RichardR

Agreed. Add to that a clearly innocent man, forced to defend himself from being brutally victimized by their son, only to be further victimized by the parents, race-baiters, media & the *cough* justice system & I have very little sympathy for anyone except for Zimmerman at this point.

Nothing prohibits gay couples from "marrying", nothing ever has prohibited them from having gay marriage ceromonies, what is at issue is whether or not those gay marriages are officially recognized & the benefits of recognized marriages being bestowed. Suggesting that it is "hateful" for folks to oppose the perversion of a millenia of tradition is intellectually dishonest, I should have not expected otherwise though.

There is the potential for procreation & progeny in traditional marriages, whether they are planned or not, zero potential in same-sex relationships for procreation/progeny. You should have had this conversation with your father as a pre-teen, if you had you wouldn't be so confused with how all of this reproductive stuff works.

You can't figure out why society would try to ease the enormous financial burden of both having/raising children for married couples? But would be reluctant to toss tax dollars at same-sex couples simply co-habitating? You can't see the logic in that?

In the past it did, Mike are you being purposely obtuse or is there genuine confusion on your end?

Sure, within the guidelines, no inter-marriage of blood relations, etc. Which again all go back to procreation & raising progedy, just because some people married for money or title doesn't change it's original reason for existing or it's main purpose. Not even sure why this is even in question, it should had been obvious.

You do realized that you justified waste, fraud & abuse by pointing at other (worse) waste, fraud & abuse.

Well since you seconded ... Marriage benefits were originaly a way to help ease the tremendous burden of procreating & raising progeny. Now I guess granting/bestowing marriage benefits are nothing more than just another way for the government to toss our tax dollars at whomever or whatever screams loudly enough in demand of them. How's that for a non-religous answer?

Chupacabra? @#$%^ now I'm hungry for Taco Bell.

Yup it is all over social network sites, comments on those sites seem to be a mixture of "the kid should done what ever police told him" & "his rights were violated". Personally I've always believed that iffin I was to ever error, at least I'd be erroring on the side of liberty, I hope to continue that trend, I just wish more folks would join me in that.

Midget ninjas wearing night-vision goggles?

*shrug* hard to prove or disprove allegedly smelling an odor that may or may not have smelled like illegal drugs.

I don't really care one way or another, what folks do to their own bodies is their own business, but I do tend to think of tatoos in terms of money, like when I see an obviously struggling young mother of 3 driving a beat-up 78' Ford LTD, with enough tat's totalling in value of a good solid used Toyota ... Of course I think the same way when I see a 78' Monte with 29' spinners & bumping stereo system that cost 5 times the original purchase price of the vehicle. But it's their money & iffin it makes them happy more power to them, unless of course they owe me money that is!

Fify. Social engineering is just repackaged intolerance in favor of a new flavor.

Bush's fault.

Some breeds of chickens are more "broody" than others, some individual chickens are more "broody" than others, it is of course easier on both the hen's & the chicks to simply incubate the eggs, but in a post-shtf scenario where electricity could be questionable, owning a couple broody hens would be a good trait & should be encouraged by seperating them so that the other hens will leave them alone, or have plenty of nesting boxes so that there is no competition for them.

Agreed. Stuff like this is one of the reasons public relations are in the toilet.

I don't think interpretation is the problem, I think it is the constant, never-ending, widespread, "purposeful" misinterpretation that is the problem.

I've also raised both chickens & rabbits (semi-commercially) I personally think chickens are the best choice of the two, mostly because they are less labor intensive but also because they provide plenty of protein without having to butcher them (ie: they lay edible eggs). Rabbits do provide fur though, which is a great resource even if there is never a SHTF scenario, in fact I mostly raised New Zealand whites because of their solid white super-soft coats of fur & nice meaty build, rabbit meat is very lean though so if you are planning on relying on rabbits as your only. (or main) source of protein you'll need another source of fat in your diet.

I know that this is going to sound "radical" & "extreme" but how about restoring the Constitution as our nation's highest set of laws? It's really a no-brainer, if agents of the State (LEO/LEA's, NSA, IRS, TSA, DHS, etc) have no RS or PC to believe that a violation of a statute or ordinance has been, is in progress, or is about to be committed, they leave citizens alone.

Depends. Did you just quickly glance over a single beetle infested tree? or have you been watching the beetle infestation slowly but surely spread across the forest?

I've seen Glock's malfunction too, again though typically it is ammunition or magazine related, but just about anything can break. Which is the reason why I always add malfunction drills into training sessions regardless of what weapon platform I'm training with at the time.

AK's can & do malfunction, if you rely on one for self-defense you should be aware of that fact. Like many other semi-autos the malfunctions are typically ammunition or magazine related, however just about any thing can break, be it an extractor or firing pin, etc. They are not as sensitive to environmental factors such as dirt/grime as some other firearm designs, but they are not infallable.

If folks just started adhering to the oaths that they took, this sort of incident would never be an incident, let alone have become standard operating procedure.

The list is literally endless, basically every movie that features a firearm in it. From the earliest cowboy western movie where six-shooters are six-hundred shooters, to what ever movies are currently being filmed on a set somewhere. Some of course are more egregious than others, but I don't think that there are many movie folks who are avid firearms enthousiests.