MHSL82
Well-Known Member
I'm not an expert on the history of guns, but they had machine gun cannons back then?!
Yeah, the government hadn't started taking away that God-given right, yet. (I'm being sarcastic and just joking here.
I'm not an expert on the history of guns, but they had machine gun cannons back then?!
I wanted to have a fistful of dollars but got greed and tried to add a few dollars more and ended up dropping the whole thing off the bridge. Sure, I had already missed out of plenty of money, but for sacrificing a few dollars more, I could have kept what I had.
It's just money. It's not as good as other things in life, like jokes.
I haven't seen that movie yet. It's been on my wishlist on my Tivo for a few months, but it hasn't been broadcast and available to record during that time.
Have you seen "The Big Lebowski"?
Bump.
Nope, I want to one day.
1. I guess, but wouldn't it make more sense to go after a random girl, who isn't with anyone?
2. If you see a girl with a newly wed husband, or another guy who's clearly her lover, then wouldn't you back off, and just target someone else?
3. Even if you wanted a girl so badly that you would r*pe to get her, wouldn't it still be more feasible to go after someone unattached? I guess r*pe isn't just about the desire, but about the power over someone else too.
4. He didn't even seem to have a history of assault toward women, it just seemed to be that one woman at that one time.
4. As they say, the first one's free. No, I'm not being serious, sorry if that offends anyone.
Bad post. But bad posts in a thread are better than no posts by you.I wanted to have a fistful of dollars but got greed and tried to add a few dollars more and ended up dropping the whole thing off the bridge. Sure, I had already missed out of plenty of money, but for sacrificing a few dollars more, I could have kept what I had.
4. As they say, the first one's free. No, I'm not being serious, sorry if that offends anyone.
A widowed woman goes up to a man in a cafe, and spits on him.
I don't get it. What's the rest of the joke? Or is that the punchline?
Just kidding (I'm referring to the "an atheist, priest, and a rabbi walk into a bar..." jokes).
I'm probably asking a thoughtless question here, but why is it acceptable to eat buffalo, but not horses (during the 1800s)? I would think that if horses were a little more abundant (not sure if they were, but could have been), then you'd eat those.
Buffalo population seemed to wax and wane, depending on if a herd was passing through.
Why not go for another animal more plentiful?