discussion comment
8 years ago
I share the sentiment. My Fathers Day will be good, very good. I am awaiting the arrival of two young grandkids, who will spend a big chunk of today with me (pool, park and messy foods) and then they will be whisked away to allow me to recover before heading off to fish a while (first, with a fiberglass pole and a line in actual water, then - later - with a more intimate pole and a line baited with cash.)
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
BigPoppa99;)Florida-hooking up with Ms. EveHartley, since 2010!
About a decade ago, Dallas nude club, weekday - mid afternoon, in VIP (open area, not private but no one else was there) I am on a couch buried balls deep in a hot - somewhat drunk - young blond sitting on my lap. I see some guy walking into the VIP, looking around, and warn my dancer. We stop motion and she leans back a little, just before the guy walks up to us. He addresses the dancer by her stage name and says something beginning with, "I came her to warn you . ." While I sweated whether I would get kicked out, or other unknown penalties, he finished by telling her they changed the rotation and she had to do a turn on stage in 20 minutes. Whew!!!!!
I am pretty sure the guy (he was the "day shift, floor manager") knew exactly what we were doing, but he didn't do anything. The same guy even brought me a mixer (comp) for my booze shortly after I returned to my table and still made not reference to the VIP.
discussion comment
8 years ago
O' stick around. Sometimes it is vital to have a regular voice here to speak up for the tiny minority of Asian strippers in the clubs. It's not my thing, but I know their out there and they need our money!
Plus, really, there are far too few contributors who know how to push a hog.
;<)
discussion comment
8 years ago
footballguy,
When the constitution was written, the preferred firearm on this continent fired a lead ball over 3/4" in diameter from a "rifled" bore. On impact, that ball could make a head explode or rip an arm completely off a body. It caused enormous damage even at it's maximum range. In trained hands, the effective range of that weapon was almost a mile (and there are claims of sniper kills in the Carolinas during the 1780s at almost 2 miles). The "long rifle" was state of the art weaponry in its day. The round from a modern "NATO" caliber rifle is actually only 1/3 the diameter, and causes significantly less trauma.
Our founding fathers didn't "expect" the people to buy the most modern firearms available. They KNEW that people ALREADY owned the most powerful infantry weapons made. The 2nd Amendment was written to PREVENT the federal government from ever stopping the people from buying or owning "high powered guns."
People in this country certainly believed, in 1789, that individuals DID need to own modern infantry combat weapons to feel safe. One of the reasons they needed those weapons then (and many people today feel the same way) is that we might need those weapons to confront and stop an overbearing federal government. Another reason was personal defense, but not everyone could afford more than one firearm, so if you could only afford one weapon, most chose the most modern, multipurpose infantry fighting weapon they could buy.
Something you appear to be unaware of: In every "mass shooting" or potential mass shooting, where the killer was confronted by someone with a firearm - the murders stopped! That includes Orlando last Sunday. When an Orlando police officer confronted the sick Islamic Terrorist inside the club, he stopped murdering to hide and exchange fire with the officer. So far, multi-victim shootings have stopped when the shooter commits suicide, when the shooter runs out of ammo, experiences a jammed weapon, or when faced with the first opponent with a firearm. That is true of every incident that has occurred in the country. Not one time, has an innocent been killed by "friendly fire" from civilian defenders (Cops, on the other hand, have killed bystanders on occasion.)
I agree, something should be done. I suggest more people honor their obligations as a citizen and arm themselves (read the Militia Act of 1792 and the modern militia law - you are in the militia and you are obligated to own and become familiar with at least one infantry combat weapon.) I think there should be fewer "gun free" zones where crazed murderers know they will have many defenseless victims. The administration should begin aggressive efforts to destroy ISIS (a few "drone" strikes" and a short battalion in Iraq doesn't count as aggressive.). We should stomp hard on any group who threatens the US or any of its citizens. Better mental health care - including a return of inpatient long term care and detention for the mentally ill. Close our borders and be smarter about who we let in.
There is no easy answer for stopping EVERY crazed, evil murderer. Disarming Americans is the worst possible response to murderous evil.
discussion comment
8 years ago
I got to say this, in memory of Alucard
BAN ALL KNIVES!
(that really used to set him off.)
discussion comment
8 years ago
So, Clubber.
Do I win the prize?
discussion comment
8 years ago
The fact is, the Second Amendment is NOT ambiguous. Like other amendments there is more than one one right enumerated. The 2nd acknowledges that American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms and specifies that the federal government can do nothing to restrict that right ("shall not be infringed.")
But before that, the 2nd also specifies that a well regulated militia is necessary. That part really confounds liberals who believe that the federal government must sanction and "regulate" this "militia" and then they try to make the militia into the modern armed forces and argue that the federal government can specify who can keep and bear arms. That is so very, very wrong.
In fact, around the 1790s (when the 2nd was written), "well regulated meant "practiced" and "competent." Specifically, in the case of the 2nd, "well regulated" means the individual militia members should be familiar with their weapons and their use. A well regulated militia would be composed of people who know how to shoot, load, repair and maintain.their weapons.
And militia - then AND NOW - is NOT a reference to anything the federal government controls day to day. The first provision of the 2nd specifically acknowledges that it is a "natural" right of Americans to assemble as an armed force! A militia is NOT a federal government controlled professional army.
The Militia Act of 1792 put to rest any question of who was in the militia. The 1792 act specified that EVERY able bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45 was a member of the militia and specified that militia membership was compulsory. The militia was self controlled, unless the individual state imposed further requirements upon the militia. The only time the federal government had any control over the militia would be when the militia were "called up" to aid in the national defense.
Today, the militia - BY LAW - includes every able bodied male citizen between the ages of 18 and 45, plus any foreign national residing in these united States who wishes to become a citizen, plus women who are members of the national guard or reserve, plus any American citizen of any age, gender or ability who wishes to volunteer for the militia. Notably no one is required to assert that they will volunteer before the militia is called up. So, essentially, we are ALL in the militia (unless we are over 45 and don't want to be.)
Because the 2nd implies the militia must have their own weapons, it is essential that any militia member have ready access to MILITARY firearms. There are many arguments still flying around about the 1930s federal tax and regulation of automatic weapons, with many legal scholars asserting that the natural right of Americans to keep automatic weapons has been unconstitutionally infringed. Other arguments about individual ownership of cannon, armored vehicles and explosives also abound. But no one can reasonably argue that the federal government can constitutionally restrict an individual's natural right to keep and bear modern personal firearms, including weapons capable of use in warfare.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Quoted from the Constitution Society about the legal theory of the right to keep and bear arms.
" 1> The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not establish the right to keep and bear arms. None of the provisions of the Constitution establish any "natural" rights. They recognize such rights, but the repeal of such provisions would not end such rights. Such rights were considered by many of the Framers as obvious or "self-evident", but they were immersed in the prevailing republican thought of the day, as expressed in the writings of Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Madison, Hamilton, and others, which discussed "natural rights" in some detail."
2> The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right of individuals under the theory of democratic government. This was clearly the understanding and intent of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution and was a long-established principle of English common law at the time the Constitution was adopted, which is considered to be a part of constitutional law for purposes of interpreting the written Constitution.
3> What the Second Amendment also does is recognize the right, power, and duty of able-bodied persons (originally males, but now females also) to organize into militias and defend the state. It effectively recognizes that all citizens have military and police powers, and the "able-bodied" ones -- the militia -- also have military and police duties, whether exercised in an organized manner or individually in a crisis. "Able-bodied" is a term of art established by English common law at the time the Constitution was adopted, and is the only qualification besides citizenship on what constitutes the "militia". While not well defined in modern terms, it is somewhat broader than just able-"bodied": implicit is also "able-minded" and "virtuous". In other words, persons might be excluded who were physically able to bear arms but who were mentally or morally defective. Defense of the "state"
discussion comment
8 years ago
I agree that the idiot is spewing stupid, counterproductive hate.
What I don't understand is, why is it so easy in this country to revile and condemn small minded idiots who happen to be Christian, and so hard to offer the same condemnation upon the entire range of hateful, bigoted, homophobic, pedophile loving Islamic Imans who spew the same filth?
One example is the father of the Orlando Murderer. The Afghan refugee has a cable TV show and Utube videos where he sometimes lauds the Taliban as representing the real Afghani and said today that it is up to God to punish homosexuals (in the context that it should not have been his son doing the punishing.) Yet, I do not hear the outrage.
discussion comment
8 years ago
As long as she doesn't try that on my lap I don't mind, but I'm not a fan. All that rapid, violent jerking around looks painful, and it looks like it might hurt parts of me I consider very important!
discussion comment
8 years ago
I used to put down fags and faggots all the time - years ago, but I've since quit smoking (and I don't work with that guy from Birmingham (UK) that called cigarettes faggots).
I never used to think "nigger" was racist, because my friends used it all the time, Then I found out that politically correct rules proclaimed that my friends, who were black, could say, "nigger" and it was OK, but I couldn't because I am not Black.
Larry, perhaps you missed my point?
discussion comment
8 years ago
I grew up in the deep south, and experienced racism first hand, fortunately I am white.. I still remember the almost weekly gatherings throughout the early 60's in my parent's living room as my dad and his two best friends drank beer and bemoaned those "damn niggers," criminal "wetbacks" and liberal "white trash." The only remarkable thing about those gatherings was that while my dad was very much a product of the rural deep south, one of his friends was a professional who grew up in Philly - and was Black. Dad's other friend grew up in Texas, but by appearance and accent, there was no hiding that he was of Mexican heritage.
My point is that racism, or bias, or prejudice, or bigotry can be a very complicated issue and there is seldom a black and white (pun intended) vies of what is right and wrong. I played with the kids of those two men, visited in their homes, went on trips together, all through the "civil rights" era. (we still remain friends). As kids, we never really cared about the (for us) distant politics, nor did we take sides (except to play games). Yet, the language of my father would identify him clearly as a very bigoted racist today!
discussion comment
8 years ago
Damn Clubber, I didn't know you were a Democrat! ;,)
BTW, Welcome back.
discussion comment
8 years ago
RandomMember, the publicized info is not yet conclusive. Several Senators claim that the shooter was previously investigated by the FBI for connections to ISIS through someone he contacted who traveled to Syria - but no arrest. Orlando officials have confirmed that the shooter did phone 911 and pledge allegiance to ISIS shortly before shooting.
Liberals in D.C. appear to be blaming the Remington rifle instead of the shooter, and in their mind it is the fault of the GOP.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Two stories - no happy conclusions:
Early 90s - I took a girlfriend to the Poconos, one of those heart-shaped bathtub "honeymoon" places. We had a private swimming pool in our suite. After trying out every other possible place in the room, we tried the pool. It worked great (other than washing off natural lubrication) until I attempted to stand on a step in the pool, holding her up while we were still connected. We both nearly drowned when one of my knees gave out and we both went unexpectedly into the water. Just a few bruises from the pool side and steps, but lots of water swallowed and inhaled. We mutually decided not to repeat our water olympics while I was waiting to see an orthopedic surgeon about the traitorous knee.
In the 70s, with my then wife - we are enjoying a wonderful day on a deserted island beach on the Texas Gulf Coast, when we decide to get frisky. First naked play in the sand and surf, then we begin to to excite each other with our hands as we stand hip deep in the waves. We run to the surf line and begin humping each other as waves wash over our legs (think "sex" scene in "From Here To Eternity" the old movie about Pearl Harbor). -- Then the "ouches" begin! We stopped when it hurt too much - and discovered that it wasn't just sand in our crotches. I had several whelps from pinches by very small (2") sand crabs, she had some kind of ant crawling all over her, and we discovered a dozen small jellyfish somehow attached to our lower legs. To add to the misery, as we are standing on the beach trying to get all the critters off a Coast Guard helo flies by and then hovers about 200 yards away to watch the two naked idiots slapping themselves and each other!
These days I prefer mattresses, couches, chairs, VIP benches, or whatever is reasonably dry.
discussion comment
8 years ago
JS69, it appears you have rediscovered the secret formula that gave Inca rulers control over half of the two American continents and insight into building techniques not rediscovered until the 20th century! The suspension of time is a sure sign you are about to breakthrough into another dimension of conceptualization and understanding.
Does your secret include both weed and coke?
discussion comment
8 years ago
For question one, the entry fee is usually $100 as stated by chessmaster.
On Tuesdays from open until 5 pm, the entry fee includes a free soda.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Called a fav one day about 2 years ago, set up OTC, hopped in my car - and - - pulled over about 10 minutes from her place. I didn't wait an hour, or even 15 minutes, I called her up after 10 minutes and lied about a family emergency. Then I drove to a club I knew she had never worked at and spent a couple of hours checking out dancers I hadn't had before!
Yes, it is crazy to pass up a sure thing. Sometimes we don't want more of what we like. Sometimes we just want to be hunters in a different jungle and take our chances.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Chessmaster, "a ban on assault weapons" was tried by Clinton. It failed miserably. First, because there are NO Assault weapons available for sale in the US - unless you have the ATF tax stamp and permit. Not one single assault weapon has been used in a mass shooting in the USA - NOT ONE. And second, simply because there is no viable means to stop illegal sales of of weapons - and illegal weapons are used in over 95% of all crimes.
THe press continues to lie about "Assault Rifles." The AR 15 designation refers to a registered trademark of Colt Arms who bought a rifle design from ARmalite in 1960. Colt originated the M-16, but that is a very different weapon from the SEMI-automatic sporting rifles sold in the US civilian market.
The modern definition of an Assault rifle, or more accurately, a combat weapon, must include the ability to fire in fully automatic mode. There are no fully automatic rifles available for retail sale in the US. What Hillary and Barrack call "assault weapons" are an entire class of hundreds of different makes and models of modern firearms that "look" dangerous to liberals who are afraid of guns.
The real facts are very different.
1> Early info indicates that the Orlando terrorist used a Remington semi-automatic rifle. Remington does not sell anything with the designation AR (again, AR-15 is a Colt trademark). The weapon used was a semi-automatic rifle.
2> Rifles are NOT "the weapon of choice" for mass murderers! The crazy kid in Connecticut did murder his mother and steal her semi automatic rifle - but he didn't use it in the school. The crazed shooter in the Colorado movie house used a shotgun and pistols even though he was carrying a semi-automatic rifle. Crazy people and terrorists use just about anything to do harm. Explosives are apparently "first choice" for terrorists.
3> Rifles (of all kinds, not just semi-automatic rifles) are used in the murders of fewer than 200 people in the USA every year. Hammers are used to murder people more often than rifles. People are murdered by fists more often than rifles. more people die falling off ladders than die as victims of rifle fire in the USA. After you ban hammers, knives and fists, then we can talk about banning rifles.
4> Some estimates place the number of semi-automatic rifles in private hands in the USA at over 50,000,000. Any attempt to confiscate all of those rifles will likely lead to bloodshed on a massive scale. Far too many people still believe that the second amendment still means what it says.
While it appears that the Orlando terrorist legally bought the rifle he used, that is seldom the case. The San Bernardino Islamic Terrorists used weapons illegally obtained. Some of the murders in Chicago, IL last year were committed with weapons sold by Holder and Obama's "Fast & Furious" scheme, but almost none of the 600 plus murders committed in Chicago every year are done using "legal" weapons. No weapon ban has ever worked as intended. No weapons ban in the USA will be tolerated by the majority of the population.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Just to chime in and demonstrate my prejudgemtal aura, Redheads are sexy as all hell - when they are young. I do truly enjoy young redhead strippers. I admit I do generalize in my expectations, but my prejudice very often proves valid. Young redheads are wild, adventurous, promiscuous, and willing. I will occasionally go VIP with a redhead, without even trying a dance first. Seldom am I disappointed.
BUT - - - outside a SC, redheads can be nightmares on steroids. Most redhead women I know socially (or through family) are demanding, unstable and prone to explosive tempers. Then there is the fact that redheads do NOT age well. Every redhead I ever knew for any length of time, was brown and gray headed, with big splotches on her skin, by age 45. I have a lot of Irish kin, and the redhead women in my family are wrinkled, fat, splotched and gray before their 45 birthday. (Including a few who were hot, hot, hot, when they were 18!)
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
ATACdawgThank God Trump is FIRED!!! Lock him up!
ATACdawg, Now is a good opportunity to create a "new" relationship with your newly retired wife. Establish a few new things you can do together, and find ways to be apart! She will eventually find things to do that do not involve you, but it is a good idea to encourage her to seek those interests. Over the short term, it is possible for you both to see TOO much of each other, especially if she is feeling a little "lost" after her retirement. Be patient, but also proactive. Push her out of the house, and spend time away from your home as well!
This is a great opportunity to kindle a new romance with her, but that will not happen if you two are tripping over each other all day long. While you help her get busy, you can create in her mind that you, also, need to have various outside interests. One of those interests should be SCs (or a hobby or sport that covers the same times, if you haven't disclosed to her your interest in hot naked strippers)
Good luck, good hunting.
discussion comment
8 years ago
![]()
motorheadFat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Depends a lot on the jurisdiction, the complaint and the individual's rap sheet. In some places the list of active warrants is so long that the only individuals pursued are violent, repeat offenders. The only ways anyone gets picked up on other warrants are getting caught committing another crime or getting stopped by a cop who is having a bad day.
But other areas are almost the opposite. In the 90s, I lived is few years in a small town in a county with a population under 75,000. One Saturday a cop stopped by my house to ask about a neighbor who missed a court date for a PARKING ticket. The officer claimed wasn't planning on taking my neighbor to jail, he said he was just working his ONE outstanding warrant. The neighbor later told me he forgot about the ticket and when he belatedly went down to pay it - the fine doubled - to $10!
discussion comment
8 years ago
From the article, "She notes that 25 percent of the residents at Covenant House, a local homeless shelter for teens, were victims of human trafficking and/or sexual labor." Once again, disinformation, misinformation and irrelevant details are used to create a "problem" for the government of the left to "fix." This attempt to close strip clubs is just another example of a liberal, big government, politician trying to regulate the behavior of her community by inventing a problem.
The extremely liberal city government of NOLA has long been known for its corruption and for its failure to accomplish anything. During Hurricane Katrina, the only NOLA cops that news cameras could find - were looting. The investigation of why the levies failed revealed that NOLA and LA had paid hundreds of millions through their own Levy Commission to update and maintain the levies - but almost all of it went to democrat office holders and their friends. Contrary to the national news reports, and the HBO "documentary," local government was responsible for maintaining the levies - not the Corps of Engineers. To hear real NOLA citizens (not in politics) tell of their city, is to hear of rampant government corruption as a tradition going back over 300 years and for most of that time the government has been claiming their efforts were to "help" the people of New Orleans..
This story uses, "sexual labor" to cover everything from dancer, waitress or shot girls in a strip club, to street walkers and escorts, to clerks in a store where Playboy is sold. And the source is NOLAs Coventry House whose mission is to take kids, 21 and under, off the street and send them home (They actually keep track of the number of bus tickets they have given to teens to "return home.). Coventry House does NOT have any statistic on how many young women were dancing in NOLA strip clubs! Coventry House asks these kids generic questions about what they were doing and admits that at least three quarters of the responses are likely false. Also Coventry House has NOT reported a single case of human trafficking to the NOPD, so the "human trafficking" part is is totally false.
This "study" will likely gain enough traction to allow the city, parish and state to spend millions (almost all going to friends of the local government) and then fall apart after the next election!
discussion comment
8 years ago
Drinking in a strip club is only a problem if:
Drinking makes you sad - crying doesn't help you get extras.
Drinking makes you mad - bouncers don't like it if you hit strippers
Drinking makes you limp - DUH!
Drinking makes you talk - strippers will find someone with fewer words and more money.
Drinks use up all your cash - no money no lap dances.
Drinking makes you inebriated before leaving to drive home - Cops will not give you a "pass" if you explain that you only drank because the dancers were ugly.
My fav clubs also serve coffee (or are very near someplace that does). I cut myself off about an hour before I plan to leave and drink coffee or water.
discussion comment
8 years ago
Rockstar666. Please check FBI.gov statistics and Summary reports compiled by the Chicago Police. Chicago, when it had a complete firearms ban, had one of the highest murder rates in the country. Mostly it was young black males killing each other (and anyone else who happened to be near) over gang territory and drug sales around the Southside and near the Daley built housing projects..
According to statistics compiled by the City of Chicago and by the FBI, the murder rate in Chicago HAS NOT changed significantly since the Supreme Court decision that asserted the Chicago weapons ban violated the 2nd Amendment. Today, the gangs and dealers are still killing each other (and anyone else who happens to be nearby) in the same areas. The only difference is that now some of the weapons used are ones sold by the Justice Department to Mexican drug dealers in "Fast & Furious."