Any way of connecting up all the tailpipes to Trump's room in the white house? :-O
I wish!
Any way of connecting up all the tailpipes to Trump's room in the white house? :-O
Any way of connecting up all the tailpipes to Trump's room in the white house? :-O
Unbelievable, just unbelievable. . ..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...e-lead-ammunition_us_58b881d9e4b02a4e8ddb710f
What is it about some people that makes them behave as if lead is miraculously de-toxified when discharged through the barrel of a gun? It's hard to imagine anyone with a genuine concern for the environment supporting this measure.
That comment probably gets you a lifetime ban on entering the US :-O
Small-mindedness and willful ignorance, for the most part, seasoned with a big helping of resentment towards "urban elites" and the conservation ethic in general. They don't "do" larger purposes (think friend litebeam supra); all they know is that steel shot costs a bit more than lead and isn't as friendly to the barrels of their precious guns.
More fulgian™ nonsense. You post like you know my stance here, when you have absolutely no idea..
I've never commented about lead use here at this forum. On other fora I have opined, lead is toxic, and I won't use it.
Why use lead when there are safer alternatives like copper bullets or steel shot?
Don't presume to lecture me on prudent life choices for the environment, yours (if you have any) wouldn't stand a chance against mine. I've posted at length about this in the past, you've provided nothing but rhetoric.
More fulgian™ nonsense. You post like you know my stance here, when you have absolutely no idea..
I've never commented here about lead use here at this forum. On other fora I have opined, lead is toxic, and I won't use it.
Why use lead when there are safer alternatives like copper bullets or steel shot?
Don't presume to lecture me on prudent life choices for the environment, yours (if you have any) wouldn't stand a chance against mine. I've posted at length about this in the past, you've provided nothing but rhetoric.
Although I acknowledge that this measure has only just been enacted, I thank you for your oblique response to my earlier question (post 111). It seems that there are issues where you would part company with the Trump administration. That's good. The common ground may be perilously small but instead of vituperation (on both sides) it would be productive to explore where we might find a shred or two more on which we can agree.
Following up on the Steve Bannion story--
http://www.theonion.com/live/president-donald-trump-first-100-days-55086/entry/128
John there are many areas I 'part company' with Trump (and the GOP).
Example? I'm very much opposed to nuclear power and its resulting waste management as it exists today. This current topic, lead, is another. I'd love to see cigarettes banned. Many would loathe me for that claiming that I'm treading on their rights.
In the same way, I think cannabis should be legal. The GOP want weed banned, or at least did.
My best friend is a liberal!...he's a defense attorney who represents those facing drug charges.
This is the internet and not everything is as it seems. I don't fall lock step with any particular party, no matter what someone here thinks. I think on every issue and weigh it myself.
I agree it's great to find common ground, but when people assume things about others and actually post based on those assumptions? Seriously? One can see how mutual respect is hopeless.
Scott Pruitt--hard to imagine a more disastrous choice for EPA administrator. . .!
http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/scott-pruitt-rejects-climate-change-reality
No comment department--
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/21/...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
(tap "skip deals" button to get to the article)