Gun Control Debate Gets Muzzled

[Iluvleiberman]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-08-07-pilots-_x.htm

[MrBenchley]

1. Swell what blood monney will buy, isn't it?

The corrupt Republican party, for one.

[Spoonman]

5. Yea, and quite a few

Democrats too I guess?

The Senate is close to passing a bill that would shield firearms manufacturers and dealers from civil lawsuits brought by victims of gun crimes. The measure, which the House passed 285-140 as 63 Democrats voted with the GOP majority, is an effort to shield the gun industry from the type of lawsuits that have been successful against tobacco and asbestos companies.

The popularity of the bill — it has 54 co-sponsors in the Senate, including several top Democrats — underscores the changed political dynamics of gun control. Senate Minority Whip Harry Reid, D-Nev., has signed on, and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., might do so.

But I guess in keeping with some people on this board, these are not "true" democrats.

[MrBenchley]

6. Gee, spoon....

You sound worried....

[Spoonman]

20. Worried hell,

Can you not read?

I believe it is you my friend, who is now in panic mode.

Hell I’m jumping for joy knowing that more and more of my Democratic party leaders are finally waking up and smelling the coffee.

1. They have begun to realize that the ranting of an emotional few does not reflect what the party majority desires.

2. They have finally regained the focus, as opposed to fuck us, that Democrats want to retain our rights, and not revoke them.

My favorite part of the article

"The soccer mom who wants to gets guns off the playgrounds through gun control is the same mom who wants pilots to be armed " he said. "The dynamic has changed. . . . It's putting it in the context of safety."

I guess they don't buy into the fewer guns = less crime either.

[CO Liberal]

2. And People Will Continue to Die

Thanks to the f**king lunatics who run the Nuts Ruining America.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

3. And people will die

because we have a society build not on respect of others but upon greed.

Neither the NRA, nor Guns, has anything to do with that.

I would say that the people that are fixated on guns and the NRA as being the problem, are part of the problem. Because their sensational and baseless rhetoric is keeping the spotlight off of the true problem, and is keeping political pressure off of the politicians to fix the TRUE problems.

[Superfly]

4. Very well said

kudos

[Spentastic]

7. I'd agree

A culture of fear, greed and selfishness has been enabled in the U.S and fostered by the right. Unfortunately, the NRA seems to lean that way.

The RKBA fiasco is a symptom rather than a cause. However, sometimes you have to treat the symptoms to stop the patient dying.

[MrBenchley]

8. Too too funny

"their sensational and baseless rhetoric is keeping the spotlight off of the true problem"
Which is that gun companies might get sued like any other business in this country without the corrupt GOP's action....

[CO Liberal]

9. And The NRA Feeds On That Greed

"Keep what we've got and prevent others from getting ahead".

The standard GOP mantra, partially financed by pro-gun forces.

[Man_in_the_Moon]

10. The NRA

the US's most successful gun-control organization.

[-..__...]

33. The anti-gun side would never do anything like that...

Not!...


Like when some tragedy strikes and the Axis of Brady/MMM/VPC bloodsuckers play the victims families
like a broken fiddle.

<insert BRADY/VPC/MMM Media Circus> <sob> Buu, buuu, buuut', they'll stammer.
"Victims of gun violence will be denied their day in court". </sob> </Media Circus>.

Their manipulation and shameless exploitation of others is abhorrent. As if it's not enough that
these people have to suffer enough (all through no fault or complicity from the firearms industry),
the anti-gun types have the audacity to parade these people in front of the TV cameras
so that they can make a fast buck or two. Yep, they groom them, give them a photo to hold up,
write a few mothballed but attention sound bytes for them to parrot, then make them dance like some
marionette on a string for the public. Just so the anti-gun Axis can foist their slack-jawed malarkey
on the rest of America and bilk a few more bucks in donations.

If that's not criminal, it should be.

Fortunately most sane and intelligent people can see through their charade.

[demsrule4life]

11. Co you are a good and honest guy

so your chances of getting shot are preatty low. What I have been reading about your state I would be more worried about those pesky mosquitos

[iverglas]

12. curious

"Co you are a good and honest guy
so your chances of getting shot are preatty low."

And here I had understood that it was the "good and honest" folk who needed all those firearms so that they could "defend themselves" against the hordes of miscreants out to slaughter them and their families, and pillage their homes, businesses and motor vehicles.

If a "good and honest guy" has such low chances of getting shot, and given that there is no reason to believe that those chances would actually be affected, i.e. decreased, by such a guy having his/her own firearms -- would s/he not reasonably be reluctant to increase those chances (and also the chances that a family member of friend would get shot) by bringing firearms into his/her life and home??

.

(typographical incoherency fixed)

[MrBenchley]

13. Good question....(n/t)

[demsrule4life]

14. Most of the people that get shot

are shot by people they know. I have said before here to DECREASE your chances of getting shot don't partake in crime and don't marry a psycho. I'am surprised CO did'nt post the article about the four people that were killed in Co last week. I would bet those four were in crime and done pissed someone off. I don't believe that people with common sense that keeps guns in their house have a high risk of shooting themselves or friends. My great grandfather kept guns in his house, my grandfather kept guns in his house, my dad kept guns in his house and I have always kept guns in my house. So for a hundred years in my family nobody has shot any family members or friends. I carry a gun for the unexpected. And I agree it is a very small chance. Last week, alabama put a guy to death for killing four during a robbery at a gas station. Two of the people that were killed were a husband and wife that stopped by to buy a coke. That is the reason why I carry. In 1977 in Indiana I was in a small market when a robber walked in and started to take care of business. I played passive and even gave him the money in my wallet. But if for any reason I thought he was going to start shooting witnesses I would of put a 230 grain bullet through his brain.

[CO Liberal]

15. But There Are Always Exceptions to This Rule

Like the victims of the DC Area snipers.

[demsrule4life]

16. I agree, why I said "most"

[CO Liberal]

18. Bottom Line? You Just Never Know Who WIll Shoot Whom

So isn't it a good idea to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them???

[MrBenchley]

19. During the summer of 2001

on another internet forum infested by the standard line of RKBA horseshit (Hitler was for gun control! They're going to take all our guns!) I took a few minutes every day to post five or six excerpts of stories of people getting shot under the title "Gun Owners in Action." Generated amazing amounts of rage among the "law abiding gun owner crowd" (death threats, etc.). Some of the stories from that summer still haunt me....

...the Colorado couple who took their five year old target shooting and handed him "daddy's rifle," whereupon he shot the back of mommy's head off...

...the Minister umpiring a softball game, shot dead by a CCW loony who decided to fling a few shots around after a fleeing purse snatcher...

...the home schooled teens found nude and dead in a NC trailer in a murder/suicide....

...the little girl who shot and killed herself accidentally by jostling a loaded gun that was in a drawer...

[iverglas]

17. hey!

" I don't believe that people with common sense that keeps guns
in their house have a high risk of shooting themselves or friends."

Believe what you like! Believe five absurd things before breakfast! That there's a free country, isn't it? I'm sure not telling anybody what s/he may or may not believe. Nobody has any duty to believe things that are sensible, or relevant. Hell no.

*I* don't believe that people who drive cars are at high risk of going through the windshield and being killed. I'm old, and I've never been in a situation in which this could have happened. None of my family has, either. My belief is perfectly rational.

So hell, why would I want to worry about that happening? Why would I want to take steps to prevent it happening if a situation arose in which it might happen? Why would I wear a seatbelt?

Maybe because ... in the unlikely event that a situation does arise in which I *might* be killed by being thrown through the windshield, having my seatbelt on will prevent it happening. Because no matter how small the risk, what might happen is so perfectly dreadful that I will go out of my way to avoid it.

And in my world, the unlikely event that someone in my family might, in a fit of depression or drunkenness or rage or pure abject stupidity, take a firearm and use it, intentionally or unintentionally, to kill or injure him/herself or others, would be quite sufficient, in terms of the seriousness of the harm that would result if that very unlikely thing did happen, for me to take steps to avoid it. Like, by not keeping the things in the house.

"Last week, alabama put a guy to death for killing four during
a robbery at a gas station. Two of the people that were killed were
a husband and wife that stopped by to buy a coke."

Truly unfortunate. I suppose that they could have avoided that fate if they had only thought to carry loaded firearms at all times, and been sure to draw their weapons before entering any gas station.

"In 1977 in Indiana I was in a small market when a robber walked in
and started to take care of business. I played passive and even gave
him the money in my wallet. But if for any reason I thought he was
going to start shooting witnesses I would of put a 230 grain bullet
through his brain."

Very brave. If I'd had a firearm on me, I would likely have done the same. Of course, I'd likely have ended up dead before he did, given that he had his firearm out and generally aimed already, while I would have had to draw mine and, um, hope he didn't notice?

On a cost-benefit analysis, I'm afraid that I see entirely too many, and too serious, potential costs, and entirely too few potential benefits, for it to be even half-way intelligent for me to be hauling around or harbouring a firearm.

.

[demsrule4life]

21. If you were correct in your assumption

that guns kept in the house would always kill family members or friends the death rate in our country would be in the millions per year. I was just stating the history in my family. You like to quote stats all the time and the stats say you stand a better chance of dying in your home by a fall, or one of your kids will die in a swimming pool. There is a question I would like answered why is it the annt-gunners always make a big deal when someone accidently (I dont believe in accidents with guns by the way) gets killed by a gun, when accidents by other means is just a two sentence block in the newspaper?

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

25. explanation REQUIRED

A FALSE STATEMENT was made ABOUT ME.

I identified the false statement and its source.

I DID NOT call the false statement a lie, or its source a liar.

I am ENTITLED to challenge false statements made about myself and to challenge makers of false statements about myself. And I don't give a good god damn who might be offended by my challenge.

What the hell is the source of this immunity that apparently protects the makers of false statements about other posters from public challenge?

I have been told that I CANNOT seek deletion of a post that contains false statements about me, because false statements about other posters are not against the rules. (If a false statement about another poster is not a "personal attack", I am Marie of Romania, but let's not let that bother us.)

Because I have received no explanation of this deletion, I am requiring one.

IT IS NOT MY FAULT if anyone is incapable of understanding anything I say.

IT **IS** THE FAULT of anyone who is incapable of understanding anything I say if S/HE MAKES FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT ME based on that lack of understanding.

I WAS ACCUSED OF SAYING SOMETHING I DID NOT SAY:

"... your assumption that guns kept in the house would always kill family members or friends ...".

I DID NOT "ASSUME" THAT.
I DID NOT SAY THAT.

The assertion that I assumed or said that is nothing short of an assertion that I am either a complete fool or a liar. ONLY a complete fool or a liar would say the enormously stupid and false thing that *I* have been accused of saying.

There is no possible way that anything I did say could have been understood by a reasonable AND honest person as meaning that.

Am I really supposed to just sit here while these kinds of false statements are made about me?

This post IS ABOUT A FALSE STATEMENT MADE ABOUT ME.

I challenge the maker of the false statement to prove it.

I do this on this board, not in a PM to a moderator or in some other forum, because the false statement WAS MADE IN THIS FORUM and IS STILL SITTING ON THIS FORUM.

The maker of a statement may be asked either to prove that it was true, or to establish that, if false, it was made without malice (and is withdrawn). I simply will not agree that I cannot use the forum in which the statement was made ABOUT ME, and read by others, to demonstrate the falseness of the statement and request either that such proof be offered or that acknowledgement and retraction of the mistake, if such it was, be given.

And that is exactly what I require. And if the person who made that statement about me either cannot prove that it is true or will not say that s/he made it out of mistake and withdraw it, then I am entitled to state my own conclusions from the facts at hand just as I am entitled to state my conclusions about anything else in the universe. I suggest that if anyone finds my conclusions malicious or unreasonable, s/he say so to my face and make his/her own case.

.

[demsrule4life]

27. In my first post to Co in this thread

I did not want or attend for this to go this far downhill. " I don't believe that people with common sense that keeps guns
in their house have a high risk of shooting themselves or friends."

Believe what you like! Believe five absurd things before breakfast! That there's a free country, isn't it? I'm sure not telling anybody what s/he may or may not believe. Nobody has any duty to believe things that are sensible, or relevant. Hell no.

I made my comment about people with common sense keeping guns in their house. You come back with the five absurd things before breakfast comment. So what was I supposed to think? If you say what I said is absurd I have to think that you are bringing up the old arguement of a gun kept in the house is more likely to kill the people that live in that house and the numbers of guns in relation to the numbers of people killed in their house just don't add up.

[pmbryant]

30. iverglas

Because I have received no explanation of this deletion, I am requiring one.

Since you asked:

Your post was deleted because it contained personal attacks on another DU poster, including "Grow up" and "you are far too old to be behaving anywhere near this childishly".

Please read the DU rules and please contact the DU Admins if you have further questions or comments about moderator actions.

Thank you,
pmbryant
DU Moderator

[iverglas]

84. further requirement

Kindly forward to me the usual explanatory post with my post attached. I do really believe that I am entitled to that copy, not having retained one myself.

"Your post was deleted because it contained personal attacks on
another DU poster, including "Grow up" and "you are far too old to be behaving anywhere near this childishly"."

The idea that anyone would have the gall to file an alert about such comments in this forum, or that anyone else would take them seriously ... well, it's one of those five absurd things I'll have to try to believe before breakfast tomorrow, I think.

In response to a post in which a poster POSTED A FALSE ALLEGATION ABOUT ME, I think somebody got off very lightly.

It's not against the rules to state a falsehood about another poster, but it is against the rules to object to the telling of falsehoods by suggesting that someone who tells them ought to grow up and stop behaving foolishly.

Damn. I'm through the looking glass already.

[Romulus]

24. fwiw

(even though I know it's not good for my blood pressure to be commenting in the Dungeon)

the NYT Magazine had an article two weekends ago on some economist who, among other things, after analyzing the data, found that

(1)in households where kids, swimming pools, and firearms were present
(2) the kids were 100 times more likely to die by drowning than by any method involving firearms

[iverglas]

85. explain this

"If you were correct in your assumption"
that guns kept in the house would always kill family members or friends
the death rate in our country would be in the millions per year."

Provide me with an explanation of why you stated that I assume "that guns kept in the house WOULD ALWAYS KILL family members or friends".

Quote me. Copy the words that I said, and paste them into a post, and show the world where I said ANYTHING that supports your statement that I assume "that guns kept in the house WOULD ALWAYS KILL family members or friends".

If you want to make statements about me, you had better be prepared to back them up with evidence of the truth and accuracy of those statements.

If you cannot provide evidence of the truth and accuracy of the statements you make about me, you had better be prepared to retract such statements and apologize, either for the mistake that resulted in you making false statements about me, or for the intentional making of false statements about me.

If you are not prepared to do either of those things, you will understand why I would not ever respond to another statement made by you, since I will have evidence that when you make statements you do so without regard for truth or accuracy, and I can't think why anyone would bother responding to anything said by anyone who is known to make such statements.

Now you get to demonstrate that you intend only to discuss issues in good faith, and you do not intend to misrepresent or mislead anyone.

Let's roll.

.

[Township75]

23. A better headline would be...

anti gunners whine as they see their anti gun rights agenda pushed closer to extinction.

If anyone supported that garbage agenda, and thank God only about 4 people do, articles like this wouldn't be written.

But since that is not the case, I am enjoying watching this agenda do a slow miserable death.

[MrBenchley]

26. Yeah, watching corruption is a million laughs

"they see their anti gun rights agenda pushed closer to extinction"
Keep on dreaming.

[Township75]

28. So let's hear about your great victories this year.

Your Million Moron March can't even get its meetups going. Didn't they have to cancel the meetup in NY where they have their largest chapter. Guess it should be the Dozen Moron March.

Probably more would have showed up if it held at Dunkin Donuts, or McDonalds.

[MrBenchley]

29. We weren't rooting for Tom DeLay and John AshKKKroft, for one

But hey, who doesn't doubt the scum of the earth is motivated? There's always 40,000 nutcases at the NRA convention.

Meanwhile let's look at those big RKBA victories for the past year: The Beltway sniper killed 10, 4 dead at LA airport, 6 dead at Lockheed Martin, school shootings in Gary, Ind,, San Diego, Calif,, and Williamsport, Pa., a City Councilman shot dead in NNYC .....

[Walter_Bowman]

31. even a chimp typing randomly will write something sensible at some point

Usually, in a million years.

The Repukes' opposition to the AWB is an example of that.

[MrBenchley]

35. Many hundreds of thousands of years to go

before we see any sense from the RKBA crowd....

[Walter_Bowman]

41. Obviously, the gun control crowd

disproves that theory about the chimp.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Township75]

34. You wrote a lot more than you needed to.

You could have just have written the following:

We haven't had a victory. We lose both in the courts and at the voting booths. Our agenda will soon go the way of the dinosaur and become extinct.

Please save DU and the web the bandwidth next time:)

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walter_Bowman]

40. Hand us all a big laugh

Where did he even mention that party?

[Township75]

43. I figured you would quit.*

*

[-..__...]

44. When the tough gets going...

The tough:

A) Hands themselves another Laugh.

B) Cry's a river.

C) Blames the NRA.

D) Remind you to check the fecal deposit in your trousers.

E) All of the above.

Winner recieves an all expenses paid trip to Ted Nugents bow hunting
and crossburning Kamp for Kids.

[MrBenchley]

47. Gee, someone who was really tough

wouldn't need to lug a gun everywhere...

[Township75]

48. So are you a big bad ass?

Do you scare people when you walk into a room Benchley? You must right? You don't carry a gun...do you?

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

74. Mostly I'm missing a gun fetish

I've got a penchant for honesty, sanity and public safety instead.

[Walter_Bowman]

78. As Pushkin (whom you've doubtless read) would put it

"gun control and public safety are two things incompatible".

[MrBenchley]

80. As Benchley puts it

"Nobody is more pathetic or dishonest than a neurotic with a gun fetish.."

[MrBenchley]

46. Then you figured wrong

I've been hearing "resistance is futile" from right wing loonies my whole life...even Star Trek's Borg don't shriek it as often as conservatives do.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CO Liberal]

79. As Someone Who Owns a Single-Wide......

.... I find these posts highly offensive.

[Township75]

82. Are you serious?

?

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walter_Bowman]

50. Quitters never win. Winners never quit. But...

if you never win AND you never quit, you're...

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[-..__...]

32. How about 4 million laughs?

As in the laughter of 4 million NRA members and 60 - 80 million gunowners. Guess whom their
laughing at? (hint: it's not at Ted Nugent or Wayne LaPierre).

Why are we laughing? Quite simple; gunowners have been wining round after round in the
courts and gaining ground in the legislatures at both the Federal and state level for some time now.

There's 44 states that trust their citizens with some form of concealed or open carry. Of the
remaining 6 holdouts, a few are showing signs of buckling at the knees. 33 other states have
led the way by granting some relief from frivolous and vindictive lawsuits aginst firearms
manufacturers.

There hasn't been a single major piece of firearms legislation enacted since the Brady Bill.
Anything submitted that even hints at gun control is routinely dismissed or filed in the trash
where it belongs.

As it's looking now, by the end of the year our firearms industry will be deservedly granted relief
at the federal level from the leeches and bottom feeders at Brady/VPC/MMM and their feeble minded lawsuits.

As it looks now, come Sept 2004 we'll once again be able to buy high-capacity mags at bargain prices.
AR-15's and AK-47's will once again be assembled and sold the way God and their designers meant them to be.

True, we still can't let our guard down and there's always another battle to be won.

They want to purpose a .50 cal ban? LOL!! Fine, it'll be ignored and ridiculed just like the last time.

If that's their idea of "common sense" gun control then we'll give them something to more to caturwaul about...
such as the rider that passed the full House Appropriations Committe a week or so ago... You know, the one
that gives firearms dealers more latitude and loosens up the requirements and red tape
for new FFL applications.

One gun a month or bullet tax you say? Swell, we can use another one of those oft mentioned laughs being
handed around.

In response we'll go about about repealing the DC gun ban. That'll be sure to get under their dust ruffles.

Ballistic fingerprinting, gun show "loopholes", waiting periods, "smart" guns, etc.

Yep, some pretty funny stuff alright. Maybe someone, someday will be kind enough to let you
and others in on the joke?

[MrBenchley]

37. How about 30,000 laughs a year

thanks to the corrupt gun industry.

"hint: it's not at Ted Nugent or Wayne LaPierre"
Of course not...those lunatics are little tin gods to the RKBA crowd, who share their racist corrupt agenda (and don't do a good job hiding it, either).

[Walter_Bowman]

38. Get a real number

Before you go around pimping it.

[Walter_Bowman]

39. And how about 2,500,000 laughs while you're at it? (nt)

nt

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walter_Bowman]

51. You know, the stupidest THR member has more common sense

than the smartest MMM marcher.

[MrBenchley]

55. Yeah, we could tell

from the stupid comments posted there.

[Walter_Bowman]

56. Cry me a river...

...I'll cry a river for you...

[MrBenchley]

57. Gee, Walt, you don't see the DUers plotting to invade them

but then who would WANT to dive into that cesspool?

[Walter_Bowman]

63. Should I give you pointers to several DUers

who already post on THR? :-)

[MrBenchley]

66. So frigging what?

That's not relevant in any way.

Besides, we KNOW that specimens sneak over here from that cesspool....they boast about doing so, and getting tossed off, and coming back under new aliases....some nine and ten times.

And <sarcasm>what a sparkling lot of intellectuals they are, too....a latter day Bloomsbury circle</sarcasm>

"Kicked off Democraticunderground for the 9th time...My wolf-in-sheep's-clothing act gets better every time out....My favorite screename I came up with was "left of stalin"...After hanging out with the DU crowd, I'd suggest a good shower at a biohazard facility..."shallow-thinker" "blind-sheep" either one should get you appointed to a "moderator" status fairly quickly on those liberal lemming sites..."

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33227&highlight=%2ADemocratic+Underground%2A

[Walter_Bowman]

68. Try w4rma

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=35583

[MrBenchley]

71. So frigging what?

You're still dodging.

[Township75]

72. Your still dodgin my question about your victories.*

*

[MrBenchley]

76. No I didn't--I answered it

My victory include the fact that I wasn't rooting for a turd like Tom DeLay or making excuses for the Beltway sniper.

[MrBenchley]

83. You're having another great victory in W. Va.

three dead so far by a serial sniper,and already RKBA enthusiasts pitching in to help explain why there should be no laws to help cops nab him ...

[Spentastic]

60. Generalisations are fun

Gun owners are all idiots. Anyone who doesn't own a gun is far superior and has bigger genitals than those who do.

see how it works?

[Walter_Bowman]

64. I'm joking

And I didn't hear you say anything about Mr. B's generalisations, though. :-)

[Spentastic]

65. Nope

You're just unlucky I replied to one of yours. I'm not enamoured of tactics on both sides of this argument!

[-..__...]

42. Thank you...

For that well thought out, informed and enlightened response. At the rate your side is going,
and the rate my side is going, I should be able to buy a H&K MP-5 with spare mags and a few boxes
of complementary "cop killer" bullets at Sears sometime after the next election cycle.

Thanks for your assistance in achieving that. You've been a mah-vu-lous asset.

HTH HAND

:)

On edit: Oh, BTW I'm still trying to contain my laughter!

[MrBenchley]

58. Any time

I'm sure that's why the gun nuts at highroadrage.com are sneaking over here with nine and ten aliases...because their battle is going so swimmingly.

[-..__...]

59. Have you checked...

Inside your closet or underneath the bed? I'll bet they're
hiding there too.

[MrBenchley]

62. Nope

but I hear that they're sneaking into libraries and photographing people in a lame intimidation try......