ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
The country seems to be divided into two camps. Those that believe the government should make meaningful reforms in the area of gun background checks, mental illness detection, and monitoring of potentially dangerous individuals, and then there's the other camp that thinks we should do nothing and that another mass shooting is just business as usual - you know $hit happens.

Maybe the fact that we never seem to do anything is why every time an incident like this occurs people in the first group speak out once more. We will never stop all gun violence but there are some common sense things we can do to make it more difficult for troubled or dangerous individuals to get access to guns without compromising the rights of law abiding citizens to own, carry and use guns. I think that's what the first group is all about, and I think its the majority.
Yes like, border control (a lot of criminals coming in there), making punishments fit the crime (liberals hate that one), stop and frisk (liberals hate that one too). Death penalty in all states (liberal hate.... well, this could go on forever.

Deee, you act as if the left's idea is to stop the killings when in fact they have increased under democratic rule in many states.
 
Yes like, border control (a lot of criminals coming in there), making punishments fit the crime (liberals hate that one), stop and frisk (liberals hate that one too). Death penalty in all states (liberal hate.... well, this could go on forever.

Deee, you act as if the left's idea is to stop the killings when in fact they have increased under democratic rule in many states.


Nice dodge. Those are important issues and my position is probably not far from yours on any of them, but they have little if anything to do with these mass murders and other types of irrational gun violence.
 
The country seems to be divided into two camps. Those that believe the government should make meaningful reforms in the area of gun background checks, mental illness detection, and monitoring of potentially dangerous individuals, and then there's the other camp that thinks we should do nothing and that another mass shooting is just business as usual - you know $hit happens.

Maybe the fact that we never seem to do anything is why every time an incident like this occurs people in the first group speak out once more. We will never stop all gun violence but there are some common sense things we can do to make it more difficult for troubled or dangerous individuals to get access to guns without compromising the rights of law abiding citizens to own, carry and use guns. I think that's what the first group is all about, and I think its the majority.
None of those "common sense" meaningful reforms would have prevented the Charleston murders from occurring....or Sandy Hook, or Va Tech, or the Gabby Giffords shootings. Truth is the people in the 2nd camp know the proposals from the 1st camp that are shouted after a shooting are just gun control knee jerk reactions that would do NOTHING to prevent these evil acts, and who's only intent would be to limit the freedom of law abiding American citizens to practice their 2nd amendment rights..

Mental Illness Detection's? LOL. Sure, lets put the government in charge of something like that as society careens down the rails embracing insanity of men declaring that they are now women, and have been women their whole lives, or white gals say they colored themselves with brown crayons at 5 yrs old so therefore they are black. Who in our society could we ever better trust to be in charge of determining who is crazy & who is not than the federal government, home of Lois Learner putting bulls-eyes on any and all Tea Party tax applications, or NSA mass data harvesting and storage, or the incompetence of designing, testing, and implementing Healthcare.gov?
 
None of those "common sense" meaningful reforms would have prevented the Charleston murders from occurring....or Sandy Hook, or Va Tech, or the Gabby Giffords shootings. Truth is the people in the 2nd camp know the proposals from the 1st camp that are shouted after a shooting are just gun control knee jerk reactions that would do NOTHING to prevent these evil acts, and who's only intent would be to limit the freedom of law abiding American citizens to practice their 2nd amendment rights..

Mental Illness Detection's? LOL. Sure, lets put the government in charge of something like that as society careens down the rails embracing insanity of men declaring that they are now women, and have been women their whole lives, or white gals say they colored themselves with brown crayons at 5 yrs old so therefore they are black. Who in our society could we ever better trust to be in charge of determining who is crazy & who is not than the federal government, home of Lois Learner putting bulls-eyes on any and all Tea Party tax applications, or NSA mass data harvesting and storage, or the incompetence of designing, testing, and implementing Healthcare.gov?

I guess we can pencil you in under Group 2, the do nothings :)

While you are correct about background checks probably having no bearing on the incidents you site, there is plenty of evidence that indicates that a lot of crimes you never hear about are committed with guns acquired from "private sales". From the Mayors Against Illegal Gun Sales website:

. A survey of prisoners who committed crimes with handguns found that nearly 80
percent of them got those guns through private transfers. And undercover investigations have
shown that 63 percent of private sellers at gun shows and 62 percent of private online sellers
are willing to sell a gun to someone who said he probably couldn’t pass a background check.
Many prohibited purchasers are evading background checks by acquiring guns through “pri
vate”
channels. This is a serious problem that demands action


http://everytown.org/documents/2014/10/background-checks-faq.pdf

Why should we wait until a mass murder is committed with a gun purchased at a gun show without a background check before we take action to prevent criminals and lunatics from getting guns so easily?
 
Yep, team do nothing here. Team do a ton of nothing. Our government keeps getting into shit it cannot handle, and the people continue to vote and pay for it.

Now this genius up there wants the government to crack down on "private gun transfers". Betcha he hates the war on drugs.
 
None of those "common sense" meaningful reforms would have prevented the Charleston murders from occurring....or Sandy Hook, or Va Tech, or the Gabby Giffords shootings. Truth is the people in the 2nd camp know the proposals from the 1st camp that are shouted after a shooting are just gun control knee jerk reactions that would do NOTHING to prevent these evil acts, and who's only intent would be to limit the freedom of law abiding American citizens to practice their 2nd amendment rights..

Mental Illness Detection's? LOL. Sure, lets put the government in charge of something like that as society careens down the rails embracing insanity of men declaring that they are now women, and have been women their whole lives, or white gals say they colored themselves with brown crayons at 5 yrs old so therefore they are black. Who in our society could we ever better trust to be in charge of determining who is crazy & who is not than the federal government, home of Lois Learner putting bulls-eyes on any and all Tea Party tax applications, or NSA mass data harvesting and storage, or the incompetence of designing, testing, and implementing Healthcare.gov?
Fact is that you have no idea whether or not any prior gun control proposals would have saved any of those casualties....while we know with 100% certainty where current laws got us.
The feds wouldn't be determining if someone was crazy or mentally ill. It would simply determine if health care records indicated a history of mental illness.
Are databases perfect? of course not. You have a problem with no-fly-lists being used to help stop people with known or questionable ties to terrorist groups from boarding aircraft?
Should we not search for weapons at airports because some weapons get through?
Is your position that if we cannot perform a function without 100% success from the beginning that we shouldn't attempt the function?
How about we stop all security checks because some have failed...

Curious, do you meet your own standard?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deeeefense
The point that went over your head, fuzz, is that you might as well use the Charleston massacre to lobby for new standards in back up cameras in 4 door sedans because those would have been just as likely to prevent the shootings.

Same with most of the tragedies Obama loves to get on TV and exploit to try and suppress gun ownership in the country.
 
The country seems to be divided into two camps. Those that believe the government should make meaningful reforms in the area of gun background checks, mental illness detection, and monitoring of potentially dangerous individuals, and then there's the other camp that thinks we should do nothing and that another mass shooting is just business as usual - you know $hit happens.

Maybe the fact that we never seem to do anything is why every time an incident like this occurs people in the first group speak out once more. We will never stop all gun violence but there are some common sense things we can do to make it more difficult for troubled or dangerous individuals to get access to guns without compromising the rights of law abiding citizens to own, carry and use guns. I think that's what the first group is all about, and I think its the majority.

If I thought there could be reforms that would actually help; Id give serious thought to supporting them. Problem is, gun reform wont help. Its all just pandering to the base.

If someone is willing to murder a group of people in cold blood, they wont bat an eye towards illegally obtaining a firearm. Murder is illegal too. But that doesnt stop any of these attacks either. Criminals dont follow laws.
 
The problem is you people want the government to do everything. And, if/when they do, you people will be whining about that because the government sucks ass. State level, federal level, local level...None of these asshats can handle the basics, yet they're hollering for more and more power/responsibility because people like you want to live in this make believe world the politicians/media are selling you, and you can't/won't do shit for yourself.

Let gun people handle gun stuff. Duh. They don't want to? Take it up in your town/city. If they can't/won't handle it, then guess who definitely can't/won't do anything? The state. The fed. Get together with your own town full of people who supposedly "care" and deal with your shit. Come up with some safety checks. Something.

But nobody cares.

We don't want to do that because it's work for us people. We would prefer the asshat Feds BANNED ALL GUNS!!! YAAAYYwe could boast on our websites and pretend to feel safe....same fed who is involved in the arms business, drug business, etc...

Uhhhhh, I can't balance a checkbook or run a mail service, and damn sure can't educate the children, but, uhhhhhhh, by gawd I'm gonna bring world peace, cure hunger, end racism, ReVERSE THE WEATHER!!!, and make people shit jelly beans!!!!

Now pick that apart and he all PC and not use a lick of logic/common sense and tell me something like "uhhh, banning guns is stupid, obviously. We the people just want the government to control the guns better and keep us safe. Is that too much to ask? Wouldn't the world be a better place?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill Cosby
Hillary Clinton hasn't said shit in 2 months, but she's jumped all over this issue. You know why? Because dumb shit like this that takes our eyes off the important stuff, and that won't get her elected.
It's awful what happened in Charleston, but they aren't going to ban guns, this was a sick young man. We aren't going to keep guns out of people's hands that will use them to hurt people.
As for the confederate flag, the only issue is the one on the SC capital grounds, and that's a South Carolina issue, not national. They aren't going to ban confederate flags, and if they try it's going to turn on them in a bad way. People will fly even more of them, just to prove to them they can't stop them.
 
Wasn't it a gun running operation that got a US diplomat murdered on Hilary Clinton's watch?

Just good to know the left is all for arming cartels and rebels, but if an American exercises his Constitutional right to own a gun he's a goddam terrorist.
 
Nice dodge. Those are important issues and my position is probably not far from yours on any of them, but they have little if anything to do with these mass murders and other types of irrational gun violence.
It is not a dodge, it is reality. We must stop coddling criminals and act as if they are being mistreated. Also, gun violence would continue to happen no matter what type of gun laws you try to implement. Criminals have always found ways to get what they want. Have we stopped drug flow and use? Enforcing laws already on the books would go a long way to helping with the problems. Another way to help is by stopping all of the hate being spewed by all sides of not just races but, idealist, political affiliations, and other devisive factions that we now have in this country. Many of which are being used by politicians including this president to keep their voting base intact.
I will give you one example of one that hits home for me. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid both said in the past that current and retired veterans are potential domestic terrorist. People who serve their country (this country) deserve better from our politicians especially since they struggle to call Islamic terrorist what they are....
 
Wtf dont they just lobby for guard robots? Get Gov't Google on it, and we'll put an armed guard robot in every school, church, and building everywhere. Duh. Why does government not care about us?

And why is the sky still blue? Blue sky represents slavery, war, mass killings, etc...it's a new damn day, damnit!! Why does our government refuse to change the color if the sky to a nice medium fuchsia to promote peace and prosperity. Ugh. So old and conservative.
 
What's your take on the flag being removed in South Carolina?

First off, I'm glad they are taking it off the Capitol building. I understand some southerners like to show their pride and heritage. Here's where it gets tricky. Everyone has seen that flag and the stereotype that goes with it. Most will say it's racist to black people and it stands for hatred. Some of that maybe correct, but if you feel it's strictly a racist flag you're wrong. That flag was chosen for them succeeding of the south, which became their flag which was started in Virginia. The big X on the flag is the southerns wanting their own flag. Furthermore, there are 13 stars on that flag just which represent the original 13 colonies. If you want to fly that flag, lgbt, or a nazi flag at your place have at it. This should of been done along time ago and I'm glad they are taking action now.
 
It will come as a surprise to exactly zero people that the science is settled and liberals like fuzz and defense are weak people who lack self control.

In a series of three studies with more than 300 participants, the authors found that people who identify as conservative perform better on tests of self-control than those who identify as liberal regardless of race, socioeconomic status and gender.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-83826403/

Basically confirms my theory that liberals are like children walking through a store picking up all the toys and throwing them into the cart without regard for whether or not one actually needs or can pay for the toy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P19978
It will come as a surprise to exactly zero people that the science is settled and liberals like fuzz and defense are weak people who lack self control.

In a series of three studies with more than 300 participants, the authors found that people who identify as conservative perform better on tests of self-control than those who identify as liberal regardless of race, socioeconomic status and gender.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-83826403/

Basically confirms my theory that liberals are like children walking through a store picking up all the toys and throwing them into the cart without regard for whether or not one actually needs or can pay for the toy.

A very simple, but accurate comparison. Its about delayed gratification. Usually, conservatives understand and can abide by the concept. Liberals cant because they dont believe gratification should ever be delayed. They think there should be immediate gratification, without regard to consequence.

At the core, thats the real split between the two parties at the grass roots level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: warrior-cat
I will give you one example of one that hits home for me. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid both said in the past that current and retired veterans are potential domestic terrorist. People who serve their country (this country) deserve better from our politicians especially since they struggle to call Islamic terrorist what they are....

That's garbage that was peddled by Limbaugh and Malkin based on a statement my Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla, that PolitiFact has reviewed and determined to be "mostly false". This was based on a confidential report by the Department of Homeland Security on right wing terrorist threats that contained this verbiage:

"The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."

The report was specifically for the use of law enforcement not for public consumption. I could find no record where either Pelosi or Reid made any kind of statement that you are alleging.

When you get all you news from people like Limbaugh and Malkin, you're going to wrong a lot of the time and than make yourself looking silly for swallowing their nonsense.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...port-right-wing-terror-risks-more-cautious-b/
 
Just another reason why the terms conservative an liberals are used...

But glad we wasted money studying that one! Shew! Took some real scholars to figure that one out!

Someone study why we're so dumb and don't even trust ourselves unless some media figure or study tells us it's OK.
 
Last edited:
That's garbage that was peddled by Limbaugh and Malkin based on a statement my Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla, that PolitiFact has reviewed and determined to be "mostly false". This was based on a confidential report by the Department of Homeland Security on right wing terrorist threats that contained this verbiage:

"The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."

The report was specifically for the use of law enforcement not for public consumption. I could find no record where either Pelosi or Reid made any kind of statement that you are alleging.

When you get all you news from people like Limbaugh and Malkin, you're going to wrong a lot of the time and than make yourself looking silly for swallowing their nonsense.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/apr/16/gus-bilirakis/dhs-report-right-wing-terror-risks-more-cautious-b/
B.S. I myself have seen her and Reid say things that have been disrespectful to the right in general along those lines. And Feinstein who basically said our Vets are metally ill (yes I know what Snopes says about it). And your mostly false claim says it all. Maybe it was not the exact words but, they have stated similar or repeated the findings. Either way, they have lied about most things including Reids lie about Mitt Romney's taxes. I'll bet you say that was false also. You talk about me listening to Limbaugh and Malkin (I can't say never but, can say rarely) all the while you are watching the View and MSNBC (Hypocritically of course) on a daily basis. Quit being such a follower of the criminals on the left and learn to think for yourself.
 
Last edited:
It is not a dodge, it is reality. We must stop coddling criminals and act as if they are being mistreated. Also, gun violence would continue to happen no matter what type of gun laws you try to implement. Criminals have always found ways to get what they want. Have we stopped drug flow and use? Enforcing laws already on the books would go a long way to helping with the problems. Another way to help is by stopping all of the hate being spewed by all sides of not just races but, idealist, political affiliations, and other devisive factions that we now have in this country. Many of which are being used by politicians including this president to keep their voting base intact.
I will give you one example of one that hits home for me. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid both said in the past that current and retired veterans are potential domestic terrorist. People who serve their country (this country) deserve better from our politicians especially since they struggle to call Islamic terrorist what they are....
WC, the first step of getting out of a hole is to stop digging. No law, no regulation is going to stop all gun violence. Gun violence occurs in Canada, England, France, Germany, Australia...all that have much stricter gun laws...but it occurs with far less frequency.
There are 10.6 gun related deaths in the US per year per 100,000 population.
Canada has 2.2
England has 0.25
France has 3.0
Germany has 1.2
Australia has 0.86
Japan has 0.06

As for "coddling criminals"... perhaps you should know that the US has more of its citizens in prison per capita than any other developed country and that those nations that incarcerate far fewer of their citizens and treat their prisoners in much more humane ways have far less crime. There is absolutely no data that supports that harsher prison sentences and prisoner treatment reduces crime. In fact, the data shows exactly the opposite. Treat people like caged animals and that's exactly what you create...people who act like caged animals.

Quit trying to play the politics card that this has anything to do with Harry and Nancy or any other politician. Every democratic nation has opposing political parties that disagree and fight over issues.
It was the DHS (Dept of Homeland Security) that issued the report. Specifically it was prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division. Coordinated with the FBI, not Reid or Pelosi. The report is dated April 7, 2009 so it would almost have been entirely authored during the end of George W's reign and addresses concerns for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
"The report says that "right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists — including lone wolves or small terrorist cells — to carry out violence." The report mentions Timothy McVeigh as an example of a veteran who associated with an extremist group after Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm in 1991. "
 
What's your take on the flag being removed in South Carolina?

First off, I'm glad they are taking it off the Capitol building. I understand some southerners like to show their pride and heritage. Here's where it gets tricky. Everyone has seen that flag and the stereotype that goes with it. Most will say it's racist to black people and it stands for hatred. Some of that maybe correct, but if you feel it's strictly a racist flag you're wrong. That flag was chosen for them succeeding of the south, which became their flag which was started in Virginia. The big X on the flag is the southerns wanting their own flag. Furthermore, there are 13 stars on that flag just which represent the original 13 colonies. If you want to fly that flag, lgbt, or a nazi flag at your place have at it. This should of been done along time ago and I'm glad they are taking action now.
W2B, the 13 stars do not represent the 13 original colonies.


Early 7-Star Confederate Flag
  • In 1861 after the formation of the Confederate States of America, there was a need for a new flag that would represent the Confederacy. The first flag that was created was a flag that bore two red bars with one white bar in the middle on the right-hand side, and in the upper-left hand corner was a navy blue square that contained seven stars that represented the seven Confederate states of the union. This flag was known as the "Stars and Bars" flag and was used as the official flag of the Confederacy from 1861 until 1863. The original seven stars represented South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas.
Later 13-Star Confederate Flag
  • As more states joined the Confederate States of America, more stars were added to the Confederate flag to represent each. The states represented by each star were South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, Missouri and Kentucky. Although both Missouri and Kentucky proclaimed neutrality during the Civil War and did not officially secede from the Union, these two states were still represented by a star. The flag displays a red background with a navy blue "X" bordered by white and filed with the 13 white stars. On each leg of the X are three stars and in the middle rests one star. This flag design is known best as the "Southern Cross."
 
You lefties do realize we have a bill of rights, correct? The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, the greatest document in the history of the world, guarantees the citizenry the right to keep and bear arms? An inherent right not granted by the government, but protected from infringement by the government?

The Second Amendment wasn't put there to protect an American's right to defend himself from other Americans. It was put their to protect an American's right to defend himself from his goverment.

So you can take your regulations and any other bullshit you can come up with as a means of exploiting a tragedy, turn it all sideways, and stick it straight up your candy asses.

I don't give a shit what France, Canada, the UK, Australia, etc. do. Our forefathers didn't fight a revolution so you pussies could hand my rights over to a central government.
 
It will come as a surprise to exactly zero people that the science is settled and liberals like fuzz and defense are weak people who lack self control.

In a series of three studies with more than 300 participants, the authors found that people who identify as conservative perform better on tests of self-control than those who identify as liberal regardless of race, socioeconomic status and gender.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-83826403/

Basically confirms my theory that liberals are like children walking through a store picking up all the toys and throwing them into the cart without regard for whether or not one actually needs or can pay for the toy.
So you think that Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and about half of the Fortune 400 all who identify themselves as "liberal" are "like children"...lol.
 
I'm not a science denier. Doesn't matter what I think. Science says liberals lack self control like children.

Not surprised a science denying childish liberal like you thinks differently.
 
You lefties do realize we have a bill of rights, correct? The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, the greatest document in the history of the world, guarantees the citizenry the right to keep and bear arms? An inherent right not granted by the government, but protected from infringement by the government?

The Second Amendment wasn't put there to protect an American's right to defend himself from other Americans. It was put their to protect an American's right to defend himself from his goverment.

So you can take your regulations and any other bullshit you can come up with as a means of exploiting a tragedy, turn it all sideways, and stick it straight up your candy asses.

I don't give a shit what France, Canada, the UK, Australia, etc. do. Our forefathers didn't fight a revolution so you pussies could hand my rights over to a central government.
Arms in 1791 consisted of muskets and flint-lock pistols. I haven't seen anyone trying to take your black powder musket away.
 
Good to see the R establishment rallying to hand Obama all the power he wants. Just a whole bunch of cocksuckers working together at the expense of the American people.

God bless America.
 
"The report mentions Timothy McVeigh as an example of a veteran who associated with an extremist group after Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm in 1991. "
FUZZ:

They are going to use one guy out of hundreds of thousands who have served over the years to point out veterans.Please. Also, when camparing America with other countries gun laws is really and truly like comparing apples and oranges. Have you ever been to some of those countries? Commit a crime and then argue with the Polizei and see how far you get. Just a really uninformed post.
 
Arms in 1791 consisted of muskets and flint-lock pistols. I haven't seen anyone trying to take your black powder musket away.
Yeah, that was the height weapon technology of 1791. The same technology was available to both the military of the day as well as to be purchased and owned by the private citizens.

If only the founding fathers were as smart as you, they would have halted the American People from buying & owning more advanced firearm developments past that date, then things wouldnt be such a mess!!! Love to see gang banging thugs from Obama's Chicago pull of a dozen driveby weekend shootings with muzzle loaders & smooth bores!!!
 
"The report mentions Timothy McVeigh as an example of a veteran who associated with an extremist group after Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm in 1991. "
FUZZ:

They are going to use one guy out of hundreds of thousands who have served over the years to point out veterans.Please. Also, when camparing America with other countries gun laws is really and truly like comparing apples and oranges. Have you ever been to some of those countries? Commit a crime and then argue with the Polizei and see how far you get. Just a really uninformed post.
Did you read the report?
Do you understand what the report says?

All extremist are a tiny fraction of any group. So if their research showed that right-wing extremist groups would attempt to recruit veterans who had skills and training in areas which would serve their causes...they shouldn't says so. W-C, are you being politically correct? Sure sounds like it. Don't call a spade a spade because it might offend other shovels???

Ahhh, argue with a cop here and you'll get your ass shot. We have plenty of examples. So what is your point?
I can compare other countries with stiffer gun laws. 80% of the population of Canada lives within 100 miles of the US, watches the same television programming and is culturally nearly identical. And the Canadian Mounties aren't any more confrontational than any US cop. Plus they have easy access to guns right across the border.

Yes WC, I've traveled to most every part of the world with the exception of Africa and the middle East...even been to both Russia and China...I'm not uninformed.
 
Yeah, that was the height weapon technology of 1791. The same technology was available to both the military of the day as well as to be purchased and owned by the private citizens.

If only the founding fathers were as smart as you, they would have halted the American People from buying & owning more advanced firearm developments past that date, then things wouldnt be such a mess!!! Love to see gang banging thugs from Obama's Chicago pull of a dozen driveby weekend shootings with muzzle loaders & smooth bores!!!

So you're in favor of making the entire military arsenal available to all citizens?
Nukes? You want "the thugs" to have access to .50 calibers mounted in the backs of their thug-mobiles? How about RPGs?
Remember, the "thugs" are going to have access to everything you can buy as well.
 
Good to see the R establishment rallying to hand Obama all the power he wants. Just a whole bunch of cocksuckers working together at the expense of the American people.

God bless America.
Stripping leadership posts from anyone that does not fall in step. Pathetic. Blackmail in the real world.
 
Couple shipments of American tanks and heavy artillery are on their way to the Baltic states and a smattering of other Eastern European countries.
 
1. Let's not lose sight of the fact that fuzz mocked the Second Amendment by saying "no one is taking your muskets." It's as if that's never been tried before. And resulted in a revolution. That led to the Second Amendment.


2. Yes. I'm perfectly fine with anyone out there buying a nuke, or .50 cal, or fighter jet on the open market.

If my neighbor wants to buy a fully loaded fighter jet, who am I to stop him? He worked hard for his hundreds of millions of dollars cash he's going to have to pony up. Nuke? Have at it. Who am I to stop an American citizen with full constitutional rights from buyiing a nuclear bomb on the open market? If you want to save up millions and millions of dollars in cash to buy a nuclear bomb, go right on ahead. I'm sure there are tons of companies waiting to get into the recreational nuclear bomb market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drawing_dead
When proven that his declaration is ignorant, wrong, and does not even support his gun-grabbing squeals, Fuzzy just responds with more inane and and inapplicable questions. so, typical uneducated liberal act.

My personal feeling on gun restriction are that I think the 1934 law restricting access to fully automatic weapons has performed just fine.
 
1. Let's not lose sight of the fact that fuzz mocked the Second Amendment by saying "no one is taking your muskets." It's as if that's never been tried before. And resulted in a revolution. That led to the Second Amendment.


2. Yes. I'm perfectly fine with anyone out there buying a nuke, or .50 cal, or fighter jet on the open market.

If my neighbor wants to buy a fully loaded fighter jet, who am I to stop him? He worked hard for his hundreds of millions of dollars cash he's going to have to pony up. Nuke? Have at it. Who am I to stop an American citizen with full constitutional rights from buyiing a nuclear bomb on the open market? If you want to save up millions and millions of dollars in cash to buy a nuclear bomb, go right on ahead. I'm sure there are tons of companies waiting to get into the recreational nuclear bomb market.
Yet you don't think Iran should have nukes...imagine that?

BTW, know who has the money? The "thugs".
 
When proven that his declaration is ignorant, wrong, and does not even support his gun-grabbing squeals, Fuzzy just responds with more inane and and inapplicable questions. so, typical uneducated liberal act.

My personal feeling on gun restriction are that I think the 1934 law restricting access to fully automatic weapons has performed just fine.
So you are saying you don't have a problem with gun control laws and regulations...you just want to argue over where to draw the line.

Thanks for taking the bait.
 
B.S. I myself have seen her and Reid say things that have been disrespectful to the right in general along those lines. And Feinstein who basically said our Vets are metally ill (yes I know what Snopes says about it). And your mostly false claim says it all. Maybe it was not the exact words but, they have stated similar or repeated the findings. Either way, they have lied about most things including Reids lie about Mitt Romney's taxes. I'll bet you say that was false also. You talk about me listening to Limbaugh and Malkin (I can't say never but, can say rarely) all the while you are watching the View and MSNBC (Hypocritically of course) on a daily basis. Quit being such a follower of the criminals on the left and learn to think for yourself.

You make all kinds of wild accusations about what politicians said, but you never provide any links to back up your statements. I can tell you right now if a liberal, moderator or conservative politician said what you are alleging Reid, Pelosi and Feinstein said their political careers would be severely damaged if not over.

Honest question where DO you get your information from? why do you never link your sources? are you afraid everyone will laugh at you?
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT