Ebow1

Don't ask me.

Due to my difficult school schedule, yes, it is.

I only ever played Sid Meiers on the 360, but I had a lot of fun with it on that.

I do my job just fine. I don't try to socialize but I'm not going to be rude to people who don't deserve it. I've been with Domino's for almost a year. In my first few months there I was working 50-60 hour weeks every week because that store was understaffed and this is when the corporate boy who's allegedly trying to get me fired was the store manager. I was there in Januarary out delivering pizzas on the snow and the ice when the guy who grew up in Russia didn't wanna come in because of the snow. Until my school schedule kicked in I never had more then one day off a week and that day was usually spent covering a shift for someone who just didn't feel like coming to work. I am plain and simple the best driver in that store (although not by much to be fair to the others). As far as my current store manager knowing more then he claims, I've suspected that since about his second day as my boss. When I was told that I was under the microscope and that my job was on the line I got pissed. I didn't think anything of the question "So you have you gotten any new guns recently", but the response of "that's good" to my answer of "no", definately seemed fishy.

I don't know corporate policy off hand, but I have no doubt if I called the office to talk to someone I wouldn't be able to get a straight answer out of them to save my life seeing as how I never have been on other issues.

One of the corporate people (my old store manager), who's very buddy buddy when he's in the store, has apparently been calling for my termination from Domino's behind my back, and my current store manager has told me he honestly has no idea why. Yesterday he asked me if I had gotten any new guns, an innocent question in and of itself, but when I answered no his response was "that's good". What do you guys make of this, cause it sounds to me like he's scared of me shooting the place up just because I'm a gun owner.

The full version of the first Starcraft was avalaible for N64. With the Zerg and the Protoss and the Terrans. You could play one on one against another person choosing from a selection of maps. They also had multiple campaigns available to each race.

I've considered something smaller then a .45 for summer carry so I wouldn't have to get all bundled up to conceal in the heat.

I threw them across the room so I could watch him run into the wall. Don't ask me why but I've found a majority of cats go absolutlely mental over a ball of newspaper.

I only ever played the first one on N64 so I'm not sure how much I want this new one. That combined with the fact that I know it's gonna be one of those games that eats every waking hour.

I had a cat that could not for the life of him figure out how to stop when running on a hardwood floor. It took him awhile but he at least figured out to slide sideways so he wouldn't hit the wall headfirst when I throw a toy across the room.

I think a photocopy of their HCP would be a good thing to get from them. Then you could show that you made certain they were licensed and legally allowed to carry a handgun.

There is no constitutional problem with making laws based on personal belief.-Agree That's not the same as mandating practice of a specific religion. Traditional judeo-christian morality is not a specific religion.-No, but to derive laws from morals that are specifically judeo-christian is the government endorsement of a specific religion. Just sayin. Suggesting not legislating anything resembling any hint of spirituality is idiotic.-I never suggested any such thing. There a plenty of laws that are also commandments in the bible. However, they have also found to be laws amongst a multitude of pre-christian tribal societies and other such groups of people. That's because they are understood seemingly by all to be basic human rights. Things like murder and theft are wrong, but they are not viewed as wrong solely in the bible, they are viewed as wrong by just about every society across the world past and present, christian or not. Laws derived from things that are said to be wrong only in the bible, or things thought to be wrong only by christians, are laws derived solely from christianity, and do not belong in our country.

I spend all Mardi Gras with the Knights of Columbus in New Orleans. I know about Catholic drinking which is why i specified the anti alcohol sentiment amongst baptists where it is much more prevalent. To say that the religion is no way at fault I think is incorrect although blaming the people for not forcing these laws to be changed I do agree with. Not having knowlege of exactly how and why the laws were put into place does hinder my argument, as it could be that baptist heavy populations got the laws in place, or that baptist politicians put them into place to appeal to their known demographic, or that the laws were put into place completely seperately of christianity (although I doubt that one). However, without having known exactly how it happened it's not very fair to start pointing fingers. I would like to point out that I'm not trying to demonize baptists or any branch of christianity. There is both a heavy concentration of baptists and blue laws in the south and it is obvious that plenty of these blue laws stem directly from christianity, especially the ones concerning alcohol sales on sunday, as it is noone else's holy day. I am merely commenting that these blue laws are obviously legal extensions of the morality of christianity. I not being a christian, should not have it legislated to me when I can and can't buy alcohol, or go to a bar.

Wasn't sure if this should go in Curios and Relics or Class III so I put it here. I got a buddy who just mentioned that he would love to have a civilian version of the STG44. I was wondering if an easily available version in fact exists, if he's gonna have to go class III to get it, or if he can get it as a CandR.

And that would be why I'm still leaning further towards the Rec7 in 6.8.

How many laws have been proposed, polled or passed that have a strictly religious basis in the United States. I may be misspoken, but I always thought that there is a distinct partition between church and state and that nothing of the such has happened to date Pretty much every law concerning alcohol. Not buying liquor on Sundays, not being able to build a liquor store within so many feet of a church. There's plenty of legally binding paper that was established from the morals and ethics of christianity in this country. While the bible is not inherently against alcohol, and certainly doesn't say don't buy alcohol on Sunday and don't build a liquor store near a church, most baptist churches are inherently anti alcohol and it is those morals and ethics that are the basis of such blue laws, and they are derived directly from chrisitianity. These might be minor laws, but to me it is still government endorsement of the morals of a specific religion.

I like what I see, but that's probably because there's not a pricetag attached yet.

Yeah, I'll stick with a .38 super Taurus PT1911 for less then half that.

"A man who refuses to be involved in politics must accept being ruled by his inferiors" Think it was Plato who said that. Sums up politicians pretty well, the people we need are the ones who won't touch politics.

I bet serial number 357 was one of the first to go.

And here's the link. http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/general-off-topic/42109-really-weird-never-looked-way-8.html#post553469

You're frigging broke? Why just a few threads ago I remember you bragging about your multiple houses and multiple cars. It was the same thread in which you claimed I couldn't grow a beard and said you have nothing to learn from a boy such as me. As far as being respectful goes, I think that last sentence shows just about how respectful you are towards. I'm certainly not asking you to agree with me, I love it when people disagree with me because then we can argue. I love a good argument. A good argument being when both sides are rational and informed, they avoid personal attacks, they stick to the issue(s), and don't try to change the subject with outlandish claims about the irrelevant, and those things right there are the exact opposite of your posts. Agree or disagree politically, personal attacks are disrespectful.

I fail to see the part where you respect others.

"of course you didn't see him stopping anybody. because he would be impersonating a police officer." It's called a citizens arrest, and it is perfectly legal if the detained person is in fact found to be in violation of a law.