tonrob

Someone has their knickers in a bunch...

Ohio556

I'm a man and that's neither funny nor polite.

elfman

FTFY

Ohio556

I only laugh at things that are funny and I would only engage in a "ball busting" remark about underwear with somebody I had known for at least several months and was friendly with. I certainly wouldn't use such a remark in my first interaction with a new-comer on a forum.

md95065

I don't think that it was meant to be polite ...

Ohio556

Yeah, but I was trying to politely inform him about his impolite remark without venturing into impolite territory myself.

I could have told him where to shove his knickers but then I'd be almost as silly as him, wouldn't I?

Etiquette is just lost on some people, isn't it?

tonrob

In all honesty I didn't stop to consider whether it was polite or not. I simply had a genuinely good laugh and wanted to share that happy emotion.

I suppose it beats the usual "can I bring my electricals" and "how do I move money from A to B" I suppose...

dbj1000

You are correct, sir.

He meant to point out that you had your panties in a bunch.

elfman

Depends whose definition of ettiquette you're talking about. In BE forum ettiquette it's usually quite acceptable for people take the piss out of newcomers whose first posts are as pompous as yours were.

Ohio556

Raising an issue about a man who is about to come to the USA with pistols that he thinks are A-OKAY just because they are old, that there may be serious legal implications under the National Firearms Act if one of his old pre-WW1 pistols just so happens to be a machine pistol, such as a broomhandle mauser, is certainly not pompous... It could very well save the man from at the least a headache with immigration and at the most a ten year prison sentence for an NFA violation.



Questioning somebody who obviously doesn't value the Constitution of my country about the wisdom of a piece of legislation he was lauding (legislation he probably knew nothing about), is certainly far from pompous.

elfman

Sooooo..... lauding the Brady bill = not valuing the entire constitution? Interesting logical leap.

Ohio556

If somebody were lauding a bill that severely curtailed the type, number, etc, of books people were able to obtain and read, in addition to prohibiting larges numbers of people from having access to books, and making it very difficult to obtain certain types of books, I doubt anybody would have an issue pointing out that they don't value freedom.

Now substitute the word "firearm" for the word "book" and tell me what the difference is. The Second Amendment is just as important as the First Amendment. Failure to appreciate the Second Amendment is basically the equivalent of trashing the entire Bill of Rights.

Some people get it and some people just don't get it.

DeltaSierra70

I promised myself I wasn't ever posting here again, but someone is going to point out the subtle differences in how much easier it is to kill someone with one over the other. Might as well be me

Ohio556

Well what if the book in question deals with making explosives or dangerous chemical agents? Wouldn't such a book be potentially much more dangerous than a simple rifle?

Ohio556

The last time the Jehovah's Witnesses came by I answered the door in my underwear while holding a pistol (I had been asleep when they woke me up via knocking on the door).

I kindly informed them I had already had a religion and wished them a pleasant day before slamming the door. They didn't hesitate to turn around and leave.

I just don't think holding a phone-book would have had the same impact...

At any rate, when you don't know who's at the door, it always pays to take your pistol with, especially if it was where it should be when you woke up, specifically right next to the bed, which is where I had it.