Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gerald Walls who wrote (10949)	9/23/1998 12:52:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

<OT> Jeez louise, you come in with a standard right wing UN bashing argument, and when called on it, all of a sudden it's just the UN line on guns you disapprove of. Sorry for getting confused, the "smear" was unintentional. It was obviously sarcastic too, I'd assume the "black helicopters" line is out of vogue for now. I've also had much more unintentional training in cheesy high school debate tricks than I'd prefer. Personally, I think the public health line on guns is the one that ought to be addressed, but that's just me. You don't need a license to buy or possess a car. Just to use it on the public roads. Many autos used on farms and ranches are never licensed or registered. How many? How many autos are never registered, and never used on public roads? So, requiring carry permits, or gun licensing for hunting on public lands, would be ok? Again, I'm not going to argue gun laws, I just detect a whiff of disingenuousness here. Aside from auto registration and driver licensing, a lot of regulation has been put in place to improve auto safety, and by all indications it has had a measurable effect in lives saved. Again, the public health argument. Cheers, Dan.