I don’t remember his name now, Chinese fella… what a great, upbeat guy. Full of character and fun to watch, and also a very good player with lots of potential.

Do you mean the Thai player, Dechawat Poomjaeng, who lost a frame on the “Three Miss” rule?

Meanwhile the madness goes on-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22506029

But, hey, let’s not get it out of proportion; the people who did it are “Free” to own guns, and that’s the important thing.

…someone had at some time erected a pile of massive stones,

Or as Thomas Hardy put it in Tess of the d’Urbevilles-

They had proceeded thus gropingly two or three miles further when on a sudden Clare became conscious of some vast erection close in his front

:highly_amused:

I just thought it was an interesting comment on a sad society that bans little chocolate eggs to protect children but can’t bring itself to address more serious threats.
Moggy

“Like”

No it is not disturbing at all.
Freedom is what hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens have died for.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Not at all disturbing that potentially some day any criminal or loony will be able to make their own firearm and bypass the already farcical checks on whether they are responsible enough to own one? IMHO these arguments re the 2nd Amendment and “Freedom” are way overused as an excuse for selfish people to demand whatever they want. If it’s a matter of fundamental “Freedom” that anyone can have the means to kill another person, then how far would you take that argument? How about, for example, driving regulations? Someone could argue “I’m a great driver, so the Govt has no right to take away my freedom to drive as fast as I want, or try to stop me when I’m out of my head on drink or drugs? I should be free to do what I want in my own car.” In a modern, mature liberaql democracy you can not demand “Freedom” without also accepting the flip-side, ie responsibilty towards others. And if we are talking about “Freedom” what about the freedom of 5 year old kids not to be massacred in school?

Last time I was at LCY, maybe 6 years ago, there was an old building or facade facing the apron. Looked like it was part of the old Docklands. Anyone know what it is, please?

This is a bit disturbing. I think it also illustrates the skewed thinking of some sections of the gun community, in that Mr Wilson seems to be saying “Yes innocent people may get killed but that’s not so important as the rest of us being “Free”to do whatever we feel like.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22421185

Asked if he felt any sense of responsibility about whose hands the gun might fall into, he told the BBC: “I recognise the tool might be used to harm other people – that’s what the tool is – it’s a gun.”But I don’t think that’s a reason to not do it – or a reason not to put it out there

Looking at that photo, I can’t help wondering if they have “Learning Difficulties”