LoJack make sense for 2004 Prius??
41 - 49 of 49 Posts
As originally attributed, the data comes from a single article taken from the OK Dept. of Health Web site. There was no effort to combine, conceal, or confuse on my part. Read it yourself:kenlacy said:
http://www.health.state.ok.us/program/i ... earmv.html
Actually, I'm only twelve, but age is irrelevant! What matters is that I've been trying to alert you to the distinction between perceived wisdom and blind arrogance since you first swaggered in here.
More's the pity,
Moo
12! (is that in dog years) if not then you are wiser beyond your age - and your parents need to wakeup and kick you off the com. Your spending too much time on it and not enough playing with your friends.
Sure seems like you were trying to combine them to me!
Twelve? Is this true? If so, am I only the second one who did a double-take at this?
That's not even of voting age, let alone driving age! That's hilarious! All the effort, all the passion spent here making points, and some of the participants can't even vote?
That's one reason I have taken a step back in all this. As I said, the angst and anger isn't energy well-spent.
But I did find that "12" to be very funny, in a very sad way.
That's not even of voting age, let alone driving age! That's hilarious!
All the effort, all the passion spent here making points, and some of the participants can't even vote?That's one reason I have taken a step back in all this. As I said, the angst and anger isn't energy well-spent.
But I did find that "12" to be very funny, in a very sad way.
There's always the chance that the person was born on Feb. 29, so they only have a birthday every 4th year...BIF said:Twelve? Is this true? If so, am I only the second one who did a double-take at this?
That's not even of voting age, let alone driving age! That's hilarious!
That's one reason I have taken a step back in all this. As I said, the angst and anger isn't energy well-spent.
But I did find that "12" to be very funny, in a very sad way.
I see. Yes, I remember having been warned about that strange sense of humor thing. Hard to detect without the occasional use of emoticons. Can make conversations difficult and even frustrating from time to time, too.
That's very observant, Michelle. Thanks. But in actuality, even somebody born on a Feb 29 could still calculate their age in days, then divide by 364.25 or 365 or something at least "close" to a year.
That's very observant, Michelle. Thanks. But in actuality, even somebody born on a Feb 29 could still calculate their age in days, then divide by 364.25 or 365 or something at least "close" to a year.
I have a friend who was born in Spain, but came to the U.S. with her parents before her first birthday. She has speculated about whether she should celebrate her birthday on the date she was born, or on the date it was at her present location at the time she was born. I.e., she had been alive for a year and a day when the date she was born reached where she is now.
To settle the quandry, I have suggested that her birthday is in Spain, not in the U.S., and that therefore she has never actually had a birthday, and is still zero years old, even though she was born 40 years ago.
Call it a variation of the Feb. 29 problem.
To settle the quandry, I have suggested that her birthday is in Spain, not in the U.S., and that therefore she has never actually had a birthday, and is still zero years old, even though she was born 40 years ago.
Call it a variation of the Feb. 29 problem.
You crack me up with your ability to see such an obvious possibility that somehow eluded and escaped the rest of us.mrv said:
For those among us who like to use "homey" sources for historical reference and wisdom, consider this, "There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.
Hey folks, don't take every comment or post simply at face value. Recall "Slick Willy" and the meaning of "is" and his redefinition of sex based on his personal situatioin vs the "plumbing" involved. Tactical manuevers and "slight" deviatioins from the simple truth that would never be permitted in a formal debate are routinely employed here.
Note to Moo: I think your familarity with the requirements for concealed carry in the state of Oklahoma is probably somewhat lacking and for you to assert that the folks with concealed carry permit are a proper subset and indistinguishable from the population of all Oklahoma gun possessors or even from the population at large. I assure you that is not the case. Your "logic" is flawed and you are stating "facts" not in evidence.
Similarly, class 3 firearms (controlled by the BATF) which includes fully automatic weapons and supressors (AKA silencers) requires special application and approval along with an expensive "tax stamp." Automatic weapons and or silencers... now there are topics that really stir up the anti-gun element. Whip out your statistics and tell us how many legally lisc fully auto weapons and or silencers were used by their lisc owners in the commission of a crime (or suicide or harm to a minor child.)
Do you think it reasonable to assume that the population of class 3 liscense holders is the same as all gun owners or the population at large? Again, I assure you that this is not the case. One of the first signature blocks on the application is for the county sheriff where essentially he has to state that he wans you to have the firearm and sign and date the form. There are extensive Federal background checks, beyond those required for a concealed carry permit.
The concealed carry permit requires passing an approved course of training and stringent background check. Any history whatsoever of family vilolence/spousal abuse and several other things are automatic disqualification.
Please get your facts straight before you assert any personal extensions or interpretations of the statistics you quote.
Oh, by the way... Yes I do have lisc/permit for class 3 firearm and it is in sight on a shelf above this computer. I feel no urge to us in on myself, even after rereading some of the misleading content of some posts.
Pat 41 - 49 of 49 Posts
