died yesterday at the hands of a madman who "had" the right to bear arms...than in ANY single day of war in Iraq. Until we start enforcing gun laws and taking the problem seriously...we can look forward to this type of garbage every once in a while.

Working out is essential to weight loss. Gaining muscle is even better. Every 1lb of muscle burns approx. 50 calories a day. So if you add 10 lbs of muscle your body will burn about 500 calories all by itself...not to mention however many calories you burn by working out to build that muscle. If you are on a 2000 calorie diet then your body will burn 1/4 of those calories by itself. Exercise and building muscle is a HUGE component. Also...don't exercise to lose weight...exercise to lose body fat. Almost anybody can easily lose 10-15lbs of weight in two weeks...its relatively easy...but almost NONE of it will be fat.

I can't wait to see the artists rendition of the missing link between the T-Rex and Chicken. Fear the Chicken Rex!!! ... Soon to be a major motion picture-- "Honey, I Shrunk the T-Rex"

Well thats the whole point of an HSA...the insurance company doesn't get your money. The insurance company has no control over your savings account. That is one reason why the deductibles are so much higher in an HSA...the insurance company actually pays less for services. My deductible for a doctors visit will go from $20 up to $85. Specialist will go from $25 to $150. It's ALOT less money the insurance company has to pay out...because I control my money. Sounds to me like you guys are talking about the older versions of the HSA called MSA"s and Flex-spending accounts...about 3 yrs ago Bush updated those and came up with HSA's. The biggest thing for me is that Democrats hate HSA's. So I figure there must be something good about them...lol. Its putting me in control of my money and allowing me to decide how my insurance premiums are handled, rather than the insurance company taking all my insurance premiums...and still charging me a co-pay. I'm going to an explanatory meeting tomorrow to find out more. I'll let you guys know what I find out.

I'll check on the deductible..but for me thats not a "too big" issue. My MAX out of pocket will be $4000 and my employer kicks in $2000 of that...so I can handle the $2000 if thats what the insurer requires. As far as the rollover...The Bush admin. made changes this year to HSA's and they DO rollover. It is a legit savings account, although the interest rates aren't gawdy. Mine is 5% and thats far better than a bank savings account. The plan is set up so that customers who stay in the HSA for multiple years can have their account grow larger than the deductible, therefore you have no exposure. Thanks for the info. Are you sure you guys aren't in an MSA? Its a bit different than an HSA which has only been around for about 2-3 yrs since Bush signed the legislation. I only ask because I don't think MSA's rolled over..like a flexable spending account.

I am about to have an insurance open enrollment and we have switched insurance companies. The new company is touting Health Savings Accounts (HSA's.) The problem I have is that it appears I would save too much money, and I'm remembering my Fathers wise words about "If it sounds to good to be true..." So I thought I'd ask just about the largest group of people I know if they have any experience with HSA's...especially people with kids. Any info would be appreciated.

A 4000lb lizard evolves into a 2lb bird....makes perfect sense to me. Especially if he was trying to hide. Is this a regressive type of evolution? Its like evolution in reverse...ets go from one of the most feared creatures on the planet...to one of the dumbest. If you chopped off a T-Rex head...would it run around like a T-Rex with its head cut off?

Okay... I believe that on some level yo-yo dieting may be a bit strenuous on the body. I know some diets are tough on your kidneys, liver, and heart etc. However...its not like obesity is any better. I'd think a person would rather have health problems due to trying to stay fit...than have health problems from being obese. Being overweight is a CONSTANT strain on the body. While dieting seems to only be an effect when done wrong. I don't think the point of the article was "don't diet...just be happy being obese." I think the point was to get yourself in shape...and have some will power to stay in shape so you don't gain the weight back. It doesn't make much sense to me that dieting is less healthy than being obese.

I went on one diet in my life...lost 30+ pounds...and felt like I was constantly eating the entire time. I learned its not the quantity of the food, but the quality. Now, several years later, I am almost back to my pre-diet weight...but alot of that is from working out and gaining muscle. I think that people who are motivated and focused are fine to diet...however, if you've been on 3 diets and are looking to a 4th...then this article is for you.

How can a warrant be frivolous? A person only gets a warrant for not complying with directives of the court. If you don't attend your court date...you get a warrant for your arrest. If you don't pay your fine...you get a warrant for your arrest. Warrants are earned by non-compliance with the judicial process.

Al Sharpton calling Imus a racist is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. Al Sharpton has said and done more racist things than Imus has even thought about...he still has a radio show. NBC should have told Sharpton that they would fire Imus as soon as Sharpton was fired. That would be a postive situation all the way around.

Way to take that verse out of context. 1) Paul says that this portion is his opinion, not a command from the Lord The bible is the Word of God, given through man. Therefore, we can assume that Pauls opinion is included herein because it also represents the very words the God himself would have for us. 2) Paul is referring to sex, not to touchingThe word for "touch" used in this passage is "haptomai"...it literally means "to touch." It is the SAME word used when the woman "touched" the hem of Jesus' garment and Jesus felt the virtue go out of Him. The entire context here is people who are becoming destracted from their mission because of burning passions. While sexual contact is certainly a degree of "touching"...there is NO reason to assume such a narrow view of the word based on the context. 3) Paul goes on to say that it's okay to have sex in marriageCertainly, that only makes sense. However, Pauls points out that there is immorality outside of marriage and that if you can't control it...then you should get married. His opinion was that nobody should be distracted by marriage, but he conceeds that people do things that cause them to "burn." The fact is, the Bible is silent on the issue. We know from Song of Solomon that he kissed his bride prior to their wedding...but other than that the Bible is silent on the issue. Thus, to try to make an argument that the Bible forbids such things before marriage is absurd.

Holy Smokes!!! The jail system is over-crowded to begin with...what're they gonna do with all those people? Now most of them can probably be field released...but if even a third of them spend one or two days in jail...thats gonna be a HUGE burden on the system. In Arizona, it is law that if you have a warrant, you MUST be taken to jail and be processed (fingerprints and photo). I can't even imagine how our woefully understaffed and crowded jail system would accomodate that many warrants.