Since the gun ban has been reversed...

Originally posted by thatguy:
i'd like to point out that most of the focus here seems to be on the slow, shuffling, romero-type zombies we have all come to know and love. unfortunately, we must also be prepared for the possibility that danny boyle got it right, and that they are gonna be coming at us much faster than originally thought possible.

Just for the sake of semantics, I would like to point out that Danny Boyle dealt in infectious diseases/conditions – the antagonists of the 28 Days/Weeks movies are in fact living people (though homicidally inclined), so are susceptible to drowning, starvation, grievous bodily harm.

Now, Zack Snyder's 2004 take on Dawn of the Dead did introduce the idea of running zombies, and while it made for absolutely thrilling cinema, it does present a revisionist history of the undead. Doesn't discredit the notion, just makes it lower on the priority and credibility scale. I mean, c'mon, who really believes that the walking dead can run.

Romero himself has taken undue liberties with his own vision. In Land of the Dead, he had zombies playing musical instruments, learning how to use a gun, and organizing under a leader, all of which are impossible.

Originally posted by Got Haggis?:
yes. since they don't breathe, they travel underwater. if you fall in, you are fucked.

Right, but they don't float. Stay in water more than 8 feet deep and you're golden.

Originally posted by thatguy:
i'm not sharing my supplies unless you've got something to offer me in return.

gilbert arenas in a sign and trade, plus conditional draft picks

Originally posted by god's shoeshine:

Originally posted by thatguy:
i'm not sharing my supplies unless you've got something to offer me in return.

gilbert arenas in a sign and trade, plus conditional draft picks

I've got Joey Barton to offer who will also work as a bouncer at the club on a 'as needed' basis.

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Got Haggis?:
yes. since they don't breathe, they travel underwater. if you fall in, you are fucked.

Right, but they don't float. Stay in water more than 8 feet deep and you're golden.

but they can stack on top of each other (like those insane ants in the indiana jones movie)

and when the zombies attack, i'm definitely hiding behind thatguy

Originally posted by Relaxer:

Originally posted by HoyaSaxa03:
fuckin a man … if you could pick anywhere in the world to set up a fort, where would it be? has to be somewhat realistic, like you'd have to be able to get there both to set up shop now, and also be able to get there when the shit hits the fan

That is the question, isn't it? Where to go. The north offers a short-term solution, in that the impending winter will also freeze the ghouls in their tracks. But then you have your own survival to worry about, to keep you alive until spring. And even if you make it that long, the milder temperatures will also thaw out the zombies and you're right back in the middle of it again.

that chapter in "world war z" about the suburban family going north into canada and starving made me want to vomit, on second thought the rockies probably isn't a great idea

Originally posted by HoyaSaxa03:
and when the zombies attack, i'm definitely hiding behind thatguy

I've seen him shoot. He wouldn't be my first choice.

I'm getting behind the 12 year old kids.

Where's the evidence?

btw, i'd be more concerned about robots. . .

Originally posted by HoyaSaxa03:

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Got Haggis?:
yes. since they don't breathe, they travel underwater. if you fall in, you are fucked.

Right, but they don't float. Stay in water more than 8 feet deep and you're golden.

but they can stack on top of each other (like those insane ants in the indiana jones movie)

and when the zombies attack, i'm definitely hiding behind thatguy

But only if you could keep up with him…he doesn't have to outrun the zombies, just outrun you!!!!

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
Where's the evidence?

btw, i'd be more concerned about robots. . .

"one of the nation's leading gun scholars" is such a bullshit introduction … gary kleck is a noted ideologue and far from a balanced source for a journalist, he's been on the NRA bandwagon for a LONG time … many other studies have come to dramatically different conclusions than kleck's

and whenever i see sam waterston i immediately think of that ad

Originally posted by HoyaSaxa03:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
Where's the evidence?

btw, i'd be more concerned about robots. . .

"one of the nation's leading gun scholars" is such a bullshit introduction … gary kleck is a noted ideologue and far from a balanced source for a journalist, he's been on the NRA bandwagon for a LONG time … many other studies have come to dramatically different conclusions than kleck's

so, i would guess that if a study was a put out by someone closely linked to brady campaign, you would say the same thing?

if it was a 'best guess' from a blog, of course. that wasnt evidence at all

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
so, i would guess that if a study was a put out by someone closely linked to brady campaign, you would say the same thing?

what if, what if… let's stick to the point here, a.k.a. what did happen: a very partisan person was presented as an academic expert. that's a journalism FAIL.

if and when someone from the brady campaign is presented as an impartial academic expert, we'll count on you to call him out. but for the moment, gun defenders look stupid(er).

Originally posted by vansmack:
I'm jumping on my surf board and paddling out. Every seen a Zombie in the water?

I'm sure there's some B movie out there called something like Attack of the Surf Zombies.

No need for guns, knives or weapons of mass destruction. We've got tons of zombies where I work. All you have to do is go about your business and leave them alone and they won't bother you. Just don't fuck with them or try to make them do any work and you'll be fine.

Edit: Just for you Smackie. Mambo Zombie Surf

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:

Originally posted by HoyaSaxa03:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
Where's the evidence?

btw, i'd be more concerned about robots. . .

"one of the nation's leading gun scholars" is such a bullshit introduction … gary kleck is a noted ideologue and far from a balanced source for a journalist, he's been on the NRA bandwagon for a LONG time … many other studies have come to dramatically different conclusions than kleck's

so, i would guess that if a study was a put out by someone closely linked to brady campaign, you would say the same thing?

of course, anyone who selectively chooses to quote only one side of a hotly debated academic issue as "the authority" is just a bad journalist

i tend to agree with the scholars who side against the "more guns less crime" folks, but i admittedly haven't looked at the scholarship on the issue closely since i put together a course curriculum on it about 6-7 years ago

Originally posted by vansmack:
I've seen him shoot. He wouldn't be my first choice.

I'm getting behind the 12 year old kids.

you've seen me shoot with a game pad. you've never seen the real deal, and i'm good under pressure. i'd like to see how "l33tsnyp0r92" holds up when the shit hits the fan.

Originally posted by 47 YEAR OLD VIRGIN:

So let the deer starve to death and rot providing a great place for disease etc instead of allowing them to be hunted and be used to feed people. Hmmm…


As far as the 'stop building on their land' concept, as soon as you raise your house to convert it to animal habitat then there will be at least an iota of credibility your point. I think you were too busy being a snide and snippity little ratbastard to read the last comment of my post, but here it is again…

I know I'm being unrealistic but I can still have my opinions [/QB]

I dont think that I was either snide or snippity. I did however read and comprehend your previous post. As you have your opinion, I have mine.

Originally posted by 47 YEAR OLD VIRGIN:

Originally posted by Rat Bastard:
So let the deer starve to death and rot providing a great place for disease etc instead of allowing them to be hunted and be used to feed people. Hmmm…


As far as the 'stop building on their land' concept, as soon as you raise your house to convert it to animal habitat then there will be at least an iota of credibility your point.

I think you were too busy being a snide and snippity little ratbastard to read the last comment of my post, but here it is again…

I know I'm being unrealistic but I can still have my opinions

I dont think that I was either snide or snippity. I did however read and comprehend your previous post. As you have your opinion, I have mine. I do feel that my opinion on this topic is supported by sound reason and logic.

Originally posted by thatguy:

Originally posted by vansmack:
I've seen him shoot. He wouldn't be my first choice.

I'm getting behind the 12 year old kids.

you've seen me shoot with a game pad. you've never seen the real deal, and i'm good under pressure. i'd like to see how "l33tsnyp0r92" holds up when the shit hits the fan.

My bet is that the "A1m1gh7y l33tn355" will be the first to drop. Hell I might take him out myself. From my days in the Marine Corps I could probably drop him at 500 meters with a M16.

Well, depending on your views, this is either a reason for a gun ban or a reason why the gun ban was abolished.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/leading_liberal_blogger_shot_i.php