NOSValves Posted July 16, 2002 Share Posted July 16, 2002 MDeneen All I can say is Wow !!!!! That was deep Welcome back Friend . You really have to quit working so much we all miss you around here ! Craig ------------------ HH Scott 299 Amp HH Scott LT-110B Tuner HH Scott P-87 Turn Table JVC JL-F50 Turn Table Sony CDP-CA7ES CD Drive 1985 Walnut Heresey I W/Layne Audio Woofers KSW-15 Subs>c> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 17, 2002 Author Share Posted July 17, 2002 By CHELSEA J. CARTER The Associated Pressf> STANTON, Calif. (July 17) - A child's body that resembles an abducted 5-year-old girl was found in a rugged, heavily forested area of a neighboring county, but officials couldn't immediately say if it was that of missing Samantha Runnion. The body is of a girl age 4 to 6 and has similarities to Samantha, who was kidnapped kicking and screaming outside her apartment Monday by a man who drove up and asked for help finding his dog. 'There are enough similarities in the individual who's out there to lead us to believe that it could be Samantha,' Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona said Tuesday night. Authorities scheduled a news conference Wednesday to offer more details on the disappearance, which follows the high-profile kidnap cases of Elizabeth Smart in Salt Lake City and Danielle van Dam in San Diego. Two men who were at a hang-gliding launch point spotted the little girl's body Tuesday in an open field 50 miles from her Stanton home, said Shelly Kennedy-Smith, a spokeswoman with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. Riverside County provided bloodhounds Tuesday night to scour the area in an effort to determine if the girl was killed there or if her body was dumped there, Kennedy-Smith said. Earlier in the day, Erin Runnion wept as she begged for the return of her daughter. 'We don't want vengeance, we just want our baby back,' she said. Samantha was playing a game with a friend when a man drove up in a two-door light green car, police said. Authorities described the car as either a Honda or an Acura. The girls were sitting on a short wall about 150 feet from Samantha's home in a housing complex, which is not gated, when the man got out and asked for help finding his puppy, said sheriff's department spokesman Jim Amormino. The girl's mother spent most of Monday night walking and driving around her neighborhood, posting fliers and searching for Samantha. When she saw a light green Honda, she jumped on the hood and asked the driver to open his trunk. He drove away. 'I heard her in my head, screaming out to me, 'Mommy!' And I jumped on his car,' she told the Los Angeles Times. Samantha's abductor has been described by police as a Hispanic man with slicked-back black hair and a thin black mustache, wearing a powder blue button-down shirt. Samantha weighs about 40 pounds and has long, curly brown hair. She was wearing a white blouse and red checkered pants when she was snatched. Her mother and stepfather, Ken Donnelly, were at work and her grandmother was inside their home when the kidnapping occurred. The once-vibrant apartment complex that used to be full of children riding bicycles and skateboards was nearly empty Tuesday night, with the exception of reporters and adults leaving flowers. Stanton - a heavily Hispanic working-class city of about 38,000 people located 25 miles southeast of Los Angeles - is a mix of industrial sites, single-family homes and apartments, and is among the safest areas of Orange County, Carona said. Erin Runnion said she heard about the kidnapping from her mother and fought back tears while driving home Monday evening from her job as an administrator at British Petroleum in Long Beach. 'I would never have thought this would happen here,' she said.f>Copyright 2002 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.f> Any chance the outcome here would have been different if mom would have run into the house and retrieved a firearm before jumping into the car to conduct her frantic search for the "light green Honda." Think maybe standing in front of the car with the firearm and placing two shots into the radiator, and then pointing the firearm at the windshield -- might have ended in a more positive result than jumping on the hood of the car while your head is filled with the sound of your child screaming for you? As long as the American public continues to base it's opinions regarding firearms on propaganda, (instead off> hard data f>, we will continue to experience unchecked, rampant crime.Then of course there is the blatant misrepresentation of the 2nd amendment that many seem to have embraced. I may have adjusted my position on the 1st amendment, but I don't think I will be flexing on this one anytime soon -- especially considering the reasoning the framers used in The Declaration to justify the rebellion against the British Crown, and the means they knew they would have to embrace to accomplish the separation. I don't understand how anyone could possibly think the 2nd amendment has any meaning at all, except in the context of ensuring that power remains with the people. There is nothing wrong with 18th century political science. The problem is 21st century political science, and the social engineers who somehow think the answer to solving violent crime is to take the sticks away from those who are not violent. The 2nd amendment was certainly not designed to be a "suicide pact" for society -- for a natural by-product of an armed populace, are criminals who are forced to be more selective in who they choose for victims. The violent criminal does not fear the police -- what he fears is the object of his aggression turning the table on him. I see three solutions to violent crime: 1) One of the problems is the lack of proper enforcement of existing laws. Deal with the violent criminal, and violent crime will go down. We need better judges, and more prisons. 2) We also need a populace that is willing to take responsibility for their own lives, and the lives around them -- instead of believing and expecting the state to be responsible for their safety. Of course, the alternative is a "Police State", where you have a cop on every street corner. 3) We also need to attack the root of violent crime, and where it happens the most -- in the inner-city. We need to somehow produce economic opportunities for people of poverty stricken communities, that will allow them to reach a standard of living that alleviates the feelings of hopeless, that is probably the largest contributer to violent crime.f> A Police Perspective on Gun Control & Political Correctness f> ------------------ Deanf>s> Klipsch RF7s - AE-25 DJH - AE-3 DJH - Sony 9000ES f>s> This message has been edited by deang on 07-17-2002 at 10:36 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted July 17, 2002 Share Posted July 17, 2002 "Any chance the outcome here would have been different if mom would have run into the house and retrieved a firearm before jumping into the car to conduct her frantic search for the "light green Honda." Think maybe standing in front of the car with the firearm and placing two shots into the radiator, and then pointing the firearm at the windshield -- might have ended in a more positive result than jumping on the hood of the car while your head is filled with the sound of your child screaming for you?" Dean, the above is one of the single most ill-advised comments I have read recently and to think you wrote it makes me wonder. If you cant see the absurdity here, then changing thy Noble volume pot is the least of your worries! Nothing like a panick stricken Mom with a loaded firearm frantically running around the neighborhood looking for "any light green Honda" to pump a few holes in the radiator and then take aim at the windshield and occupant as she "imagines" the screams of her child within her head. What is going on in your skull, Dean? My advice is that if you are really looking for a more positive take on firearms and anti-gun control lobbying, please stop writing posts, as you have metaphorically shot yourself in the foot more often than not. I dont speak for the others here at this point. But I can now barely stand to read this type of post anymore, especially within a forum dedicated to audio, and especially when the comments are, in my opinion, so blindingly ill conceived. I am all for humor, meandering threads, intelligent discourse, and interesting references. But this is painful to read, especially when it smacks of low com denom reasoning bordering on the absurd. Given the format of this forum, where you have ONE title (which happens to be "Consonance"), I dont think it fitting to start this type of exchange. It is like wandering up on road kill.... And it's the reason why I much prefer the Asylum format where individual posts are listed with titles. kh This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 07-17-2002 at 01:02 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 17, 2002 Share Posted July 17, 2002 Wow, so it not really the fault of Satan who messed up God's plan. Interesting. -C&S ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 17, 2002 Author Share Posted July 17, 2002 Nothing like a panick stricken Mom with a loaded firearm frantically running around the neighborhood looking for "any light green Honda" to pump a few holes in the radiator and then take aim at the windshield and occupant as she "imagines" the screams of her child within her head.f> Kelly, "I heard her in my head, screaming out to me, 'Mommy!" -- Sorry, I took this to mean she "heard" her. It is curious that the driver would not stop to find out why the loony lady wanted to look in his trunk. Instead, he steps on the gas, and drives away with a women on the hood of his car. There's really nothing inherently "wrong" with my posts, or my arguments for the most part -- except that they greatly offend you. My posts are merely responses to other respondants. You advise that I stop writing posts, but you don't advise that those who share your sentiments also "stop writing posts". You also fail to respond to the arguments, or the data found at the links I provide. Instead, you take an isolated phrase and make that the focus of your comments. You have taken a couple things I have said out of context (the Bat Masterson quote for one), and have now brought in the "skull factor".f>It seems that everyone else takes my views in stride, why can't you? We often disagree with each other, and I have always treated you with respect, yet you refer to the things I say as "blathering". Thanks. Much appreciated. If you are going to post, why not instead build a good argument -- instead of resorting to insults? Hell, it's probably the same amount of keystrokes. I'm adding you to my "turkey" list along with Clipped, and Cluless.f> "What is important is not what Jay "thought" would happen, or what Adams would "do" today. What is important is what WE WANT NOW for our future considering that we can assimilate the facts and realities of where we stand today."f> I agree with the latter but not the former. However, the latter has to worked within the framework of what is Constitutionally permissable or deniable. I maintain that taking MY firearms won't lower the violent crime rate one iota. Violent criminals deserve a bullet in their head, and I'm not much concerned with what they're thinking about in the Emergency Room. I admire your idealism, but unfortunately, it doesn't help with the here and the now. We need to quit treating the symptoms and start addressing the cancer.f>Crime is rampant because we are choosing to have it so. Little girls are being kidnapped from their soft beds because we are consciously and collectively choosing to have this be so. 12-year old boys are mowing down their fellow students because we are choosing to have this be so. We don't have to choose this, but we are because we prefer it to other alternatives we have available.f> I don't know why I'm having trouble with this. There is something wrong here but I can't quite put my finger on it. If I haven't said it already, it's nice to see you back on the forum. BTW -- I'm one of the "good guys".f>------------------ Deanf>s> Klipsch RF7s - AE-25 DJH - AE-3 DJH - Sony 9000ES f>s> This message has been edited by deang on 07-17-2002 at 03:19 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 17, 2002 Author Share Posted July 17, 2002 Now Clipped, I am truly impressed. Have you been out there dipping into my arsenal? God is sovereign as well as all knowing. It is difficult to foreknow yet not predestine. However, in spite of this, we (as well as the devil) are held accountable for our actions. It is a paradox. The two ideas meet somewhere in the mind of God, and make perfect sense. I believe love limits sovereignty, and that God has a system based on fairness -- just don't ask me to explain it you. If someone says they understand it -- they're lying.f> ------------------ Deanf>s> Klipsch RF7s - AE-25 DJH - AE-3 DJH - Sony 9000ES f>s> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 18, 2002 Author Share Posted July 18, 2002 Yes, I can't help but agree with what you are saying here. You bring up individual and collective responsibility. I really think this is the weak link in my argument -- because the one thing I don't think the framers imagined, or accounted for -- is a society completely coming apart at the seems in regard to a lack of these two elements. It is evident from Washington's Farewell Address that he/they understood the new government would only thrive in a value driven, value oriented society. The Constitutional concepts work -- as long as this fabric remains intact.f>Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happinessthese firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, "where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?" And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?..." "...Observe good faith and justice towards all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct. And can it be that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period a great nation to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that in the course of time and things the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?"f>s> From George Washington's Farewell Address f> ------------------ Deanf>s> Klipsch RF7s - AE-25 DJH - AE-3 DJH - Sony 9000ES f>s> This message has been edited by deang on 07-18-2002 at 12:33 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 18, 2002 Share Posted July 18, 2002 deang, Simply put, why do think society is completely coming apart at the seems? The reasons, not the symptoms. {over and above "people thinking more about themselves than others"}. -C&S ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 18, 2002 Share Posted July 18, 2002 Wow, so then it really is the fault of Satan who messed up God's plan. Interesting. -lazy one sentence feather dusting turkey making sweeping statements...... ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 18, 2002 Share Posted July 18, 2002 Got problems? OK, here are the solutions: 1., 2, 3, .... Oh, you won't use the solutions. Won't change your mind set. OK, it's you bed, you sleep in it. What is the role of rebelliousness to instituted unatural repression in all of this? Denial? Not to say centuries of contradictory illogical irrational nonsense crammed downed people's throats essentially by force. Remember Charleton Heston finding that fragment of the Statue of Liberty on the beach....now there's an image that stays with you. -California Wild Turkey ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components This message has been edited by Clipped and Shorn on 07-18-2002 at 01:20 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 18, 2002 Author Share Posted July 18, 2002 Mdeneen, Marvelous post. Clipped, Why do I think society is completely coming apart at the seems? Cause there ain't no love man, what else? "Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold." -- Matthew 24:12 This message has been edited by deang on 07-18-2002 at 01:34 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 18, 2002 Author Share Posted July 18, 2002 "What is this long standing aversion to rational solutions and logical pragmatic problem solving? Could Religions have something to do with it? I don't really know how you are applying this comment. The past (Dark Ages), or the present (religious right). At any rate, I've always considered those things to be foundational to the faith. I believe many I know would concur. You aren't watching TBN again are you? People act as if "Christian Intellectuals" is some kind of oxymoron. Yeesh. Consider that the great majority of early scientific discoveries were made by religious people (predominately Christian), who had an interest in poking around in God's creation. Now, certainly religious 'systems' steeped in a rigid, judgmental, and traditional mind-set, have historically, always attempted to cut the legs out from beneath any 'intellectual', Christian or otherwise -- that questions their authority, teaching, or makes them feel as if their power base could be eroded. People who use the things of God as a cloak to hide their self-serving and immoral lives, or conspire to decieve the masses from the pure truth -- are condemned. As far as the "Religious Right" is concerned -- they are not opposed to logical, pragmatic solutions. What they are opposed to are solutions that do not address the need for some standard of morality. "What is the role of rebelliousness to instituted unatural repression in all of this? Denial? Not to say centuries of contradictory illogical irrational nonsense crammed downed people's throats essentially by force. Deep. Rebellion exists in all of us. The Christian is no exception. It lies at the root of the human condition. God has a three letter word for it. "Un-natural repression"? How about "repression is un-natural"? Repression is a by-product of our natural desires fighting against our conscience -- our deep rooted ideas of right and wrong. Un-natural, in the sense that in the original design the conflict did not exist. We are simply built this way. Regardless of how permissive a society becomes -- laws are in place to prevent chaos and anarchy. No one can do "anything" their un-repressed natural (or un-natural, from your point of view) inclinations tell them to do. Now, my fine feathered friend -- why don't you take a day and read Lewis' book? And please, quit associating the whole lot of us with Jimmy Swaggart, Tammy Faye, Jim Jones, The Dark Ages, the Crusades, and of course --Benny Hinn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 19, 2002 Share Posted July 19, 2002 I don't need to read no badges (oops, I mean books) because you tell me to, and I will associate you with who I choose. I am no more likely to think like you, than you are to think like me. Seems the likes of Galileo and Copernicus, along with countless others in history had their problems with The Church and its Dogma to say the least. The confrontation between truth and dogma as seen in the movie Planet Of The Apes is a good and entertainng model for this all too familiar pattern. Do you remember the film, the first in the series? Human's are capable of contradictory behavior and just because a scientist continues to practice some religion does not mean the two belief systems are intellectually compatible. I don't care what religion you practice, but don't be here preaching to me about how logical, rational, and true it is. I never said anything about a religious person being less intelligent, that is your own paranoia and also the paranoid basis of that Think Tank list of Objections which apparently does not really contain any answers that I could discern. Practice your religion and stop worrying about defending it against objections. You will be liberated by the knowledge that such a defense is inherently impossible. Embrace those objections because they are all true. To me, your defensiveness weakens any attraction you might expect your religion to have. Your faith is the sound of your one hand clapping etc. no more no less. Remember those references to Lao Tzu? The life of Jesus is exemplary, but I don't see any self proclaimed Christians like George Bush or the rest of the high profile gun toting Christian Right behaving anything at all like Him. Not at all. Clearly they don't get it. As long as you preach in public like Tammy Faye you are asking to be judged in a similar fashion. Your only defense, and the only way I would respect the integrity of your faith is to stop tyring to convince me of it and how you really are different from those who hide behind its cloak {to use your terminology}. You are so close, just go for it. Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm -C&S (from my desk inside the fortune cookie factory) ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components This message has been edited by Clipped and Shorn on 07-19-2002 at 02:59 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 19, 2002 Share Posted July 19, 2002 mdeneen, Granted there would be plenty of occasions for self sacrafice in order to enact good citizenship, but I can also envision mass enthusiasm, fun, and joyful fellowship in the knowledge that reason based productive activities were going to make life better for all and create peace and prosperity on Earth here and now. Teamwork. Can you imagine how effective and quick that "army" could be for fixing the world . Just turning the military budget around could fix things so fast that the enemies would loose their will to fight for fear of missing out on all the fun of peace and prosperity. Guess we would have to use some mind altering drugs on quite a few stubborn cases also, but they would dig it, sort of, in a manner of speaking, if you wlll, in the end. Better life through chemistry you know. Things To Come ...... After the Third Way there is the Fouth Way....... -Moolah Notary Sojak and Mulla Bazz Fazz ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 19, 2002 Author Share Posted July 19, 2002 Clipped, You asked questions, I answered them. I thought you were being "sincere" with your questions. I would have spared you my responses if I would have known you were just being sarcastic. Who's being defensive? I don't see where you are getting this "paranoid" business. That's funny. I answer your questions and I'm "paranoid"? Since your questions touched on areas covered in Lewis' book, I thought you might enjoy reading it. I was hardly demanding you read the book. Answering objections is necessary for the purpose of answering the critics. I know of no discipline worth it's salt that avoid's it. I was only wanting you not to throw all Christians together in one lump, and making associations where none exist -- I wasn't telling you what to think. No one likes being stereo-typed. There, I ended on an audio related note -- we can move on now. Sorry to have moved your feathers out of place. This message has been edited by deang on 07-19-2002 at 01:31 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted July 19, 2002 Share Posted July 19, 2002 dean, I apologize, it looks like I was the one doing the preaching, albeit in fortune cookie fashion, and you are right in that I was tending to address a generalized negative image I have of right wing Christians as piped in by the media rather than preceiving your specific identity in relation to it. I was not exactly being sarcastic and I still feel that the attempt to "answer" objections to a religion as presented at the think tank is on shaky philosophical ground although I am sure it is of some comfort to those already in its fold who believe they are somehow "protected" by the attempt. Taste in religions is like taste in music and there is no point in arguing about it. -C&S ------------------ Cornwalls currently upgrading to all tube components Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 19, 2002 Author Share Posted July 19, 2002 Apologists don't exist to bring comfort to those in "the fold", they exist to make a ready defense against detractors. Those in "the fold" are comforted by the God who lives in them. If it wasn't for the critics, we wouldn't need apologists. BTW, we are ALL on shaky philosophical ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted October 10, 2003 Author Share Posted October 10, 2003 Hee hee. Everyone remember this painful thread. Certainly not my finest moment here. Hey guys, if we can survive this, we can survive anything. So, how about that Joplin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted October 10, 2003 Share Posted October 10, 2003 If you are patient, there might be a PP2A3 monoblock "STEP BY STEP" build site online in the future, with pictures and detailed instructions. Might a fun way to try this out... kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted October 10, 2003 Author Share Posted October 10, 2003 I am definitely interested in something like that, but I do need something for now. What kind of time frame are we looking at, and do have any idea of what kind of money we are talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.