tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post747000818079123843..comments2024-02-05T03:41:13.688+01:00Comments on Mikeb302000: Abortion Rights vs. Gun RightsAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-20118688289648845922009-02-11T19:39:00.000+01:002009-02-11T19:39:00.000+01:00Mike, I do give as GOOD as I get --but not as bad ...Mike, I do give as GOOD as I get --but not as bad as I get. I don't censure people off my blog except for spam or extreme language and phony posts appropriating other people's blog names --and I don't post personal identities and addresses and photos of others and their houses --nor publish their pictures on crosses, etc. --nor ridicule their bodies (OK, I called Microdot an ol' wiry (did I say skinny?) geezer --when I would really think he's a cool character if he wasn't so mean to me, feeding my troll) --but the difference between me and MR (whom I should stop mentioning with recitals of his blog sins, I know) is that he really despises me and people who hold my views --and I don't despise him or the people he claims I despise. HE WILL NOT DENY that hatred. I've encouraged him to do so --to "say it isn't so." He won't say he doesn't hate me; he'll just recite why I'm hateful and should be hated. <BR/><BR/>I could run from him and drag my tail between my legs, yipping like a kicked dog, avoiding his blog which tells me to stay away -- or I can have a sense of humor about him --which I prefer. And I do yield to temptation to tease him -and at his blog-but I am good-natured in the process. He writes about my people unfairly and dishonestly --and says a lot of interesting things that are SOOOO arguable --and I hate to see him go unchallenged. But he doesn't want anyone on his blog to see the other side (the truth, IMO) about anything he says. <BR/><BR/>I think the hatred between groups who disagree is what escalates to gun violence. But if we didn't have guns, there would still be the violence. Over on his blog, MR just said in a comment that all the right wingers should be rounded up and put in boxcars. I told you he has Nazi German roots! And he said his father hated protestants --I suspect he has that old German ethic against Jews, also. I think he really does feel sincerely self-righteous in his hatreds. And that's sad --and very unhelpful to world and national problems.<BR/><BR/>Yes, I post often, post scripture, post lengthily, believe what I believe, and disagree with gay marriage and abortion and orthodox Darwinian dogma --that does not mean I should be censored or locked up or worse.<BR/><BR/>I can feel friendly toward, find common ground with (grandchildren, e.g.) go to coffee or lunch with anyone --but maybe I should pack a pistol. Just kidding. <BR/><BR/>I would not meet a blogger alone in a private place. I'd bring my husband or my white belt martial arts son along. <BR/><BR/>MR accuses me of thinking I'm always right --don't we all who fill these blogs? Says I never admit I'm wrong. I don't live my life to be wrong --I try to be right. Again, don't we all? except haters. They ARE wrong! But disagreeing with a lifestyle --be it aborting, committing homosexual acts, doing drugs, going to church, bearing arms, supporting Biblical morals --<BR/><BR/>Such disagreement is no grounds for incivility and the outright hatred I have witnessed on blogs.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-89141469739405885072009-02-11T12:30:00.000+01:002009-02-11T12:30:00.000+01:00Mike,because it's the 2nd Amendment and just becau...Mike,<BR/><BR/><I>because it's the 2nd Amendment and just because the Founders wrote it, it can't be looked at, discussed and perhaps even amended with another Amendment.</I><BR/><BR/>How about we look at all of them and decide what to amend?<BR/><BR/>Let's take a vote on the board and determine what rights of YOURS we want to amend.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Let's make it easier for the police to stop you and strip search you anytime, any place.<BR/><BR/>How about your freedom of speech, want to get governmental approval prior to writing each blog post?<BR/><BR/>Apply the same reasoning to every other amendment and I'll support you.<BR/><BR/>And before you tell me it isn't the same, how about arson....causes great harm, let's stop and search everyone to see if they are illegally carrying lighters and acceleratants.<BR/><BR/>Maddof scammed 50 million dollars using his freedom of speech, how many lives did he ruin?<BR/><BR/>If the 2nd amendment is up for grabs, all of them should be.Bob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15882819735831651314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-40741101193356180222009-02-11T12:05:00.000+01:002009-02-11T12:05:00.000+01:00Rob, I'd never think of Barb as suffering from "tr...Rob, I'd never think of Barb as suffering from "trolldom against harmless ladies." It seems to me she gives it as good as she gets it.<BR/><BR/>And so far, I welcome everyone.<BR/><BR/>Weer'd, I don't think I said the 2nd Amendment is "a meaningless issue." Those are your words that you're putting in my mouth. I think it's anything but meaningless. What I don't think is, that just because it's the 2nd Amendment and just because the Founders wrote it, it can't be looked at, discussed and perhaps even amended with another Amendment.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-56884531391987360922009-02-10T18:00:00.000+01:002009-02-10T18:00:00.000+01:00Mike, on Mudrake's blog, you wrote regarding conse...Mike, on Mudrake's blog, you wrote regarding conservative talk radio: <BR/><BR/><I>Those conservatives do seem to be about hate. That's why the religious conservatives are so disconcerting, at least to me.</I><BR/><BR/>And so I said HERE, "Mike said religious conservatives were disturbing and hateful in his view" and wondered what your rationale was.<BR/><BR/>to which you wrote, <I>I couldn't disagree more. Look at today's post about New Mexico.</I><BR/><BR/>which does show your appreciation for people being against the death penalty because of their need to forgive (as Christ taught) though I didn't see a lot of references to conservative Christian faith being their motivation --but forgiveness IS a Christian theme. God says we MUST forgive to be forgiven. NOt that others don't believe in forgiveness also.<BR/><BR/>I still wonder, however, what Jesus would expect society to do to a man who tortures and buries a little girl alive --considering He said, "Whoever harms one of these little ones, were better a millstone were hung about his neck and he were cast into the sea." There is personal revenge (bad --"vengeance is mine, saith the Lord," and then there is corporate community justice --as in eye for an eye --which can be prison instead of death. It is still punishment and taking offender off the streets.)<BR/><BR/>As for the issue of conservative talk radio, it is not the religious right evangelicals dominating there, (except on religious broadcasting) but Mormon Glenn Beck, and Catholics Hannity and O'Reilly. I think Rush respects the Religious Right and some of their stands, but I don't think he's a devout Christian but a pretty secular-living guy. Hence, he doesn't feel bad if he's vitriolic. NOr do O'Reilly and Ann Coulter. Michael Reagan says he accepted Christ under his father's spiritual counsel.<BR/><BR/>But in blogville, I've not run across anyone as unrelentingly vitriolic and joyless in the process, and self-righteous about it, as MR against religious conservatives.<BR/><BR/>WEER'D --YES, we are armed. Besides, I have Rob around who has 3 white belts in martial arts --which belts, he says, are the ones to keep your pants up when you first walk in the door of the training center.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-67555805766162241622009-02-10T17:34:00.000+01:002009-02-10T17:34:00.000+01:00repost after editingYou're just feeding a troll wh...repost after editing<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><EM>You're just feeding a troll who otherwise has a lot of good things to say.</EM><BR/><BR/>The metaphor of the blog as a living room has its limits (eg people don't sit in their living rooms and announce to the neighborhood their views. Living rooms are private and blogs are not unless access is limited)<BR/><BR/>It's useful in this case though on etiquette regarding trolls. I appreciate that mike desires to promote discussion amongst differing view points and makes this almost explicit in just about every post asking "what do you think?", but if we are to think on the living room analogy, it's quite rude to your guests to invite them into discussion and then snicker and pat someone on the back when he insults these guests. I'm not saying mike did this in this blog topic, but it's definitely one of those troll treats that's been handed out.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-80470701581022849762009-02-10T17:22:00.000+01:002009-02-10T17:22:00.000+01:00No matter what, Barb, if you don't have one, best ...No matter what, Barb, if you don't have one, best you change that.<BR/><BR/>See my comments in the other thread about punching holes through steel with a screw-driver.Weer'd Beardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13528978001340070552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-84766496360601402302009-02-10T17:14:00.000+01:002009-02-10T17:14:00.000+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-72211917040358273642009-02-10T16:55:00.000+01:002009-02-10T16:55:00.000+01:00I must add to that --I didn't know that Mudrake st...I must add to that --I didn't know that Mudrake started up his blog again (He used to be Liberal Democrat of Politics in Mudville) --he was completely free from my input for quite awhile. Then, apparently wanting the attention of me and my small circle of readers, he commented on my blog and I knew he was in business again. I recognized his style and blog personna and his commenters even with his new blog name and identity. I think hating me is a big part of his life!! I'm glad to think he doesn't probably own a gun.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-85458782267474731312009-02-10T16:51:00.000+01:002009-02-10T16:51:00.000+01:00Mudrake can't separate views he loathes from the p...Mudrake can't separate views he loathes from the people -he has to loathe them too, and show it --especially to women, I've observed. He shows a little more deference to men--especially if they agree with him on something. Like Sepp of Uncommon Squalor. <BR/><BR/>Trouble is, MR and I rarely agree on anything so his contempt is complete --and obsessive --so that he isn't even interested in whatever common ground we might find. He isn't remotely interested in cordiality. We know who each other is --and I feel pretty sure he wouldn't crack a friendly smile in my direction if we should meet by chance --bet he would turn his back to avoid a face to face. A pity. Considering I run into him daily in blogosphere and we have such a common interest in topics and blogs. <BR/><BR/>By the Grace of God, I am able to enjoy people regardless of differences (including homosexuals who I am said to hate) --and even have a sense of humor re: MR's intolerance which reaches the level of ridiculous. <BR/><BR/>But I do understand one thing about the ol' muckraker --he is sincere in seeing his position as righteous (just like a terrorist) and mine (and the gun-defenders, pro-lifers, traditional marriage defenders, republicans) as evil. I am his "great Satan" and I suspect he wouldn't shed a tear to see me keel over. He closed his blog once, being mysterious as to why, and I expressed genuine regret and a compliment to his relevant, interesting, colorful blog--and he deleted the comment.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-52966546290359605432009-02-10T11:38:00.000+01:002009-02-10T11:38:00.000+01:00So Mike, why do you keep blogging about the 2nd Am...So Mike, why do you keep blogging about the 2nd Amendment, if it's a meaningless issue?<BR/><BR/>I call bullshit on that one.<BR/><BR/>You're just feeding a troll who otherwise has a lot of good things to say.<BR/><BR/>Have you notice tho, that Muddy WILL give valid arguments on other issues, but sticks to misdirection and insults when it comes to the gun issue?<BR/><BR/>I haven't decided which of the two anti-gun types he is, but it's certainly one of them.<BR/><BR/>His rude nature suggests the nefarious kind, what do you think, Mike?Weer'd Beardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13528978001340070552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-54779825764826377062009-02-10T08:29:00.000+01:002009-02-10T08:29:00.000+01:00Mudrake said, "There are more pressing problems in...Mudrake said, "There are more pressing problems in this universe like whether this universe is a hologram or not." I couldn't agree more.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Barb said, "Mike said religious conservatives were disturbing and hateful in his view" I couldn't disagree more. Look at today's post about New Mexico.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-44515825999611221442009-02-09T18:19:00.000+01:002009-02-09T18:19:00.000+01:00Well, Mudrake is still deleting. Only slight impr...Well, Mudrake is still deleting. Only slight improvement in that he's not announcing it, or complaining that I posted, so no one but he and I will know that he did it. This is MUCH smarter, Mudrake. Progress of a sort.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-54358949298273223372009-02-09T18:12:00.000+01:002009-02-09T18:12:00.000+01:00Mudrake, last I looked, I believe you've taken off...Mudrake, last I looked, I believe you've taken off your anti-Barb stuff at your blog, so I'll be glad to retract things here --if you let my 2 recent comments at your blog stand. But you'll probably blame me for bringing up homosexuality over there (and here) --but I only did it because Mike said religious conservatives were disturbing and hateful in his view --and I said I knew it was the gay issue for you--what is it for Mike? <BR/><BR/>Please don't be predictable!! and hyperventilate again on the gay issue.<BR/><BR/>There's a My Turn piece in the latest Newsweek by Richard Mouw, the head of Fuller Theological Seminary who wants to be able to disagree peaceably on this issue and not be demonized for it. Read: <BR/><A HREF="http://www.newsweek.com/id/182531" REL="nofollow">Less Shouting More Talking</A>Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-26705812184203554812009-02-09T17:56:00.000+01:002009-02-09T17:56:00.000+01:00Wow, what a parallel. So what everyone else (but y...Wow, what a parallel. So what everyone else (but your yes men) would see as thoughtless trolldom against harmless ladies and other bloggers who want to discuss the ideas honestly while you're hiding and clinging desperately to anonymity (at least when you had it) is comparable to Clint Eastwood style machismo and heroics. <BR/><BR/>Hmmm. Yeah, that's going to be a hard sell.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00892441574014784305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-50305726886191044962009-02-09T17:49:00.000+01:002009-02-09T17:49:00.000+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00892441574014784305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-20360821081305230122009-02-09T15:56:00.000+01:002009-02-09T15:56:00.000+01:00What an odd post by you, Mudrake! I don't think y...What an odd post by you, Mudrake! I don't think you are self-analyzing accurately at all! Because you are the bully. And your excremental language could give Kowalski a run for his money--and I've never heard Kowalski.<BR/><BR/>You are very self-righteous in your blog topic views --but your comments in response to other people's comments are generally pointless, vindictive, thoughtless, counter-productive to the discussion, ad hominem attacks, and scornful of all who disagree. No civility for you.<BR/><BR/>And you could change that anytime and all would be forgiven on my part.<BR/><BR/>Whereas, in your opinion, it doesn't matter WHAT I say; if I don't approve homosexuality and gay marriage, I'm a sub-human who should shut up on every topic --what Sepp called a "gaycist" on the same level as racist--unfit to share the planet or an opinion. NOted, Sepp was speaking in defense of so-called "gaycists." He coined the term at www.uncommonsqualor.blogspot.com.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-19655629225124921962009-02-09T14:42:00.000+01:002009-02-09T14:42:00.000+01:00Bob says-Maybe you don't want to convince people o...Bob says-<BR/><BR/><I>Maybe you don't want to convince people of the righteousness of your arguments.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you can't convince people because as Weer'd says it is a dodge.</I><BR/><BR/>Righteousness of argument [or of religion] has never been the point of my posts or comments. I don't give a shit whether someone else thinks I'm right or not. I'm just blowing steam and if someone gets too close they get burned.<BR/><BR/>You and Weerd might find this odd but I enjoyed Clint Eastwood's Stan Kowalski in Gran Torino. Did you see it?<BR/><BR/>Although Stan and I are world's apart in about everything on the surface [prejudice, guns, swearing, education level] he and I had a deeper connection: we don't take shit from anyone, most especially bulies.<BR/><BR/>So, I'm not making comments on Mike's blog to get the congeniality award; never got that one ever. I just slap down my opinion, throw some elbows, and move on.<BR/><BR/>Righteousness is for pussies, as Stan would say.mud_rakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04786611698569598023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-740052869745878422009-02-09T14:29:00.000+01:002009-02-09T14:29:00.000+01:00Weer'd Beard said...D O D G E!!!I never owned a Do...Weer'd Beard said...<BR/>D O D G E!!!<BR/><BR/>I never owned a Dodge, but drove a Dodge taxi back in the mid-60's. It had a push button transmission control which was quite unique.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately I drove a '74 Plymouth [Valiant] which quickly proved not to be.<BR/><BR/>What's your car experience, Weerd?mud_rakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04786611698569598023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-79902782919066000952009-02-09T05:20:00.000+01:002009-02-09T05:20:00.000+01:00Mike,Mentioned it over on Weer'd's blog, but thank...Mike,<BR/><BR/>Mentioned it over on Weer'd's blog, but thanks for keeping your comments open, keeping them free of moderation, keeping the freedom for people who disagree with you to comment.<BR/><BR/>We may not agree, but I thank you for the opportunity to discuss it and your willingness to let us speak our piece at your place.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Sir.Bob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15882819735831651314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-79272239496894476342009-02-09T05:17:00.000+01:002009-02-09T05:17:00.000+01:00Mud,I agree that we aren't likely to change each o...Mud,<BR/><BR/>I agree that we aren't likely to change each others' mind; some of us have researched the issue and some of us have decided before reviewing the evidence.<BR/><BR/>Given the comments, the information presented; you can guess who is who but there are other people out there besides the people on the extremes.<BR/><BR/>Those are the people that haven't really decided because they haven't thought through the issue. <BR/><BR/>Why not present the facts, the information, statistics, even the emotional arguments that gun banners seem to depend on in place of evidence?<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>So little importance.</I><BR/><BR/>Hmm, so you think one of the liberties protected by the Constitution is of so little importance. Do you feel the same way about the 1st amendment? <BR/>Given the numerous restrictions on our 2nd amendment rights, would you put up with any similar restrictions on your right to assemble, your right to free speech?<BR/><BR/>How about a 1 column/post a month law....after all who <B>needs</B> to write more then that?<BR/><BR/>How about limiting your freedom of speech to the equipment available at the time of the Constitution's ratification? Quill pens, parchment, etc--no high speed copiers, no inkjet/laser jet printers?<BR/><BR/>See how "of little importance" those rights are when you have to live with the restrictions that pro-gunners have to.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you don't want to convince people of the righteousness of your arguments.<BR/><BR/>Maybe you can't convince people because as Weer'd says it is a dodge.Bob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15882819735831651314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-8090084002173298852009-02-09T04:50:00.000+01:002009-02-09T04:50:00.000+01:00D O D G E!!!Nobody is more blind than those who re...D O D G E!!!<BR/><BR/>Nobody is more blind than those who refuse to see!Weer'd Beardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13528978001340070552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-21174720143988215382009-02-09T04:17:00.000+01:002009-02-09T04:17:00.000+01:00Nomen and Bob- as Mike said earlier, this topic wi...Nomen and Bob- as Mike said earlier, this topic will get no one no where no how. So, why even debate it? Even after 90 comments, no one's mind will be changed. So many words. So little importance.<BR/><BR/>There are more pressing problems in this universe like whether this universe is a hologram or not.mud_rakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04786611698569598023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-30620936062889701142009-02-08T23:10:00.000+01:002009-02-08T23:10:00.000+01:00i've got to confess, i don't se muddy's point eith...i've got to confess, i don't se muddy's point either. he means to ridicule bob, that much is clear, but what bob said that he finds so ridiculous and childish is not. judging by what muddy quoted, one might conclude he thinks the very notion of defending oneself is somehow ridiculous; but that makes no sense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-22522404307445415832009-02-08T20:37:00.000+01:002009-02-08T20:37:00.000+01:00The right to bear arms --and doing so --is a bulwa...The right to bear arms --and doing so --is a bulwark protecting us from tyranny --against any despot who would control an army against his own people at their expense.<BR/><BR/>Tyrannized people are usually without hope because they have no weapons.<BR/><BR/>Church folks who are peace churches --like JW's, Mennonites, Amish, Quakers --and other conscientious objectors glibly speak of our sovereign God protecting and delivering His people --while Christians in No. Korea, Iran, Pakistan and other nations are tormented for their faith routinely. They have no self-defense, and God is letting them be martyred.<BR/><BR/>In America, the peaceniks and the gun-less have the defense of our national military and police --and as a balance, the domestic gun-toters are one reason that our politicians don't rise to tyranny. Of course, we have years of Christian influence, too, the old Methodist and UB circuit riders, e.g., who preached that love and forgiveness AND peace were the earmarks of God's spirit in a life, a church, a community. <BR/><BR/>but there ARE bullies --and God expects us to stop them --and sometimes that has involved weapons.Barbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05016832868807957194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-91084365761209845082009-02-08T19:31:00.000+01:002009-02-08T19:31:00.000+01:00Mud,I grow up watching those shows also.I also not...Mud,<BR/><BR/>I grow up watching those shows also.<BR/><BR/>I also noted that:<BR/><I>Every man in town on the screen had a 6-shooter hanging from his belt.</I><BR/><BR/>What I also noted was that most of those men weren't criminals, but just average citizens and they were trusted to carry firearms.<BR/><BR/>I noted that when the Sheriff needed help, it was those folks with 6 guns hanging on their hips he turned to.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Perhaps if you had spent more time reading instead of watching TV, you wouldn't see life in such simple -- perhaps childish terms.<BR/><BR/><I>Life was so simple then. The black-and-white TV mirrored the black-and-white thinking. Evil was a known commodity. 'Justice' was clear,simple, and swift.</I><BR/><BR/>Justice, even in the shows, wasn't portrayed as so simple. How many "good guys" had a past as a bad guys? Many of the greatest lawman of the old west had criminal or shady backgrounds.<BR/><BR/>For example the James-Younger gang- heroes or outlaws? Depends on who you asked.<BR/><BR/>Also note that the people tolerated the gangs for only a while. It wasn't the police that ended the gang, but the average folks walking around with 6 shooters on their hips.<BR/><BR/><I>On September 7, 1876, at 2 p.m., they attempted to rob the bank. Three outlaws entered the bank, and the other five stood guard outside. <B>The citizens realized a robbery was in progress and took up arms. Shooting from behind cover, they poured a deadly fire on the outlaws, killing Miller and Chadwell, and wounding the Youngers (particularly Bob, who suffered a shattered elbow).</B> They also shot Bob Younger's horse. One of the outlaws shot a bystander dead. Inside the bank, cashier Joseph Lee Heywood refused to open the safe, and was murdered in cold blood for his resistance. The infamous failure of the raid is celebrated every year in Northfield as Defeat of Jesse James Days. </I>- Wikipedia<BR/><BR/>So, perhaps there was a purpose and still is a purpose for an armed citizenry, eh?<BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Then we grew up.</I> Then again, some people prove they haven't grown up or at least matured.Bob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15882819735831651314noreply@blogger.com