freddy333

With all due respect, I have.

No, it was LBJ's attempt to - putting it as generic as I can - level the playing field & redistribute wealth. Of course, depending on which political winds sway you, your mileage may vary.

No, it was the largest federally sponsored set of social welfare programs (implemented by LBJ's administration) since FDR.

No, not sarcasm & there were certainly problems (there always are). But, & you can insert whatever politically unfashionable issue you prefer here, the fact remains that, as far as mass killings with firearms go, something changed in the US culture since the Leave it to Beaver days. I believe it was the unintentioned consequencies of LBJ's Great Society programs that, while well-intentioned, caused a lowering of the bar for acceptable levels of violence & courseness within society.

Without getting into the accuracy of Clinton's comment, I will say that, in general, I suspect he is correct. However, & I have had this debate among friends for the past 25 or so years, I believe the problem is due more to the continual coarsening of society, not the number/style of guns. Of course, this is a far more complicated subject than can be explained (with complete accuracy) in this context, but I trace the beginning of the end, in great part, on LBJ's 'Great Society' programs of the mid-60s. Prior to that, we lived in Leave it to Beaver land, where doors were routinely left unlocked, women walked the streets in safety & mass shootings were, for the most part, a fluke. After that............well, we have the world we live in today.

Ending the work week wearing my Aryan 'Master

I have only seen the date stamp on 1 leave, not both.

No, Ken, it is the other way around. The Federalist Papers, written after the Constitution was drafted, were, essentially, a sales pitch to the states & people explaining, as Nanuq correctly said, some of the more idiosyncratic ideas cited in the Constitution. Constitutional scholars often return to the Federalist Papers, as well as the private writings of the men who drafted the Constitution, to gain insight into their reasoning behind the tenets defined in it. And, again, if the majority of people feel the Constitution is no longer valid, there is a simple process (outlined within the Constitution itself) to amend it. If there is not a majority, then the Constitution was purposely (&, to my way of thinking, correctly) written to make it difficult for un-constitutional laws to be enacted. And remember, too, that it is not only the president who must defend & protect the Constitution, it is every US citizen's responsibility as well, which is why free people must never have their right to keep & bear arms infringed upon by the government.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

This hackneyed argument is silly & unwarranted. If the majority of people feel this way, then simply amend the Constitution to bring it up-to-date (the Constitution includes instructions for amending it).

'The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.' -- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers 'The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.' --James Madison, The Federalist Papers The Federalist Papers (& personal writings of the framers of the US Constitution), which were written, separately, by the framers in an effort to 'sell' the Constitution to Congress & the country, are rife with similar comments, which support Madison's original premise. 'Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.' -- Hubert H. Humphrey Democrat Senator (& later Vice President) Humphrey mirrored Madison's (& the framers') original intentions. 'The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ...' -- James Madison Above is Madison's original statement to Congress, which was the basis for the 2nd Amendment. In this context, I think his (& the 2nd Amendment's) intent is clear. 'The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.' -- Adolph Hitler Not to belabor this, but 'being necessary to the security of a free state' is the key to understanding the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. The 'right of the people to keep and bear arms' was intended to give citizens the right to protect themselves from the government, not other citizens, as is often (incorrectly) stated. And, further, that this right 'not be infringed' was intended to allow the 'the people' access to whatever arms are needed to defend themselves from the government. It seems to me that the only area that is open to reasonable debate is the definition of 'free'.

You really need a better pic for any type of detailed identification. If the case is engraved with 5500, the dial says only Precision (& no 'SWISS' below 6) & the watch is fitted with a 78350 bracelet (manufactured between 1975 & the mid-2000s), then you have a hodge-podge of parts. It might be a good idea to take it to a watchmaker to see what type of movement is inside.

1st, I apologize for this thread having taken so long to appear. 2nd, we are working to sort out the member upgrade procedure. Unfortunately, at this time, that is all I can tell you. Please know that Admin is working on this & once the system has been updated, it will be announced here.

Correct. Babes should be posted to the Bits, Bytes & Babes forum, not this 1.

If you have the tools/skill to remove the movement from the case & then to remove the hands/dial from the movement, you should be able to see the problem within the keyless works (the set of gears/wheels driven by the stem).

2 watches today, Ubi?

Owners of new/current Rolex watches tend to know nothing (beyond the name on the dial), but owners of vintage Rolex watches, generally speaking, are almost always (reasonably knowledgeable) collectors. After all, why would a credit card plunker pay the high price & put up with the idiosyncrasies of a 1665 unless he had a good deal of knowledge about it? Therefore, my gut tells me that a guy like lionsandtigers described would probably be wearing a rep.

The Federalist Papers.

Regardless of which side you are on, here are a couple of facts - 1. The people who wrote the US Constitution included the 2nd Amendment primarily to give citizens a way to protect themselves from the government. 2. Israel has 1 of the world's highest number of guns per capita (nearly every family has at least 1 military-style firearm), but 1 of the lowest rates of gun-related crime in the world (both Switzerland & Canada have significantly higher numbers of gun-related deaths than does Israel).

I think I am pretty critical when it comes to details &, viewed under normal circumstances, unless the seconds hand ticks like a quartz watch, I could not tell the difference between the sweep of an 18k & 28k hand, let alone 21k. Point being that I would spend more effort in getting the visual details correct & less with things like sweep. You (Onscreen) should spend some time educating yourself about the look, function & variations of genuine 6536s before clicking any Buy buttons. Relying on others' opinions is a sure-fire recipe for buyers remorse, especially when cost must play such an important factor in your buying decision.

I assume by 'AR crystal' you mean the cyclops has an AR coating, not the entire crystal. Correct?