| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Please, please see that your daughter gets counseling. And for
yourself as well. This is not an idle suggestion. I was violently raped and the after effects were very damaging. I was visiting in St. Croix, staying at the luxury Hotel Buccaneer. The man I was traveling with was in the dining room having a business breakfast , and I took a walk on the beach, 8:15 in the morning. I got to the end of the cove and was looking over the rocks at some beautiful sea birds. A native man walked out of the palm trees toward me, big and strong, he held his arms like a man who lifts weights. He put out his hand as though to shake mine. I turned and ran into the ocean, but he followed me. The terror was so strong I could hardly breathe. I couldn't have called for help, or blown a whistle. He held me under water until I was coughing and weak. My feet were being badly cut by the sea urchins, but the fear I was feeling kept me from noticing this till later. He dragged me back across the sea urchins, the sand, the shrubbery and threw me on my back. He was very strong and held my arms immobile. When I continued to struggle he hit me with a rock, in the side of my head, very hard. (Later it was x-rayed and there was a "spider" fracture). I was stripped, and the rest followed..I truly felt that I was dying, from fright, disgust. There were moments when I felt myself almost flip over into insanity, that my mind would be gone. I almost wanted to die to stop it. But I forced myself to think this: "I'm not really here .the real me has left my body. This terrible thing is just happening to my body, not to me. He was going to hurt me some more, he got rough. Instinctively I said, "You don't really want to do this. I think you're too nice a man to do this." Obviously I didn't mean it, but I thought it might have an effect on him somehow. It did. He let me go. I was taken to a doctor, a woman, and her first question was "How many were there?"--so at least I escaped that. She said "It happens on that beach all the time. But here's the important part. I was psychologically damaged for quite a long time. I was unable to make sensible decisions. I allowed myself to be led into marriage by the man I was with. I knew before the incident that I didn't want to marry him. I was listless. When I got home I had several close calls while driving. I was unable to make decisions. I did finally get some therapy and it slowly helped. I ended the marriage. It was such a relief. I never told any of my friends about it. My daughter guessed something was very wrong when I got home. I just said, "There was a man on the beach", and she knew. No one else knows. It has been a long time now, and I handle things better. But I don't tell my friends. I guess I feel anonymous with all of you, so I've let myself tell you the story. I hope it helps someone. It takes will to make that phone call for a therapist. But they can help in a way that family and friends can't . Thanks for listening. Nancree |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
JimLane > wrote:
>BTW, someone showing up at local hospitals with a severely damaged eye >would not be too common. I suspect the police are monitoring for that. > > >jim That's pretty much the only hope of finding him. I'm not sure he's hurt all that bad - we'll have to wait and see. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
nancree wrote:
> Please, please see that your daughter gets counseling. And for > yourself as well. This is not an idle suggestion. I was violently > raped and the after effects were very damaging. I was visiting in St. > Croix, staying at the luxury Hotel Buccaneer. The man I was traveling > with was in the dining room having a business breakfast , and I took a > walk on the beach, 8:15 in the morning. I got to the end of the cove > and was looking over the rocks at some beautiful sea birds. A native > man walked out of the palm trees toward me, big and strong, he held his > arms like a man who lifts weights. He put out his hand as though to > shake mine. I turned and ran into the ocean, but he followed me. The > terror was so strong I could hardly breathe. I couldn't have called for > help, or blown a whistle. He held me under water until I was coughing > and weak. My feet were being badly cut by the sea urchins, but the > fear I was feeling kept me from noticing this till later. He dragged > me back across the sea urchins, the sand, the shrubbery and threw me on > my back. He was very strong and held my arms immobile. When I continued > to struggle he hit me with a rock, in the side of my head, very hard. > (Later it was x-rayed and there was a "spider" fracture). I was > stripped, and the rest followed..I truly felt that I was dying, from > fright, disgust. There were moments when I felt myself almost flip over > into insanity, that my mind would be gone. I almost wanted to die to > stop it. But I forced myself to think this: "I'm not really here .the > real me has left my body. This terrible thing is just happening to my > body, not to me. He was going to hurt me some more, he got rough. > Instinctively I said, "You don't really want to do this. I think you're > too nice a man to do this." Obviously I didn't mean it, but I thought > it might have an effect on him somehow. It did. He let me go. > I was taken to a doctor, a woman, and her first question was "How many > were there?"--so at least I escaped that. She said "It happens on that > beach all the time. > But here's the important part. I was psychologically damaged for > quite a long time. I was unable to make sensible decisions. I allowed > myself to be led into marriage by the man I was with. I knew before > the incident that I didn't want to marry him. I was listless. When I > got home I had several close calls while driving. I was unable to make > decisions. I did finally get some therapy and it slowly helped. I > ended the marriage. It was such a relief. I never told any of my > friends about it. My daughter guessed something was very wrong when I > got home. I just said, "There was a man on the beach", and she knew. > No one else knows. It has been a long time now, and I handle things > better. But I don't tell my friends. I guess I feel anonymous with > all of you, so I've let myself tell you the story. I hope it helps > someone. It takes will to make that phone call for a therapist. But > they can help in a way that family and friends can't . > Thanks for listening. > Nancree > Wow! Sending you {{{{{hugs}}}}}. Being a victim of violence is no fun, speaking from experience. According to the DA, I'm a murder victim as in a loved one was murdered. I got to pick up the pieces, arrange the funeral, clean out the actual victim's appartment, and sit through several days of the trial. It wasn't pleasant.I agree you need to talk these things out. I unsuccessfully tried the counselling. The cousellor wanted to go back to when I was born for Pete's sake without even touching on the violent event. My opinion of her was she was a royal f*ckwad! Sorry to be so blunt but to want to go to the beginning instead of helping the immediate problem, what more can I say. I gave up on her incompetence and turned to DH and my church. With the help of both, I came to a quiet acceptance. On the anniversary date, I still get quite aggitated and very emotional. I still have bad days where the pain is just too much. Again I turn to DH and my church. In a couple of years, the jerk will be up for parole. I intend to be there with my victims impact statement to keep him where he belongs! Once again, I will see his face! Funny, at the first trial, I thought he doesn't look like a monster. Given what he had done, he was. Yet, he looked like a normal person! How dare he! Like you, my friends don't know. I just don't talk about it. A couple of very close friends. They came to the funeral. We just don't talk about it. People are uncomfortable if I mention the murder on the very rare occasion. They get very antsy and very quiet then they act very nervous. I've learned to just keep quiet. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article .com>,
"nancree" > wrote: > I guess I feel anonymous with > all of you, so I've let myself tell you the story. I hope it helps > someone. It takes will to make that phone call for a therapist. But > they can help in a way that family and friends can't . > Thanks for listening. Thank you for being willing to share about your experience. You're right that therapy can really help. It can help with the aftermath of experiences as dramatically horrible as yours and with the aftermath of much more subtle violation which doesn't even pass the bounds of legality, and with everything inbetween. Being someone who loves the person who was victimized can be as traumatic as being the one victimized, in some cases. There is no shame in asking for help. It is one of the bravest things one can do. And it can make all the difference. Priscilla, been there -- "You can't welcome someone into a body of Christ and then say only certain rooms are open." -- dancertm in alt.religion.christian.episcopal |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Serendipity wrote:
[snip] > I just don't talk about it. A couple of very close friends. They > came to the funeral. We just don't talk about it. People are > uncomfortable if I mention the murder on the very rare occasion. > They get very antsy and very quiet then they act very nervous. I've > learned to just keep quiet. They are nervous because they don't know what to say to help, not necessarily because they don't wanna hear about it. (Maybe they don't want to hear about it, but that's a totally different issue and you can't assume anything.) If you don't want to talk about it because you don't want to talk about it, that's fine. If you don't want to talk about it because it makes your friends clam up and act nervous, you are doing them and yourself a disservice. "I've learned to just keep quiet" sounds like you still have a lot to say. Best regards, Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:31:43 -0500 (EST), Lena B Katz
> wrote: > > >On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: > >> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>> That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: >> I thank you for your comments, and your points are noted. She has no >> fear of guns, by the way. She can outshoot me on any given day, as she >> has since she was little. It's embarassing. > >just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more practical >ideas (like sound grenades). > Sorry Lena. If you learn how to use a gun, it is really easy to defend yourself. Stun grenades are a fire hazard. >never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" Point, aim and shoot are instinctive if you are trained >guns are offensive weapons. Many in this country are used for self defense Pan Ohco |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
zxcvbob wrote:
> Serendipity wrote: > [snip] > >> I just don't talk about it. A couple of very close friends. They >> came to the funeral. We just don't talk about it. People are >> uncomfortable if I mention the murder on the very rare occasion. >> They get very antsy and very quiet then they act very nervous. I've >> learned to just keep quiet. > > > > They are nervous because they don't know what to say to help, not > necessarily because they don't wanna hear about it. (Maybe they don't > want to hear about it, but that's a totally different issue and you > can't assume anything.) If you don't want to talk about it because you > don't want to talk about it, that's fine. If you don't want to talk > about it because it makes your friends clam up and act nervous, you are > doing them and yourself a disservice. "I've learned to just keep quiet" > sounds like you still have a lot to say. Hey Bob, I probably have a lot to say on the matter but I don't. I find comfort in cooking. When I have a real bad day, I cook and cook. On days like this, my freezer and fridge as well as anyone close by are well stocked with food. Somehow it eases the pain and soothes the soul  I can't explain it but it does help.> > Best regards, > Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
TheAlligator wrote: > My daughter was attacked yesterday - apparently an attempted rape or > abduction. I responded like a spoiled brat, and have publically > apologized in another group for the filthy, racist statements that I > made. I'm really quite ashamed of myself, and I don't quite know > where it all came from. It's not the way I was raised. Why is it > that we really think we have it all together and then when the chips > are down, we always disappoint ourselves and everyone around us? I'm > feeling pretty damn humble right now, and have a lot of people to > apologize to. Particularly the law enforcement guys, one of which was > wise and kind enough to ignore my statements about killing him to get > to the guy if I had to. I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get you for retaliation, it's predetermined. Feel good that your little girl can take care of herself and not be a victim! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
TheAlligator wrote: > My daughter was attacked yesterday - apparently an attempted rape or > abduction. I responded like a spoiled brat, and have publically > apologized in another group for the filthy, racist statements that I > made. I'm really quite ashamed of myself, and I don't quite know > where it all came from. It's not the way I was raised. Why is it > that we really think we have it all together and then when the chips > are down, we always disappoint ourselves and everyone around us? I'm > feeling pretty damn humble right now, and have a lot of people to > apologize to. Particularly the law enforcement guys, one of which was > wise and kind enough to ignore my statements about killing him to get > to the guy if I had to. I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get you for retaliation, it's predetermined. Feel good that your little girl can take care of herself and not be a victim! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"sf" > wrote:
>I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those >statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on >record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get >you for retaliation, it's predetermined. > >Feel good that your little girl can take care of herself and not be a >victim! > > > No chance of following through. Self-defense is one thing, but murder is out of the question. I think we're all doing pretty well now. She has tried to carefully think over things so that she can drop the latent fear that he could find her. I don't think so. My outlook on a lot of things changed this week. I don't know if it's temporary - I hope not. I found a side of me I don't like very much, and I want that to go away. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: > Lena B Katz > wrote: >> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more practical >> ideas (like sound grenades). >> >> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >> >> lena >> >> guns are offensive weapons. > Nothing personal, but I don't like you very much. You sound like an > idiot. you walk different streets, you learn different lessons. I enjoy passing on a bit of knowledge that I've learned. If you don't want to learn, that's fine with me. but why does a good knowledge of the strategic limitations of a gun make me sound like an idiot? Lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message > ... >> >> >> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >> >>> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>>> That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: >>> I thank you for your comments, and your points are noted. She has no >>> fear of guns, by the way. She can outshoot me on any given day, as she >>> has since she was little. It's embarassing. >> >> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more practical >> ideas (like sound grenades). > > OK. Where do you live that you're able to purchase sound grenades? legally or illegally? ;-) many things are purchasable/makeable outside of the law. But seriously, my speaker system at home could be used as a sonic weapon. It isn't out of the question for any bar to have a similar setup (last minute panic button... everyone goes down, with bleeding ears... but everyone survives.). Smoke bombs and explosives (both of which i'd image are a bit less in need of "setup") can probably be purchased/fashioned relatively easily. Plastic explosives can be made in HS chemistry class. >> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" > > Well....if you don't have awareness of the attack, it probably doesn't > matter what you're being attacked with, or what means of defense you have. A bulletproof vest will probably stop most bullets aimed at your chest. And it really depends on how much awareness you get... someone shooting a cannon at your building is not likely to kill you... but it is a real warning that trouble is on the way. it's hard to have no warning with knives, as they require close contact... someone with a sniper rifle pointed on you probably means you're dead... but people walk away from snipers and ambushes every day. > The trick is to be aware of what's going on around you, and release a > certain energy into that space. That's how many people manage to live > unscathed in certain cities. better to be invisible -- the person no one selects as being interesting. lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lena B Katz" > wrote in message ... > > > On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: > >> Lena B Katz > wrote: >>> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >>> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more >>> practical >>> ideas (like sound grenades). >>> >>> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >>> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >>> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >>> >>> lena >>> >>> guns are offensive weapons. >> Nothing personal, but I don't like you very much. You sound like an >> idiot. > > you walk different streets, you learn different lessons. I enjoy passing > on a bit of knowledge that I've learned. If you don't want to learn, > that's fine with me. > > but why does a good knowledge of the strategic limitations of a gun make > me sound like an idiot? > > Lena (From a different guy) I don't think you're an idiot, but you might need to slow down a bit before you write. 1) "just don't try using guns to defend yourself". That's a silly generalization. 2) You suggest sound grenades. That's ridiculous. If you could get them easily, half the country's teenagers would be deaf by now. 3) Your line of sight comment assumes you have a choice of how you're going to be threatened. And, are you suggesting some sort of weapon that works around corners? 4) If you are, in fact, in a situation where a handgun is your only option, then by definition, you have no choice but to draw the gun and muster everything you've learned from practicing. 5) Your typing gives me a headache. Throw in some capital letters and proper punctuation, for the good of the world. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Pan Ohco wrote: > On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:31:43 -0500 (EST), Lena B Katz > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >> >>> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>>> That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: >>> I thank you for your comments, and your points are noted. She has no >>> fear of guns, by the way. She can outshoot me on any given day, as she >>> has since she was little. It's embarassing. >> >> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more practical >> ideas (like sound grenades). >> > Sorry Lena. If you learn how to use a gun, it is really easy to > defend yourself. not really. you need to be "good" with a gun to defend yourself. be "calm" in the face of danger. and, most of all, you've got to be able to see the other person. If you can see the other person, that was his second mistake. The first was not wounding you severely on the first shot. but, you can find weapons that are more effective against ... more intelligent foes. and you shouldn't assume that the person attacking you is stupid. The reaction of hearing a bullet/gunshot should never be reaching for your gun... it should be "hit the deck" followed shortly thereafter by creating a physical blockade of stuff between you and where the gunshot came from. >> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" > Point, aim and shoot are instinctive if you are trained yeah. but they shouldn't be the only instincts you're trained with... and they're probably not the best instincts, anywhichway. >> guns are offensive weapons. > Many in this country are used for self defense by idiots, fighting idiots. lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > > "TheAlligator" > wrote in message > ... >> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>> Did they catch the guy, or is wandering around minus an eye? >> No, he's still wandering around, and will continue to, if the usual >> Nothing happens, like it seems to around here. I don't know if she >> actually destroyed his eye, but she seems to think so. I'm sure my >> tax dollars will make him well - and around here, it wouldn't surprise >> me if he files a damage suit against us - and WINS, by the way. >> Welcome to Amerika. > > That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: > > > 2) Wait two more years and see if your daughter wants a handgun. Rape > usually does away with any nonsensical thoughts about how evil guns are. oh, to hell with that idea! try this one: get her the kind of purse you can put a 9mm in (it's not big and bulky, it looks like a pagebag). Then teach her how to walk like she's got heat. preventitive medicine, with none of the bad consequences of carrying a concealed weapon. lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: > "sf" > wrote: >> I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those >> statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on >> record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get >> you for retaliation, it's predetermined. >> >> Feel good that your little girl can take care of herself and not be a >> victim! >> >> >> > No chance of following through. Self-defense is one thing, but murder > is out of the question. I think we're all doing pretty well now. She > has tried to carefully think over things so that she can drop the > latent fear that he could find her. I don't think so. My outlook on > a lot of things changed this week. I don't know if it's temporary - I > hope not. I found a side of me I don't like very much, and I want > that to go away. don't try to make it go away. accept it, and set guards against it. to know that there's a part of you that can get unreasonably angry, is, believe it or not, a good thing. provided you deal with it. lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article . com>, "sf"
> wrote: > I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those > statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on > record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get > you for retaliation, it's predetermined. Predetermined? Premeditated. (I thought you're a teacher!) -- -Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> Sweet Potato Follies added 2/24/05. "I read recipes the way I read science fiction: I get to the end and say,'Well, that's not going to happen.'" - Comedian Rita Rudner, performance at New York, New York, January 10, 2005. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Melba's Jammin' > wrote in
: > In article . com>, > "sf" > wrote: > > > I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made > > those statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but > > you're on record now, so if you actually follow through - not only > > will they get you for retaliation, it's predetermined. > > Predetermined? Premeditated. (I thought you're a teacher!) ummm... predetermined they'll (John Law) get him...premeditated if he (the dad) goes after the attacker. Depends on how you read it. I can't spell worth shit, but I can read up a storm! -- No Bread Crumbs were hurt in the making of this Meal. Type 2 Diabetic 1AC 5.6mmol or 101mg/dl Continuing to be Manitoban |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Melba's Jammin' wrote: > In article . com>, "sf" > > wrote: > > > I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those > > statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on > > record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get > > you for retaliation, it's predetermined. > > Predetermined? Premeditated. (I thought you're a teacher!) > -- > -Barb Actually both can apply... PREDETERMINED (exhibited a tendancy, before the fact- threat) and PREMEDITATED (willfully planned and followed through- after the fact). He didn't do anything yet, only implied a threat, so "predetermined" is more correct. Had he actualy made the threat (I seriously doubt it) he would have been held... it's a crime to threaten bodily harm, especialy with all the racist rantings he claims to have made. I don't believe much of the Alligators fercocktah story, way too many holes in it... he never actually says whether the 'perp' was previously known, or not... I have a really big problem with that. Anyone whose Sig. is "Alligator, the other white meat" leaves little doubt in my mind that he is now and has always been a racist... middle aged men don't all of a sudden become racist. Probably his daughter is dating someone of a race of which he doesn't approve and he's angry as hell.. it's pretty safe to act out ones anger anonymously on the net... it's what cowards do. The other Newsgroup where he spends most of his time is one of those fercocktah Survivalist/Supremacist groups. Sheldon |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sheldon" > wrote:
>He didn't do anything yet, only implied a >threat, so "predetermined" is more correct. Had he actualy made the >threat (I seriously doubt it) he would have been held I didn't actually make a threat, or have the intent to, I don't think > I don't believe much of the Alligators fercocktah >story, way too many holes in it... he never actually says whether the >'perp' was previously known, or not I don't care whether you believe me or not - and no, she doesn't know him AFAIK >Anyone whose Sig. is "Alligator, the other white meat" leaves >little doubt in my mind that he is now and has always been a racist... It's supposed to be joke - like "the other yellow meat". Being a foodie and all, I'm sorry that went over your head. Now whose being unreasonably judgemental? >middle aged men don't all of a sudden become racist. No they don't - butwhatever latent amount of it we wish hadn't been put there comes out when we least expect it or want it. >The other Newsgroup where he >spends most of his time is one of those fercocktah >Survivalist/Supremacist groups. It is supposed to be survivalism as in taking care of yourself and your family. As in sort of an extension of what is discussed here - food and lots of common sense stuff. At least that's what it used to be. I THOUGHT a lot of things I shouldn't have, too - this is not an isolated incident of this nature (well, not this exact nature), although certainly by far the worst. All of them added together ina short period of time get a little old. By the way, I think the supremacist type have only become common as of late. In general they're tolerated but you;'ll very little positive response to the aluminum foil hat crowd. But it is usenet, and they have a right to say what they want too. There's a lot of nice people there, but if you hang out too long you start talking a little crazy. That's the stuff I have been talking about not liking so much. I already said I apologized there too, and probably have a lot more to be sorry about, but sometimes you got to just move on. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > > "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message > ... >> >> >> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >> >>> Lena B Katz > wrote: >>>> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >>>> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more >>>> practical >>>> ideas (like sound grenades). >>>> >>>> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >>>> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >>>> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >>>> >>>> lena >>>> >>>> guns are offensive weapons. >>> Nothing personal, but I don't like you very much. You sound like an >>> idiot. >> >> you walk different streets, you learn different lessons. I enjoy passing >> on a bit of knowledge that I've learned. If you don't want to learn, >> that's fine with me. >> >> but why does a good knowledge of the strategic limitations of a gun make >> me sound like an idiot? >> >> Lena > > (From a different guy) > I don't think you're an idiot, but you might need to slow down a bit before > you write. Or, maybe try thinking a bit before hitting send. ;-) > 1) "just don't try using guns to defend yourself". That's a silly > generalization. Not really. With guns, the hunter always has the advantage. If, say, someone was breaking into your house, and you had a blind (of some sort...), you'd be the hunter. If someone's already drawn a weapon on you, chances are you'd be better off dealing with that without use of a gun (believe it or not, but people with knives can cut you quicker than you can draw a gun... close range for knives is about six feet (That's assuming a 5 second draw-aim-shoot time. Yes, with extensive practice in the art of quickdraw, you can get it down lower.) If you are in the situation of close combat, it pays more to know vulnerabilities and how to exploit them. And it pays to fight dirty. > 2) You suggest sound grenades. That's ridiculous. If you could get them > easily, half the country's teenagers would be deaf by now. Who says they aren't? I'd imagine most teenagers suffer from at least temporary hearing loss. And getting something "easily" is a different idea than getting something because it is _necessary_. > 3) Your line of sight comment assumes you have a choice of how you're going > to be threatened. Depending on where you go, and what you do, you can gauge likelihood of various criminal elements trying to kill you. You can also gauge likelihood of weapon, attack posture (ambush, mugging, barfight), etc. > And, are you suggesting some sort of weapon that works > around corners? Smokebombs do. Sound grenades do. Explosives do. There are many defensive weapons; just as there are many offensive weapons. > 4) If you are, in fact, in a situation where a handgun is your only option, > then by definition, you have no choice but to draw the gun and muster > everything you've learned from practicing. There is no situation where a handgun is your "only" option. You still have options like "charging the person" or "physically disarming them by taking a knife in the arm". There are very few times when using a handgun is the "best" option. > 5) Your typing gives me a headache. Throw in some capital letters and proper > punctuation, for the good of the world. Believe it or not, I'm not trying to give you a headache. Hope this helps! lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
TheAlligator wrote: > "Sheldon" > wrote: [snip] > >The other Newsgroup where he > >spends most of his time is one of those fercocktah > >Survivalist/Supremacist groups. > It is supposed to be survivalism as in taking care of yourself and > your family. As in sort of an extension of what is discussed here - > food and lots of common sense stuff. At least that's what it used to > be. [snip] By the way, I think the > supremacist type have only become common as of late. In general > they're tolerated but you;'ll very little positive response to the > aluminum foil hat crowd. But it is usenet, and they have a right to > say what they want too. There's a lot of nice people there, but if > you hang out too long you start talking a little crazy. That's the > stuff I have been talking about not liking so much. I already said I > apologized there too, and probably have a lot more to be sorry about, > but sometimes you got to just move on. I went and took a look at that group. I'm glad you didn't post here what you did there. Problem is, you got responses there that supported the worst of what you said, and even took it further. There are some seriously f***ed up people there. -aem |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lena B Katz wrote:
[snip] > >> you walk different streets, you learn different lessons. I enjoy > >> passing on a bit of knowledge that I've learned. [snip] What you're enjoying here is a rich fantasy, and I encourage you to pursue it in the real world. Weapons and self-defense are even more fascinating when you begin to learn something about them. -aem |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"aem" > wrote:
>I went and took a look at that group. I'm glad you didn't post here >what you did there. Problem is, you got responses there that supported >the worst of what you said, and even took it further. There are some >seriously f***ed up people there. > >-aem > But there are also some seriously good ones, too. I know - I said this wasn't an isolated incident, and it became more common over the last few months. If you were able to piece it all together, you'd see that some of the horrible things I have said were in a very heated exchange, or is followed up by me - not exactly apologizing - but elaborating in a calmer manner. A note to Sheldon - I like reading your stuff, and I really don't mean this in a bad way, only as a question: Have you thought back to some of the foul, disgusting things you have said to and about people on occasion. You are obviously, for whatever reason, not yourself when that happens. I don't hold it against you, and it'd be nice to get the same from you. Or not - whatever you want. I have reasons, although not good ones, for why I keep snapping about stuff. One is dealing with a medical problem, but it's no excuse. There are good arguments that end up productive there, sometimes. But it's no excuse to use whatever reasons you think you have to spew hate about some thing or group, when it's not even necessary to the discussion. I believe I have admitted this, said I don't like it, and am at least doing something about it. A lot more things have happened in the last few days than what I've said. Some of it very good, and I hope it works. I'm sorry this ever started to begin with, but it has also been part of the solution. Let's get back to food. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, x-no-archive: yes
wrote: (snip) > I'm sorry this ever started to begin with, but it has also been part > of the solution. > Let's get back to food. Fat free yogurt sucks. -- -Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> Sweet Potato Follies added 2/24/05. "I read recipes the way I read science fiction: I get to the end and say,'Well, that's not going to happen.'" - Comedian Rita Rudner, performance at New York, New York, January 10, 2005. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article >, x-no-archive: yes > wrote: > > Let's get back to food. > > Fat free yogurt sucks. > -- Not in this recipe. Here, it contributes to making a cornbread that is firm enough to hold together against chili. It comes from Sunset magazine and is attributed to Victoria Modarresi, Tucson. 1 cup all purpose flour 1 cup yellow cornmeal 1/4 cup sugar 1 tsp baking soda 3/4 tsp salt 1 cup plain nonfat yogurt [room temp] 2 large eggs [room temp] Preheat oven to 400=B0F. Mix dry ingredients in a bowl. Add yogurt, mix eggs slightly and add them, mix just until blended. Pour into a buttered 8-inch cast iron frying pan. Bake 20 to 25 minutes, until top springs back when gently pressed in the=20 center. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Melba's Jammin' > wrote:
>Fat free yogurt sucks. >-- >-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> Sweet Potato Follies added 2/24/05. >"I read recipes the way I read science fiction: I get to the end and >say,'Well, that's not going to happen.'" - Comedian Rita Rudner, >performance at New York, New York, January 10, 2005. By the way, I didn't ignore your ping - I just saw it after I already had something in motion. Thanks, though. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lena B Katz" > wrote in message ... > > > On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > >> "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message >> ... >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >>> >>>> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>>>> That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: >>>> I thank you for your comments, and your points are noted. She has no >>>> fear of guns, by the way. She can outshoot me on any given day, as she >>>> has since she was little. It's embarassing. >>> >>> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >>> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more >>> practical >>> ideas (like sound grenades). >> >> OK. Where do you live that you're able to purchase sound grenades? > > legally or illegally? ;-) many things are purchasable/makeable outside of > the law. > > But seriously, my speaker system at home could be used as a sonic weapon. > It isn't out of the question for any bar to have a similar setup (last > minute panic button... everyone goes down, with bleeding ears... but > everyone survives.). > > Smoke bombs and explosives (both of which i'd image are a bit less in need > of "setup") can probably be purchased/fashioned relatively easily. > > Plastic explosives can be made in HS chemistry class. > >>> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >>> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >>> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >> >> Well....if you don't have awareness of the attack, it probably doesn't >> matter what you're being attacked with, or what means of defense you >> have. > > A bulletproof vest will probably stop most bullets aimed at your chest. > > And it really depends on how much awareness you get... someone shooting a > cannon at your building is not likely to kill you... but it is a real > warning that trouble is on the way. > > it's hard to have no warning with knives, as they require close contact... > > someone with a sniper rifle pointed on you probably means you're dead... > but people walk away from snipers and ambushes every day. > >> The trick is to be aware of what's going on around you, and release a >> certain energy into that space. That's how many people manage to live >> unscathed in certain cities. > > better to be invisible -- the person no one selects as being interesting. > > lena OK..now I understand. I thought you were being serious. Never mind. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lena B Katz" > wrote in message
... > > > On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > >> >> "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message >> ... >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >>> >>>> Lena B Katz > wrote: >>>>> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad >>>>> idea. >>>>> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more >>>>> practical >>>>> ideas (like sound grenades). >>>>> >>>>> never try to defend yourself with something that requires >>>>> line-of-sight. >>>>> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >>>>> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >>>>> >>>>> lena >>>>> >>>>> guns are offensive weapons. >>>> Nothing personal, but I don't like you very much. You sound like an >>>> idiot. >>> >>> you walk different streets, you learn different lessons. I enjoy >>> passing >>> on a bit of knowledge that I've learned. If you don't want to learn, >>> that's fine with me. >>> >>> but why does a good knowledge of the strategic limitations of a gun make >>> me sound like an idiot? >>> >>> Lena >> >> (From a different guy) >> I don't think you're an idiot, but you might need to slow down a bit >> before >> you write. > > Or, maybe try thinking a bit before hitting send. ;-) > >> 1) "just don't try using guns to defend yourself". That's a silly >> generalization. > > Not really. With guns, the hunter always has the advantage. If, say, > someone was breaking into your house, and you had a blind (of some > sort...), you'd be the hunter. If someone's already drawn a weapon on > you, chances are you'd be better off dealing with that without use of a > gun (believe it or not, but people with knives can cut you quicker than > you can draw a gun... close range for knives is about six feet (That's > assuming a 5 second draw-aim-shoot time. Yes, with extensive practice in > the art of quickdraw, you can get it down lower.) If it takes you 5 seconds to draw a carry piece and use it, you have bigger problems than the situation you're in at the moment. I can do it in 2 seconds, as can most of the participants of the civilian pistol gatherings I attend every now and then at my gun club. We're shooting at 8-1/2 x 11" targets from 50', and drawing from inside typical outerwear. You might want to look at the second hand on a watch as it ticks through 5 seconds. >> 2) You suggest sound grenades. That's ridiculous. If you could get them >> easily, half the country's teenagers would be deaf by now. > > Who says they aren't? I'd imagine most teenagers suffer from at least > temporary hearing loss. > > And getting something "easily" is a different idea than getting something > because it is _necessary_. That's a sweet thing to say, but generally speaking, nobody can get those things, nor would they want to carry them. If they did, they wouldn't be trained in their proper use. And, it might be tricky asking an attacker if he could please stand downwind of you. >> And, are you suggesting some sort of weapon that works >> around corners? > > Smokebombs do. Sound grenades do. Explosives do. There are many > defensive weapons; just as there are many offensive weapons. You are watching too many movies. The things you've mentioned would be absurd options for civilian self defense. >> 4) If you are, in fact, in a situation where a handgun is your only >> option, >> then by definition, you have no choice but to draw the gun and muster >> everything you've learned from practicing. > > There is no situation where a handgun is your "only" option. You still > have options like "charging the person" or "physically disarming them by > taking a knife in the arm". There are very few times when using a handgun > is the "best" option. In some instances, an attacker or intruder makes a clear request to be killed. It is your civic duty to oblige. I hope I never have to, but things happen, you know? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lena B Katz" > wrote in message ... > > > On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Pan Ohco wrote: > >> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:31:43 -0500 (EST), Lena B Katz >> > wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >>> >>>> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>>>> That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: >>>> I thank you for your comments, and your points are noted. She has no >>>> fear of guns, by the way. She can outshoot me on any given day, as she >>>> has since she was little. It's embarassing. >>> >>> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad idea. >>> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more >>> practical >>> ideas (like sound grenades). >>> >> Sorry Lena. If you learn how to use a gun, it is really easy to >> defend yourself. > > not really. you need to be "good" with a gun to defend yourself. be > "calm" in the face of danger. and, most of all, you've got to be able to > see the other person. > > If you can see the other person, that was his second mistake. The first > was not wounding you severely on the first shot. > > but, you can find weapons that are more effective against ... more > intelligent foes. and you shouldn't assume that the person attacking you > is stupid. > > The reaction of hearing a bullet/gunshot should never be reaching for your > gun... it should be "hit the deck" followed shortly thereafter by creating > a physical blockade of stuff between you and where the gunshot came from. > >>> never try to defend yourself with something that requires line-of-sight. >>> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >>> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >> Point, aim and shoot are instinctive if you are trained > > yeah. but they shouldn't be the only instincts you're trained with... and > they're probably not the best instincts, anywhichway. > >>> guns are offensive weapons. >> Many in this country are used for self defense > > by idiots, fighting idiots. > > lena Someone who drops an intruder in their home in the middle of the night is a "fighting idiot"??? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lena B Katz" > wrote in message ... > > > On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > >> >> "TheAlligator" > wrote in message >> ... >>> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: >>>> Did they catch the guy, or is wandering around minus an eye? >>> No, he's still wandering around, and will continue to, if the usual >>> Nothing happens, like it seems to around here. I don't know if she >>> actually destroyed his eye, but she seems to think so. I'm sure my >>> tax dollars will make him well - and around here, it wouldn't surprise >>> me if he files a damage suit against us - and WINS, by the way. >>> Welcome to Amerika. >> >> That last comment is the best reason of all to do one or both of: >> >> >> 2) Wait two more years and see if your daughter wants a handgun. Rape >> usually does away with any nonsensical thoughts about how evil guns are. > > oh, to hell with that idea! > > try this one: get her the kind of purse you can put a 9mm in (it's not > big and bulky, it looks like a pagebag). Then teach her how to walk like > she's got heat. > > preventitive medicine, with none of the bad consequences of carrying a > concealed weapon. > > lena What bad consequences? If you have 50 acquaintances, I'll bet 20 carry concealed, legally, and you have no awareness of it. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"TheAlligator" > wrote in message
... > "sf" > wrote: >>I think you racted like a loving father. Unfortunately, you made those >>statements in front of John Law. They reacted kindly... but you're on >>record now, so if you actually follow through - not only will they get >>you for retaliation, it's predetermined. Premeditated....if the *******'s body is found. If it is, it means you haven't been doing your homework. Go to Blockbuster and rent seasons 1 & 2 of "The Sopranos". There will be a quiz. :-) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message ... > In article >, x-no-archive: yes > wrote: > (snip) >> I'm sorry this ever started to begin with, but it has also been part >> of the solution. >> Let's get back to food. > > Fat free yogurt sucks. FF cheese and cream cheese, too. Whoever invented them should have his pee-pee whacked with a metal ruler. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Doug Kanter wrote:
> "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message > ... > >>In article >, x-no-archive: yes >>wrote: >>(snip) >> >>>I'm sorry this ever started to begin with, but it has also been part >>>of the solution. >>>Let's get back to food. >> >>Fat free yogurt sucks. > > > FF cheese and cream cheese, too. Whoever invented them should have his > pee-pee whacked with a metal ruler. > > Anyone who would invent fat-free sour creme might *like* getting whacked with a metal ruler. Best regards, Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message > ... >> >> >> On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: >> >>> >>> "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message >>> ... >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lena B Katz > wrote: >>>>>> just don't try using guns to defend yourself... it is _such_ a bad >>>>>> idea. >>>>>> if people want to use stuff to defend themselves, there are more >>>>>> practical >>>>>> ideas (like sound grenades). >>>>>> >>>>>> never try to defend yourself with something that requires >>>>>> line-of-sight. >>>>>> in most situations, you're lucky if you have _awareness_ of an attack, >>>>>> before it occurs, let alone time enough to "point, aim, shoot" >>>>>> >>>>>> lena >>>>>> >>>>>> guns are offensive weapons. >>>>> Nothing personal, but I don't like you very much. You sound like an >>>>> idiot. >>>> >>>> you walk different streets, you learn different lessons. I enjoy >>>> passing >>>> on a bit of knowledge that I've learned. If you don't want to learn, >>>> that's fine with me. >>>> >>>> but why does a good knowledge of the strategic limitations of a gun make >>>> me sound like an idiot? >>>> >>>> Lena >>> >>> (From a different guy) >>> I don't think you're an idiot, but you might need to slow down a bit >>> before >>> you write. >> >> Or, maybe try thinking a bit before hitting send. ;-) >> >>> 1) "just don't try using guns to defend yourself". That's a silly >>> generalization. >> >> Not really. With guns, the hunter always has the advantage. If, say, >> someone was breaking into your house, and you had a blind (of some >> sort...), you'd be the hunter. If someone's already drawn a weapon on >> you, chances are you'd be better off dealing with that without use of a >> gun (believe it or not, but people with knives can cut you quicker than >> you can draw a gun... close range for knives is about six feet (That's >> assuming a 5 second draw-aim-shoot time. Yes, with extensive practice in >> the art of quickdraw, you can get it down lower.) > > If it takes you 5 seconds to draw a carry piece and use it, you have bigger > problems than the situation you're in at the moment. I can do it in 2 > seconds, as can most of the participants of the civilian pistol gatherings I > attend every now and then at my gun club. We're shooting at 8-1/2 x 11" > targets from 50', and drawing from inside typical outerwear. > > You might want to look at the second hand on a watch as it ticks through 5 > seconds. Order of magnitude approximation? What kind of holsters are you using, btw? >>> 2) You suggest sound grenades. That's ridiculous. If you could get them >>> easily, half the country's teenagers would be deaf by now. >> >> Who says they aren't? I'd imagine most teenagers suffer from at least >> temporary hearing loss. >> >> And getting something "easily" is a different idea than getting something >> because it is _necessary_. > > That's a sweet thing to say, but generally speaking, nobody can get those > things, nor would they want to carry them. If they did, they wouldn't be > trained in their proper use. And, it might be tricky asking an attacker if > he could please stand downwind of you. Generally speaking you can get whatever you want. It just depends on how much effort you want to expend to acquire it. Hell, you could probably get a fully automatic rifle (yeah, i know people who have them. For bear hunting, presumably). You can get training in most things, including proper use of grenades, smoke bombs, and explosives. Hell, they teach those skills to thirteen year olds, last I checked (when they said boot camp, they meant it). Using smoke bombs outside of urban combat is just idiotic. But putting up a strawman is idiotic too. >>> And, are you suggesting some sort of weapon that works >>> around corners? >> >> Smokebombs do. Sound grenades do. Explosives do. There are many >> defensive weapons; just as there are many offensive weapons. > > You are watching too many movies. The things you've mentioned would be > absurd options for civilian self defense. Not at all. So you're telling me you've got a better solution to twelve year olds on motorcycles with assault rifles shooting your family? (here's a hint-- think "caltrops"). >>> 4) If you are, in fact, in a situation where a handgun is your only >>> option, >>> then by definition, you have no choice but to draw the gun and muster >>> everything you've learned from practicing. >> >> There is no situation where a handgun is your "only" option. You still >> have options like "charging the person" or "physically disarming them by >> taking a knife in the arm". There are very few times when using a handgun >> is the "best" option. > > In some instances, an attacker or intruder makes a clear request to be > killed. It is your civic duty to oblige. I hope I never have to, but things > happen, you know? No thief wants to meet someone in the house. Bothering them is asking for a panicked person. While a panicked person with a knife or gun is probably less dangerous than a panicked person with a car, you're better off just leaving. lena |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: > > "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message > ... >> >> >> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Doug Kanter wrote: >> >>> "Lena B Katz" > wrote in message >>> ... >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, TheAlligator wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Doug Kanter" > wrote: > OK..now I understand. I thought you were being serious. Never mind. I am being serious. Perhaps I've just been in more serious danger than you. 1. I've been followed home, by about five people, in a rather deserted urban area. 2. I've been in a building where someone shot a cannon at it. (It's called the Cathedral of Learning... ever heard of it? Yeah, it made the news.) 3. I've regularly worked in places where there are week-old bloodstains on the streets, and evidence of drive-by shootings. Not to mention the liquor-scented stench of lost hope. Lena what, you mean you've never lost power because someone(*cough* Petek *cough*) has been playing with the laser too much? or lost power because someone was shooting a superconducting railgun? man, you missed _everything_! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In rec.food.cooking, Lena B Katz > wrote:
> Not at all. So you're telling me you've got a better solution to twelve > year olds on motorcycles with assault rifles shooting your family? I have not yet found that my neighborhood twelve year olds ride motorcycles. Much less shoot guns. Much less assault rifles. If it were a common enough phenomenon that I was worried about it, I think I'd move, rather than buying illegal grenades and carrying them around. But maybe you like your methods better. -- In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. -- Dwight David Eisenhower |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lena B Katz wrote:
>>> >>> Smokebombs do. Sound grenades do. Explosives do. There are many >>> defensive weapons; just as there are many offensive weapons. >> And possession of such explosive devices is a felony. I'd rather take my chances with a perfectly legal carbine or shotgun. If I lived in Great Britain, where all weapons are illegal anyway, I might entertain the idea of grenades. >> >> You are watching too many movies. The things you've mentioned would be >> absurd options for civilian self defense. > > > Not at all. So you're telling me you've got a better solution to twelve > year olds on motorcycles with assault rifles shooting your family? > (here's a hint-- think "caltrops"). > Where are these 12 year olds getting fully-automatic machine guns? That's what an assault rifle* technically is; a machine gun with selective fire (switchable between full automatic and semi automatic) chambered for a low-powered rifle cartridge -- but more powerful than the hot pistol cartidges used by a submachine gun. > > No thief wants to meet someone in the house. Bothering them is asking > for a panicked person. It depends who has "the drop" on whom. And how did we transition from attempted rape to robbery to burglary? Rape and robbery are violent crimes and burglary is not. You switched the perp from a rapist or robber to a thief in order to paint the homeowner defending his/her family as the aggressor. Shame on you. Best regards, Bob * "Assault weapon" is a media hype term for a gun that looks particularly evil; especially if it rather looks like an assault rifle. It doesn't really have a technical definition, but is supposed to conjure up a terrifying image of a light-weight machine gun firing full-powered rifle cartridges with armor-piercing bullets. In fact, most of these so-called "assault weapons" fire rather anemic rifle cartridges or are chambered for pistol cartridges. In some states they are legal for hunting deer, and in some states they are not powerful enough to legally hunt any big game. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Crhistians attacked for christmas | General Cooking | |||
| In California, wave a U.S. flag and be attacked by foreigners who snuck into the country illegally | General Cooking | |||
| Man attacked by Omulet causes New Orleans disaster | General Cooking | |||
| A Coffee-Monster attacked me | Coffee | |||
Linear Mode
