Yours has a lot of life in it yet, unless the CO folks put fender solvent (a/k/a salt) on the roads in the winter or you don't maintain it. Oh yeah, I've got less that 200K miles.

Wow, my 320E is only a '95...

Wil, you're still missing it. I honestly don't know anyone who went to Chick-Fil-A that day because they are string fans of "traditional marriage". If it had been nothing but a reaction to Dan Cathy's opinions it would have been a much smaller event. What got so many people's ire going were the actions of the Mayors of Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco threatening to use the Government to prevent Chick-Fil-A from opening stores in their cities. THAT is a threat against the First Amendment. Even the ACLU agreed. Now, let me give you a little hint: you're an actor and writer. I'm a recovering actor and writer. If the government has the power to deny us equal rights with someone based on something we wrote or said, then that hits us where we live. Yes, you were being a dick. Good on you for noticing. But you're still being a fool.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/08/05/in-honor-of-the-sikhs-of-wisconsin/

NK, tell you what. you explain to me why anyone would need to be able to print more than 100 pages at a time, and why the size of paper "magazines" shouldn't be limited?

But oddly enough, this is really an argument for bearing arms as part of an organized militia rather than a personal liberty right. Which is, of course, why the militia was defined in 1792 -- and continues to be defined -- as all males between 18 and 45. Not an organized militia, not a trained militia. All males.

By the way, this business about the Churchill bust still being in the White House isn't what was reported at the time: http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/27/wheres-winston/

Grumph. Notice I didn't put in quotation marks. You've corrupted my thinking.

hey impose conditions on -- and therefore by definition abridge-- the inalienable right to vote for the government that will act with the consent of the People. Um. Well, to start with, voting isn't an inalienable right; your right to vote can be abridged. The Constitution didn't even define who may vote until the 14th Amendment, which limits the right to vote to either natural born or naturalized citizens. It follows therefore that establishing a person's citizenship is a necessary condition to voting. In contrast, the right to keep an bear arms is stated in the Second Amendment, and is stated very clearly as "shall not be abridged." Period. Nice try but if I can spot the problem in your legal reasoning, the real lawyers here are probably hurting themselves laughing.

AR-15/Ninja Drag-- does the AR-15 variant have a significantly higher muzzle velocity, bullet weight/penetration, or rate of fire as compared to a conventional .223? No, the ballistics are pretty much the same and it still only fires once per trigger pull. What purpose does a 100 round magazine serve-- assuming it can be made to function reliably? Holds more bullets. As several people have noted recently, in self-defense you never here someone complain "Oh, damn, I didn't need all these bullets."

Honestly, I suspect that even for pistol, getting a 94 percent hitting-the-target ratio would really worry me in stand-up range firing. I suspect some fool read that the average score is 94 and turned that into 94 percent hit ratio.

I wonder what happened to what I typed after the quote?

BTW, my answers only seem flippant on the surface. They are real, legitimate and wholly sufficient answers. Exactly.

self-defense in case of home invasion or carjack, is a shotgun superior to a rifle? Home invasion, yes -- a shotgun looks *real* impressive and makes very large holes. Carjacking, neither is great, because they're three feet long.

So, was that a high-capacity printing press, Mr Franklin? Are there any legitimate hunting or personal publication uses for such a press?

I'm having a hard time imagining any firearm or magazine not useful for self defense,

NK, the rifle was an AR-15, which is more or less a .22 in ninja drag. (Really, .223/5.56mm) It had a 100 round cylindrical magazine, which proves he wasn't all that sophisticated because everyone who is sophisticated knows they jam, as this one in fact did. And yeah, I've used an AR-15 for varmint hunting as a kid, as well as target shooting and the time-honored recreational plinking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

Oh, Pamela, Beckel did apologize. he apologized during the show, and he's been apologizing all day on twitter. You're better than that.

I'd say there's a difference between what someone might rationally choose to do, and what Joe Stiglitz thinks they ought to do if they were only as rational as he is, and knew then what he knows now. Consider, eg, the recent financial crisis. It appears that it came about primarily by people rationally maximizing return in the presence of non-market drivers like regulation. This led to "regulatory arbitrage", and so led to situations like AIG's, where one division behind a firewall in Europe was able to expose the entire firm to a prodigious amount of risk that didn't show up on the company's books in the US. But the people in Europe were rationally maximizing their returns in compensation within their rules; the people in the US were rationally obeying the accounting and financial rules as they stood; and AIG was rationally taking advantage of the differences between US and European regulations to generate a return, without grasping the risk to which they were actually exposed. It would appear that the presence of regulations that made the lack of information transmitted from one corporate entity to another a mechanism for generating real cash returns lef a bunch of smaller actors, each acting rationally, into a situation that appears irrational later.