WR - Weapons of Mass Destruction

11-01-2004, 04:29 PM	#31
Insaniteus whore Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Oak Ridge, TN, (Nukeville) Posts: 667/0.38 Threads: 0 Friends Network	Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction I was refering to schutzenkonig's stance, who's a guy lol. Also, the main positives to automatic (or any) gun ownership are security and recreation. If you're so worried about guns, you should vote for Kerry who favors better background checks, liability of gun dealers who sell to criminals, and reinstituting the assault weapons ban . -Insaniteus-

	\| quote \|

11-01-2004, 04:35 PM	#32
schutzenkonig This is my rifle... Champion! Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: in the US Posts: 1,630/1.04 Threads: 10 Friends Network	Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction For reasons one why they should be less RESTRICTED (as they are NOT illegal to own), check my thread on auto-weapons. And from a quick look, "HIS stance" was refering to CE, not you. Edit: I see no reason to smile when I hear "reinstituting" the "assault weapons" ban.

	\| quote \|

11-01-2004, 10:23 PM	#33
kgilly whore Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: san antonio Posts: 375/0.24 Threads: 3 Friends Network	Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction I honestly don;t see someoen turning in there guns for food or water in the society in which they live. Even if they did turn in "a gun or two" it is so easy to get weapons in Iraq that they could go get more or they have more than what they turned in. Not an effective policy if you ask me. The only thing that can work is enstating an effective police force and military and over time things will become more civilized and laws will actually begin to mean something rather than just pieces of paper than cant be enforced.

	\| quote \|

Sponsored Links
REMOVE ADS

11-01-2004, 10:49 PM

#34

sillyrabbit

whore

Join Date: Sep 2004

Location: Indiana

Posts: 647/0.42

Threads: 0

Friends Network

Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgilly

I honestly don;t see someoen turning in there guns for food or water in the society in which they live. Even if they did turn in "a gun or two" it is so easy to get weapons in Iraq that they could go get more or they have more than what they turned in. Not an effective policy if you ask me. The only thing that can work is enstating an effective police force and military and over time things will become more civilized and laws will actually begin to mean something rather than just pieces of paper than cant be enforced.

yeah....that was my point exactly, sorry if it didnt sound that way

| quote |

11-01-2004, 10:57 PM

#35

Jimi

Banned by pornerators

Champion!

Champion!

Champion!

Champion!

Champion!

Join Date: Jan 2003

Location: San Antonio, TX

Posts: 10,153/4.73

Threads: 318

Friends Network

Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimi

Well, Miss Toosmart.... I didn't say you could shoot a Nuclear bomb and it would explode. Nuclear bombs use highly unstable radiactive materials, such as uranium-235. In a nuclear bomb, a sphere of U-235 is place at the end of a long tube. At the other end of the tube is a U-235 "bullet" with a gun-trigger mechanism. When the bomb is to explode, the gun-trigger mechanism shoots the U-235 bullet into the U-235 sphere. That's the jist of how the weapon works. So, guess your expectations should have stayed high?

Also, as far as your perception of what a WMD is.... your definition really doesn't matter, to be quite frank.

As far as any governmental/military/scientific/pyrotechnic engineer goes.... C4, or components, are not a WMD.

The UN sanctions did not include the materials found. Iraq was allowed particular short-ranged missiles, and these missiles could clearly have been built with these explosive materials.

| quote |

11-01-2004, 10:58 PM	#36
sillyrabbit whore Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Indiana Posts: 647/0.42 Threads: 0 Friends Network	Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction no, im not gonna give you credit about the bullet.....but i liked the pic of the mushroom cloud

	\| quote \|

11-03-2004, 12:14 AM	#37
CD Psychic MOD Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Everywhere Posts: 7,078/4.46 Threads: 272 Friends Network Gold Member	Re: Weapons of Mass Destruction C-4 isn't a WMD just as a Hummer with a top mounted chain gun isn't too. They could theoretically both kill similar numbers of people but mass destruction isn't measured in the hundreds... it's measured in the tens of thousands to millions. One thing I don't understand is that if Bush is so scared of nuclear weapons being created (nevermind the fact that we have a ton of them AND have no desire to get rid of any), why target Iraq? Korea has already detonated one just to show the world that they have working nuclear weaponry. Anyone who says this war on Iraq is for freedom needs to examine the true status of world events. There are dictators still in power just as bad as Sadam that we are ignoring. There are places in Africa dealing with extreme famine and ritualistic extermination. And fucking around with the way they live their day to day lives is just going to bite us in the ass down the road. So yes, we may be safer now, but our kids are going to be the ones who pay, and anyone who wants their kids to live in a more dangerous world shouldn't have kids to begin with.
	___________________________________________
	\| quote \|