 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
weasle
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 08:52 pm |
|
| they will cange their minds after a few criminals break into their homes , and pass the word around that a gun wont go off, when ya beak in. that is stupid . think NYC has the same law ,and they got a high crime rate.
|
zippo
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 08:47 pm |
|
We have concealed carry here. It passed a couple of years ago.
San Franciso should start its own country. The Liberal Socialist Republic of the Bay Area
|
Mikey
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 08:20 pm |
|
Dave wrote: Can't believe that they actually approved this one. Hope the Circus Court Of Appeals comes to their senses on this one. It's going to end up in the courts...
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Voters in famously liberal San Francisco overwhelmingly approved measures banning handguns and encouraging schools to keep military recruiters off campus, according to election results on Wednesday.
With 100 percent of precincts reporting results from Tuesday's election, Measure H, which prohibits San Franciscans from owning handguns and bans the sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, passed with 57.9 percent of the vote.
The National Rifle Association said the measure's passage would prove a "hollow victory" for gun control activists and that it would file a lawsuit challenging the measure.
"Lawful residents of San Francisco are being stripped of their freedom because of an illegal measure that defies common sense. We will fight this outrageous assault on the rights of law-abiding San Franciscans and I believe that we will prevail," association vice-president Wayne LaPierre said in statement.
Measure I, a largely symbolic "declaration of policy that the people of San Francisco oppose the federal government's use of public schools to recruit students for service in the military," passed with 59.7 percent of votes.
The measure will have no effect on military recruiters as they are allowed on school grounds under federal law, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Defense. - Reuters -
I saw that on the news...is that right??..they are outlawing you from having a handgun in your own home also???? People better wake up in a hurry on that one..Here in WI it is looking like they finally will have enuf votes to pass the concealed carry bill..allowing us to legally conceal our handguns..There is no law against openly carrying..but you will be arrested for menacing..
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 07:43 pm |
|
Can't believe that they actually approved this one. Hope the Circus Court Of Appeals comes to their senses on this one. It's going to end up in the courts...
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Voters in famously liberal San Francisco overwhelmingly approved measures banning handguns and encouraging schools to keep military recruiters off campus, according to election results on Wednesday.
With 100 percent of precincts reporting results from Tuesday's election, Measure H, which prohibits San Franciscans from owning handguns and bans the sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, passed with 57.9 percent of the vote.
The National Rifle Association said the measure's passage would prove a "hollow victory" for gun control activists and that it would file a lawsuit challenging the measure.
"Lawful residents of San Francisco are being stripped of their freedom because of an illegal measure that defies common sense. We will fight this outrageous assault on the rights of law-abiding San Franciscans and I believe that we will prevail," association vice-president Wayne LaPierre said in statement.
Measure I, a largely symbolic "declaration of policy that the people of San Francisco oppose the federal government's use of public schools to recruit students for service in the military," passed with 59.7 percent of votes.
The measure will have no effect on military recruiters as they are allowed on school grounds under federal law, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Defense. - Reuters -
|
Babe
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 07:20 pm |
|
Ok Zippo n Abo.....I think you guys should protest! I will donate the signs for ya!!
|
Abo
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 06:24 pm |
|
| Hey man. Zippo your right. " LET THOES PUPPYS BREATHE". Ride Free Abo
|
zippo
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 05:57 pm |
|
Babe wrote: Ok Dave...remember YOU brought this one up...lol NOT Randy's fault this time...
The whole padded bra thing......ok that's all fine for small chested women, great give them a boost. What I cant understand, is why the heck they pad bras for larger breasted women??!!! I am totally convinced that:
1. Men invented bras!!
2. Men decided to PAD the damn things!
Ok...and who decided they should classify cup sizes as letters?(A,B,C,D) whatever happened to good ole fashioned small, medium, large, extra large, and "holy crap look at that rack!!" ????
Where the heck is Andy now to find all these answers for me?? ANDY!!!
lol
Wrongo boob breath, men would never want em covered up!
|
Babe
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 05:22 pm |
|
Ok Dave...remember YOU brought this one up...lol NOT Randy's fault this time...
The whole padded bra thing......ok that's all fine for small chested women, great give them a boost. What I cant understand, is why the heck they pad bras for larger breasted women??!!! I am totally convinced that:
1. Men invented bras!!
2. Men decided to PAD the damn things!
Ok...and who decided they should classify cup sizes as letters?(A,B,C,D) whatever happened to good ole fashioned small, medium, large, extra large, and "holy crap look at that rack!!" ????
Where the heck is Andy now to find all these answers for me?? ANDY!!!
lol
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 04:49 pm |
|
What will they think of next?
Japanese Lingerie Maker Unveils Heated Bra For Winter
POSTED: 7:55 am PST November 10, 2005
TOKYO -- The Japanese government wants workers to dress warmly this winter and save energy. And a Japanese company is giving an unusual lift to that campaign.
Government leaders have been promoting their "Warm Biz" drive nationwide. Now Triumph International is offering the Warm Biz Bra that the company said will add "a little fun and chic to office wear." (Click here to see photo of bra.)
The bra has removable pads that can be heated in a microwave or hot water. It also features long, furry straps that wrap around the neck, like a scarf. There also are matching shorts.
The company said the material helps save warmth, thus cutting down on the need to turn up the heat.
And then there was this...
Chinese Are Serious About Building Better Bras
POSTED: 4:59 am PST November 10, 2005
BAGUALING, China -- The Chinese are serious about building a better bra.
There's now a degree in bra studies at Hong Kong's Polytechnic University. And China's biggest lingerie manufacturer, Top Form, has a bra lab at its factory. The company makes more than 60 million bras a year for well-known labels such as Victoria's Secret, Playtex and Maidenform.
The Wall Street Journal reports Top Form has been experimenting with various types of padding to give the bust a boost.
They've tried air, but like tires it was prone to flats. Oil-filled pads were too expensive and heavy.
Now, the company is trying a filling made from a thin type of fiberfill, the stuffing used in ski parkas.
Last edited on Thu Nov 10th, 2005 04:50 pm by Dave |
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Nov 10th, 2005 11:22 am |
|
Anytime that gas prices have gone up more than a few cents in that short of period of time, the politicians make a show of it and demand answers. This is nothing new and I really don't expect anything more than a "Dog and Pony" show out of the whole thing.
It's really nothing more than a distraction from something else that we really should be watching. Who knows what else they're doing and this is getting more publicity?
Oh Yeah, did I mention that Barbara Boxer is an idiot?
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 07:16 pm |
|
zippo wrote:
Here is a more complete article. A 7.7% margin ain't shabby, but it sure isn't gouging. Sure the revenues are high, the market for oil is growing, but revenue is just one side of the equation, the other is cost. Most places define profit margin as (revenue-cost)/revenue.
Boxer is a kick, who the hell said the executives should sacrifice, what the hell did she sacrifice? This is all political posturing for elections.
Gotta remember Barbara Boxer, is an idiot...
Last edited on Wed Nov 9th, 2005 07:16 pm by Dave |
zippo
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 07:04 pm |
|
Here is a more complete article. A 7.7% margin ain't shabby, but it sure isn't gouging. Sure the revenues are high, the market for oil is growing, but revenue is just one side of the equation, the other is cost. Most places define profit margin as (revenue-cost)/revenue.
Boxer is a kick, who the hell said the executives should sacrifice, what the hell did she sacrifice? This is all political posturing for elections.
Oil Company Execs Defend Huge Profits
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
document.write(getElapsed("20051109T182657Z"));
19 minutes agoUPDATED 3 MINUTES AGO
WASHINGTON - The chiefs of five major oil companies defended the industry's huge profits Wednesday at a Senate hearing where they were exhorted to explain prices and assure customers they're not being gouged.
There is a "growing suspicion that oil companies are taking unfair advantage," Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said, opening the hearing in a packed committee room.
"The oil companies owe the American people an explanation," he declared.
Lee Raymond, chairman of Exxon Mobil Corp., said he recognizes that high gasoline prices "have put a strain on Americans' household budgets" but he defended his company's huge profits, saying petroleum earnings "go up and down" from year to year.
ExxonMobil, the worlds' largest privately owned oil company, earned nearly $10 billion in the third quarter. Raymond was joined at the witness table by the chief executives of Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BPAmerica and Shell Oil USA.
Together the companies earned more than $25 billion in profits in the July-September quarter as the price of crude oil hit $70 a barrel and gasoline surged to record levels after the disruptions of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Raymond said the profits are in line with other industries when earnings are compared to the industry's enormous revenues.
But senators pressed Raymond to explain why in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina some ExxonMobil gas station operators complained the company had raised the wholesale price of its gas by 24 cents a gallon in 24 hours. Is that not price gouging? they asked.
Raymond said he could not confirm the specific price increase, but that ExxonMobil had issued a directive in response to the storm disruptions "to minimize the increase in price while at the same time recognizing if we kept the price too low we would quickly run out (of fuel) at the service stations."
"It was a tough balancing act," said Raymond, who said it was not price gouging.
Democrats had wanted the executives to testify under oath, but Republicans rejected the idea. "If I were a witness I would demand to be put under oath," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii. The soaring prices have sent shivers through a Congress worried about political fallout.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., made the issue personal, noting that the executives were reaping multimillion-dollar bonuses on top of multimillion-dollar salaries as "working people struggle" to pay for gasoline and face the specter of soaring home heating bills this winter. "Your sacrifice appears to be nothing," Boxer told the executives.
The head of the National Association of Manufacturers, former Michigan Gov. John Engler, criticized lawmakers for the way they handled the hearing.
"Demagoguery and demonization will not reduce energy prices or solve supply problems in the long run," he said. "Our energy supply and infrastructure have suffered from 25 years of increasingly restrictive government policies that have made it almost impossible to access and refine the resources we have. The Senate should dispense with the theatrics and get serious about Americas energy supply."
The White House said that President Bush, too, is concerned about energy prices.
"Energy prices have been too high and energy companies have realized significant increases in profits," said spokesman Scott McClellan. "It's important that the private sector be good corporate citizens and invest in the energy infrastructure and support those who are in need."
A number of Democrats, joined by a few Republicans, have called for a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
Domenici said he opposes such a move, saying "it didn't work before and probably won't work again." The government imposed taxes on oil company windfall profits in the 1970s, resulting in a drop in investment in oil development.
The executives hoped to dampen any further momentum for calls for taxing windfall oil company profits, something still viewed as a longshot but also no longer out of the question. Such a tax could inhibit investment in refineries or oil exploration and production, the industry argues.
James Mulva, chairman of ConocoPhillips, said "we are ready open our records" to dispute allegations of price gouging. ConocoPhillips earned $3.8 billion in the third quarter, an 89 percent increase over a year earlier. But he said that represents only a 7.7 percent profit margin for every dollar of sales. "We do not consider that a windfall," said Mulva.
Raymond cautioned against Congress imposing "punitive measures, hastily crafted" _ an apparent reference to windfall profits taxes _ and suggested that they would inhibit investment in domestic energy projects. Both Republicans and Democrats have urged the companies to use more of their profits to build refineries and other energy projects.
David O'Reilly, chairman of Chevron, attributed the high energy prices to tight supplies even before the Gulf hurricanes hit and said his company is "investing aggressively in the development of new energy supplies."
The oil executives said their companies spend tens of billions of dollars in investments.
Shell earned $9 billion in the third quarter, said John Hofmeister, president of Shell Oil Co., but he said over the last five years the company's investment in U.S. operations was equal to its income from U.S. sales.
The oil industry's record third-quarter profits _ at a time when motorists were reeling from unprecedentedly high gasoline costs and warned of huge heating bills this winter _ have caught the attention of both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Some analysts predict the 29 largest oil companies will earn $96 billion this year.
|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 05:57 pm |
|
Oil Company Executives Defend Profits
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
The chiefs of five major oil companies defended the industry's huge profits Wednesday at a Senate hearing where lawmakers said they should explain prices and assure people they're not being gouged.
There is a "growing suspicion that oil companies are taking unfair advantage," Sen. Pete Domenici (news, bio, voting record), R-N.M., said as the hearing opened in a packed Senate committee room.
"The oil companies owe the country an explanation," he said.
Lee Raymond, chairman of Exxon Mobil Corp., said he recognizes that high gasoline prices "have put a strain on Americans' household budgets" but he defended his companies huge profits, saying petroleum earnings "go up and down" from year to year.
ExxonMobil, the worlds' largest privately owned oil company, earned nearly $10 billion in the third quarter. Raymond was joined at the witness table by the chief executives of Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BPAmerica and Shell Oil USA.
Together the companies earned more than $25 billion in profits in the July-September quarter as the price of crude oil hit $70 a barrel and gasoline surged to record levels after the disruptions of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Raymond said the profits are in line with other industries when profits are compared to the industry's enormous revenues.
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1834 |
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 04:28 pm |
|
zippo wrote: empty wrote: Yup. Is that a rag on that cat's head? Musta been hanging out behind a 7-11 Osama Ben Pussy! Very dangerous, likes to blow up wiener dawgs.
You can mess up a perfectly good wiener dog doin' stuff like that.
|
zippo
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 04:19 pm |
|
empty wrote: Yup. Is that a rag on that cat's head? Musta been hanging out behind a 7-11 Osama Ben Pussy! Very dangerous, likes to blow up wiener dawgs.
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1834 |
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 02:30 pm |
|
| Yup. Is that a rag on that cat's head? Musta been hanging out behind a 7-11
|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 02:15 pm |
|
| Yup....LOL....
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 01:54 pm |
|
Can ya'all see the picture now?
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1834 |
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 01:40 pm |
|
marc wrote: weasle wrote: shit i aint gettin nothing but a red X Me too.... I thought that red x was the cat's disguise.
|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Wed Nov 9th, 2005 12:56 pm |
|
weasle wrote: shit i aint gettin nothing but a red X Me too....
|
|
|
|
|
|
