High Capacity Rock Sacks

[StewNTexas]

I have never been to Tahrir Square in Egypt, but for a paved area in a urban setting, there sure are a lot of rocks. I took a good look earlier today when making a milk/bread run just ahead of the ugly Texas weather, and I did not see any rocks suitable for throwing laying around anywhere.

It appears to me that people must be bringing their own supply of rocks, which I think should be regulated by the government. A normal throwing supply should be somewhere between 8 and 10. A high capacity rock sack could probably hold up to 17 or 19.

Why would anyone need to have more than 10 rocks to defend themselves? Allowing then to use high capacity rock sacks would seem to endanger the public at large. I am sure that if this were to happen in America, politicans would be quick to make laws to limit rock sacks to the lower amount. I am sure the penalty would be quite large, and there would soon be a shortage of high capacity sacks, and there would be a supply shortage.

From the TV coverage last night where the streets were relatively smooth, todays view shows rocks to be at least 3" deep.

What 'ya think??

[RPB]

When the new rock sack limitation bill reaches committee, we'll need to add that the low capacity rock sacks can't be easily modified by adding more material later to make them hi-caps.

Also they must be 80% recycled materials and be recyclable and not cause global warming, although today I could use some global warming.

[StewNTexas]

Okay, no more ironic posts from me. Thought this would go over way better than it did.

[RPB]

Okay, no more ironic posts from me. Thought this would go over way better than it did.

Well, just don't let the anti-s remember that David only took 5 against Goliath, but only "needed" one

[ZeeMan]

Well, just don't let the anti-s remember that David only took 5 against Goliath, but only "needed" one

it's all about shot placement

[Mr.ViperBoa]

Okay, no more ironic posts from me. Thought this would go over way better than it did.

Well, just don't let the anti-s remember that David only took 5 against Goliath, but only "needed" one

He took 5 because Goliath had 4 brothers. One for each if they felt like jumping in.

[RPB]

Okay, no more ironic posts from me. Thought this would go over way better than it did.

Well, just don't let the anti-s remember that David only took 5 against Goliath, but only "needed" one

He took 5 because Goliath had 4 brothers. One for each if they felt like jumping in.

More proof of the "deterrent effect" .... They didn't jump in

[rmr1923]

Okay, no more ironic posts from me. Thought this would go over way better than it did.

Well, just don't let the anti-s remember that David only took 5 against Goliath, but only "needed" one

not sure what version of the story your book told, but in mine i'm pretty sure David did a double-tap... just to be sure