TexasCHLforum.com

PSLOwner wrote: No kidding. That is why I love in movies when a character is handed a gun and they something like "you know I dont like guns"..... then later on they actually need and use the gun to kill the bad guy.

Ha Ha... yeah... I have noticed that too. It seems to be Hollywoods way of taking a stab at advocating gun control while admitting that guns might actually be necessary. Just goes to show that in the name of making a buck they will sell out their own beliefs. They know an action movie with no guns would flop like a fish on the beach.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

PSLOwner wrote: No kidding. That is why I love in movies when a character is handed a gun and they something like "you know I dont like guns"..... then later on they actually need and use the gun to kill the bad guy.

Ha Ha... yeah... I have noticed that too. It seems to be Hollywoods way of taking a stab at advocating gun control while admitting that guns might actually be necessary. Just goes to show that in the name of making a buck they will sell out their own beliefs. They know an action movie with no guns would flop like a fish on the beach.

Sadly, guns cannot save every action movie,

03Lightningrocks wrote:

catwoman wrote:I seem to recall reading somewhere (don't remember where) that, if you can stick a finger in the BG's eye and keep pushing, then wiggle the finger around a bit, you'll have a BG with a slightly scrambled brain...your manicure might need retouching, but that's life. I haven't had occasion to try it, but makes me wonder how long before UK contemplates banning fingers!

This has to be one of my all time favorite posts.

Thank you so much! One does what one can to help

The UK should just go all the way and ban touching, if you banned touching, then that would make it illegal to use any instrument within your control to touch another human being. Now of course you could take a class and get a permit for handshaking, and then if you really qualify you could get a reproductive permit, but otherwise any object used to touch another human being would be off limits including your own body parts. I mean this would solve all their problems, banning guns didnt work, banning knives wont work, so why not ban touching. And if that doesnt work they should pass legislation that requires all citizens to spin in circles no more than 15 feet from the vicinity of another UK citizen spinning in circles. Problemo Solved!!!!!! OH YEAH!!!!

03Lightningrocks wrote:Good Lord... I hate to sound like a weeny but that picture is impossible to look at without flinching. No kidding... could you turn that into a link or something????

I have to agree. The picture is rough. I have to say though, they did a good job stopping the bleeding.

VoiceofReason wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Good Lord... I hate to sound like a weeny but that picture is impossible to look at without flinching. No kidding... could you turn that into a link or something????

I have to agree. The picture is rough. I have to say though, they did a good job stopping the bleeding.

May not have had to. Often when there is a clean (IOW not torn) laceration the ends of the blood vessels will retract into the muscle tissue and the spasm in the muscles will "clamp" the bleeding off. I have seen amputations that had very little blood on the ground as well as razor cuts.

Is it still there??? I am scared to look.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Is it still there??? I am scared to look.

No, I don't see it anymore. When I first saw that picture, I was thinking it was breaking a forum rule.

USA1 wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Is it still there??? I am scared to look.

No, I don't see it anymore. When I first saw that picture, I was thinking it was breaking a forum rule.

I bet if there was a purty girl wearing a bikini in the picture it would have been pulled before I cried about it... LOL.

If its not breaking a forum rule, could somebody PM me the link to that picture?
It shocked me when I first saw it, but I think it has a lot of value in any discussion on the dangers of a knife.