Toonpack

It's an exaggeration not a conspiracy in my book. It's something that is there and is taken advantage of, it's not totally engineered. That makes it different IMO. If that doesn't fit with a pure definition of a conspiracy I couldn't care less.

QFT

Aye OK

TAPWATER !!! TAPWATER !!!! RO water only in a tank, if you're going to do it properly. Koi - wouldn't go near them, water has to absolutely perfect.

and of course the science at the end of the grant must be aimed towards proving the aims of the originator of said grant (if further grants are to be received). Does co2 effect climate = yes, Does man contribute co2 to the atmosphere = yes, ergo, yes + yes = "bingo" or "Kerching" I do my bit, I plant trees. (and pay exorbitant tax each week when I fly).

Nope, just an opportunity exploited. To be a conspiracy in my book, climate change would have to be an invention/fabrication, as I said I do believe it is happening, but then again it always has. We may understand things better (through science) that contribute to climate change and mankinds activities may well have an effect but change is totally natural. If we could shut down volcano's and stop cattle farting we'd have more effect than "turning a light off" or not flying.

It is if you populate your tank simply based upon what looks good, the fact that many of the more attractive fish tend to be arch predators rarely gets considered. They're only doing what comes natural.

What conspiracies do you think I subscribe to ??? Can't think of any myself. Climate change is not a conspiracy, it's happening, I do believe though man's part as catalyst/driver of it is way overblown and also just so happens to be a "nice little earner".

Read lots about it, to keep tropical fish properly is a high maintenance "job" and they have a habit of eating each other if you aren't carefull with your fish choices.

Am with Parky on this one. Climate changes all the time and has throughout history, it's just one of those cycles but governments and scientists have twigged they can exploit it for dosh

It's not just Ashley and Newcastle that's melting away from what it was, it's football in general

Regarding #9, what's the problem ??? Should do that here.

Them crazy yanks and their guns eh??

You can't stigmatize the majority, minority aye, piece of piss, see smokers as an example.

If Sports Direct was in the US it would sell guns, hunting is HUGE in the USA, they think of it as nothing different to an aisle of fishing rods.

They can't, that's a huge and erroneous simplification. In nearly all states (Connecticut being one of the strictest) you have to pass police and federal checks to buy a gun, you cannot just walk into somewhere and walk out with a gun like it was a packet of sweets, not sure about ammo purchase but in most places guns aren't a walk in walk out sort of thing (in Texas you can if you have State resident ID).

Funny isn't it, you can get jailed/villified for calling someone a nasty name, yet the everyday clinical killing of a baby, for cosmetic reasons by and large (as in "I don't want it/ it was a mistake") is just "run of the mill" acceptable.

I'm not. I'm not saying nothing should be done, but I do think it's impossible. The will just is not there in the electorate even after something like this, on all the NFL boards I frequent there's plenty of "condolence" threads/posts but not one mention of the "g" word. Guns are so embedded in society and always have been, the psyche of Mr/Mrs average American is that they have guns and wouldn't dream of shooting anyone, and that they and their guns are not the problem. Anyone buying a gun in Wallmart gets checked (and in most gun stores) it's the private sales and gun shows where stuff gets under the radar. But the majority of these "sprees" are undertaken with legal guns from "upstanding" checked out owners. All they can do is manage down the problem and they are doing that given the gun crime figures. It's not like the enactment of the gun controls here post Hungerford/Dunblane where gun ownership even then was a very minority thing, it's easy via legislation to subjugate and police a minority but how easy is it if you are doing something the majority doesn't want. Even with our zero tolerance to guns we still have occassional shooting sprees here, there was one just off the end of my street years ago.

It's that time of year again. Christmas Curry night in the same old curry house, started 35--ish years ago with "the lads" last Saturday (or 2nd last) before christmas, mass curry house invasion, then the girlfriends started to attend, then they became wives and kept attending, then the kids started to come, then the kids and their girfirend/boyfriends stared to attend, now some are wives/husbands and they organise it now. Nice little tradition I guess. God help the curry house, some of us have never grown up That said they tend to give us the back of the room for our annual naan bread aerodynamics testing. They're used to us now.

They are doing something, deaths from firearms are reducing in the USA they are way down from 20 years ago that fact gets lost when a nutter goes off.

But they're the big killers. As I mentioned earlier the teacher would likely have passed the tests.

Roy Jenkins has a lot to answer for, since when has abortion improved lives, (except in maybe rape/severe disability of the child cases) similarly the death penalty (yes I am firmly in the pro camp). Look what happens when a copper here shoots an armed piece of shit, riots. Try taking the guns back over there by force it'd be armageddon. Even with the firearms ploriferation gun crime in the states is falling year on year. The guns used in this spree (the one's used against those poor kids) were legally owned by a schoolteacher, she'd have passed any tests you'd likely want to institute, it probably wouldn't have stopped this. Why she wanted firearms is another matter of course. But even with strickter rules I doubt this could have been avoided.

It's WAY too late

I am not pro gun per se (in the America context) but I can't fathom how you can revert it. I do object to the fact that I am not allowed to own one though (and yes I'd happily go through all the checks anyone could want). Then again I also object that I can't protect my home from a burglar (for example) with the force I see fit at the time (if the need arose) even without a firearm. The perpetrator didn't just "walk into a gun store". Given America's short (and bloody) history, and associated gun culture, how do you reel it in, I can't see a way If you are of a deranged-mind to go "on a spree" you will find the means. Most of these mass murder "nutters" aren't from the dregs of society they plan and they act.

But how do you take them away?? it's not like they've just been introduced they've always been there, it's a VERY young nation and guns have by necessity (in the early years of the country) always been there, their very constitution empowers the right to bear arms, (to protect the people from the government, is the reason) it's been there from the start. Their country was built by the gun and very recently in historical terms, our was build by the sword but that was a long long time ago. The american equivalent of my great grandfather was killing his fellow countrymen in a civil war.