Context not relevent. You CAN only kill someone once. (Actually, a hole in the heart baby who survived because on the fourth go his mum took him to a different hospital.)
And on similar lines, from a story about proposals to ban smoking in cars where there are children...
"How will the law cope with people without children who want to smoke in cars?"
Children who want to smoke? Just tell them no!
"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
"How will the law cope with people without children who want to smoke in cars?"
Children who want to smoke? Just tell them no!
The question is, though, how will the law cope without children puffing away. I'd have thought that it needn't concern its pretty little head about non-smoking children.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Context not relevent. You CAN only kill someone once.
Of course you can only kill someone once, but I did think the context would be important. Turns out, at least for me, it was. It seems perfectly clear to me...but then I disagree with "engulfed to" and you don't so apparently we're not on the same linguistic wavelength.
