### Apollo BBS Archive - June 7, 1990

    X-Rated Cosmos Bulletin Board command:$C

    Message: 3861
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Question ?
    Subject: SYSOP
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 01:42:58

    What's the difference between these:

      (1) UP YOURS!

          UP Y--RS!

      (2) EAT SHIT!

          EAT S--T! or EAT $#!+

      (3) GO FUCK YOURSELF

          GO F--- YOURSELF.

    The answer I'm looking for will be one which separates the abilty
    to be offended by either phrase in the samples above. My contention
    here is that removing only one, two or three letters of an "OFFENSIVE"
    word isn't good enough. People aren't so stupid as to be able to make
    out what the rest of it is...and if the REAL purpose is to anihilate
    any possibility of being OFFENSIVE..then we must TOTALLY remove the
    word or INFERENCE of the word altogether. Otherwise it's defeated
    entirely and I question the validity of the whole damn mess on the
    Public Sig.
                                    -FANG

    Message: 3862
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer !
    Subject: Mike
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 02:12:51

            Go Fuck yourself.....    (Grin)
                    I know what you mean, but like you posted in another
    message, you consider all users friends, but sometimes to wake them up, you
    need to use a few colorful metaphors, even when you don't personally mean
    it.
            All those statements you listed can be taken as very hard insults.
    And sometimes you can see them as a joke...  like you 'Throwing a brick
    though a window", I knew it was a joke, in jest...  but that showed me and
    other users it was time for action, even if that ment standing on a street
    holding a sign and smiling at the passersby.

            But the other side of the coin, is NEW users and FIRST time BBS
    users don't understand!  Apollo needs new blood, and I am fearfull we have
    chased away many people who thought we were just terrible people.  When you
    are a hardened Apollo vet, you can take most of this stuff with a grain of
    salt.  I was surprised by Miz Dee's reation to your 'Brick' statement.
    However, in one post, you did get carried away with lots of color.

            I was also set back by Middleton's retort to my 'Up Yours' remark,
    and he really laid it out as sexual, in finite detail.

            With Zak, I was just being careful, and will admit, "Got Balls" is
    very, very weak....but where is the line drawn?
                                            continued---->

    Message: 3863
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer !
    Subject: Mike, part 2
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 02:26:18

            As for $#!+ and other such stuff,  I guess it just does not look as
    intimidating as 'SHIT'!  Sorta a-way of saying "I'm just joking", or a milk
    toast version of 'shit' that don't smell...  ????  you tell me, but people
    seem less offended.

            The Idea here is to let a few more users speak, and come to some
    'acceptable' agreement that will keep the PUBlic board SOMEWHAT clean even
    if it don't quite get the 'Sqeaky Kleen' award.

            I would like to hear from Bill Burkett, Gary Jones, and DEE!
    Just how offended are/were they?

    As for Rod's post of his fantasy, Saying 'fornicate' this and that, over and
    over again is like a two year old learning a new word.  He did that for
    shock value and I still felt it was not PUBlic board material.  I even tried
    to get him to change it, or move it to this SIG.  There has got to be a
    line, and when I say you crossed it, you should fix it.... but I should
    never have to say it, because you know better. It does not always take
    PROFANE words to make a post with a PROFANE meaning.  This is something that
    Rod and Zak do NOT understand.
            "He grabbed her by the ankles, spreading her legs out and back over
    her head till it hurt, then poked away till they both came"... Not ONE
    profane word in there, but non the less, I do NOT want to see that type post
    on the PUBlic board... it's profane in meaning.

    Message: 3864
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Warning...
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 02:36:15

            Zak is one that does this.....  If I ask him NOT to say a word on
    the PUBlic board, he goes and posts a message about it on the PUBlic board
    spelling it all out.  Like he dares me to do something about it.  Well,
    first off, it is my board...  If you don't like it, take it to this SIG and
    let's get it out and talk about it.

            I knoticed that in one of Zak's posts of the 6th (yesterday) he uses
    the word 'testicle'  and this is AFTER I posted that we were to keep all
    words dealing with sexual parts OFF the PUBlic board...at least to we get it
    strait as to what is going to be okay and what is not.   Zak tries my
    patience all the time like this..he enjoys making me upset.

            Thank you Mr Carter for bringing your POST here to the SIG where we
    can let it all hang out.  I wish ZAK would take a lesson in manners!

      66311 is the post with the word 'Testicles' in it.

      After re-readin Zak's posts again, I get the idea that ZAK thinks he
    should be able to say what he wants and where he wants and damn the
    'sensitive' people and their rights.  Not that ZAk posts bad posts mind you.

            *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 3865
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Answer !
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 09:31:45

    I knew that the first time Carter talked of throwing bricks that it was in
    jest.  However, he then said that anyone who did not really have the guts to
    do it was a "yellow bellied"  thing that and the other.  I was only pointing
    out that it would not take much for his statement of jest to ring true.  He
    tends to have a fly-off-the-handle temper and THAT is what scares me about
    him, not his gun.  I understand his frustration of people not coming out and
    supporting their cause until it's too late but I really did feel that if
    pushed, he would have been the first to throw a brick through the window.

    Message: 3866
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Answer !
    Subject: last
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 12:20:26

    Actually it is my intent to get you to perhaps think that I would do
    that. In reality I'd probably be the only one who didn't throw a brick
    if everyone else did.
    The idea behind the statements was to question everyones feelings about
    their ideals and how strongly they may or may not feel about them.
    It is frustrating to watch people TALK about rights and never actually
    do more than just that. SOmetimes it takes getting up off your duff and
    standing in the street with a sign or standing on a soapbox.
    I do feel, however, that one day throwing a brick through DeConcini's
    office window might not be such a bad idea. Attatched to the brick would
    be a note.
    The note would read;
    You have a right to own a window. I have a right to own a brick.
    Just because I threw it through your window doesnt justify you going
    out and banning bricks. Think about it.

    Actions often speak louder than words. It may take a shocking and
    uncivil action such as ditching a brick in a window..something I think
    at this point still isn't a good idea...to really get his attention.
    He's ignored the thousands and thousands of telephone calls and letters
    he has received over the last few weeks. What *DO* you do with such
    a "representative" of our Constitution ?

    Message: 3867
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Dee on Mike
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 12:41:53

            You don't know Mike the way I do.. the people from down under have a
    different sense of humor that YOU can't seem to grasp, and you think Mike
    really means it!   It is all verbage, with a tinge of panic.  I do it!   I
    bet you even do it!  You two seem to be going for each others jugular, when
    all along, we are on the same team.   I want both you guys as friends and
    users.

            Dee, you are the right ball, and Mike is the left ball and I am the
    prick caught in the middle!

            Don't you just love the COSmos?

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 3868
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: $#!+
    Subject: Euphemisms
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 15:07:25

            Mike, I agree with you wholeheartedly.  Even substitutions
    such as "$#!+" are inappropriate in a public, open-to-all
    discussion.
            In fact, in some sense, I find these cute work-arounds even
    more offensive than the "real thing."  It tells me that the
    author knows what he or she is writing is unacceptable for public
    consumption, yet wants to say something naughty, not unlike a
    two-year-old who's just learned how to make a farting noise with
    his mouth.
            I think it relates back to something that excerpt Zak
    uploaded said; the part about attacking ideas without attacking
    the person.  An attack on one's sensibilities is an attack on the
    person and contributes nothing to the discussion at hand.

    Message: 3869
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Testicles
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 18:37:04

    That's TEST-ICK-LEEZ, as in the fifth book of the Bible.  Next you'll be
    up-in-arms about Genesis, claiming that it's a pornographic magazine.

    Message: 3870
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: 3867
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 20:17:29

    I'd sue for divorce

    Message: 3871
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: 3868/substitutions
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 20:18:56

    You know, I kind of agree with you there.  I noticed one tonight (from
    cliff?) that was $hit, I think, and wondered how that passed for 'squeaky
    clean'  --  even though that has always been acceptable on Apollo (at least
    during my tenure).

    Message: 3872
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Question ?
    Subject: B-Dog last
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 21:58:49

            You noticed a '$hit' from me on the PUBlic board.  You failed to
    tell me the message number so I couuld FIX it.
            Besides, Blame Miz Dee for the level of the 'Squeaky Clean'
    campaign. With out her, we would not have banned such things as "Up Yours"
    and other simple harmless phrases...

            UPDATE:  I found the post # 66307 and removed the word '$hit' from
    the Dog story.  It was not used in a human sexual way, but to satisfy B-Dog
    and Bill Burkett, I corrected my post.  You realize this  is what you are
    asking for...  I also found Dean Hathaway said 'ass' in one of his posts.
    tisk tisk...  By the way Bill B., did my Dog story upset you? msg 66307

            This is silly... I will shut down the PUBlic board to all out side
    non-members if you guys don't get real.  The first complaints were about
    personal attacks, and name calling of other users with questionable insults.
    Now if we should talk about an animal..'Jack-ass' you demand deletion.

            If Zak does not remove his word 'Testicle' by morning, do you want
    me to remove his $tatus? Come on, egg me on...give me the challenge.  Dee?
    Dog?  Carter?  Bill?

            I won't do it, but you guys are going nuts on me.  let's do a
    livable real approach.
            *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    X-Rated Cosmos Bulletin Board command:EC

    You chose Cosmos-Chatter

    Subject:Censorship

    Enter a line containing only an <*> to stop
     1:There seems to be a lot of petty censorship going on.  Most six year olds
     2:know more fuck words than grown-ups.
     3:
     4:It is really petty when one cannot say "ass" in a message.
     5:
     6:By the way, the Songs of Solomon in the fucking bable is lewd and just plain
     7:filthy.  No, I never fucked anyone in the ass and I don't care to.  I guess
     8:those babical chaps really liked it though.
     9:
    10:end

    Edit command:S

    Saving message...
    The message is 3873

    *=* End of the Universe Bulletin Board entered *=*

    Message: 1320
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Piss on it!
    Subject: this SIG?
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 07:32:55

    What don't you like about this SIG, dear SYSOP ?

    Message: 1321
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Last/Roger
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 09:27:26

            The heathens of Apollo wanted their own SIG... but when you saw
    there were no Christians to kick in the ribs, you found it to be no fun and
    quit posting.

            I just don't see the need for a SIG that is not used.

    clif-

    Message: 1322
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Cliff/bashing
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 16:49:32

    I understand that this SIG originally was intended for the discussion
    of Bob. Have you ever read that book ? I can't remember the name of it.

    Message: 1323
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Originally
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 17:01:06

    this SIG was going to be called thr eist SIG, but when I started to
    create it, Sandy walked into the computer den and said to name it the
    RGB SIG.. meaning Rod, God, Bob.  To us, this was an atheist way of poking
    fun at Gods.  You can discuss and summarize all you want about what this SIG
    was intended for.... but I KNOW what I created it for.

            In fact, I tossed in Mike Carter as the only Christian just for fun
    to see if he could stand the heat...  Hmmmmm  maybe that is what this SIG
    needs, A Christian thrown in with you lions.  Oh Mike, You are needed again.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 1324
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 20:00:41

         So when are you going to put an atheist in the Christian sig?  Or don't
    you play fair?

    Message: 1325
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Shut Up Already!
    Subject: Zak weenie
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 01:02:18

    Figuratively speaking, Cliff is the ** MIGHTY APOLLO SYSOP ** and is
    the CREATOR of this SIG. He can do with it as he damn well pleases.
    And now, a much needed exasperation is required to loosen the bolt of
    lightning God shoved up my rear on the Public Sig.
    ...
    HEY ALL YOU FAKE HEATHEN SCUM BAG LOLLIPOP SUCK-OFFS...TAKE YOUR
    PRIMADONNA SEXUAL SENSITIVITY AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR COLLECTIVELY
    GLORIFIED SHIT HOLES AND SMOKE IT IN YOUR TONISLECTOMY.

    We now resume to dignified well being.

    Now what's with this biz of dropping me into the lions den again?

                    -FANG

    Message: 1326
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Mike on last
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 02:38:52

            This SIG is not subjected to 'Sqeaky Kleen' rules.

            And Mike, if a lion tries to eat you, it will barf its guts out from
    the bad taste.... so don't worry, you are safe!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 1327
    Author: $ Peter Petrisko
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: LAST FEW
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 03:07:33

    yawn.

    Message: 1328
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Piss, etc
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 09:36:16

    So, which sigs is profanity acceptable, partially acceptable and forbidden.
    I think that using the word "testicles" may be appropriate for some debates
    (althought I can't think of a subject off hand).
    I'm just getting a bit confused.  I thought the LAT sig was a free board,
    then I am told it is not.  I thought then that only the x-rated sig was
    allowed to have swear words and in this sig and the creative sig both
    subjects (Headass and Piss on it) contain swear words.  I don't care; I am
    the last person on here to be offended by any cursing.  I just would like
    the rules to be consistant.

    Message: 1329
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Shut Up Already!
    Subject: Miz Pee, err, Dee
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 12:26:49

    "HEADASS" is meant to be pronounced; "HE-A-DASS".
    It's your scum-baggit rearward searching mind that WANTS it to
    be something else.

    Your fixation and pre-occupation with assholes tends to
    bend your thinking toward expecting everthing to somehow realate, rectally.

    Now, go play with your cucumber.

    Message: 1330
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Expired Soul
    Subject: Petrisko
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 12:28:13

    Go back to sleep, ye yucca snorting coward.

    Message: 1331
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Dee...
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 13:01:04

            I too would like the rules to be more consistant.  The COSmos SIG is
    the SIG that I have decreed that anything can go.   It is a SIG, not a
    private club.  I select who get's access there from the requests I get.

            The LATe night SIG is in EVERY $tatus users profile.  But, like late
    night TV and not PRIME Time TV, we have a compromise. It can be SUGGESTIVE
    like late night TV is...and till I get a complaint to the contrary, I leave
    it alone.  I did not SCOLD you miz Dee, just made you aware of the facts, as
    your posts can get pretty steamy.  he he he

            The DEVil's SIG (this place), well, it is like a private club almost
    with really only the hard core users of Apollo in it.  If Rod Williams is
    not offended, or anyone else..  I am in approval to let you guys make of it
    what you want.

            The FILm SIG...  Since Apollo is MOSTly an adult SIG and there are
    adult movies...I see no reason why we only have to talk about G-rated
    movies.  As long as the talk has to do with the movie or film, and is not
    dirty talk for the sake of shock value, I have NO problem with that and have
    not had any complaints otherwise on that SIG.

            I as SysOp, am trying to give something to everyone, at different
    levels.  This is real life and people are different.  Zak wants the people
    who are offended, not to have such a place as 'Sqeaky Kleen'.  UNFAIR!

    Message: 1332
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Last
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 14:36:33

      I think Cliff goes out of his way to provide a suitable forum for every
    kind of discussion. I thank him for that. I understood that this SIG would
    be wide open in content from the beginning. It happens to be the only one I
    belong to which is.
      See You Later,
         Dean H.

    Message: 1333
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Dean
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 17:18:35

            Thanks Dean...  Did you want on the COSmos SIG?  I was not even
    aware you were not there till just now and I looked you up and sure
    enough...you wasn't!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 1334
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Testicles
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 20:23:03

    Join my church, the Church of the Ranting Canine.  part of being a member is
    the surgical implantation of a third testicle.  This is a 50% increase and a
    *very* good deal.

    Message: 1335
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Religion
    Subject: last/testicles
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 20:26:54

    Oh, yeah, if you join the Church of the SubGenius, they'll only give you a
    third nostril.

    How's the sniffing, Peter?

    Message: 1336
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Hi, ya all
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 23:13:59

    FACTOID (First in a series)
          Did you know that God, Jehovah, likes nothing better than to suck
    elephant cocks.  It is quite true that He finds them most satisfying as He
    can easily handle the 2 to 3 quarts of elephant cum.

    FACTOID # 2
          Between little Lard Jesus and God, God wins in the blow-job
    department as He has a softer beard plus due to His apparent age, his teeth
    have long since fallen out.  But Jesus is no amateur as He can suck with the
    best of them.

    FACTOID # 3
          God, knowing full well what He was doing, created AIDS while
    butt-fucking Jesus, Gabriel and Michael.  Satan would have nothing to do
    with it and that is why, to this very day, they do not get along.

    FACTOID # 4
          Did you know that Jesus' cock measures (when hard) a full 18 inches
    long?  That is why Jesus never 'womanized' aside from the fact that he is
    homosexual but instead was able to give himself some really heavenly
    blow jobs.

    Public & Free Bulletin Board command:$C

    Message: 66280
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gary Jones
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 05:18:49

     Gary, this whole thing about the constitution came about because of a
    simple statement I made a few days ago that was turned around to mean
    something the "turner" knew very well I never meant.
     Mike Middleton, the pretender to the throne of Biblical rewriters, made the
    statement that the constitution is a document intended to be amended and
    interpreted to meet the needs of present day problems, a concept with which
    I fully agree, by the way.
     Not one to miss a golden opportunity, and referring NOT to the
    constitution, but to past statements and positions of his, I came back with
    the simple statement that his position on he constitution and the Bible seem
    to be the same. (If you have been following his wild-eyed theories about
    being Christs and sin-bearing, you will know what I meant.)
     Now my statement has been turned around, I think by ROger Mann, to mean
    what I never said, namely that I think that the Constitution is
    God-inspired. (A rather strange statement coming from a person who
    apparently does not believe that even the Bible is God-inspired.)
     I hope this clears up any misunderstanding, since I have no intention of
    pursuing the thing any further.

    Message: 66281
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Ann/fear
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 05:22:25

    "Do you have an answer as to why this country fears socialized medicine?"
     "This country" doesn't fear it, Ann. THe American Medical Society (the
    doctor's union) fears it, since it will remove the high profit motive for
    "practicing" physicians, and allow their greed to be hung out for everybody
    to see.
     This is yet another application of the golden rule. Them that has the gold,
    rules. The AMA is one of the strongest lobbies in congress.
     How's that for an answer for ya?

    Message: 66282
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 05:27:43

     If you consider a 22 wheel gun a weapon,I have a weapon. Aside from that, I
    had a 25 auto that I sold, and a 32 caliber deer rifle (antique).
     I used to teach hunter safety classes back east, but that was years ago.
    (Eons, actually) and I could use some refreshing, for sure.
     The 38 sounds pretty good. Does Sandy like her 380 better, or what?
     Let me see what the time and money situation is after we get moved and
    settled, and I'll see what I can come up with. Hopefully both should be a
    little freer then. Thanks for the info. I WILL get back to you.
    Paul

    Message: 66283
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: socialize medicine
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 07:20:31

    It seems that the Canadian form of socialized medicine is a success. Perhaps
    we could look at that model. Rejection of socialized medicine out of hand
    is not a reasonable approach.

    Message: 66284
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: bill of rights
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 07:22:58

    The second amendment to the constitution could be revoked at any time the
    Congress and 3/4? of the states vote to do so. Perhaps we should start
    a drive ? (Just joking). Actually, the whole constitution could be replace
    if a constitutional convention were to be called. And it seems that we came
    perilously close recently. Can't remember the issue, tho.

    Message: 66285
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: registration
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 07:26:53

    I find it amusing that people don't consider it an infringement of their
    freedoms to register a car and find it an infringement to register a gun.
    I think that every gun owner should be forced to take a safety course in
    which they are trained in the safe use of their weapon. After passing a
    test, they would be duly registered so that communists could seize their
    guns any time they chose to do so.

    The argument that criminals wouldn't register guns is as bogus as that
    criminals wouldn't register stolen cars. Hell, criminals probably break
    a lot of laws --- should we repeal them because criminals don't obey them.
    Get real !

    Message: 66286
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: mcdonalds
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 07:30:11

    Yes, Big Macs have probably caused more deaths than all the handguns put
    together in the US.

    Message: 66287
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul Savage
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 07:31:37

    So you DON'T think the Constitution is divinely inspired ??? I still haven't
    seen a post to that effect.

    Message: 66288
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Medicine
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 08:19:58

      I pay for my own insurance, partly through a payroll deduction and partly
    through the basic benefits I get from my employer. That is part of my pay
    for work done. Under that I get medical care of my choice and nobody is
    coerced into paying for it on my behalf. The appeal of socialized medicine
    is that it will be something for nothing, and that it will penalize the
    medical profession for their expensive care in the past. Give these two
    things a little thought. There is no free lunch and the person who will be
    repairing you when your health is threatened is the last person in the world
    you want to turn into a disgusted, mediocre, assembly line worker who is
    under the thumb of beaurocrats.
      Sure, you can get a cut tended to by anybody. Slaves could probably do
    that. I want a doctor who knows that there is no guarantee that anyone will
    use his services at all unless he earns their trust and proves that he is
    worth his pay every time he works.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 66289
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Bill Of Rights
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 08:30:35

      The founding fathers rightly saw the 2nd Amendment as the cornerstone of
    the Bill of Rights and the Constitution itself. It is the enforcement
    clause. Without it, the voice of the people means nothing in determining
    the affairs of government. Kings of old and dictators of all time have known
    that governments rule with the consent of the people, but rendering them
    defenseless forces them to consent beyond the meaning of the word.
       When a person or group tells you that your right to own a weapon is a
    threat to them, even though you have done nothing to justify such a
    statement, you have to ask yourself, "What is it that they want to do that
    they can not do as long as I am armed?"
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 66290
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Registration
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 08:59:17

      Auto registration is a form of taxation and control over commerce. When
    applied to gun ownership it is nothing but an infringement of the right of
    ownership. Mike M. compared speed limits on fast cars with banning guns.
    A speed limit is a safety provision, comparable to a law against shooting
    wildly in a populated area, it is not the equivalent of a gun ban.
       Roger dismisses the fact that gun laws have no effect on criminals as
    irrelevant. This points out something gun owners should keep in mind about
    the opposition. It is you, the responsible gun owner, who is the real target
    of their efforts to ban guns. They know that the criminal will not be
    deterred, and they know that a person who would be irresponsible
    enough to harm others would likewise disregard such laws. Gun laws can only
    affect the law abiding. We have decades of experience to prove that beyond a
    shadow of a doubt, so do not be misled as to what those who fear the
    law-abiding gun owner really desire.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 66291
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Drug Talk
    Subject: Testing
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 09:13:27

      I posted a message a while back in which I criticized drug testing and
    said that safety concerns would be much better addressed by performance
    testing and that workplace drug testing is nothing but back-door search and
    seizure imposed by government blackmail. The following piece arrived
    yesterday in the new issue of Reason:
       URINE OR YOU'RE OUT   by Jacob Sullum
       Advocates of workplace drug testing make their strongest arguments where
    safety is involved. Nobody, they say, would want pilots, bus drivers, or
    air-traffic controllers operating under the influence.
       A new alternative to urinalysis better addresses pubic-safety concerns
    without invading employee's privacy. It directly measures
    impairment-regardless of its cause-rather than simply picking up traces of
    illegal drugs.
       The system, which resembles a video game, measures hand-eye coordination
    and reaction time, comparing them to the subject's performance on an
    earlier, baseline test. It takes only a few minutes to run, and it detects
    impairment due to alcohol, prescription drugs, fatigue, and other factors
    that do not turn up on conventional drug tests.
       Urinalysis, by contrast, does not show impairment; it only indicates
    whether the subject has ingested certain illegal drugs. Traces of such
    substances linger in the urine long after the effects have worn off-in the
    case of marijuana, for weeks or months.

    Message: 66292
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Drug Talk
    Subject: Testing
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 09:20:33

       The new test, called Factor One, was developed by Systems Technology Inc.
    of Hawthorne, California, and is marketed by Performance Factors Inc. of
    Emeryville, California. Three California transportation companies have begun
    to use Factor One to test drivers and shipcrew members.
       Don Harrison, general manager of Old Town Trolley Tours in San Diego,
    told the New York Times that the test has been well received by the
    company's employees. "I think most of them like the idea the we're judging
    them on their performance rather than on what they might have been doing a
    couple of nights ago," he said. "I like it because it's practical."
       Factor One is based on a system developed by the National Aeronautics and
    Space Administration in the 1960s during research for the Skylab program.
    The Air Force has used the system, known as the critical tracking test, to
    investigate the ability of pilots to control damaged aircraft. The National
    Highway Traffic Safety Administration has successfully used CTT to detect
    drunk drivers.
       So why has the federal government been pushing imprecise and needlessly
    intrusive drug tests instead? Ask Bill Bennett.

       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 66293
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Paul on 22
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 09:47:10

            A 22 is a weapon... and can be just as deadly as a 38

            Sandy has several 38 wheel guns.. she is not selling the one she
    uses, but one of the extra weapons she somehow acquired. Sandy likes the 380
    as well, but that is for personal protection when a big bulky gun just won't
    do.  (sounds just terrible, don't it)

            Sandy as an instructer has several weapons for teaching aids.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66294
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: War!
    Subject: SYSOP
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 10:56:51

    I'll ask you to read message 66277 and 66278 and tell me
    they don't fall under the same window for harassment for sexual
    innuendo.
    Unlike certain parties, I wont repeat the offending lines, making me
    look hypocritical.
    I'd like a public harassment for Rod Williams like I got to be sure thngs
    are EQUAL for every user and not just a few VOCAL ones.
    Since the Sex police on here only arrest my messages, it'll be a cold
    day in hell before I relent.

    Message: 66295
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean on socialized
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 11:29:09

    Well, you sure made it sound bleak and your probably right. I would not
    think that having socialized medicine would put the regular doctors and
    specialist out of busines. Why? Because I think most people would still go
    to their reg. doctors and dentists. But we need something from which to
    choose. My husband, being a vet can go to the V.A. for treatments,
    operations, etc. and not pay a penny. Granted, he would not be getting as
    good of treatments as he would with a reg. doc. or attention, but he at
    least has the choice. This service should be offered to everyone whether
    they are vets or not. All the times I have went to a doctor over the years,
    I would have choose a socialized type because I did not need speciality
    treatment or operations. But if it was serious, I would go to my reg.
    doctor. Do you see my point? It just isn't right that a long term illness
    should ruin people's lives because of the formitable doctors and hospital
    fees - medicine! A person works hard for what the get materially and then it
    is wiped out with one bout of cancer if the person lives or dies!! Their
    families in some cases end up on the streets. Why not put some money into a
    type of socialize medicine instead of the waste it's going to now for the
    most part? Doesn't England have some type of it for example? Has it ruined
    their country - the rest of the doctors? Doesn't Canada also? Australia?
    Maybe socialized med. isn't the answer, but it's obvious something is needed
    with our longivity rising all the time. Do you have any answers as to what
    we can do about this? -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 66296
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff L. on hospital
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 11:41:42

    Boy have I heard that from so many people - about them waiting while
    bleeding or in pain, but 'dat ole paper work gotta be filled out first'! You
    could give birth in the hall if you don't have that paper work done!
    One time my husband broke his arm in the afternoon - (he didn't know it for
    sure) - but that night at 2:AM the pain was great and I took him to the
    local emergency hospital. We waited for two hours before they even saw him.
    It was obvious to the nurse at the station he was in a lot of pain. I made
    out the paper work at that time. What got me, there was NO OTHER patients at
    that time of night - doctors and nurses walking all over the place, yet they
    couldn't take him/wouldn't take him in right away. Finally they got to him -
    spent a little under an hour with him and that included a cast and the bill
    was close to $2,000! I can't remember what the medication costs were
    anymore, but they were formidable. I know this was an emergency service, but
    $2,000????? On top of that, they put the cast on too tight, he had to have
    it replaced three days later. They didn't charge for this but we had to wait
    a couple more hours for them to get around to him and his hand was purple
    from lack of blood. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 66297
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Today's paper
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 11:50:32

    In this mornings Repulsive - in the letters to the editor section was one
    written by a David Lambert that I found said a lot about all these little
    freedoms of ours the keep getting eroded! The headline of this article
    read: "Seat-belt law constrains personal liberties"! It went on to say --
    --- "In her May 30 letter Martha Lisanti made a telling point by drawing
    "The comparison between the confinement of seat-belt use vs. the
    confinement of a wheelchair. It's a good argument, which along with
    several other good arguments, ought to convince any intelligent person to
    use their seat belts and to require others in their car to do the same.
    But it missed the 'loss of freedom' point entirely. A key and fundamental
    idea behind our Constitution and its concept of appropriate government
    function and power is our freedom must simultaneously enhance our freedom
    to an equal or greater degree! For example, drunken drivers endanger us
    all and that very real danger reduces our freedom to use our vehicles and
    roads. One might try to argue that laws inhibiting the right to drink and
    drive inhibit the drunken driver's freedoms. But the vast majority of us
    are willing to give up our freedom to drive intoxicated in order to
    minimize the danger from other drunken drivers. Laws against drunk
    driving clearly serve to enhance our freedoms more then they infringe on
    them. But the seat belt law does no such thing! My seat belt usage has
    absolutely no measurable effect on your safety or any of your freedoms.
    Your freedom is not enhanced by my use of a seat belt. Nor is your
    freedom enhanced by a law requiring that usage. Hence the law is an
    infringement on freedom. The same can be said of many other existing and

    Message: 66298
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cont.
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 11:54:54

    proposed laws which nibble away at our personal freedoms without any pay
    back. In fact, the continuing erosion of our freedom is a much greater
    threat than any of the problems addressed by the legislation.:

    I wrote out this article in it's entirety. I thought it said it like it is!
                                 -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 66299
    Author: Hans Glans
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Socialized medicine
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 12:11:43

    You tax those that aren't sick to pay for those that are...If I don't have
    medical bills, should I have to pay those of another?

    as for the paper work, I am sure that if the "i"s weren't dotted, and the
    "t"s weren't crossed, and something went wrong on the treatment, you would
    be the first to sue saying you didn't properly give consent. With 29 million
    dollar judgements within the realm of possibility, they must cover their
    rumps.

    s

    Message: 66300
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: War!
    Subject: Anatomy
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 13:09:25

            Users will keep sexual anatomy references OFF this PUBlic board.
    I am a little fed up with everyone pointing fingers at everyone else!
    You INTELLIGENT users surly can express yourselves with out the sexual
    innuendos and slams.   Me included!

                                    sigh, clif-

    Message: 66301
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Tip!
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 13:10:59

            You $tatus users I hope realize that NON-$tatus users can NOT see
    posts with the '$tatus users only' category.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66302
    Author: $ Steve MacGregor
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Ann/Seat Belts
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 15:01:24

       But in one way, someone else's not wearing a seat belt *does* affect me
    where it hurts the most -- in the wallet.
       If you don't want to wear your seat belt, you're going to get *really*
    hurt if you're in an accident.  Your medical expenses will be much greater
    than if you wore the belt.  Your insurance -- or the insurance of the driver
    at fault -- will pay more.  That raises the insurance company's expenses.
    They have to get more income to cover the expense.  They have to keep
    premiums up to get the income.
       Now if they'd just pass a law saying that if you're at fault in an
    accident, you -- or your insurance company -- are responsible for damages to
    the other vehicle, and to all passengers who were wearing seat belts.  Those
    not wearing belts -- or their insurance companies -- are responsible in that
    case.
       An insurance company could charge less for people who wear seat belts,
    and would put in clause saying that they don't pay *anything* to you if
    you're not wearing a seat belt.
       This way, much of the expense that we now see in insurance rates would
    simply move to people involved in accidents who don't wear seat belts.  And
    it's all voluntary, because you wouldn't have to wear the seat belt if you
    didn't want to.  Just be *very* careful, because it'll come out of your
    pocket, unless you get the extra-cost insurance for unbelted passengers.

    #(O,O)#  Hoot!

    Message: 66303
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Ann
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 16:16:46

      Socialized medicine doesn't drive every doctor out of the system, only the
    best. Look at the beauracracy and cost-shifting going on under our partially
    socialized system and then imagine it as a forced system in which everyone
    is told exactly what to do. Steve M. is right in pointing out that medical
    costs are so high now because we are paying for risks other people choose to
    take.
      Take a closer look at all those countries with socialized medicine and you
    will see that the doctors who were innovators and exceptional have probably
    Hm-.a\bVFuT85\c|d away. A competitive health industry reaches a certain
    point in development and then stagnates immediately when it becomes
    socialized. It can drag on at that same level indefinately, but it can not
    advance significantly because that requires independent brain power, the
    very thing that socialization degrades and drives out.
       You can get cheap clinical care out of it, but at what cost? Without the
    constraints placed on medicine in America by socialization of costs and
    unreasonable assessments of liability you would see not only better, but
    cheaper, health care here. If you want something to work like it should, get
       Do we really want to create another monopoly like the post office, which
    private business could easily outperform, but is not allowed to compete
    with?w{
       See You Later,
           Dean H.

    Message: 66304
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: gun registration
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 16:38:32

    Let's take the case of the mentally unstable person who purchased a gun
    in downtown Phoenix not too long ago and blew his brains out in front of
    his neighbors. Now, here was a case where such a person should not be
    allowed to buy a gun. It is unlikely that such a person would not have
    been able to get a gun unless it was extremely easy for him to do so, since
    he was also retarded.

    This is much like the bar-tender who, if he sees someone obviously very
    drunk should not sell that person any liquor. I should think that a gun
    seller, if he sees someone trying to buy a gun who is obviously unstable
    or otherwise exhibiting characteristics that mark him as person that
    shouldn't have access to a gun, to allow a cooling off period. At least
    a period in which the fellow could be checked out for mental illness or
    a criminal record.

    Message: 66305
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: seat belts
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 16:43:43

    agreed. Seat belt law like pool fence law is a bad law. I don't like
    gov't getting another way to get me, even tho I use my  seatbelt in
    my truck and car. I will NOT , however, use those lapbelts in the back.

    Message: 66306
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: health costs
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 16:47:46

    There is a problem of cost, though. I heard Koop speak at the N. Scottsdale
    Memorial Hospital dedication about this crisis. He mentioned to the doctors
    there that we need to come up with a way to control skyrocketing medical
    costs, otherwise, he thinks that socialized medicine will be the result.
    We can see some of that sentiment here on this board. I am not a proponent
    of socialized medicine, but I do think that health-care costs have risen
    out of control.

    My company, for example, has me paying more of my health insurance. It
    used to be a fully paid benefit. The reason --- higher costs !

    Message: 66307
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Steve M on S belts
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 17:20:50

            The Insurance company HAS not lowered insurance where seat belt laws
    were passed.   The Arizona Insurance network has said they 'Might' lower
    rates if there are LESS accidents.  If the dog hadn't stopped to Poop, it
    'Might' have caught the rabbit!  But it didn't happen.....

            Allowing insurance companies out of their liability because someone
    was NOT wearing a belt and was not even at fault is a pretty sad reward for
    getting slightly cheaper insurance.  Next thing is you will have to prove is
    you were wearing a seat belt in an accident.  Besiteb1=5=A1:!=:I
    thrown clear of an rolling, tumbling vehicle were saved from certain death,
    had they had on their seat belt.  The choice should be YOURS, not some
    legislature!

            Don't get me wrong, Seat-Belts do help in many accidents, but that
    should fall under EDUCATION and not more laws and less freedom.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66308
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Criminal record
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 17:48:48

            Yes, criminals should not have weapons...  but that is the problem,
    he can get them anyway from anywhere or make one himself.  I made guns and
    cannons that really shot when I was a kid for crying out loud.  A LAW is not
    going to stop the criminal...the underground is vast!  I am not lilly white
    and have delt with the underground in my past, and NEVER had any trouble
    buying guns where I was not suppose to have one... it is a JOKE!  The ONLY
    people that won't have guns are the good guys that FOLLOW the law to the
    letter.  You good people are being duped that such laws will stop bad
    guys... hell, they won't even slow them down. GET REAL!

            MOST of the weapons I now have were NOT bought over a counter. I
    prefer USED guns as they can't lead anyone out to confiscate them to me.
    When you buy a NEW weapon now, there is paper work and you need to show your
    drivers licence.....  Is that enough?  Not according to idiots out there who
    want your name in the computer and on all sorts of lists so the bad guys
    will know where to steal them from. Or, Heaven forbid, a government gone bad
    knocking on your door.

            *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66309
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: CLIFF/66301
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 18:33:58

    Yes, I just re-remembered that not too long ago.  I'm sure that it will come
    in handy.

    Daryl

    Message: 66310
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Apollo Sysop
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 20:05:53

         Thanks for changing message 66238.  Everyone:  It originally said "Got
    -----?  Give me a call."  Cliff changed it to "Got bats?"  Cliff, what is
    your problem with the word '-----'?

    [Note:  this message, like the original, has been updated as of the eve of
    June 6.  The word in question describes sperical objects.]

    Message: 66311
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: more
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 20:29:14

         Oh, I see that Apollo is now starting to censor messages for the
    tiniest things.  There is a difference between objecting to something (which
    is fine) and objecting to it and having it destroyed (which is blatant
    censorship).
         I can understand not allowing a few basic dirty words, such as the 7
    dirty words George Carlin refers to in one of his comedy routines.  But to
    censor lesser slang phrases is going overboard.  Is Apollo turning into the
    Ark?  I hope not.  If so, lord help us.
         My message specifically says "Got -----?  Give me a call."  Now those
    of you who pull your hair out at such an outlandish 'sexual reference' think
    about this for one second.  What am I saying?  I'm saying, obviously, that
    you should give me a call if you're up to the challenge of what I had
    proposed.  (I am, by the way, serious about the TV thing.)  I merely used
    words that were crisp and happened to rhyme.  Whether or not somebody has
    testicles is not the literal meaning.
         What is more important is that people keep their self-righteousness in
    check.  When you think of the words '@$$' and 'b@!!,' does it really send
    chills of horror down your spine?  Or, perhaps, are you objecting because
    you have nothing better to do?  Are you looking for something to get upset
    about?  Maybe you should go elsewhere.  For me, I do not feel that most
    writing is enriched through the use of slang words, but if people use it,
    why should I let it bug me?  I have better things to think about.
         Instead of pulling your hair out over nothing, go comb it and get the
    $%&* on with life.

    Message: 66314
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Peter Petrisko
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 20:52:14

    The other day as I came out of a theatre and went to get into my car, I
    noticed a pamphlet on my windshield.  It was an "important update" on the
    "Fugitive Pope."  As I read through this tract, which apparently blamed
    every evil in the world on Catholics, I assumed that it was an atheist joke,
    some sort of pseudo-religion similar to the Church of the Subgenious.  I
    mean, I couldn't imagine anyone seriously asserting that the Pope was a
    poison gas salesman during WW II, or that the picture showing George Bush
    kissing a nun, with the caption "He's one of them," was intended to be taken
    seriously.  Evidently it was.  There was an 800 number, belonging to a
    24-hour "counciling line" of Tony Alamo's Music Square Church.  I told them
    that I had assumed it to be a joke, at which point they became annoyed and
    asked me why.  I said, because it's a collection of absurdities, a tissue of
    lies from cover to cover.  "Prove it," was the response.  Ever hear of this
    outfit?

    Message: 66315
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 20:56:57

    Public access?

    Only if I get to do a segment called "Shut Your Face."  In this segment, I
    interview various intellectual types, listening politely for a while, and
    then abruptly becoming hostile, saying "Shut your face."  At this point, the
    person will confusedly ask "What?"  at which time I will fly off the handle
    and throw a psychotic tantrum, preferably ending with some beefy security
    guards dragging the astonished victim off camera.

    Message: 66316
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 22:01:57

    That sounds good.  Who do we get for intellectual?

    Message: 66317
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Rules for Rationals
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 22:02:15

         The following is a book excerpt titled "Rules for Rationals."  It
    discusses the problems in having arguments and some good rules of thumb for
    when you get into them.  I think you will enjoy it.

    Message: 66318
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: RfR
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 22:03:57

                              RULES FOR RATIONALS
    [from _The Psychology of the Psychic_ by David Marks and Richard Kammann]

         Having confronted so many varieties of rationalization we wondered,
    almost whimsicially, if we could construct a set of rules for rationals.
    While very few people can be scientists, and very few really want to be,
    anybody can be rational if he wants to.
         The art of doubt can be fun, like having the only pin at a balloon
    party.  But it is important to make a distinction between confronting an
    idea and confronting a person.  It is one thing to show that an idea is
    wrong and quite another to show that a person is wrong.  The object is
    never to win, only to learn.  When you win, you lose.
         For some unknown reason a lot of people have got it into their heads
    that they have to "be right" in order to be lovable, respectable, and
    happy.  And yet who is more lovable and worthy of our respect than the
    person who says, "Say, you're absolutely right.  Fancy that, all my life I
    have believed just the opposite, and I was completely wrong."  This is a
    person with real self-confidence, with humility, with flexibility.  For him
    it is more important to learn the truth of things than to appear to be
    right.
         For a rational person, no idea is sacrosanct or above challenge,
    including his own ideas.  For him, "being right" is a posturing game, and a
    serious source of human frustration and confusion.  The rational person
    finds it equally amusing to discover that his opinions and views are right
    or wrong.
         When two rational people sit down to talk, they have a wonderful
    freedom to play with ideas.  One can offer a proposition, while the other
    can be the devil's advocate who tries to destroy it.  In the middle, they
    can switch roles.  Or they can jointly brainstorm an idea to see how far
    they can push it.
         When a rational person meets a rationalizing person, he finds
    discussion to be a waste of time, because it is not a learning opportunity,
    except to learn how this person carries out his rationalizations.  Having
    no interest "being right" or in causing useless upset and distress, the
    rational person drops the discussion.

         1.  *If-what-then-what*  Many beliefs are stated in such vague terms
    that even the author doesn't know what they mean.  They are judged on their
    esthetic merits, like a painting.  To bring a belief down to earth you can
    ask what it predicts, what it means in terms of if-what-then-what.  For
    example, a person offers the opinion that we have hardly begun to grasp the
    possibilities of cosmic consciousness.  You ask what he means, and get
    another string of words you don't understand.  So then you might say, if I
    have cosmic consciousness, how will my life be different?

         2.  *Disprovability*  This is another way of stating rule 1.  Instead
    of repeating if-what-then-what, you may need to shift gears and ask, what
    piece of evidence would make your theory incorrect?  For example, the
    believer says, lots of people have mental telepathy.  You can startle his
    logic by asking, what kind of evidence would make him change his mind.
    Since he has only thought in terms of positive cases, this will add a new
    dimension to the discussion.

         3.  *The Burden of Proof*  The burden of proof is on the believer.  A
    person asks, why are you so skeptical about UFOs.  It is easy to fall into
    the trap of trying to give reasons why UFOs are impobable.  The best answer
    is, why do you *believe* in UFOs?

         4.  *Alternative Thinking*  When evidence is presented, you may ask
    (or just wonder) if there is any explanation that could produce the same
    results.  For example, the advocate says, modern medicine has increased our
    life expectancy from thiry-five years to seventy years.  You could ask if
    anything else could have done it, even if you don't have a hypothesis, like
    diet, sanitation, housing, immunity, etc.  *Alternative thinking is your
    most creative tool.*

         5.  *Missing Negative Cases*  This rule has three applications.
         a.  Probablility Matches.  One needs to count all
    possible events including negative cases to see how often a result might
    occur by chance in the long run.
         b.  Sometimes negative cases are ruled out by an escape clause.  For
    example, the reason that UFOs are never photographed clearly is that they
    always run away from cameras.  People may see them clearly, but bring out a
    camera and away they go.  This is like the "negative vibes" clause in ESP
    theory.
         c.  Sometimes the negative cases have been literally eliminated.  An
    educator reports a survey showing that senior students all love high
    school, overlooking the fact that all the drop-outs were not interviewed.
    The story is told of a British officer who proposed to add armor plates to
    certain sections of Royal Air Force planes during World War II.  He
    presented a diagram showing the regions with a high density of gunnery
    scars after combat missions.  But Winston Churchill said maybe he should
    put the armor everywhere else because he had only studied the planes which
    came back.

         6.  *Personal Observation*  What a person has observed in his personal
    clinical experience is no evidence for his belief.  Unless he has at least
    kept a written tally of positive and negative cases, you can reasonably
    assume he is giving his subjectrive validations.

         7.  *Testimonials*  The worst kind of evidence for a belief about
    human nature comes from people's experience of themselves.  We recently met
    a man who claimed that the key to giving up smoking was simple will power,
    which he had demonstrated himself.  As the story went on, it turned out
    that he had developed a chronic chest complaint that got worse, and his
    doctor told him that if he didn't quit smoking he would soon die.  Above
    all, remember the Forer effect--fortune tellers (even in plain clothes or
    white coats) always seem to be right.

         8.  *Sources*  It is always helpful to find out where a person got his
    ideas.  This may turn out to be completely frivolous source like a
    newspaper or a TV program.  If the source sounds more credible than that,
    you may decide it's worth looking up.  But you can always apply the
    short-cut rule--if the believer can't make a plausible case himself, forget
    his sources.

         9.  *Emotional Commitment*  If the person advocating an idea is
    committed to it emotionally, if he cannot consider being wrong in a
    matter-of-fact style, then you are wasting your time for two reasons.
    First, your questions are threatening his personal beliefs for no good
    purpose (unless he is doing public harm).  Second, you can reasonably
    assume that his theory is false.  Of course, this is not inevitably so.
    But it is unlikely that an emotionally committed person has weighed his
    evidence pro and con.  He is advocating a belief that feels good to him.

        10.  *The Ad Hominem Technique*  The Latin phrase means "to the man."
    It has many variations.  First, a believer may hold certain authorities to
    be infallible, and quote their opinions as evidence.  Second, he may try to
    place contrary believers into a category of bad people and thus reject
    their arguments out of hand.  Third, he may turn against you, accusing you
    of bad motives or stupidity.  All of these arguments are fallacious, and it
    is not only important to recognize them, but also not to use them.  The
    object is to learn, not to win.

    Message: 66324
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: so-called profanity
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 23:04:53

         After writing my initial messages responding to the censoriship of my
    and other users' messages, Cliff educated me about the revolution this board
    has had.  I previously didn't know that some of you are that oversensitive.
    Needless to say, I went back and updated my messages, removing the foul
    words and replacing them with dashes or ampersands, etc., if only to
    preserve my $tatus.
         My point is this.  Those of you who are complaining about things like
    "up y--rs" are simply acting foolish.  The reality of the situation is that
    minor sayings like that are harmless and can be dealt with just as
    effectively by ignoring them or by discouraging the person who posted the
    message.  Pressuring Cliff into censoring is the wrong route -- squeaky
    clean is not worth aspiring to.  Now Cliff has given a few users power to
    control the expression of ideas on the most important sig on the board.  Rod
    had a message zapped just because he described personal fantasies (with no
    profanity).  This is absurd.
         Think about it--the people who are complaining have been around this
    long while the board was not "squeaky clean."  If they didn't like it, why
    didn't they leave?  Because they enjoyed the BBS anyway.  Monitoring and
    censoring every little word isn't going to bring in loads of new users. Only
    a handful of ultrasensitive people will be made happier.
         In any case, I think this board has taken a turn for the worse.  I
    can't even write a small blurb about a TV show I want to produce without
    having a problem over something as dumb as the word 'ball'.
         Zak

    Message: 66325
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak W on sperical
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 23:37:40

            Yes, I see your frustration...  I had to re-word even some of my
    posts and Apollo-gize as well as Miz Dee and Mr Carter.  It gets real
    difficult when we blast a few users about 'Suggestive' words and then let
    others get away with it.  I mean if I left it alone, I am sure that would
    make Mr Carter very offended like Mr Carter left Miz Dee feeling offended,
    after she was criticized for her posts..etc. Besides, you do have the COSmos
    SIG where you can get away with anything. Why can't we have a 'sqeaky clean'
    PUBlic board?  Do we have to be vulgar on all the boards to get our points
    across?    I hardly think so.

            What is fair for one, is fair for all... I assure you Zak, you are
    not being picked on in anyway.  Rod on the other hand, we pick on him all
    the time...     (Joke-Joke)

            SysOp  sigh!    clif-

    Message: 66326
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak again
    Date: 06/06/90  Time: 23:51:50

    Frankly, I like the PUBlic board 'Sqeaky Clean'!   If you don't like that
    idea, then maybe you are on the wrong board.

            Besides, it may help me be more creative with my posts and stick to
    issues by getting away from insults.  I like the challenge!

            Note:  I have no complaint with Zak as far as clean posts go, never
    had one either!

                            clif-

    Message: 66327
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: bread and circuses
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 00:05:49

    Who do we get for an intellectual?  Hmmm...Good question.  We probably
    couldn't get any REAL intellectuals to waste their time, so why don't we
    start with Mike Middleton?

    Message: 66328
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Question?
    Subject: calculus
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 00:16:36

    If a first derivative is the slope of the tangent to a curve at a point, and
    the second derivative is the rate of change of the first derivative. "at a
    point," (or the rate of curvature of the curve "at a point"), what are the
    third, fourth, etc. derivatives, in these terms?
    I have read "the automobile designer uses the third derivative in order to
    test the riding quality of the car he designs, and the structural engineer
    has even to go to the fourth derivative in order to measure the elasticity
    of beams and the strength of columns."
    Please explain this to me.  Feel free to use your own examples, but keep
    them concrete and accessible to the neophyte.

    Message: 66329
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/rfr
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 00:30:04

    Thanks for posting that.

    Message: 66330
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Vulagirty+Tolerance
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 00:53:34

    Zak; I'm actually pleased that someone else sees my point.
    It's not the fact I wish to truly offend, but I feel there is a point
    where rational people have to say the offended minority need just
    [S]kip if they're so sensitive. It's like making the choice between
    reading House & Garden and Hustler. If you don't like reading material
    that may contain a couple stanza's of sexual innuendo then DONT READ IT.

    As far as the board is concerned, there was really very little to complain
    about. It was Miz dee's and Mr Burkett's extreeme sensitivity in this
    area which has brought us to the current state of affairs.

    I also must aggree with Cliff in that it might just be a better idea
    to keep this board [S]queaky Klean. In fact, I'm nominating that
    we change the [C]ategory list to include [S]queaky klean,
    [T]iptoe thru the tulips , [M]ilk & Honey  [F]lower power, [B]less you
    and [U]nited we stand naked in front of the burgeois opressors.

    Any further posts containing negative or immoral material, material
    which is destructive or anti-establishmentary will be censored.
    You can bet the SEX POLICE on here will enforce the innuendo laws.
    Any references to bodily anatomy, functionality, existance of same or
    inferences and third generation syntatic analogies will be censored.

    Message: 66331
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: War!
    Subject: TOLERANCE
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 01:23:57

    Let me preface this one before I go onward.
    (1) I consider everyone on this board, pro or con to my own ideas,
        adversary or not, to be like a friend. I have no enemies on Apollo.
        Never have let my disputes interfere with my interpersonal actions.

    I have seen and will continue to see a steady decline, albeit plummet
    of the general tolerance level between people everywhere.
    There are, I'm sure, several of you who could extrapolate on this to
    some great extent. This recent barrage of intolerance is just a small
    sample. Lets look at a wider audience for a moment...removing ourselves
    from the BBS and looking at our own society as it sits festering right
    now. Look at what the MOBILE and ENSCO Toxic waste soap opera has
    brought out. All kinds of unrest, disputes, fights, arguments and
    in the fray, stun gun crazy sheriffs and gestapo like attitudes from
    law-enforcement personnel. I went to a class the other day....the Basic
    hand-gun course offered by the USMA.
    There I was not just simply educated...but my suspicions confirmed. My
    doubts cleared. There is by no means mistaking the Cop vs Public
    attitude. In keeping with the [S]queaky Klean drive here, suffice to
    say that I cannot repeat what was said concerning what the police view
    John Q. Public as.
    This is and should be something to be alarmed about. You sleeping
    beauties out there might do good to wake up...and pitch those rosy dreams
    of standing naked in front of everyone with your holier-than-thou

    Message: 66332
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: cont
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 01:35:04

    "Peace to all you peace loving gentle creatures" types.
    I truly wish that could be. I'd rather not have to ever defend
    myself. I'd rather live in a society which doesn't need a police force.
    It just isn't so.
    In all of this, we should keep in mind what we perceive as normal or
    expected. The tolerance level reflected here might be a good barometer
    of the general publics reaction to opposing viewpoints.
    I've noticed a marked increase in hostility...open hostility from all
    corners. The good, the bad and the ugly.
    3 Years ago it would be a rare day to see someone get cut off on the
    road and have the two cars involved in a silly-buggers game of
    DARE for the next 5 miles...fingers at attention and lips working
    overtime. Hostility and general lack of tolerance is a good indication
    of the morale of a given group. In the case I present here, it's
    not just Apollo, it's not just the Cops, Arizona or the West.

    Intolerance breeds intolerance which is intolerable. If you scathe
    intolerance towards someone for something...something that normally would
    have gone by like water off a ducks back...you should expect them to
    become just as intolerant..especially in view of the humanistic values
    being presently accepted as the norm.
    Today, you can see a fight on the road everytime you go out, you read
    about violence and the like in every media presented...just think...
    it's probably going to get a lot more "intolerable".

    Message: 66333
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: War!
    Subject: SEX POLICE
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 01:45:09

    If you have $tatus I request you read my post in the COSmos SIG.
    Since it would be offensive to post the question here, I have
    delt with it in the proper area.
    Be forewarned...it contains material of sexually explicit phrases
    and might singe your sensibilities.

    I ** DEMAND JUSTICE ** !!!!!!!

    Message: 66334
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Mike on last
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 02:42:01

            Mike, not ALL $tatus users have access to the COSmos...  some have
    tried it only to demand their profile be cleared of access to that SIG.
    This shows you, some just don't like those kind of posts...
            See you in the COSmos to talk about it.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66335
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger Mann
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 04:55:51

     I refuse to reduce myself to responding to questions based on statements
    that have been taken completely out of context or manipulated to mean other
    than what I had intended in the first place.
     Since you and your mentor, Middleton, have become so inept at mudslinging,
    I suggest that you go back to your own puddle until you get some more
    experience. Perhaps you could practice on each other, if you can get your
    noses out of each other's backsides long enough.
     End of "conversation".

    Message: 66336
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 05:02:32

     I realize the hazards of a 22. My remark was sort of tongue-in-cheek, aimed
    at the expert in you and Sandy. Sort of like the Chevy owners' opinion of
    Fords, I suspect that most knowledgeable gun folks would tend to look down
    on the lowly 22 caliber.
     Ask Sandy to hang on to that 38 until I see what my finances look like
    after we get settled and get all the things we think we will need in the
    mobile home. ok?
     Paul

    Message: 66337
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve/ seat belts
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 05:10:35

     I doubt that insurance companies will grant any discounts to people who
    claim they wear seat belts.
     There is also another side to the seat belt coin. While I would not say
    with assurance that my late wife would still be alive had she NOT been
    wearing her seat belt, the paramedics had to cut hers off to get her out of
    the car. DOA as far as I was concerned, but the highly touted medical
    profession kept bodily functions working for some 25 hours, presumably so
    that they could justify some $25,000 in costs.
     All of which leaves me on the fence in the seat belt debate.

    Message: 66338
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff Beck
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 05:19:52

     Tony Alamo is a radical right winger who has been giving basic Christianity
    a bad name for several years with his outrageous slings and arrows. Most
    reasonable people, Christians included, give him the credit he is due. None.
     Unfortunately, the old axiom holds true that if you tell the same lie often
    enough, you will find some who will believe it. So, just as unbelievers have
    the burden of the Rod Williams' of this world, the believers must bear the
    burdens of the Tony Alamos.

    Message: 66339
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: RfR/Zak
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 07:34:30

    Zak, thanks for entering that excellent piece. I know that the Phoenix
    Skeptics are looking for articles to put in their quarterly or so
    newsletter. This would be an excellent submission. Do you know Mike
    Stackpole or Ted Karren ? If you don't, would you mind if I mention your
    article to them for possible inclusion ?

    Message: 66340
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: derivatives
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 07:40:04

    The third, fourth, etc, derivatives are the rate of change of the lower
    order derivative. If a curve is expressed as Kx**3, then the first
    derivative of this curve is the rate of change of the curve itself, which
    can be expressed a 3Kx**2, which itself is a curve. Taking the derivative
    of this curve we get 6Kx, which is a straight line which says that the
    tangent to the curve varies linearly according to x. Taking the derivative
    of 6Kx we get 6K, which says slope of the tangent or rate of change of this
    "curve" is a constant.

    Message: 66341
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul Savage
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 07:42:49

    Mike Middleton is not my mentor. We are friends. And I suspect that since
    you refuse to answer my question in a straightforward manner that you DO
    think that the Constitution is divinely inspired.

    I'll ignore the rest of your juvenile response.

    Message: 66342
    Author: Jeff Lochansky
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff L.
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 10:16:53

    Sorry I havent answered any post in the last vew days, just bot my 1200 baud
    modem, and had to hardwire it into my * Toy Computer * took me a couple of
    days, but I'm back. Now that I've read all post you'll all get answers later
    in the day.
                    THE MAD MAX

    Message: 66343
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 11:07:16

    Re:  "Now be a good boy and read your bible and do what the good lord tells
    you to so that one day, when you die, you can go to heaven."

    Gee Rod, I was thinking to answer your post on the problems of the world,
    and then I got to your sentence (above) and realized you were just being
    sarcastic about the whole thing and had to change my reaction.

    I think part of the problem with the world is people like you with their
    intolerance toward others who love and worship Jesus Christ.

    Message: 66344
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Medicine
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 11:09:49

    Re:  "Do you have an answer as to why this country fears socialized
    medicine?"

    If socialized medicine is anything like that received in the military, I
    can understand why people would fear it.

    Message: 66345
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Glands
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 11:20:13

    Re:  "You tax those that aren't sick to pay for those that are."

    Isn't that kind of the definition of socialism?  You take from those who
    have and redistribute to those who don't have.  It sure isn't the other way
    around.  It's kind of like Robin Hood.

    Message: 66346
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 11:22:49

    Re:  "An insurance company could charge less for people who wear seat belts,
    and would put in clause saying that they don't pay *anything* to you if
    you're not wearing a seat belt."

    It sounds like a good idea to me.  I have already heard of insurance
    companies who do this with alcohol.

    Message: 66347
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 11:26:38

    Re:  "Socialized medicine doesn't drive every doctor out of the system, only
    the best."

    What no one has mentioned yet is the leading cause of high medical costs.
    It is the high insurance doctors pay to cover mistakes.  And what has caused
    this insurance to be so high?  Greedy people who sue doctors for zillions
    over screwing up a hangnail operation.

    As a matter of fact, I think "greed" is the cause of many ills of our
    society.

    Message: 66348
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: last
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 12:06:41

    You can bet Greed insurance will be next.

    Message: 66349
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob T on Rod
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 13:16:50

    Re: "I think part of the problem with the world is people like you with
    their intolerance toward others who love and worship Jesus Christ."

    BINGO!   By George (I mean Roger), you got it ol'boy!  You hit the
    proverbial nail on the head!  Rod is 'intolerant', and becomes very hateful
    and crude because of it.  He hates this world, he hates politics, he hates
    life, he hates EVERYTHING.   He is just like 'Mikey' on the cereal
    commercial.  And worse of all, he hates Jesus Christ!

            Too bad, I sorta like Rod, but this intolerance of his, has driven a
    wedge between us, and for this I am sad.

                            clif-

    Message: 66350
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: The SYSOP Speaks
    Subject: Posts...
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 13:23:12

            GREAT posts guys...  We are a family here at Apollo, remember that!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66351
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Mike C/Censorship
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 15:05:17

            Well, it seems all of a sudden Ms. Dee and myself find
    ourselves cast as prime villains in that most intolerable of
    modern sins, intolerance.
            It's a shame that a simple plea for civility -- if only in
    public -- is perverted into an argument for intolerance.
            Make no mistake about it, Mr. Carter, I have no objection to
    the expression of any idea whatsoever.  I have found myself
    equally repulsed by Cliff's lack of tolerance for some
    expressions of atheism as I have by Rod's lack of tolerance for
    the religious beliefs of others.  The same holds true for many
    other issues as well.
            As I said in my rather lengthy post of the other day, it is
    the uncivil expression of viewpoints to which I object.
            To draw an analogy, it seems you would say to those who
    complain about a beach strewn with garbage, "Go find another
    beach!"  I, for one, appreciate Cliff's efforts to keep this
    particular beach clean for all to enjoy.

    Message: 66352
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Thanks, Zak!
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 15:05:52

            Thanks for posting those excerpts, Zak.  There are things
    there for all of us to learn.
            And I'm sorry you seem to have come into this "squeaky
    clean" thing so late.  I suspect you, too, would have objected to
    some of the same posts Melissa and I did.

    Message: 66353
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: $Jeff Beck
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 15:15:19

      It sounds like you want to do the Wally George Show.
        See You Later,
           Dean H.

    Message: 66354
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/guns
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 15:43:06

      Did you read about the guy who went into a pawn shop and picked up a skil
    saw and plugged it in. He cut his throat with it right there in the store.
    This happened right here in Phoenix. You can not prevent unstable people
    from harming themselves or others by controlling objects. It is impossible.
    It is also a minor side stream in the argument over gun control. The real
    issue is does the government have the right to infringe my right to keep and
    bear arms as long as I have not given them a reason by commiting a violent
    crime or being found insane. The answer is no, absolutely no. And if the law
    ever says otherwise, then the law is an ass. That is one thing the
    prohibitionists don't fully understand, or they wouldn't be wasting their
    time. Disarming the law abiding citizen is a moral wrong which would be
    resisted to the extent that it could not be carried out.
       Such a state of affairs would only serve to create a more general state
    of lawlessness, as it became common practice to view the law as an evil
    thing. If drug war is fun, wait till you see gun war. The policeman who is
    working the street, and not a politically appointed mouthpiece, will tell
    you that firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens are a postive thing.
    When there is no such thing as an armed, law-abiding citizen because owning
    a gun makes you a criminal, the police will find themselves with no allies,
    except the 'security through vulnerability' crowd.
      See You Later,
         Dean H.

    Message: 66355
    Author: Hans Glans
    Category: War!
    Subject: Seat belts
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 16:12:19

    Mr. MacGregor. That is a good one. Liability totally transferred because one
    does not wear a seatbelt? It is ok for someone to hit me, because I did not
    do something passive? I wear my seatbelt, but I don't think it would be fair
    to completly penalize people for not wearing them. It's like saying a
    manufacturer shouldn't be responsible for a damages because of a blowout or
    f one of their tires because the person couldn't control the instability of
    a vehicle with a blown out tire.
    And, for your edification, judges and juries now can limit damages to a
    certain degree because of the comparative negligence of someone not wearing
    their seat belt. I think it should not result in damage reduction of more
    than 10%, however. This is the product of a Supreme Court verdict.

    s

    Message: 66356
    Author: Hans Glans
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Language
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 16:15:21

     Unfortunatly, language such as that in question has become the common
    tongue of our country. Those alarmed at children reading obscenity should
    hear children some time. They are more obscene than many adults. And they
    understand most of what it means. When I was in 3rd grade, I moved from one
    school to another. I was treated with many words I didn't know. For
    instance, one kid asked me if I knew what a "screw" was. I said, "yeah, it
    holds things together".

    Message: 66357
    Author: Hans Glans
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Robbin' Hoods
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 16:19:56

    I don't believe in forced charity. The government will always find someone
    who needs your money more than you, either for real, or imagined needs.
    I think charity should be left up to the individual. Charities now don't do
    near as well as they would if we were not forced by beauocracy to contribute
    to others. One out of ten people is completly on the dole, with many others
    on at least partly. Being humanistic is great, but supporting a poor woman
    who chooses to have many children is ridiculous.
    Socialized medicine is like that. I may never father a children and face the
    costs incurred by that act. I don't think I should be made to force someone
    elses decision for or against. I also don't think I should pay a smoker's
    medical bills. Large amounts of budgets go for two self-inflicted aliments.

    Message: 66358
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Laws for safety (sic
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 16:56:57

            Someone MIGHT buy a gun and blow his brains out, so let's punish
    everyone.  Never mind that a person may suddenly find himself in danger only
    to have the police tell you they can ONLY help after 'your murder' has been
    committed, and then find you can't even buy a gun until six days later.
    (assuming now he does not know how to buy a gun from the underground)

             Someone might buy a gallon of gasoline and douse themselves and
    set themselves on fire.  Oh My GOD!  Let's have a six day waiting period
    before you can buy gas, and only after an extensive police search of your
    records.  Why, they may even want to make a Molotov cocktail, and really put
    someone though a painful death.  Better yet, why don't we outlaw Gasoline
    altogether.  (This paragraph makes about as much sense as all those anti-gun
    lobbyists.)

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 66359
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Woman's gun
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 17:12:54

            I was asked about a gun for a woman, so let me give a very brief
    answer here that may help others, from a mistake I see to many times.

            To often the MALE buys the gun for the female. The male will pick
    out a big gun for himself (4inch and up)  "Me MAN, me get BIG Gun"
    Then he picks out 'A cute little one' for the "Little woman"...
            WRONG!   WRONG...WRONG!   those little two inch 38s that seem so
    cute and popular KICK like a MULE!   You need weapon mass to absorb the
    energy.

            Anyone NOT believeing this, feel free to see me, and we can go out
    and shoot a two inch 38 and a 4 inch 38 using the same ammo.. BIG
    difference...  If you MUST have a gun for personal protection, make sure it
    is one you can handle, and get some training in weapon law and use of said
    weapon.   Give me a call if you need help.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*  only trying to help and keep you safe.

    Message: 66360
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill B on poor Cliff
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 17:35:56

            Hey, I have also been repulsed by my own lack of tolerance for some
    expressions of atheism.  I plead guilty Bill.... get a rope?

            I feel most users agree that the PUBlic board, the SHOW CASE of
    Apollo, needs to be kept 'Squeaky Clean'..... even if I am not sure what
    'Squeaky Clean' is.

            We would like more $tatus users on Apollo, but I fear we drive too
    many away, always sounding like a WAR board, then a bunch of friends who
    get over zealous in our posted debates.  I agree with Bill Burkett!
    And for you hard core Apolloites, you know there are SIGs where you can let
    it all hang out.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=* poof *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Maybe Hans Glans and Mad Max will become $tatus users... if we don't
    frighten them away....  yes?  no?  others?

    Message: 66361
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: RfR
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 18:24:29

    I object to the assertion that propositions made by those with an emotional
    involvement should be rejected on that basis.  Everyone feels emotionally
    about things.  Humans are essentially creatures of emotion, not intellect.
    If you don't think that scientists have a similar regard for relativity that
    Christians have for the Trinity, then you haven't been observing people very
    objectively.
    I'm sure that the author of Rules for RAtionality has an emotional interest
    in being rational and of propounding rationality.

    Message: 66362
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: War!
    Subject: Bill Burkett
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 18:28:04

    I am repulsed by your lack of tolerance for the intolerance of others.

    Message: 66363
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/derivatives
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 18:33:21

    Well, if I wanted to sit there and spout 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order derivatives
    for simple functions I could have done it myself.  What I wanted to know,
    was how third and fourth...order derivatives are used; concrete
    applications, meaningful and not trivial.

    Also, it is my understanding that the 1st derivative is the limit of the
    change in y relative to a change in x as the change in x approaches zero: in
    other words, the slope of the curve "at a point".
    It is my understanding that the second derivative measures the rate of
    change of the curve "at a point", because if you have a first order
    derivative at a point P, and another at Q, the average rate of curvature
    over this segment is the angle of the second tangent minus the angle of the
    first tangent, with this quantity over the length of the segment PQ.  The
    second order derivative then, is the limit of this as the length of PQ
    approaches zero.

    Feel free to correct me if this is wrong, but make sure you understand
    exactly what I'm saying before you jump in with a refutation, please.

    Message: 66364
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: dean/guns
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 21:03:03

    I am not suggesting banning guns, I'm just suggesting that criminals
    and mental patients shouldn't be allowed to buy them. If you are
    not a mental patient or a criminal, you have nothing to worry about.
    I'll tell you what I see happening. The majority of Americans are
    going to get fed up with the "no way, no how" attitude of certain
    gun owners, and instead of allowing for reasonable restrictions on
    gun ownership, they will vote in draconian measures that no one
    is going to like.

    Message: 66365
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: jeff/refutation
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 21:06:18

    Refutation ? What refutation. I was just trying to answer your question.

    Message: 66366
    Author: Jeff Lochansky
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Soci}ialized medicin
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 21:38:58

    Yes I'm back and I can dispute every point made against socialized medicine,
    because I dealt with it for apx. 19 years. So I'm talking firsthand
    experience, not rumors. For one german doctor are every bit as good as any
    other doctor in the world. Again socialized medicine is confused with
    communism. It has nothing to do with it . The word socialized is derived
    from the word society and you can check that in the dictionary. so when you
    talk socialized you are talking about something that benefits ALL of
    society,not just the individual. As for competive medicine, I know for a
    fact that german doctors drive mercedes benz to, and not because of
    kickbacks. Doctors in germany are well compensated for their services. Even
    here in the  US the government sets a limit on how much a doctor can charge
    for a certain service. As I stated before, in earlier post, my payroll
    deductions in germany were, percentage wise, the same as in the US.I with my
    medical insurance, unemployment ins., social security ins., and federal
    taxes in germany equalt the payroll deduction in the US. Now to speak of
    service. The service I received through socialized med. in germany is
    excellent. Let me just state some of the basic benefits you receive:
    total medical costs   almost free except for certain token payments ( most
    token payment no more than a $1.
    total dental  completly free, any kind of dental work you need.( including
    dentures, root canals, just about anything you can think of)
    optical almost totaly free the doctor visit is free and you have a set
    amount you can spent on glasses. (the government is by far not cheap with
    its alowance)        PART 1

    Message: 66367
    Author: Jeff Lochansky
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: socializedMedicine
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 21:50:06

    Lets look into medical expenses for a moment. If you needed open heart
    surgery, you would receive it, even if it had to be done in the US. You have
    NO deductible or copayment.As a comparison to med. care to a VA hospital,
    there is a 100% difference. I am not complaining about the VA, I go there
    for most of my needs.I cant think of any real drawbacks. And an other point,
    the government does not tell you which DR to visit, that is totally up to
    you. The only requirement is that you stay with that DR of your choice for a
    minimum 3 month, since you did make that choice. He will inturn refer you to
    any specialist you might need to see, of your choice that is again. I have
    never received inadequet care from a german DR, neather can I state a
    felling of indiference towards me. The german ins. also covers you during
    visits to other country
    , for up to 1 year continuesly. I am making all these atatements from
    experience, not what I've read or heard. Well thats all I've got for now,
    and I'm still open for further disscusion on this suject.
     Talk to you all later
           THE MAD MAX

    Message: 66368
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: War!
    Subject: Roger in all his
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 22:31:37

    wisdom... tell me just HOW do you stop JUST the criminal from buying a gun?
    You have a waiting period and the owner/buyer is registered in the attempt
    to buy a weapon.  The GOOD guy may be dead by time the law (who make
    mistakes) okays the sale.   But this does not happen, but the gun owner is
    now down on paper/computer/job report that he owns a gun.

            In Poland in the 30's.. people with Roger's wisdom said let's
    register all gun owners...  Not much later the Germans took over Poland and
    found this Gun list..  they went to all the gun owners and collected all the
    guns.  How nice of Roger, but this is not the end of the story.  The Germans
    lost control to the Russians...who found the same list.  But this time when
    the Russians went out to collect the guns, the Polish people said, "But we
    don't have any guns"    The Russians shot them ALL!   Thank you Roger for
    the murder of thousands of un-armed people.

            Roger, do you believe this law will apply to the criminal
    underground?  Do you really think this would STOP a criminal from buying a
    gun?

            I have been approached several times, to think about making parts
    for 'out-lawed' weapons, should it come to them being banned.  If you
    think I am joking you Roger, visit my airospace machine shop!

            Skill saws are ok, so is gasoline... but not protection tools.

    Message: 66369
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff & Paul
    Date: 06/07/90  Time: 23:36:29

    You missed it a tad, Paul.  People like you and Cliff who profess to be
    Christians DOES give that religion a bad name.

    It is obvious to all that the both of you are intolerant bigots when it
    comes to most issues.

    Cliff is so wishy-washy on most everything he says that he is considered a
    joke by those who know him.

    He bashes me on this squeaky-clean public board like I don't exist.  His
    rules are for everyone except him.

    Your brains are right where the sun don't shine.

    This board has all the marks of the ARK.     -Rod

Content of this site is © Mark Firestone or whomever wrote it. All rights reserved.