The outdated 2nd amendment.

Jump to Last Post 401-450 of 519 discussions (4003 posts)

0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

Just a couple of real facts !
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

Real facts ! There is so much proof against anti gun people out there , that it makes me more than realize their agenda ! Teach your children well people , like our parents taught us , there ARE bad people out there , AND out there , there are uninformed liberal socialists with an agenda against our heritage , against all our history , and against truth .

They use lies , hysteria , anger , they use the schools , the courts and the peer pressure of children to spread their collective delusional diseases , they are rabid and they DO want a new world order . One that they don't even understand themselves though , they actually don't even know WHAT that new order is . So that IS why I'm still here pointing out truth in laymen's terms . I will continue to point these truths out , not only because of my interests in guns but because of my interest in truth itself.
reply report
1. 70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Real Facts? Truth? Against our heritage? Against our history? Here's a fact for you, Archie, and Jughead that you can all discuss while polishing the gun racks:
  
  The greatest single act of terrorism in the history of the world was the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To this day no one has been able to explain how innocent civilians, including women and children, were a threat to the United States. Especially since the historical record reveals that at the time of the bombing the Japanese were at the very brink of surrender. But that is just one example from a long list of atrocities committed by the United States. Of course, it is no surprise that the poor white underclass would seek to emulate the ruling elite by advocating guns and violence. We can see the same mindless behavior in attack dogs that strike on command.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Wrong again. It was determined it would cost 2 million or more soldiers lives.
  The Japs raped, murdered, killed on such a scale it would make Columbus look like a Saint.
  The only thing I would have done differently is let the Ruskies take the islands.
  Then see how many rapes and murders there would be!
  
  Why should we risk the lives of soldiers? The japs should have given up their brain washed emperor god worship way before this point. It was they who attacked us. And we gave all lands back and then a bunch of money.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Do gun advocates even care about their own children? How many women do you think 6 month old babies were raping? How many women were Japanese women, or 9 year old girls raping? And they didn't have viagra back then, so it's safe to say that the old men who were incinerated weren't raping anybody either. The 2 million figure is simply an arbitrary figure concocted to help cover up a war crime. If the Japs were doing so much raping and pillaging then it would make more sense to attack the perpetrators instead of innocent civilian targets. The ends do not justify the means when innocent human lives are at stake.
  
  The gun advocates care more about the Second Amendment than they do a human life. All this misty eyed talk about "founding fathers" has really made me start to wonder. On your feet or on your knees? When I was a kid we pledged allegiance to the flag while standing on our feet. It seems that many gun advocates would rather do it on their knees. Since all of the "founding fathers" have been dead for over 200 years, it gives a whole new meaning to the phrase"throwing the dog a bone".
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It is about the constitution before the founders got corrupted some. Should have stayed with a one party system. Jackson was not a signer or contributor. Even the prophets at times backslid.
  
  Trueman is evil to you because he had to weigh in the balance Allied lives vs enemy lives.
  Prove he knew at the time that the Japs where on the verge of surrender. They were offered to surrender in July. They turned down all offers. And fought nearly to the last man. From the losses of these smaller island it was estimated a much larger death toll to Allies would result based on percentages. Not simply an arbitrary number as you say!
  
  It was the stupid not caring emperor that caused all those lives. Just like Hitlers' refusing to surrender because of evil pride.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Japanese culture and customs are very strict. They have a rule, or Kata, for every kind of behavior. They may have not been bombed the second time if they had a kata for surrendering. They simply didn't know how to say it.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There seems to be a shift there in morality and ethics from the savagery of WWII and today. One of the safest places to live now. I think maybe there was a word or phrase for surrender they just refused to do it. The U.S. offered surrender in July. The fanatical emperor refused and still insisted it was death to the last man women even child. It could have ended a lot sooner and no A bomb! Hitler in Germany was just as fanatical. A large number of the German
  military surrendered before wars' end in spite of his rantings to fight to the last.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "The 2 million figure is simply an arbitrary figure concocted to help cover up a war crime."
  
  Can you at least prove this simple statement? Perhaps with a link to a document wherein the top brass says they will just make up a figure to give an excuse for attack? A recording of the President saying he doesn't care, he just want's to kill Japanese civilians? Something to show that you have even a modicum of truth in the statement?
  
  Or is it just another ridiculous claim, made up to give an excuse to vilify Caucasians and Americans?
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Of course, there is no documentation that can prove the governments assertion. And the burden of proof is always on the accuser in a court of law. I "am" the authority. There is nothing written or documented concerning this topic that exceeds that authority. You, like many Americans, have no faith in yourselves, but incessantly demand proof from a second, or third party, when the proof is all around you! For God's sake, you are literally swimming in it! This often reminds me of Lennie always asking George to tell him about the rabbits in Steinbecks masterpiece, "Of Mice and Men".
  
  But let's keep it real. It is your dislike for me that drives your commentary. This is clearly evident when we examine your comments that raise doubt about the truthfulness, or the good intentions of the government, certain politicians, or political parties. However, whenever I question the government you come riding in on your big white horse from Idaho suggesting that any functionary of the government is beyond reproach. It reminds me of how many so-called Christians will argue that everything written in the Holy Bible is an indisputable fact. However, as recently demonstrated by their shameful indifference toward Syrian refugees, they will often re-interpret, or ignore certain biblical teachings that do not accommodate their current needs or wishes. My advice to the lovers of guns, mayhem, and violence: Keep doing what you are doing, stay on the short bus, enjoy the ride, and we'll take care of the rest.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am all for letting Christian Syrians in. They are the ones that are getting slaughtered
  Obama has rejected the ones that are really persecuted in favor his pet religion.
  Christians from the other countries as well. He is limiting it to just Syrian.
  
  What about all those "religion of peace" countries stepping up and allowing them in their countries? Sweden has lost its country due to too many Muslims taking over and riding herd.
  
  I donated from my widow's mite to Glenn Beck to rescue Christians from the area. What have you done?
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  What have I done? I've been saving the world, Doug. What else would I be doing? Giving money may seem to help a little, but in the long run it doesn't change a thing. People were giving money to help the needy before WWII. But look around Doug. The world is still full of poor, needy people. And the violence continues as well. Throwing money at the problem has been proven to be ineffective overall. There is a better way, and that's what i'm working on. "From each according to his ability.To each according to his need."
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Who are you bringing in from that hell hole over there? You are not over there protecting them!
  Jesus said the poor will always be with us. That does not mean they shouldn't be helped.
  Takes money to transport them from there to here or any other safe area.
  I don't have those psycho powers you claim to have. If all it took was prayer then the problem would have been resolved long time ago.
  reply report
  79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  actually, wrench, extreme poverty is at a record low.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Tell that to the homeless people in Ft Lauderdale. As recently as November 2014 a 90 year old man and two ministers were arrested for feeding the homeless. There are a lot of poor people in Florida. Many of the "lucky" ones are retired on fixed incomes, and just barely able to get from month to month. But they do have a roof over their head. It's a total mess and an outrage.
  
  This segment of the population is usually not figured when people speak of poverty in the U.S.. Perhaps the numbers are there, but no one is paying attention. These are people who raised families, worked hard , and paid into the system. Now many are working part time jobs in their mid 70's trying to make ends meet. I travel all over the state, I listen to what people are saying. Most of them are white, and very pissed off. The government screwed them and they know it. Down here on the ground I haven't heard anybody talking about that record low you mentioned. Of course, I am sure wilderness who lives in Idaho knows more about it than I do. I'll bet he's got the graph hanging on the wall in his study; right next to the busted chain saw and the rusty lawn mower engine.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Threw away the lawn mower engine when it wouldn't run any more, but the chain saw isn't busted at all. Just needs a new chain!
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Who's fault is all that? The regime didn't give cost of living to retired people on fixed incomes because they didn't consider food and heat costs as part of the cost of living. This is ridiculousness because both have risen faster then most other expenses, save his other pet money grab, Obama Care or Affordable Care Act that dummies think are two different things.
  
  It is estimated that SS payments would have been 40% higher if the gov. would have kept their greedy fingers out of it.
  reply report
  79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  very few in the US suffer extreme poverty, living on less than $2 per day. it's a third world problem, and it IS at a record low.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  OK, but I still don't see the relevance. Extreme poverty was projected to fall below 10% in 2015. Are you suggesting that now I don't have to save the world? Have you ever lived on $12,000 a year? That amounts to about $33.00 a day, which is well above the extreme poverty you indicated at below $2:00 a day. As a musician, there have been several years when my yearly income hovered around that figure. That may not be extreme poverty, but it's as extreme as I care to get. And if anyone thinks $12,000 a year is a walk in the park, I suggest you try it yourself and see. And when your car breaks down, or when somebody steals your guitar, guitar amplifier, and PA system; the tools you use to make the money, that's when life gets really interesting.
  
  I am not disputing your figures, I am simply saying that the people that come up with these figures are usually driving a nice new car, living in a nice big house with a jacuzzi and swimming pool (standard), have a nice big bank account, and usually have several family members with nice bank accounts to catch them when they fall. In other words, their numbers add up to very little in the real world. It doesn't make life much easier for someone living on $33.00 a day, to know that somewhere in the world someone else is living on less than $2.00. Especially when they've got one foot in the street, the roof is starting to leak, and they're running low on SPAM.
  reply report
  79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  i lived on $300 per month for two years. would not have survived had my parents not let me stay in their home rent-free. they also paid my car insurance. i covered food, medicine, clothes, gas, entertainment. then my income went up to $900 per month for several more years, during which i supported myself. so i'm no stranger to low income. i kept perspective by thinking about those others who had so much less. i didn't feel poor compared to them. i also worked as a social worker for seven years, during which time i assisted many folks who usually survived on about $750 per month. they live in subsidized housing and can't afford cars, but they eat okay and some seem to be able to afford to smoke. we have some public transportation in this semi-rural area, which, though inconvenient, seems to suffice. i also made $80k per year as a physician at one point and happily paid my higher tax rate and still voted democrat. i'm now in the middle as far as income goes. as the apostle paul said, "i have learned whatever state i am in to be content."
  report
  79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  WB, you are an expert in making biased opinions sound like truth; opinions which are so far from factual it is pitiful. And that's about all - certainly you have shown yourself totally unable to support any of your ideas about history or anything else.
  
  Just like the 2 million figure - there is absolutely zero basis in fact in that statement, or in any other comment you might imaginatively make up to vilify a country - rather than "question" government you simply mouth lies. And that is an excellent reason to ignore what you have to say.
  
  One day you may learn that only fools believe everything the see on the web; until then I assume you will continue to give opinions as factual, and you will continue to run into individuals that call you on it.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Of course, your childish insults have been stamped "Return To Sender".Actually I low-balled the number. I have seen some apologist estimates as high as 4 million allied lives saved as the result of bombing the two soft targets; a war crime that resulted in the deaths of over 200,000 men, women, and children. Of course Truman and his thugs had to circulate propaganda to support and justify his decision to murder that many people. You defend guns and you defend murderers. Why? What has happened in your life to make you this way? "Excuse me, while I kiss the sky"
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  A war crime. That was judged and found guilty, by...who was the judge again? Somebody called "WB" you say?
  
  More unsupported claims, huh? Or will you now pretend to support that I defend murderers?
  
  No? Why did I already know that?
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Talk to the hand. There is plenty of evidence to back up my claim. First of all, the 200,000 non-combatants he murdered should be a good indication. I understand that they weren't white Europeans, but they were still people. How dead does someone have to be before you can understand that somebody killed them? And were is your proof that Truman was justified? You have none. But here is just one example of evidence to the contrary. Of course, I don't expect that you will read it , as your primary purpose doesn't seem to be a search for the truth.
  
  http://www.workers.org/2005/world/hiroshima-0811/.
  reply report
  72
  tommylopposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  No the nuclear bomb was done has an act of war, truth be told all 3 sides (USA, Germany, and Japan) wanted the bomb we were the first to get it and use it. If we did not use it we would have to go in by land assault and the Japanese government had Kamazaki equipment for women and kids.
  
  If you really want to know our history in context you should look at what the citzens of Okanawa did when they saw us coming a lot of them leap to there deaths because they were fearful of death, slavery, and torture that usually came with being conquered the enemys. Those that diden't kill themselves but hid were startle to find that the American soilders came with food and medicine.
  
  And while it is true we are the only country to use a nuke in war time what did we do to the country that we defeated with it. We rebuild them, gave them there own government, and left them more freer and prosperous then when we found them. Most countries in the world after fighting such a brutal war would have taken over the country, killed most of the men, and enslaved the women and children that did not happen.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The Okinawans where fed a bunch of lies like the rest of Japan was. The Death toll was estimated to be 1 million or more troops on the Allies side. Why would you not want to end it with less casualties?
  
  A German sub surrendered just after Germany did loaded with nuclear material headed for Japan so they could beat us to the A bomb. What do you think they would have done with it. Mr Biscuits is a great cherry picker and looses the big picture in his rants.
  
  If the Indians would have banded together and beat the settlers and army, how many would they have spared? Would have tortured most that survived and made slaves of the rest.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The Japanese culture is very ancient and they believe strongly in the concept of shame. They would rather die than be captured. On the opposite side of the coin, peer pressure is a big thing there too, so that's bad for the young people.
  
  I always thought it was weird the way our country destroys another one, then helps them rebuild. Too bad we didn't do that after the Civil War, maybe we wouldn't still be fighting it today.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  It is quite fascinating how people feel they can hide evil behind meaningless words and phrases. War or Terrorism? Terrorism or War? A civilian in New Jersey can imagine that a soldier is lying dead on a battelfield in Iraq. The words "soldier", "battlefield", and the unspoken word, "war", enable the civilian to soften the harsh reality. But the simple truth is that the dead person's name is John Smith, and he was murdered by an enemy combatant in the desert.
  
  Using the word "war" does not justify murder. And to say killing on a so-called battlefield is not the same as murder only reveals one's own inhumanity. To further suggest that anyone is better off because of the tens of thousands of innocent people ( approx . 200,000) who were killed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima is nothing less than an outrage. I can tell from reading many of these posts that a considerable number of people are not far removed from Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, or John Wayne Gacy. Perhaps they simply haven't graduated to that level yet, or they simply haven't been caught.
  
  Your comment about the "humane" treatment of the Japanese by the Americans reminds me a lot of Billy Bob Logic. Billy Bob married his sister, and they get along fine, except for once in a while Billy Bob likes to use his sister as a punching bag. The last time he beat her up, down, and sideways, he bought her a new riding lawnmower and a dozen roses. The time before that, after he had her remaining teeth replaced with expensive implants, he sent her to a plastic surgeon for that facelift she has always wanted. Now she looks more like Priscilla Presley than his sister. According to you, there's absolutely nothing wrong with beating up your wife,or sister, as long as you buy her an expensive gift afterwards. Besides, there are a lot of poor women who will never be able to afford that new lawnmower, dental implants, or a facelift.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "And to say killing on a so-called battlefield is not the same as murder only reveals one's own inhumanity."
  
  And to say they are the same reveals only ignorance. Legally and ethically there is a huge difference.
  
  "To further suggest that anyone is better off because of the tens of thousands of innocent people ( approx . 200,000) who were killed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima is nothing less than an outrage."
  
  To suggest that the lives of countless US military personnel that would have died in a mainland assault are not better off is patently false as well.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  A huge difference? Many a dead man would argue otherwise. Who could actually think that a 20 year old kid who died a horrible death in Iraq fighting for rich people and oil wells would actually feel good about forfeiting what could have been a great life with his family and friends? Are you suggesting that such a death is more acceptable because it is not commonly defined as murder, but as a heroic sacrifice? Who really aspires to be a dead hero? People from Idaho perhaps?
  
  A great majority of gun lovers, warmongers, and arm chair warriors have never set foot on a battlefield, never had to kill another human being, or fear every minute of the day that they might step on a land mine, or get shot in the gut and linger for days. If there is such a "huge" difference between killing and murder then why do so many veterans suffer from PTSD, and why is the suicide rate so high among veterans? Of course, these are rhetorical questions, as most anyone who is not living on the Big Rock Candy Mountain knows the answer.
  
  Hear Ye! Hear Ye!
  
  The ethics of a savage, or the sick fantasies of tyrants forged as legal documents are hardly recognized by the civilized mind. Let us not forget that this is the age where humans still sit in public restaurants and eat the remains of dead animals, all the while speaking of love, honor, and the pursuit of happiness. As if cannibalism is not only a virtue, but a divine right. Yet, they are only one step away from the Lion and his pride who so eagerly devour the living.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Once again the elitist of humankind , the Wanna-be God himself has judged all of us meek, mindless , immoral humankind . We bow once again to you and your all knowing Oh Master . You are the man or woman or whatever , We bow to you and your faultless wisdom of our wicked ways , and we promise all as one and one as all ,heads bowed , hands clasped between us ,that if only we could catch up , if only we could be ........well, be just like you wrenchbisket ,.......Oh what a beautiful world it would be .
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It does sound kind of funny, coming from an anarchist, doesn't it? When the rule of the land is simple strength and power, when force is the primary tool to take whatever is wanted, it does sound odd to then proclaim that war is identical to murder.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  This is the definition of murder:
  
  noun
  1.
  the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
  "the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"
  synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More
  verb
  1.
  kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation.
  "somebody tried to murder Joe"
  synonyms: kill, put to death, assassinate, execute, liquidate, eliminate, dispatch, butcher, slaughter, massacre, wipe out.
  
  Therefore if you are a member of the armed services and you kill the enemy while in combat, it is not murder, because it is not unlawful. The fact that you are a member of the military gives one the lawful right to perform such an act.
  
  This is from U.S. History.org...please go to the link to read the complete citing.
  
  "Truman stated that his decision to drop the bomb was purely military. A Normandy-type amphibious landing would have cost an estimated million casualties. Truman believed that the bombs saved Japanese lives as well. Prolonging the war was not an option for the President. Over 3,500 Japanese kamikaze raids had already wrought great destruction and loss of American lives.
  
  The President rejected a demonstration of the atomic bomb to the Japanese leadership. He knew there was no guarantee the Japanese would surrender if the test succeeded, and he felt that a failed demonstration would be worse than none at all. Even the scientific community failed to foresee the awful effects of RADIATION SICKNESS. Truman saw little difference between atomic bombing Hiroshima and FIRE BOMBING Dresden or Tokyo.
  
  The ethical debate over the decision to drop the atomic bomb will never be resolved. The bombs did, however, bring an end to the most destructive war in history. The Manhattan Project that produced it demonstrated the possibility of how a nation's resources could be mobilized.
  
  Pandora's box was now open. The question that came flying out was, "How will the world use its nuclear capability?"
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you. I was too lazy to actually look up the definition, mostly because it won't make any difference to WB. The underlying thought seems to be that anarchy is preferable to any government and that no laws are needed at all and therefore are all to be maligned and misconstrued to be something they are not.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I thought that you, prepper, and ahorseback were the anarchists, based on your posts.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  No you didn't. That's just more rhetoric because you don't like the truth being offered about gun laws.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Again you nailed it. "Keep & Bear" means own and CARRY for such a time as this.
  report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Governments have made a distinction between state sponsored murder and murder committed by an individual, or individuals independent of said governments. To suggest that there is such a thing as unlawful killing implies that killing can be justified under certain circumstances. Of course, those circumstances are always decided by a powerful minority. The very definition of murder is perverse in its implication, as a distinction has been made where none truly exists.
  
  A man who is killed "legall;y" is just as dead as the man killed "illegaly". Both families suffer the same degree of loss. It has yet to be proven, or understood by the mainstream that World War I and World War II were staged events, but that day will come. However, it is currently the general consensus that the Vietnam War and the Irag War were both mistakes, and that the United States should have never engaged in these wars.
  
  Understanding that the government made a "mistake" x 2, we can only understand that what once was held to be right and proper, has proven to be wrong from the very beginning! Thus, the premise that killing during wartime is "legal" is seriously called into question when the declaration of hostilities was fundamentally wrong to begin with, rendering any subsequent military action that led to the killing of enemy combatants and innocent civilians equally wrong, regardless of any perceived "legal definition".
  
  Consequently, it has been shown that U.S. citizens in both cases were purposely coerced into committing crimes against humanity under the pretense of patriotic duty, and civic responsibility. If "legality" can so easily be manipulated to reflect the evil ambitions and motivations of corrupt world governments, then we need to seriously question the usefulness of certain legal definitions, and concern ourselves with finding a remedy that might lead to a cure, as opposed to the current apathetic mentality that can only lead to more violence.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  " … finding a remedy that might lead to a cure,"
  
  Suggestions:
  Raising children in positivity through respect, justice, fairness, love and acceptance.
  Education where children learn with selves in tact.
  Cooperation and good will between nations.
  A world where growth is the goal rather than death,
  I would say.
  
  IS IT so DIFFICULT to create a world of civilized earth riders?
  Yes, due to misguided free will.
  Well guided self-will is the answer. How can we get people to guide their wills better, wB?
  WE CAN'T
  So what hope is there?
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Wrench Biscuit: Unfortunately, when when one joins the U.S. military, they have to take an oath. It goes like this:
  
  "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed."
  
  This is what provides the legal right to kill your enemy when ordered to do so or to protect yourself and your country during combat.
  
  If one doesn't obey the orders, then they are subject to the articles of the UCMJ (United States Code of Military Justice) and possible court martial under the articles of the UCMJ, which is much worse than a civilian court.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I took the same oath, and I am well acquainted with the UCMJ. But the "legality" of the matter is irrelevant. No government, nor any amount of legal documentation, or semantics, can supersede the natural laws. Killing is a perversion of human nature, and there is no getting around that. As I have stated, if killing were not a perverse act, then PTSD would not affect so many war veterans. Obviously, the knowledge that one has the legal right to kill or be killed has had little positive effect on the 30% of Iraq and Afghan war veterans who suffer from PTSD, or the over 200,000 Vietnam War vets who still suffer from the psychological ravages of war. Since the end of the Vietnam War over 100,000 Vietnam Veterans have committed suicide.
  
  A study published in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine found that combat veterans are not only more likely to have suicidal ideation, often associated with PTSD and depression, but they are more likely to act on a suicidal plan.
  
  These statistics only provide further proof that making a distinction between murder and the killing sanctioned by world governments, serves no good purpose.
  report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "No government, nor any amount of legal documentation, or semantics, can supersede the natural laws. "
  
  You might want to explain that to millions of jailbirds. They should be happy to know they are free to walk out; that "natural law" (whatever that is) says they are free.
  
  "Killing is a perversion of human nature, and there is no getting around that."
  
  As man has been killing both man and animal for hundreds of thousands of years, this would seem to be false on the face of it. While it makes a nice ethical statement, it plainly isn't true.
  
  "Obviously, the knowledge that one has the legal right to kill or be killed has had little positive effect on the 30% of Iraq and Afghan war veterans who suffer from PTSD,"
  
  And you would place the cause on killing enemy combatants rather than the constant danger of being killed. Or the immense strain of separating combatants from innocent people. Or just the poor living conditions. Or the requirement to follow the rules given soldiers rather than simply killing everything in sight to protect themselves. Well and good...but can you back it up? Or just assign blame as it suits your purpose? (I know a Vietnam vet who will dive under a table at the sound of a backfire - I've seen it happen. I don't think that comes from shooting a gun; it comes from being shot at.)
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You're one to condemn others then it is you who came out and admitted to causing the deaths of some that disagreed with you. And getting off over a poor guy shooting himself while cleaning his gun! You know nothing about those people other than they like guns.
  
  Where is your moral compass about "Thou shalt not kill"? The Ten Commandments? God also commanded the Israelites to kill everyone in certain areas. So, the word kill is used everywhere when the original Hebrew writings had different words. Like the difference between murder and kill. The OT was not completely translated correctly.
  
  You are the murderer, even if you really didn't cause the deaths of those you pumped yourself up to think you did. It is the evil in your heart that tells on you. And then if you actually did cause those deaths then, evil is you to a greater degree.
  
  Your rant about not eating animals is also way off. The Bible clearly says that even eating what was previously not allowed, now is allowed. Peter is told, 'What God has made clean, do not call common. Unless you can find the original writings that says different.
  
  Also, it is fact that no vegetarian has lived over 100. Plenty of meat eaters have. And so what if you are vegetarian! Do you think intentionally causing ones death is forgiven if you are a vegetarian?
  report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "Thus, the premise that killing during wartime is "legal" is seriously called into question"
  
  No it's not. Whether you like it or not, whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant. What IS relevant, in determining whether a killing was "murder" or not, is the law and not some story tale you make up to demonize the US.
  
  Yes, Vietnam was a mistake. So, probably, was Korea and Iraq. Not Kuwait, not WWI, not WWII, not the revolutionary war, and probably not even the Civil War. You will, of course, disagree under the premise that no killing is ever justified or legal, but you would be wrong.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  It appears that you are referring to the current state of affairs with your comment: " ... When the rule of the land is simple strength and power, when force is the primary tool to take whatever is wanted ..."
  
  If so then here I must agree. Ethics and morality are the province of the powerless. However, if you are alluding to Anarchy, a subject you have proven to know nothing about, then you are sorely mistaken. Whenever a light bulb is burned out , most people do not try to fix it, they simply replace the old light bulb. And so, I will do the same, by offering the reader who has the capacity, and the desire to understand , an example of Anarchy that many can relate to.
  
  Anyone who has ever been involved in a loving relationship has experienced a form of Anarchy. For instance, in my family my mother and father were equals, as they shared a solidarity of purpose. One did not rule over the other. Consequently,there were never any "wars" waged between them, and I cannot recall an argument that ever lasted more than 5 minutes. But even during those minor events, the language was always civil and "G rated". Anyone who grew up in a home where one parent dominated the other would have experienced what is similar to a dictatorship, a democracy, or an oligarchy under the rule of a central government.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Your version of anarchy is fine...for people in love, for people that respect other's rights, for moral people that refuse to force their desires onto others.
  
  Unfortunately, that does not reflect the world we live in, no matter how hard you would pretend that it does. Our world is full of people that do NOT respect the rights of others, that will do just as they please as long as no one can force them to behave themselves. One has only to look at how many are killed, how many suffer robberies or vandalism to see this.
  
  So we have laws, laws enforced by the will of the people, to protect the people. And we will require that until such time as humanity has become the perfect people you would have them to be.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I see you still do not understand. Anarchy simply means "without government". More specifically: Without the rule of a central government. The rule of law is inextricably bound to solidarity of purpose, as I have already mentioned. It is absurd to suggest that solidarity of purpose could ever be achieved amidst chaos and lawlessness. Before you express your opinion on a topic you know nothing about, perhaps you should read a book.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Or perhaps you should actually think about the nonsense you are spouting.
  
  For "without government" means exactly that, and it means as well a lack of police and military. Both of which describe states wherein a nation cannot endure; the first results in the old west and all it's faults when the one with the most guns ruled the land and the second in a quick end to the nation and rule/control by another nation. And yes, I recognize that "nation" doesn't truly apply when there is no government; it is perhaps one of the reasons this land was so easily subjugated to rule by Europeans. While small, individual tribes of native Indians were not anarchistic, the land as a whole had no central government and thus was. Much like your anarchistic loving family when it encounters a much larger group that wishes to take what they have. Without the force of a central government behind it, it will quickly succumb to those with a "bigger gun".
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  A military, a police force, public school system, emergency services etc., can all function properly without a central government. You are simply parroting what you have been taught by a system designed by a ruling elite; a powerful minority who seek to maintain their stranglehold over the masses. What you are expressing is a perfect example of how well brainwashing techniques can blind a majority to the truth.
  
  You mindlessly defend paper tigers like the Constitution and the Second Amendment, when the truth is that the federal government at anytime can suspend all of your so-called "rights" in the interest of national security. The Patriot Act, the Social Security Act, and the Federal Reserve Act were all designed with that purpose in mind.
  
  Many here apparently have a problem understanding language and meaning. The success of the European Invasion was not due to a lack of a central "government" amongst the First Nations. It was the matter of a lack of "solidarity" among the nations. The words "solidarity" and "government" are not synonymous. This lack of solidarity, along with the biological weapon of smallpox that was used as an effective means of ethnic cleansing, are together the primary reasons why the Europeans succeeded. Until one can truly understand language and meaning, it is not possible for one to rise above the level of a servant.
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  More cherry picked lies by the only one on this thread that is a confessed murderer!
  
  http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/524045 … w=fulltext
  In this analysis of the genocide rhetoric employed over the years by Ward Churchill, an ethnic studies professor at the University of Colorado, a "distressing" conclusion is reached: Churchill has habitually committed multiple counts of research misconduct—specifically, fabrication and falsification. While acknowledging the "politicization" of the topic and evidence of other outrages committed against Native American tribes in times past, this study examines the different versions of the "smallpox blankets" episode published by Churchill between 1994 and 2003. The "preponderance of evidence" standard of proof strongly indicates that Churchill fabricated events that never occurred—namely the U.S. Army's alleged distribution of smallpox infested blankets to the Mandan Indians in 1837. The analysis additionally reveals that Churchill falsified sources to support his fabricated version of events, and also concealed evidence in his cited sources that actually disconfirms, rather than substantiates, his allegations of genocide.
  
  Prove there was an attempt at a genocide anything close to a Hitler type genocide. Or the Muslim-Turkish one committed against the Armenians 1915. Please don't cherry pick a skirmish here and there!
  report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And who will run that military, requiring more money than any full state, let alone a small village, can provide? Will individual, voluntary donations provide the funding? Which small town will be responsible for sending them out? We're not talking 250 member societies here; we're talking about a 300,000,000 member country! Will each soldier decide for himself what he wants to do, where he wants to go and how to get there? It's called government.
  
  And when you consider each "nation" as an "individual" among the Indians, you have anarchy. Rather than individual people as anarchists, you have nations that don't cooperate, don't work together, don't have the same values and use force to impose their will on other "nations". Yes, the entire world is run that way, with nearly 200 nations that all have a strong sense of individuality and do as they wish. It is only lately that we see nations actually cooperating (beyond military alliances) to control the "anarchist" nations that will overrun other nations at a whim. The human race has progressed far beyond what it was, but has a long, long way to go.
  
  No, WB, the entire world will have to gain the mindset you attribute to them before anarchy is possible as a reasonable form of "government". Until it does the inevitable result will be rule by the strong.
  report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I have to agree with Wilderness on that one. You have to have some kind of organized government. People can't just walk around doing whatever they want, hurting others, stealing, taking over other people's land, etc. Any civilized society has to have a set of rules to follow. I know right now our country doesn't agree about a lot of laws, but we can't just throw them all away either.
  report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Jean,
  As I have explained, Anarchy has nothing to do with chaos and lawlessness. On the contrary, Anarchy encourages order, and solidarity of purpose. But it is not possible to explain a philosophy in just a few soundbytes, or paragraphs. However if you are interested, here is a link to Malatesta's famous work "Anarchy" in audiobook format. The entire work can be listened to in it's entirety for free!
  The total time of the presentation is 104 minutes.
  
  http://wrenchbiscuit.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_25.html
  report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You did indeed explain that. But that doesn't mean that your "explanation" is true, and it patently is not. Anarchy has everything to do with chaos and lawlessness - it is exactly that lack of laws ("lawlessness") that defines the term and the events that go with it. Rather than providing order, it provides only for what order can be achieved by force; force applied only by an individual rather than a society, and usually force that is applied against or by a group with a government (regardless of how small or poorly defined).
  
  For in your eden of anarchy it is the group banding together to take whatever it is they wish that will have the only large force available to it. The individual does not.
  report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Justice consists in giving a man his due. What is due a man? What is naturally his such as, Pursuit of Happiness and Liberty ... but we are not free to do whatever we want because justice consists in giving a man his due.
  http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/file … /M-654.pdf
  In other words, we are free to do what we want as long as we do not encroach on others' rights. How are these rights guaranteed in anarchy?
  
  In anarchy these rights are guaranteed by
  
  WHAT?
  report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  comment: "... In anarchy these rights are guaranteed by WHAT?"
  
  Consider what has just transpired in Oregon. Although I am inclined to believe that no one has been killed, and that this is a government PsyOps, let's pretend for the sake of argument that the Oregon Standoff is real. Now let us consider the players. On one side we have law enforcement and on the other side we have disgruntled ranchers who want to extend white privilege to cover free grazing rights on federal land. On both sides we see that firearms are the weapons of choice. When all else fails, law enforcement, as well as groups like the Ammon Bundy and Archie Bunker Brigade, resort to deadly force. Contrary to what wilderness would have us believe, no one on either side of the equation has chosen a baseball bat, a chain saw, or a ballpeen hammer as their weapon of choice. Why? Because a gun is sexier, and far more efficient. And how far can a bullet travel? Over a mile? Do you know anyone who can throw a baseball bat that far and hit a moving target? Of course, I am sure there are people in Idaho who believe that this can be done.
  
  Now that I have established that guns are the weapons of choice in this confrontation, let us consider the fate of Mr. Finicum. He was hanging out with a group of angry men who were all carrying guns. He was also a lover of guns, and the people they challenged are also fond of guns. As I stated, if we pretend that this is really all true, then it should be no surprise that this follows perfectly the phrase: "live by the sword, die by the sword". We can clearly see that Mr. Finicums gun, and his reliance on violence as a last resort, did not protect him from anything, but instead got him killed.
  
  All of this directly relates to your question: "...In anarchy these rights are guaranteed by WHAT?" Although it is not presently understood as such, Anarchy is one of the natural laws, such as The Law of Gravity. Once mankind understood that it was a bad idea to jump into the Grand Canyon, or from the top of a very tall tree, there was no longer any need to enact legislation prohibiting such behavior. Once mankind accepts that the current socio-political systems are also detrimental to our health, Anarchy will reign supreme within the Earth. There will be no need to protect the superior system against forces that might want to return us to the old ways of Democracy, Oligarchy, and Tyranny.
  
  We must replace our reliance on guns and violence with love and kindness. And as can be gathered from the superior teachings of Jesus, it is love and kindness that leads us to a perfect state of Anarchy. Guaranteed by what? By the Earth, By God, By Love and Kindness.
  report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  People are loving, kind, respectful of earth/nature and God) in optimal conditions.
  We need optimal conditions on earth first. Maybe you are putting the carriage before the horse.
  We can't even stop war, abortions or drug abuse.
  We can't even develop better educational institutions.
  We can't even provide healthful inexpensive food for each other.
  We can't even stop putting mercury in our landfills via mercury filled light bulbs
  or polluting our oceans with plastic trash ...
  We can't even help the homeless or shut down bars selling alcohol which creates homelessness.
  Jesus came to save the world ...
  We can't (refuse to) even believe in his words in the Bible! (Or interpret them accurately!)
  
  And you want us to adopt Anarchy?
  
  It has to start with the majority of individuals on the same page.
  How are you gonna get individuals to be on the same page?
  report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  What you have just stated is verifiably false. The ancient Greek simply defines Anarchy as "without rulers". Pierre Proudhon used the term in his treatise What Is Property? to refer to a new political philosophy, anarchism, which advocates stateless societies based on voluntary associations. In this sense anarchy refers to the lessening, or complete abolition of government.
  
  What you are referring to is the perverse definition that has been promoted and seeded throughout the common vernacular to the extent that dictionaries now include this inaccurate definition with the original. Of course this nonsense has been promoted by a ruling elite that depends on ignorance and fear in order to maintain control. The word "Gay" has suffered a similar fate. For hundreds of years, Gay was simply a synonym for happy. Now, it is impossible to hear the word without thinking of homosexuality. The same holds true for the term "Anarchy". Because of the perverse use of the word since the late 19th century, it is impossible for the uneducated person to hear the term without thinking of chaos, lawlessness, and violence in general.
  
  And so I am now inspired, and when I find the time I will write one of my greatest works. It will be entitled. "Confessions of a Gay Anarchist". I am sure that Howard Stern will love it.
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  an·ar·chy
  ˈanərkē/
  noun
  noun: anarchy
  
  a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
  "he must ensure public order in a country threatened with anarchy"
  synonyms: lawlessness, nihilism, mobocracy, revolution, insurrection, disorder, chaos, mayhem, tumult, turmoil
  "conditions are dangerously ripe for anarchy"
  antonyms: government, order
  absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
  
  Origin: irrelevant
  mid 16th century: via medieval Latin from Greek anarkhia, from anarkhos, from an- ‘without’ + arkhos ‘chief, ruler.’
  Translate anarchy to
  Use over time for: anarchy
  
  Bottom line is what it means today! Meaning: You lose, good day sir!
  report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  First of all you have only further illustrated my point by posting the perverse definitions I had already indicated or alluded to. But most importantly, you have revealed the danger of allowing ourselves to focus more on the popular definition of a word as opposed to the actual meaning of the thing the word purports to describe!
  
  You have subscribed to a perverse definition, yet you have never taken the time to study the "thing" and discover it's true meaning. I could tell a stranger that I Hate Him, and then turn around and give him a check for ten thousand dollars. I could also tell a stranger I Love Him, and then hand him a bill for one million. The moral of the story is that we should be careful not to take words too seriously. And that we should always weigh the meaning of the word with the meaning of the thing. Finally, it is fascinating that you would vilify the sound of freedom while applauding the perpetual encore of a parasite.
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Whew ? You guys d realize that you are debating an anarchist's definition of anarchy , And that anarchist is now disputing the meaning of that very definition ?...........I just want to bring that up , as he states in his last paragraph here . If there was ever a post that brings WB's forum involvement and meanings to light , that's the one .
  report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't read WrenchBiscuit's blog on anarchy yet, (I will) but think people want to feel safe and need guidelines, nay, rules and laws to have a functioning society. And I don't know what your blog says yet WB. Did anyone ever read Stephen King's The Stand? The government is working on a cure for an illness, it gets out, and kills most of the population. Those from the East who are alive yet get together, the first thing they do is begin to set up a government, so it's clear what gets done where, and what is and is not allowed. The people from the West were evil, so they had their own set of "rules".
  
  Busy weekend, will get to your blog WB.
  
  IMHO, The people who serve on the Supreme Ct. should have term limits. They could be long 20-25 years, but at some point the people serving there get out of touch with what's really going on in the U.S. I understand that the terms have to be long enough that the Court doesn't get "trendy" about what they vote on, some of them get downright decrepit. Again, a new idea for a changing society, just like I believe the Constitution should be updated maybe every 25 years (Thomas Jefferson believed this).
  report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you for the link, I'll read it.
  report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Again. for everybody's edification regarding what anarchy really is:
  
  The COMPLETE picture is captured in the following:
  
  1.
  a state of society without government or law.
  2.
  political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control:
  The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
  Synonyms: lawlessness, disruption, turmoil.
  3.
  anarchism (def 1).
  4.
  lack of obedience to an authority; insubordination:
  the anarchy of his rebellious teenage years.
  5.
  confusion and disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.
  report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  What you present is simply propaganda through the purposeful perversion of a concept that has been a threat to the status quo since the beginning of time. The fundamental difference here is that I am speaking from a position of authority, as the study of philosophy and anthropology have been part of my daily routine for many years. One reason that I became a traveling entertainer was that it afforded me the opportunity to study human behavior from a particular perspective that would not have been possible otherwise.
  
  But I can tell that whatever your field of expertise, it is certainly not philosophy. Furthermore, nowhere in the definitions you found online do we see Anarchy defined as a philosophy, which is what it truly is. Why? Because the people who control the world, presidents, and kings, do not want the common man to realize how easy it would be to tear down their house of cards. Of all the sophisticated weaponry that the governments of the world possess, the two most formidable weapons are ignorance and fear.
  
  The historical record shows that Jesus is considered to be the first anarchist.Famed author Georges Lechartier has been quoted: "The true founder of anarchy was Jesus Christ and ... the first anarchist society was that of the apostles.
  report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Propaganda? Now why would you say that? Because the accepted definition isn't what you want it to be; it doesn't match the propaganda you wish to promote? Or because you just like making up new meanings for old words?
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Even taking his meaning of the word anarchy: a philosophy, he is way off saying Jesus was a person of no gov. Jesus represents the most total yet free form of gov. We are free to learn by experiencing and toward the total conformance to God's pure gov. But still be free in a good sort of way. It is called theocracy. So, Jesus was/is a theocracyist. "I and my Father are of one" Just like anarchy of today means something different then Biscuits says. Theocracy is totally different in Jesus'/ Gods case than say, the evil Islam has represented it to be.
  
  With freedom to keep and bear there should be accountability. Those that don't show that: need to have those weapons taken away. Not on a blanket bases, but individual bases. The gov. knows where the bad boys/girls are. They seem to know everything else about you. Quit all the politically correct crap and do some real solving!
  
  IF the regime truly wanted to limit gun deaths they would concentrate on the biggest areas first. Stop drugging up the populace and go after the gangs. Instead they make attempts at small highly emotional areas. For what? No wonder there are conspiracy theories!
  Or are they just theories? Seems not!
  report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Good thinking. It would help if we didn't have a lawless illegal-alien in our White House.
  report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Read a book? So should you. Your definition of anarchy is only a small part of the story. The COMPLETE picture is captured in the following:
  
  1.
  a state of society without government or law.
  2.
  political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control:
  The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
  Synonyms: lawlessness, disruption, turmoil.
  3.
  anarchism (def 1).
  4.
  lack of obedience to an authority; insubordination:
  the anarchy of his rebellious teenage years.
  5.
  confusion and disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I have a friend who served in Vietnam and flew bombers. He left his native Alabama, to get away from what he felt was a racist and backward state. After the war, he stayed in the North, and currently is in NJ, though he visits AL and is married to a women from NH.
  
  Now he feels such guilt from the bombing that he did, he won't even talk about it, unless in trusted company he knew a long time. He's such a nice man. He's 70 now, and many in his age group figure he's conservative. But he's the biggest liberal I know. There's not a trace of a Southern accent in his speech, unless he's kidding around. I feel bad for him, because he did what he had to do in the military, you have no choice. And it was his ticket out of AL. But it's a heavy load to carry around all those years.
  
  I think veterans need more mental health help than they get. I know he's not a person who will go into a place and shoot everyone. But so many veterans are committing suicide, today I heard 22 a day. They need help. The public is so far removed from what they do, nobody thinks about it, and few care. He is against any "stupid wars" and politically, especially "anymore stupid Presidents from TX."
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Jean: What we call PTSD today, after WWII was called shell shock. My uncle was in the Normandy invasion and when he was discharged he was living with his parents on a ranch in Burbank California. He would not sleep in the house, so he pitched a tent in the yard. They lived close to an airport and every time an airplane flew over, he would run out of the tent and look up as if he was under attack. He also could not stand the spell of bacon frying. It smelled like flesh burning from a flame thower. It took a long time for him to get over his shell shock.
  
  War is hell and it is sad what it does to the troops who return from it.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hi peoplepower,
  It's a shame we don't do more to help the people we send to all these awful countries where they encounter so much emotional and physical damage. I forgot they used to call it "shell shock." I guess it's like most traumatic things in life, though some you manage to get through more easily.
  
  Republicans are always so big on war, I guess they don't want to spend money to help our brave men and women in uniform. And since Presidents don't bother getting Congressional or approval from anybody before they go to war now, civilians are too far removed from it. I don't even know anybody in the military right now, though my Dad and my husband's Dad were in the Navy in the Korean war.
  
  My son has a few friends who joined the Marines. But most of them were poor students and didn't have any job options when they got out of high school. So I guess that's the incentive.
  reply report
  57
  cwritesnowposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I love your response! I too have a friend who is a "nam" veteran and.....wow.....the way the got treated like shit when they came home from the general public and from the government.....they need major MH services which is why I'm going into that field.....they gave so much for us that it's time for us to give back.
  
  Thank you for being his friend and being there for him. BTW I'm a huge fan of the BUFF and the utter power it represents but I feel for the pilots who have the guilty feeling for doing their job(s) - so easy for others to criticize them but more difficult for them to be understood, to be empathized with.
  
  Has your friend considered seeing if the local VA offers Peer Support services as part of their MH services? Please give a warm thank you to him for me....
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for speaking out too. Our Vets deserve so much more than they get, after the Hell they suffer. My friend is lucky he remarried about 10 yrs. ago, it was unexpected. He lived in an apt. complex, and the woman and he got talking while doing their laundry. We all thought it was so cute that he found love again at his age. She is very outgoing, and they travel a lot.
  
  But it is hard in the military. I always think of Jack Nicholson "You can't handle the truth!" Even when the guys testified and told the truth about what happened, they got court martialed anyway. It takes a certain kind of person. It kills me to see old men getting $1.00 for a fake red poppy on Memorial Day in my state, like they have to beg for money. I always thank them and try to give as much as I have on me. But they must have mental health treatment.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The reception the yanks got when they occupied Japan tells a different story. The Japs had the populace so brainwashed that the school kids where shocked that they were not being mistreated by our guys. They actually thought we had Devil horns! So again you have shown you expert cherry picking abilities and those have been proven wrong. Killed anyone lately with you evil eye or stare or whatever it is?
  
  Would you rather they got the bomb first? They proved to the world how evil they where!
  Just ask the other Asians they dealt their evil to.
  reply report
2. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback, wilderness, and everybody else in this forum.
  
  Here is everything that you wanted to know about gun violence in America, the good, the bad, and the ugly. And yes ahorseback, there are even statistics that support your views...imagine that! This is long but very comprehensive. It has a lot of graphics to support both views.
  
  Oh, and by the way, ahorseback, you don't have to insult everybody that doesn't agree with your views in order to make your points. I feel your anger and I feel as threatened of conservatives view as you do of liberal views.
  
  Have a Happy New Year Everybody!
  
  http://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417/gu … es-america
  reply report
3. 84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  So, you are one of the ones who think suicides aren't real deaths and should be ignored.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Or maybe just one that thinks that the proper solution is to help those people rather than deny/limit 2A rights to the other 300,000,000 people in the country?
  
  But that doesn't fit with the agenda to limit gun ownership to the maximum extent possible, does it? So we see silly accusations (suicide isn't a real death or "you don't care!") rather than discuss anything but getting guns out of the hands of the population. Or did you "forget" that there are other popular options for suicides, like driving the wrong way on the freeway, antagonizing a cop, sleeping pills or other poisons or hanging?
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

Kind of takes the wind out of the anti - gun people's sails , no ?
reply report
1. 67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Bares out what I have found on other sites. We are living in the safest times in 110 years as far as gun deaths are concerned. The one area that is rising in recent years is mass murders. Who's watch is this on? And who is getting free passes?
  
  http://www.gannett-cdn.com/GDContent/ma … #frequency
  
  While only about 1% of all murders nationally, mass killings still happen frequently. The FBI counted 172 cases of mass killings between 2006 and 2011. That does not include some large states such as Florida, for example. Poor reporting by police agencies to the FBI also means some mass killings were left out, while others that don’t meet the standard were included.
  
  There are those on this hub that have slandered and accused some of being this and that giving a false impression about how high mass murders are. I am not taking your vicious attacks anymore. You know who you are! You have lost all credibility with me. You have lost it with others too. Just go back and read all your hyped up crap! And those that have quit listening to your rants.
  Cherry pick away
  reply report
2. 75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I would add one more red arrow, sometime in the mid 90's, to show when we began loosening the laws (and enforcement of those laws) on marijuana. While the "war on drugs" continued, the fight against the most common "criminal" (THC user) was put on the back burner. And, just like prohibition, the murder rate fell.
  
  Certainly not conclusive (two instances of correlation do not a rule make), but very interesting. Will we see a repeat of the big hump when guns are banned and the people still demand them? Like ethanol or THC?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I would say the reason for the drop is when MJ is readily and legally available the 54% has less to fight over. There is no longer a buck to make, in that anyway.
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
The MAIN reason I own a gun is to protect my right to own a gun.
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  +++++++NOW I LIKE THIS +++++++
  reply report
80
colorfuloneposted 9 years ago
Total shootings in Chicago for 2015 is: 2981 Victims. That's sad!

Strict gun free zones and strict gun laws don't work in Chicago...unless less gun violence really isn't the intended goal.

* http://armored-column.com/east-side-chi … c-31-2015/
reply report
1. 79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  the reason gun laws don't work in chicago is that there are too many easily-accessible guns in nearby communities.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  That's what the governor of California said when the last shooting went down there. That the guns were legally purchased in California didn't deter him one bit from blaming surrounding states.
  
  Isn't it about time we quit putting the blame on someone else and accept it ourselves? Guns are easily accessible everywhere in the world, not just communities nearby to Chicago. Guns don't cause violence or murders, and the solution to such violence won't be found there. It won't be found at all, and the pile of dead will continue to grow, until we root out what it is in our society that accepts and glorifies violence.
  
  Whereupon we will look back into the past and wonder just why so many people tried so hard to ban objects that have nothing to do with the death toll or why it is there. And why we spent so many years and dollars in a fake attempt to control violence when it is so obvious that guns don't cause anything at all.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  <" Whereupon we will look back into the past and wonder just why so many people tried so hard to ban objects that have nothing to do with the death toll or why it is there. And why we spent so many years and dollars in a fake attempt to control violence when it is so obvious that guns don't cause anything at all."> w
  +1
  
  Take James Holmes.
  It was reported that possibly he had undiagnosed asbergers or high functioning autism.
  Our youth may be mentally affected in some way due to_________________?
  
  We need to find out and learn how to affectvely deal with our youth who are suffering;
  whose needs are not being met on both physical (diet / environment) and psychological (educational / emotional,) levels.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Fully agree...with the caveat that before we meet the "needs" of everyone (young OR old) we need to understand the difference between "needs" and "wants" as well as just what "needs" society is responsible for as opposed to the individual in question.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  - good caveating.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  EXACTLY cathylynn99 ~ That's WHY Gun Control Laws must be "Uniform & Universal" to Maximize Effectiveness ~ One state's STRICT Gun Laws are Diluted Significantly if a Neighbor State has adopted a "Lenient Stance" on GUNz ~
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Gonna apply them to Mexico too? Hope you have better luck than stopping the influx of illegals!
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There's the absolute in excuses of liberals , It's somebody else's fault not mine , another person another city another state's .!
  
  Chicago is a nightmare city in regards to gun violence , Violence actually maintained and manipulated and thus perpetrated by liberal political leadership . Take guns out of a law abiding citizens home , welcome the criminal in , unhindered ! But ,hey lets not fix it , let's blame it on someone else !
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Right, blame it on the liberals! Hold on to your guns because Obama and his group of Neo Fascist, NAZI, Maxists, Socialist, tyrannical liberals are coming for them. But then if he does take them, we can always use knifes, forks, baseball bats and any other form of equivalent weapons to protect ourselves They are equivalent to guns right, because we said so?
  
  No we don't have to do any of that, just let those dirty rat liberals solve their own problems that they created in the inner cities and the whole gun violence problem will go away. Oh, then we have the nanny state as well that the liberals have created. Let's just privatize social security, repeal Obama Care, Medicare, and all the regulatory agencies that protect us. Let's just turn everything over to private industry, they will look out for our best interest. The financial meltdown, and the mid-east soup sandwich is all the liberals and Obama's fault.
  
  Why should we have to pay taxes? We don't need the department of defense and all branches of the military. They are going to turn against us when Obama starts his mission of tyranny. Oh don't forget to throw Hillary in jail. She killed four Americans and lied about it. Let's return all government control back to the states. There is too much government anyway. Who needs the federal government? Each state should have its own government and let's just let the NRA be our government. They will protect us from all threats. Maybe we should have each state become its own country while we are at it. Texas wanted to secede from the nation anyway.
  
  Just go away and leave me alone. I'm a law abiding citizens and should not be subject to the liberal federal government insanity that has brought this country down for decades and will continue to do so way into the future. There is no hope but hold on to your guns...or there equivalents, if Obama comes for them.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hey! You're finally say'in things that make sense!
  
  Now, if Biscuits would. No the hub would be too boring!
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
"Keep & Bear" will always mean own and carry. Get used to it!
reply report
1. 61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  That's SIMPLY Wrong ~ Get re-used to it ~ ~
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
You have to love it how liberal social re-constructionist's ALWAYS associate poverty with all the ills of a culture , that of extreme crime , drugs , alcoholism , and now gun crimes in America . AND at the same time lambasting the extreme crime rates of America against all other countries ! Of course, on all of those charts are countries of EXTREME poverty or at least , far, far less economic stability .!
Mexico
Chile
Argentina

And yet ,in the mind of the American liberal it's only the American poor ,who makes 12,000 dollars a year in income and the ONLY ones who have turned to a life of gang related , drug or alcohol infested criminal world ? And ,with a very unique fascination with using guns in those crimes . It must be me But I can't simply relate the poverty to violence like that which rules the inner city gangs , You guys have been swallowing too much media drivel .

How about this , all the charts I read show that seven- teen years old is the peak age of criminal offenses , Now is that because of poverty ? I doubt it ! Is it because of law abiding gun owners ? I Doubt that too ! Or is it simply because of Pi&& poor parenting skills of ANY economic income level ?
So America , what are you doing to cause this age group to go off the tracks ?
reply report
1. 70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  You don't even know where America is! The United States is only one of a number of American countries.Mexico, Chile,and all the rest are also American. Apparently, according to you, America begins and ends at the U.S.border. And you claim that you are not racist. Do you also live in Idaho? Furthermore, all of the countries were founded by Europeans, and are predominantly still colonialist squatter nations. Quite elementary onhorseback!
  
  You also have shown that you know very little about how capitalism works. Capitalism "cannot" exist without an underclass. It is simply not possible since capitalism is based on a pyramid. Consequently, poverty will "always" exist under this current system, until the system is destroyed. The system cannot be made to eliminate the poor; no more than it is possible for a man to cut off both of his legs and still be standing at the same height. If we were all equal then no one would be rich, as wealth would have no meaning. As a result, the powerful would no longer have control. I assure you, they will not give up without a fight.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  How ridiculous! Just because you can't relate that when one says they live in America the U.S.A is implied. Like the good old days when the boss told the sexitaty to make xeroxes of a letter and pat or butt as the goes by. She didn't come back and say there are no Xerox copiers and come back without copies. She used the other brand copiers. Now maybe you would come back empty handed except maybe your boy member in hand.
  I have never got an email saying they are from Brazil, America (or any other country).
  
  More lib drivel! Capitalism is a method where by the average person can make it without over restrictions from a nanny gov. Local or big. The capitalist hirers employees and they buy goods and services. Not to say their aren't abuses. Communism was supposed to be everyone kicked in and shared equally. The top abused that too. Too a much worser degree than our free system. Why don't you leave and go to one of those commie countries. Don't try to ruin the best system in the world today. It can be improved a lot I will agree.
  
  Never was meant to have everyone equal. That is your anti-pinko commie Archie Bunker mentality. You are confusing the two. Why would a small family business person that works 120 hrs a week get the same as a 32 hour employee? Same with a 8 year doctor certificate. They should get the same as an intern? You as a musician think you should get the same as George Harrison or Ringo Starr? Or they should be pulled down to your level?
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  First of all, you don't know what I think I should get, as I have never told you. Do you have a crystal ball like wilderness? It is unfortunate, but it is not my cross to bear that many have been addicted to materialism, and deceived by consumerism. Your statement about George Harrison and Ringo Starr reveals much about deception. Unlike you, I am an active artist. I not only follow a muse, I live in it.
  
  As an artist I do not idolize other artists. I may appreciate or admire their work, but they are only men like me. I have enjoyed both money and fame, but money and fame are not necessarily the measure of a man's worth, or talent. A baboon or hyena could care less about Bach, Miles Davis, or the Beatles. At the other end of the spectrum , a Reptilian Overlord most likely feels the same way, as they are devoid of emotion. There are any number of kids writing, producing, and performing music on sites such as Soundcloud, who are as good, if not better, than any of the Beatles. The Beatles, like all other famous artists, were elevated to their status,not solely through the measure of their collective musical talent, but through their talent in conjunction with the "art of business", which is the parent category of ":the art of marketing".
  
  I am one of the greatest pop songwriters of the late 20th, and early 21st century. You have sought to denigrate me with your comment but it is to no avail. I do not need you, nor any man to justify my art and my contributions to the world. I have already been recognized, and admired by the world. Perhaps fame is something that a karaoke singer dreams about, but I have "been there done that". What is most thrilling about art is the actual process of "doing" art. Most humans are frustrated artists who have been enslaved by a ruling class and made into meat puppets. Everyone has a great contribution, and no man stands above the other, unless the other chooses to remain on the ground, be an apologist for evil, and crawl on his belly. But now is not the time to be writing a song. It is time now to stop the killing. And that is what I intend to do. If the Second Amendment, or even the entire Constitution must be discarded, then let it be so. There is nothing more important than the life of a child. Absolutely nothing! You cannot save the world with money, but only with the changing of a man's heart.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: Unfettered capitalism is what the upper echelon of the conservative republican party always wants. They hate any type of regulations. They believe that if removing laws creates moral hazard, so be it. Poverty is no big thing to them. That is the way capitalism is supposed to work. If all the wealth flows to the top, that is the way it should work. Corruption and greed are all part of the equation. The system is supposed to give privilege to those at the top of the food chain. It is an "I got mine, you can go get yours if you can" mentality.
  
  This what happened with the removal of the Glass Stegal Act. The poor were taken advantage of by selling them houses without any qualifications, They didn't even need a job. The people who were writing those loans got huge commissions. The people at the bottom had no idea they were getting variable interest rate loans that had extremely high second tier interest. As soon as it kicked in, those people couldn't afford those homes, so they walked away.
  
  The financial industry packaged those loans into exotic instruments to mitigate their risk and then they bet against those toxic assets going down the tubes and made even more money. That's what moral hazard and unfettered capitalism is about. It creates poverty, because those actions caused a calamity that affected the whole worlds economy. One could argue that the buyers should have known better, but there should also be laws that don't allow that to happen.
  
  As it worked out the financial markets also went down the tubes and we the tax payers had to bail them out with a 700 billion loan. Buy the way all those at the top, still received huge commissions from the bail out. That's what real capitalism is about. It's about creating wealth, but also poverty. As a result of that whole scheme, business went down the tubes, because the banks wouldn't loan any short term loans. This put people out of work, including many banks and financial institutions closing. Since these toxic assets were traded world wide, it affected the world's economy. All of these was done during George W's regime. And not a single person went to jail.
  
  This is what Obama inherited. Or as you say the Regime. By the way, I hate that word when you refer to Obama and it almost makes you sound treasonous. Just think of capitalism without socialism as driving without any traffic lights or speed limits. Look at the chaos it would create, You could go as fast as you wanted to without regard for anybodies safety including your own. If you come to an intersection, there are no controls, it's every man for himself.
  
  The effects of the removal of Glass Stegal affected the inner cities as well and helped create the poverty that they have. That's part of the reason for all the gun violence in the inner cities. You can thank your conservative gun people and the NRA for that as well.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I know all about greed and evil. Both parties are guilty.
  
  Common practice of lib unions was to vote for min. wage to increase. Where they concerned for the poor? No! they had built into contracts that a union worker gets 3 1/2 times more than min. wage. They did it solely for their own greedy selves. Most are Dems.
  
  The people writing those also had their parts twisted by the regime to give out all those risky loans or be punished, looked over for any gov. dangling carrot. have the IRS sic'd on them etc. All for politically correct or vindictive crap. Then the whole stink'n mess collapsed. They have recently talked about doing it again!
  
  Obama is treasonous! So regime fits. Any system is evil if evil is what they do!
  
  Communism would work too, if the people were near perfect. It isn't the system as much as the people in said system. Capitalism would (and is better) if morals where put in. I should be rewarded more if I put more effort in. Instead of putting my stuff in and some lazy so and so getting the same back for doing nothing. This failed at New Plymouth 1620.
  
  Obama increased the dept 7 trillion more, in six years and climbing! Had the audacity to spank Bush for raising it by only 4 trillion! Will he apologize'? Fat chance of that! No lamb excuses please!
  
  You are wrong as you are wrong about the mentally ill as the biggest problem with gun deaths. It isn't some act that people don't even know about. It is accountability and moral issues that the libs have replaced with politically correct and corrupt ideology.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry Doug, but you are simply Wrong as USUAL, or you just don't Follow Politics as closely as you probably should ~
  
  FACTS ~ ALL CONservative Republican Candidates for President are Advocating ANOTHER Grotesquely HUGE WEALTH Give AWAY to the Filthy Rich & Greed Driven Corporations in the FORM of a Massive TAX Cut ~ The last idiot to do this ? George W Bush and the end result was an Economic Catastrophe that President Obama MIRACULOUSLY Cleaned Up ~
  
  On the other hand, Progressive Democratic & Democratic Socialist Candidates are advocating TAX Relief for "We the PEOPLE" ONLY ~ JUST the FACTS Doug ~ Just watch any old republican DEBATE and you'll find this to be TRUE ~ Or simply research on You-Tube ~
  
  You must be EXTREMELY Wealthy Doug, otherwise, WHY on this EARTH would you or anyone else who is of SOUND-Mind get easily "Bamboozled" into VOTING Republican ?? Insane ~
  
  P.S. ~ Trying to play this Republican FOX Loser Snooze Game of "They ARE ALL Corrupt" or "They ALL want the SAME thing" is NONSENSE ~ DEMOCRATS & Republicans are Different in EVERY Way, Republicans FAVOR the Extremely Wealthy & Wall Street Greedy Swindlers, which they've done since the beginning of TIME, and Progressive Democrats REPRESENT Everyone Else ~ AND That's a Well Understood FACT of LIFE here in America ~
  
  P.S. ~ Dunce George W Bush ADDED much MORE than 4 Trillion to our National Debt and "We the People" have very little to show for it ~ Shortly after taking office Bush GAVE away 2 Trillion in Surplus primarily to the Wealthiest and Greediest among us, this does NOT Include the monies for his WARS etc ~
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You are extremely........words that will get me banned by some thin skinned lib namby pamby bamby boy, or girl.
  
  You ass-umed way too much! I wont vote for any corrupt system. Just the libs/ Dems are 4 times worse than the other bad. Haven't voted since 76. Was so dis-appointed decided wouldn't vote till there was something worth my effort or interest.
  
  I survive on just above poverty level of near $19,000 yr. with wife and one grown daughter in an area that average household is $34,000. I do not receive any assistance whatsoever.
  Daughter does not pay anything to help so is a liability. Sound wealthy to you? Just an average Joe beaten down by the regime, wife and local gov.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: You haven't voted since 1976. Therefore, you don't get any representation. When you say you won't vote until there is something worth your effort or interest is a great way of blaming everybody else for your ills, because you have no skin in the game and no vested interest. It must be nice to be on the sidelines and blame the liberals and the evil regime for your ills. I think you may have watched too many Star Wars movies.
  
  In order for our form of democracy and our republic to work effectively, there needs to be a balance between capitalism and socialism. That's what the two party system is all about. But we have a republican congress, that is only concerned about getting elected for the next term, so that they can wield there capitalist agenda to make the wealth flow to the top. They use the uninformed republicans, like the tea party as pawns to get their votes. When Mitch McConnell says our job is to make Obama a one term president, what do you think his mission is? But Obama and his evil regime prevailed. By the way, what makes Obama so evil?
  
  There are somethings that are done better by a federal government than by private enterprise. That's why we need social programs. I know it sounds like communism to you and your people, but it just the federal government doing things at a national level that should not be handled by states or private enterprise, like interstate highways, the CDC, FDA, and on and on.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "But we have a republican congress, that is only concerned about getting elected for the next term, so that they can wield there capitalist agenda to make the wealth flow to the top. They use the uninformed republicans, like the tea party as pawns to get their votes. "
  
  The liberals are only concerned about getting elected for the next term, growing a majority in congress and maintaining the presidency, so they can wield their socialist agenda to destroy the economy and bankrupt the country in order to better control the populace. They use the uninformed Democrats as pawns to get their votes.
  
  But there are somethings that are done better by private industry and citizenry than by federal or state government. I know it sounds horrible and unethical to you and your people, but things like wages belong in the hands of those paying and receiving them, as does (nearly) all forms of morality and ethics questions.
  
  Amazing, isn't it, how nearly identical statements can both be truthful and yet completely opposite?
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Wilderness: Yes, and that shows you why there needs to be a balance between republicans and democrats, conservatives and liberals, capitalism and socialism, free enterprise and regulations. Our country works best when there is bipartisan cooperation.
  
  The fact is both sides of congress and any administration have been bought out by big corporations and big moneyed interests represented by their lobbyists. The average person on the street is not represented anymore.
  
  If I call a congressman, and tell him or her, I would like to donate $100.00 to their campaign and at the same time a lobbyist calls on the other line and wants to donate $10,000.00 to the campaign, who do you think will get the call? Many congressman who have left congress become lobbyist for the same people who funded them, earning bigger bucks than they could earn as congressmen. It's called the revolving door policy.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am a citizen of the U.S. That is all I need. Who are you to tell me a have to vote?
  The majority of minorities didn't vote either till 2008. Yet they got special treatment at the expense of the other people.
  
  We are supposed to be a representative republic with no parties.
  Socialism or capitalism is not a party.
  
  The republicans don't want the Tea Party. Where did you get that from?"
  
  Lets see! Islam is the religion of love and tolerance, Obama care will save the average family, $2,300 a year, No Christians can come in except a token number from Syria. Sicing the IRS on conservative or republican businesses. Many other actions and lies.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: I never said socialism or capitalism are parties. A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority. A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good).
  
  You wrote, this is why Obama is evil:
  
  "Lets see! Islam is the religion of love and tolerance, Obama care will save the average family, $2,300 a year, No Christians can come in except a token number from Syria. Sicing the IRS on conservative or republican businesses. Many other actions and lies."
  
  Wow that's really evil stuff, especially the part about many other actions and lies. That really warrants calling him the evil regime.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good)." or not so good
  
  Founders never intended a party type system, fell into the trap they did! Or perhaps had to to be considered by the way things turned out.
  If you know what democrats(democracies) are, why do you support them?
  
  The 1st amend. also gives me the right to say what I please as much as anyone else. Has nothing to do whether I voted or not.
  
  You have your opinion and I have mine about Obama and Islam.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: You are right about one thing, it is your opinion.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  My opinion is that there is only one version of the truth. Truth does not change. Truth is eternal. Kenyan-born Obama will always be The Antichrist and Jesus will always be Lord. Get used to it!
  report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt. Pepper: And what do you base these self-evident truths on?
  report
2. 67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Just heard this morning all crime levels are down except gun violence in Chicago and suicides.
  
  I think there is some sort herd mentality and that is what gets you accepted. Lack of parenting is said to have a big influence too.
  
  Suicides up due to the regimes failed polices. Look at what they say. Employment at good level. Look at the jobs offered for the not so educated. If that is all there is why bother.
  
  Most know that job figures have been fudged by the regime. Using the method of 10 years ago would show unemployment to be 14%. 21% by minorities.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The method of figuring unemployment rates HAS NOT changed in any significant way since the 1950s - get your facts right
  
  Suicides are up because more guns are available for people to kill themselves with; homicides are basically flat since 2007. I have no idea what "regime" you are referring to, could it be the Assad regime or the Khomeini regime of Iran?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Boy do you need an education! You can't see that the one's in power are the regime?
  Regime: Authoritative ones in power. Anti-constitution to boot. Down right illegal.
  
  All people that have dropped off unemployment are no longer consider now.
  The work week is now based on a 30 or 32hr week. was 40 hrs.
  Those that have just plain stopped looking are not counted. The under employed.
  American family incomes are down about 5,000 a year as compared to before Obama.
  Mc Donald's type jobs now are considered average employment.
  
  The work force participation numbers are way down. This is the most accurate way to gauge employment. The regime uses their own phonied up figures. Totally different from before.
  
  They magically got that to around 5% and lied to the low information voters just before election time. Apparently you smoked the same smack
  
  Adding all these adverse conditions together I would put the rate as closer to 25-30%.
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
So I got to looking at age groups in all crimes but particularly violence in crime . I came up with this , What Americans need to do is outlaw fifteen to twenty five year olds !
reply report
1. 75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Or kick out the illegal aliens, back off of work limitations and put them to work somewhere. Quit buying their car insurance and gas, their phone, their fancy cloths and let them earn it themselves.
  
  Not only will they learn an invaluable life lesson but crime will be reduced as well. A two-fer-one, and done without violating the constitution even once!
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Why is it the immigrant population (legal and illegal) are more law-abiding as a group than American citizens are?
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  If true (and I doubt there is any truth in that statement) it could be because they are too busy working low paid jobs to get into trouble. Much like I think the teens would be. Or it could be that they are too busy looking over their shoulders for cops. Or that the price for minor crime (deportation) is too great. Or that they actually do love their country (immigrants, not illegal aliens) and wish to be a part of it.
  
  Could be a dozen reasons - why do you ask? Is this a topic that could have repercussions for gun control?
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  SURE, and let's continue to BUY Car Insurance, Gas, I-Phones, Fancy Cloths, Expensive Luxury Cars, Expensive Luxury HOMES for all of OUR Lovely Wall STREET Swindlers & Their Greed Driven CEO's as your beloved CONservative Republican Politicians Advocate ~
  
  So, wilderness, what if a child is an un-documented Immigrant but not the Parent(s) ?? ~ Do you "Kick-Out" the Child ?? ~ What if the Working/Supporting Father of 4 is Un-Documented but not the Wife or Children ?? ~ By your Inhumane HARSH Standards, the Father would be "Kicked Out" of the country leaving a Wife & Children Behind for us to Support Financially ~ You do realize that most Un-Documented Immigrants do indeed SUPPORT their OWN Families Financially right ? And they do it by Working Jobs that nobody else would take ~
  
  Once again wilderness, your "Master Plan" is ill-Conceived ~
  
  P.S. ~ I'm sure there are many documented "Christians" who will more than likely "Pick Up the Crime Slack" once you "Kick-Out" all Un-Documented Immigrants ~ So a decrease in Crime as you CLAIM to be a direct result, is highly unlikely ~
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  *shrug* if you can afford a fancy I-phone, buy it. Just don't expect or ask me to do it for you. A concept liberals cannot seem to understand, but then they are not strong on the idea of freedom, either.
  
  No one has ever said anything about kicking out legal US citizens - that is a disgusting liberal debate tactic without truth in it. Nor do most illegal aliens (there are no "Un-Documented Immigrants" as immigration requires documents) support their own families financially. Even liberals agree as minimum wage will not financially support a family and illegal aliens often work for less than that.
  
  So once more, your pretend "facts" are shown to be nothing more that imagination at work, designed and produced solely to further the liberal agenda of government control on the nanny state.
  
  Haven't a clue what your Christian diatribe is about, and couldn't care less anyway. Just another red herring in an effort to distract attention from the real issue of teens not being able to work because illegal aliens are taking the jobs that they would normally have.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  As usual wilderness, you conveniently "DODGED" the question so I'll ask it once again ~
  
  What would you do if the "Father" was an Un-Documented Mexican and his Wife & 2 Children held U.S. Citizenship ?? Would you "KICK Out" the Father ?? Just Curious how you would handle this whole DEPORTATION thing ~ And would the same apply to Germans & Asians ??
  
  P.S. ~ I'm certainly NOT Surprised to hear that you don't mind FINANCING a Filthy Rich CEO's Toys yet you FEROCIOUSLY Oppose Raising the Minimum Wage for American Workers ~
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There is proof that the regime posted ads in papers encouraging families to send their unconverted kids to our boarder so they can become anchor kids and get their own sorry asses here. The regime caused a lot of this misery! Why, to increase the low information voting population to keep their own sleazy asses in power.
  
  Last month there was another big un-escorted surge. Regime again? I think so!
  
  The poor excuses for republicans in the houses didn't mind because it furnishes low wage workers for their big bizz interests. Both parties are evil. We need to go back to accountability and a no party system. Also vote in judges and not let a rouge appoint them.
  
  You have a problem with Christians" Those are the ones in Africa and the East that we should be letting in. They are the ones that are being targeted by evil Islam. That is what you sound like. Even your pic looks like one. Other, actually endangered groups, should be considered long before a religion that has proven to be evil. What is Obama's real reason? Not hard to figure out. What side are you on? Is that why you want to take our guns? So Islam can have a cake walk invading us? More lie to the infidel crap!
  reply report
52
vidyasagarbeeraposted 9 years ago
It is very easy to ur government to stop or to control gun issues but y they r not controlling
reply report
52
vidyasagarbeeraposted 9 years ago
Be happy with all of them so their is no use of gun issues
reply report
54
Kiwi-65posted 9 years ago
Aw that is amazingly cute
reply report
80
colorfuloneposted 9 years ago
I was going to ask about the "gun show loophole" that Obama brings up and Hillary parrots, but did some reading on it. Evidently, the GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE is another STRAWMAN fabricated from an outdated phone survey of "251 people who acquired firearms in 1993 and 1994" to further more restrictions and regulations. There are no-gun-show crimes being committed at gun shows!

Federal legislation's main purpose would be...?...to infringe on First and Second Amendment rights.

A federal firearms license has been require to sell firearms since 1938. Every sell, be it in store or over a table has to have permission by the FBI first with an instant background check.

Mark Twain ~ "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

http://dailysignal.com/2013/02/08/backg … -loophole/
http://www.cato.org/publications/commen … -gun-shows

Sigh!
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

All the way to this !

And from this .
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback: You know that picture of Obama has been photo shopped right? Now you have finally come out to show your true ignorance and racism...good for you. I knew it was just a matter of time, before your true colors came out...no put intended.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I wouldn't mind Carson or similar. Didn't like Obama because of his policies and tactics as a community dis organizer thug and senator baby killer. You like to jump to conclusions just like Obama. Is that why you like him? Try that out for why I think he is evil on top of other things I mentioned earlier.
  
  Like Hillery's screech "Wouldn't you like to see a woman president" Yes, but certainly not her!
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Any man that has a Doctorate in Constitutional Law who chooses to work to serve people in the most humble of ways, when he could have chosen far more lucrative pursuits, is alright in my book. So because he worked in Chicago, he was a thug? There are so many like you that consistently 'dont get it'. Rightwingers are not only losers, but are hopelessly jealous and resentful. He, while not perfect, is far better than any of you and those that represent you. That, in itself, is good enough for me to like him.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Evil people are more interested in power than money. It is what he did while in Chicago. Thugged his way into businesses twisted them into donating to causes or have other thugs do things to them in a corrupt legal way. Signed to have babies left to die unaided.
  Birds of the feather are you? I suppose you are for Islam and terrorists too?
  
  You too evidently don't keep up with posts. I say elect the best person regardless of party. And I have called both parties evil. What is wrong with Carson other than being a republican?
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Evil People-= Donald Trump
  
  What wrong with Carson is that he IS a Republican. He subscribes to the party's ideals of racism, economic inequity, military sabre rattling, suckups to the aristocracy at the expense of everyone else. As a Black man, he of all people should know that this party is no good!! Need I say more?
  
  I heard what you said about the best person, but if the 'best person' were liberal/progressive, you would choose Satan first, without question. That 'best person' stuff is just so much BS rhetoric, quite transparent as well. It is not too hard to follow your 'droppings' about the forum. You also said that the libs are 4 times worse than the right. Well I say it is just the opposite. For you, the lesser of two evils would be either Trump or Carson, both which are unacceptable for me.
  
  I don't have to be a non-xenophobe with the goal of exposing rightwinged nonsense, to be called traitor by the rightwing nitwit gallery. If they have problems with me, then I know that I am doing something correctly!
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I threatened no one. How many threatening posts have you made? Several! Truth hurts!
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There is no threat, Doug, just a revelation. I am answering your questions..
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Doug,
  I tend to lean D, but will vote for the person I think can do the best job. One thing I see which bothers me is that Obama was a one term senator, and so are a few of the guys running, or trying to run, on the R ticket. I have concerns that anyone who has that little time served in the Senate hasn't had time to build the relationships needed to reach out to each other. Whether you like Hillary or not, she knows a lot of the people she will be working with if she wins the nomination, while Rubio and Cruz have only one term in the Senate. They would be naive like Obama was.
  
  As far as Trump and Carson, at least Trump has business experience. Early footage of him when he was a much younger businessman make him look at lot more mature and calm. Sometimes he forgets and says things that reveal that he used to be a D. Carson scares me, he says a lot of dumb things if you listen hard. I think he's smart about what he knows, but being a neurosurgeon is a lot different than being President.
  
  I'm not criticizing Obama, I think he did the best he could in circumstances where R's were determined not to work with him. I mean, couldn't they at least have come up with an infrastructure bill? The country is falling apart. And it's so immature to keep shutting down the government. Maybe Senators should have their pay docked when they don't work, since they don't work much anyway.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I agree, PBO's inability to communicate with Congress hurt him a lot.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hi My Esoteric,
  I don't know if Obama had too much pride, or just gave up trying to reason with them. I once heard him kidding in a speech saying, "Maybe I should tell them I want the opposite of what I want so they would vote for it."
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I think he could have had a lifetime of experience in Congress and would have not done any better with the conservatives currently in power. On the flip-side, his inability to work with the Congressional Democrats lost him a lot of initiatives when they had a super majority. They spent WAY too much time getting Obamacare passed and in the process made one of the signature programs in America's history into a laughingstock that has yet to recover its footing.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, they were determined to block anything Obama did.
  Obamacare is a beginning, but it needs a lot of work. I live in NJ, one of the states that took the Medicaid expansion, but people with it can only get really bottom of the barrel doctors to accept the insurance. Many people are going without testing and care that they really need, they just won't be seen by specialists in whatever field they need. It's sad.
  
  If I was rich, I would gladly pay more so people could get the health care they need. I don't know why that gets certain people insane and ranting about Socialism. Sometimes the European model is better. Why not copy a system which actually works? It doesn't mean the whole country has to change the way it does things.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hello, Jean,
  
  Obama's mistake was actually believing that moving the country forward was a noble goal over partisan obstinance and bickering. You heard Senator McConnell, who said after Obama's election that he was committed to making him a one term president. That is not in the tradition of our system, which says that the American people had spoken and chosen Obama, so let's get on with the people's business. This was the attitude of the rank and file GOP to a man/woman throughout Obama's term.
  
  Trump is just as inexperienced as Carson, being a wealthy and successful real estate mogal under dubious circumstances is not necessarily qualifying for the job of President, where you just can't people order around and terminate them at will. Sounds a lot like the thinking of Ross Perot in 1992.
  
  As a result of this obstinacy and defiance in the face of a clear victory for President Obama, I and many like me will hold this against GOP into the foreseeable future.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Credence: Boy you got that right. I feel the same way about resenting the GOP. When it comes to Obama Care, Initially Obama was going for the single payer system, but had to give it up in a compromise with the GOP, to get the act passed.
  reply report
2. 70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Racism notwithstanding, this crude attempt at socio-political commentary is predicated on the false notion that as far as politics is concerned, we live in a world of "Good Guys vs the Bad Guys". Yes, when I was in the 5th grade I believed that too. But somewhere along the line I grew up.
  
  READ & LEARN: Most of the good guys are tied to a grinding wheel struggling to support their families, while the bad guys rule the world on every side of the equation. They stage wars and battle each other, using the good guys as moving targets, human mine sweepers, and cannon fodder. And when they send the good guys home in a box, they praise them as "heroes" on their way to the yacht club.
  
  Based on your commentary, it appears you are a member of the proletariat. George Washington was a member of the elite land owners. He would have never invited you to his home for dinner. He would have simply used you, as he did thousands of poor white men and boys, to fight and to die, and to win his war. Not for your kind, but for himself and his kind; the elite kind; the kind that will always feel they are superior, and better than you. But in the mind of this elite class, the poor , and working class whites, are not far removed from the black slaves that Washington worked like beasts of burden. They simply have a lighter complexion, and they have been placed on a longer leash, and afforded a higher standard of living.
  
  But the greatest insult of all is to tell a slave that he is free, give him songs to sing and flags to wave, and then send him marching down the street praising the name of his oppressor. They not only have murdered the people of the First Nations, but they have also murdered the poor whites, and have made fools of those who have come to believe in this terrible lie.
  reply report
3. 81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, you are a good example of 18th century thinking and reasoning. Thanks for the poster
  reply report
67
Doug Cutlerposted 9 years ago
Evil is what Evil does!
What is it with Obama and this huge push for gun control? Is the NWO twisting his uhms to do something before election time so they have an excuse to declare marshal law?

It is a matter of record that gun violence is way down and falling on its own.
Something just isn't right! Mass shootings account for about 100 a year as compared to the current ~8,500. He way, way , way ( a bunch more ways) over exaggerates to get his lying way. proof : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: … er_by_year
Why the blacks would flock to the party of the KKK is a mystery to me! Same with that lie to the infidel Islam. Go back to whatever religion you had before Islam! There is a large black Jewish group.

One of the fastest growing gun death areas is terrorism by Islam. He refuses to do much about terrorism and sites politically correct B.S.

Obama care is a piece of crap. It is a control mechanism.
Has screwed those on fixed incomes. Making it harder to survive by declaring food and energy costs don't count. How ridicules. The only reason they allowed a cost of living increase recently was because their greedy asses got an increase too. Let congress and that A hole Sharpton slide on the huge amounts of back taxes they owe and garnish wages of low income people if they owe a little on co pays, etc.

Has enticed children to come across the border for his own personal voting numbers increase. At the peril of those children.
Pure Evil!
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: Of course it's down by those definitions. Did you even read what that persons definition of mass murder includes? He doesn't even define what P and C stand for.
  
  "Mass murder is the act of murdering a large number of people, typically at the same time or over a relatively short period of time. Mass murder is also defined to be intentional and indiscriminate murder of large number of people by government agents. Examples are shooting of unarmed protestors, carpet bombing of cities, lobbying of grenades into prison cells, random execution of civilians." (see R. J. Rummel, Irving Louis Horowitz, Death by Government, Page 35, ISBN: 1560009276"
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I was going to respond to Doug as well and changed my mind because it ends up being pointless trying to discuss things with someone who has no grasp on the facts or reality.
  
  Ones energy should be saved to try to ward off similar beings who could do actual damage to America such as Donald Trump(et) and Ted Cruz.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Absolutely CORRECT My Esoteric, Republican Leaning individuals are Brainwashed and Beyond Help, nothing will EVER get through to them just like the Republican guy who recently said the following after they found a Video Tape Depicting Trump as an Effective Bad Guy Recruitment Tool ~ "That's Just a MADE Up Deal" ~ Just like Climate Change is a "Made Up Deal" & Math & Science is a "Made Up Deal" etc etc ~
  
  It's unfortunate, but come election time we just need to Hope & Pray as a Collective Nation that "We the Sensible & Reasonably Intelligent Individuals" out number the Intellectualy Impaired CONservative Republican Dum*Bellz ~
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Did you even read the link? Mass murder is described as 4 or more. That is what that 96 (p = people) in the 2015 count is based on. And a huge percentage done by Islam. You know that terrorist group that the dummy in chief refuses to acknowledge!
  
  Facts bear out that most violence is done by stolen or under the table illegal purchases by
  the thugs. He is direct attacking the law bidding populace. This thug element is where the concentration in reduction needs to be directed. Politically correct B.S!
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  What does the C stand for and I didn't see anything about Islam in there!
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It turns out that P stands for each instance. Haven't a clue about C or an F I saw. So, I will change that post if I can.
  
  This is from: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati … n/3821897/ "Everyone is always asking 'Why are these mass killings increasing?' '' says criminologist James Alan Fox, professor of criminology at Northeastern University. "They are not.'' I say, just ginned up by a hateful conceited anti-U.S traitor in chief.
  
  The average is only 137 per year. Far short of the liar in chief's statement that tens of thousands were being mowed down since 2013. He is confusing what Islam is doing and what the U.S, is doing. These mass murders are well represented by Muslim murders for whacko religious reasons.
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
The lame duck is back from Hawaii , he's got a new tan and is he ever mad !
Why do all of the other candidates get it but him .
' Its the criminal stupid" !
So ,here's some idea's for Obama ,,

Gun crimes are caused by global warming .
Terrorism is caused by Hillary.
Bill Clinton causes domestic abuse .
Clive Bundy is his new image of global terrorism .
reply report
1. 70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Contrary to what you and the Sons of the Pioneers have been suggesting, it appears that the American Terrorists in Burns Oregon prefer firearms over baseball bats, knives, or toaster ovens. None of them are black, and as far as I know none of them are from Chicago. The guns they are using aren't toy guns either. They took over a federal building two days ago and have been planning this action publicly for over a month. Ammon Bundy has even threatened violence if the Feds try to arrest them.
  
  However, the Feds and the National Guard only started moving on the situation last night. By contrast, the pigs in Cleveland killed 12 year old Tamir Rice within 2 seconds of arriving on the scene where he was playing with a toy gun. Tamir Rice threatened no one and didn't even get a chance to explain. This also destroys the theory that the United States is not a racist, white supremacist nation. Obviously White Lives Matter more than Black Lives or Ammon Bundy and his gang of thugs would already be dead. When we add this to the fact that his miscreant father, Cliven Bundy, and members of an armed militia,stood down federal agents last year for throwing the Bundy's off the welfare rolls,it is very clear that your drivel here in support of guns and violence has been exposed for what it truly is: an apology for evil.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  the art is so appropriate, interesting how the double standard seems to persist. You would think that a bunch of yaahoos pointing weapons at federal agents on Bundy's ranch would be enough to justify scores of arrests at that time. But, these guys get a free pass while the mother of Tamir Rice is told that her 12 year old looked too much an adult and should have been kept out of the park. What about the sister, who was unarmed (toy gun or otherwise) that the cop wrestled to the ground without justification? Believe me, we have not heard the last of this.....
  
  Long Live the "Black Lives Matter" movement.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Wrench: Excellent piece! And there we have it, the well regulated militia. Thank you 2nd amendment and the NRA. His father has been grazing his cattle on federal land for the last ten years and refuses to pay taxes for that entire period. Now he and his son and their thugs are trying to organize a nation-wide "well regulated militia" against the federal government.
  
  According to the constitution. Here is what treason is:
  
  Article III, Section 3.
  
  "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
  
  The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted."
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And tax laws say that those crooks in congress shoud be fined or jailed or both for non payment of taxes. Sharpton, A sleazy muck raking trouble maker one of the worst offenders.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Thanks peoplepower. But the article you presented has 80 words, and we have clearly seen that the "patriots" here still haven't been able to wrap their heads around the 33 words of the Second Amendment. I hardly think they have the collective brain power to figure that one out.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "Keep" means own and maintain. "Bear" means to have and to hold. American citizens must always have firearms and weaponry available similar to that of foot-soldiers and law enforcement as they are the ones we will battle against under martial-law.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  When do you think this will happen?
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It will happen after it is too late to stop it. This Kenyan-born usurper, or the next tyrant, will issue an edict attempting to negate our God-given right to self-defense. His goals will include gun-confiscation and a bloody chaotic battle between patriotic Americans and government forces. Likely in 2016 but possibly as late as 2017.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Right, Sgt. Prepper, Obama's term ends January 20, 2017, so how much time do we need to see your prophecy come to fruition? So, I guess that the end as you predict it will have to hurry up?
  
  The next tyrant could well be Donald J. Trump, now that is a possibility that truly resonates.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I can't bear to read all 157 posts on this thread, but why do people still keep insisting President Obama was born in Kenya? He provided birth certificates, when he didn't have to, all candidates for the office are properly vetted. I can't stand the way this lie keeps being perpetuated. Republicans have to stop repeating lies and denying facts, just "because they don't see it that way." Facts are real. They actually exist.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I have simply have not seen this kind of obstinacy and plain downright mean and hateful from the left.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Who is your left? The regime is the left. Republicans, tea party and conservatives are the right! Did you make a mistake? You showed how much you hate the republicans in earlier posts.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I won't deny it, I don't like GOP. They have moved from moderate just right of center to rabid reactionaries in the last few years. And they just keep getting worse with time, so I am being honest and not mincing words.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It is the regimes fault for letting a lie fester. They should have produced the certificate upfront. Even Obama, in a book claimed he was born in Kenya. I believe the certificate is a doctored up one to hide a few embarrassing facts. Marshall was planking his mom and is the real dad. She got impregnated and along came the Kenyan.They met at some collage class in Hawaii they both were taking. They married when she was 3 months along. She finds out he hi is married and kicks him out. The doctored certificate names the Kenyan the dad to cover up the embarrassment of what the original said. They just didn't want the real facts to become known so they kept up the lie until the doctored certificate could be forged.
  
  This isn't the only lie they let fester, The Benghazi indecent was because of a video lie.
  
  Obama care will save the average family $2.300 a year lie. And many others.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Pretty elaborate ruse, hey Doug, He has schemed to fool all of these people for months before the election, the experts who certainly would have seen that constitutional requirements to hold the office of president were complied with...
  
  But then it is you and the birthers that somehow have obtained information that make all these experts look like fools, I wonder just how is it that you guys got so smart?
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I learned the definition of "natural-born citizen" in high school Civics in 1968. Must be born on U.S. soil to parents who were BOTH American citizens a the time of birth. Hence Rubio, Cruz, Santorum, Obama, Jindahl & McCain don't qualify. Panama-born McCain was not born in a U.S. government facility. According to a December 2013 Jewish magazine Bernie Sanders was an Israeli dual-citizen so he can't qualify either.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There should be a DNA on Obama's ass to determine the real father. They probably already know. Really too late? They went back and put two people in jail that served their time like it was yesterday! Skirting double jeopardy laws. All involved in the birth certificate cover up should be prosecuted for all the trouble it caused. If below is true it makes no difference who the father is. Still, why the big cover up? As not to show obama a liar? Did he even know where he was born until recently? Either he didn't know or he lied.
  
  Cruz, Obama and McCain are all natural born citizens. I didn't check the others.
  That is if his mom didn't renounce citizenship. Apparently it makes no difference who the father is. You defiantly know who the mother is. No artificial insemination or shared birth
  canal, womb etc. stuff.
  
  From now on the letter of the law should be followed to avoid such in the future.
  
  Two provisions are obvious: The candidate must be 35 years of age and a resident of the United States for 14 years. The third qualification: He or she must be a "natural born citizen."
  
  What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"?
  
  Most legal experts contend it means someone is a citizen from birth and doesn’t have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen.
  
  If that’s the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth. The Congressional Research Service, the agency tasked with providing authoritative research to all members of Congress, published a report after the 2008 election supporting the thinking that "natural born" citizenship means citizenship held "at birth."
  report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Obama was born in Hawaii. You do know Hawaii is a state, right? And it was a state before he was born. I'm sure his Mother remembers having him.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah and I got some oceanfront property in Arizona. Wanna buy a bridge?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am saying he was. Just that the Kenyan was not his real father. Where do you get I say otherwise? I think maybe you put your reply on the wrong post by accident.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug Cutler, Sgt. Pepper, Colorfulone: I don't know where you people get your information. But I'm certain that you have been brainwashed. I am so sorry, you are living in an alternate reality. Do you know what fictional propaganda is? If what you are saying is true, and it isn't, time will bear out your false prophecies. Of course, you will continue to make these false statements until you are no longer with us, because by then you will either have expired or be on another planet.
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  What does Obama's dad have to do with future events? Please reply to proper posts.
  These events are all over the net if you bother to look. Let those who have eyes see. Or is that too deep for your atheist thinking.
  report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: Just because these events are all over the internet, does not make them true or even fact. I suspect you have never heard of Orly Taitz. This is the women who started the whole Obama Birther thing. She was born in the USSR and suffered under communism. She was labeled a nut case by many of the media, including Bill O' Riely and Larry O' Donnell. You have to check things out, not just run with it because it fits your agenda. Look at Snopes and Fact check, before you start making claims just because they are all over the internet. Here is the wikipedia link.
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orly_Taitz
  report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Its interesting to do fact checks on Snopes and Fact check and the liberal bias...even on the people behind those computers that publish some on that nonsense.
  report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Did you even look at the link?
  report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  All that is hidden WILL be revealed including Bathhouse Barry's Kenyan-birthplace, his being born a Brit before Indonesian adoption, BHO's stolen Social Security number(s) and even his paternity.
  I don't generally wish bad on people but I will rejoice when Skull&Bones, the Jesuits and Freemasons are revealed for the evil they really are. I hope you realize 9/11 was an inside-job.
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  9/11 was multi tasked like the Kennedy assassination. Looks like it wont come to light until we are dead. Stay vigilant. God may speed up the process lest all mankind is destroyed via their own. actions. I.E. Iran and such getting nukes. and using them to speed up their world conquest desires.
  report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt. Pepper: So you are saying 9/11 was a conspiracy perpetrated by George W's administration?
  report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am saying that the 9/11 plan was hatched already years before, possibly as early as when 911 was first being used as an emergency number. That is why after Gore's people cheated to take Florida in the 2000 selection the Bush people had to retroactively cheat to get the win there. Cheney was more responsible for 9/11 than GWB. Consider why the flashcard words read by the students that day in the classroom GW was visiting unscheduled were KITE MUST HIT STEEL!
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Bush let it happen. Guilt by not stopping it. Bin Laden and the Muslims where in on it too. Why would the Muslim community pick that day to Hoover around the TV at universities at that time and hoot and holler with glee when the towers fell.
  
  There is the issue of tower 7 collapsing with Fed records in it. Multiple explosions on the exterior of the towers as they went down. Large explosions in the lobby before the flames got that far.
  
  Shorting of the airline stocks. Big bank in England and other big financial institutions shenanigans. On and on the list goes.
  report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Don't forget WTC#6 and "The Five Dancing Jews"! The filthy, evil Moslems gained nothing by 9/11. They were just patsies like Oswald was. It was the Zionists who gained so much. Just look what Larry Silverstein gained!
  Please think about this a minute: When I served as an Infantry Squad-leader in the middle of the Kuwaiti desert for a year we were under strict orders to drink a gallon and a-half of bottled water everyday. I even had to routinely check my squad-member's urine to make sure it wasn't dark. We were only allowed to drink bottled water as supposedly we couldn't trust local sources.
  Now multiply a gallon & a-half times 300,000 troops and personnel times 365-days a year times twelve years! Nestle, Evian, Anheuser-Busch & other water-bottlers get most of the water they filter or reverse-osmosis FREE so it is almost pure profit. Who knows what the taxpayers are paying big-water to keep our people hydrated? The wars in SW-Asia are more about water than about oil, drugs and minerals combined.
  As per the UN's Agenda-21 & Project 2030 every person on earth will eventually have to pay for every drop of fluoridated water they ingest and wash with. THAT is how the NWO will control us and force us to take the "Mark-of-the-Beast".
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There are bad apples in all groups. Those that bless Israel will be blessed. Those that are against Israel will share in the woes that will come.
  
  Jesus was against certain groups of Jews. Certainly not the masses of Jews. It is the individual to look at. Some groups have more baddies than others.
  report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Fact is Grandma Sarah Obama has repeatedly insisted she was present when the little turd was pooped out in Mombassa along with an older half-brother to Bathhouse Barry. In 2008 Lucas D. Smith, at great expense and danger, smuggled a certified copy of the original Birth Certificate from Kenya. Obama himself proudly proclaimed he "was born in Kenya" in his Harvard Law Review mini-bio and to a lecture-hall full of students at the university in Chicago.
  Being born a Brit in Kenya to a non-American father and an underaged mother precludes this usurper from any claim of being a natural-born citizen.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Bathhouse Barry will most likely be the tyrant who issues the edict as an Executive Order. The next President is most likely Shotgun Joe who will be suddenly thrust into the White House at least six months before any elected President is ever inaugurated. As for birther-Trump I really find it hard to believe the evil Bush-family & the Clintons will allow him to get the GOP-nomination.
  When Ronald W. Reagan got the nomination he had no choice but to take GHWB as his running-mate. Later Reagan said "I forgot to duck" after being shot but he must have ducked a little. It was enough to keep GHWB out of the Presidency several more years but RWR was politically impotent after that. Reagan was a tool of the Jesuits & Freemasons too but still managed to setback the NWO-plans of The Illuminati a good ten years. Birther-Trump would do likewise even if he has Jeb as VP.
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  We're sending him into outer space with no mission and without a gun.
  reply report
  79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  NWO? illuminati? and you expect people to take you seriously?
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Former president G. Bush senior is the one who started it with his famous New World Order speech on September 11th, 1990.
  Full Speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8dAMZ6YdUo
  Short Clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bnkvPBrRjc
  
  Added
  
  Bill Clinton agrees with Bush about New World Order
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwJ1B-8oAg0
  
  George Bush Jr. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF-obJ8lYWc
  
  Obama's Speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYH75mTrQDA
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  PERFECT, thank you.
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You are welcome! We do not need another Bush or Clinton in the White House. Its hard to believe that the elites are trying to create a NWO and so on. But, they have plainly said that very thing publicly. Its not hard to research what a president said is the plan. Those ones are in cahoots.
  report
  79
  cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  i don't think they're referring to the same dystopia you envision.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  The Bush legacy is one of pure evil. This family of bottom feeders is just one more example of the absurdity of "The American Dream". The proletariat have enshrined the U.S. Constitution and all of the so-called "freedom" it affords, when in reality tyrants like the Bush's have primarily ruled over the people and set the Imperialistic course of the United States. The Bush's involvement in the NWO began prior to Word War II, and it is well known that Prescott Bush (father of G.Bush Sr,) profited from the Nazi's rise to power and actually aided the enemy. George Bush senior has also been accused of being an avid pedophile.
  
  Prescott Bush Nazi Collaborator: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/s … ndworldwar
  
  George Bush Sr. Pedophile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNQp6EmN2Xw
  
  New World Order/ Manufactured Scarcity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJS3kL_G2eQ
  report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Envision the dystopia of Orwell's "1984", Beck's "Agenda-21" and the books of Daniel & Revelation in the Holy Bible for an idea of what's coming our way. I hate Big Brother Obama the Antichrist.
  report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You say, ... "i don't think...". Then, I'll take you at your word, seems reasonable enough.
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Wrench , It should be obvious up until at least this point that you and I are at the extremes in ideology , Well no ,! I am not the extreme right , yet I understand THEM far more than you . Why ?
  
  They actually make more sense , Why , you might ask me ? ........ Because they..........., at least ,........love something ! You my friend don't seem to love anything with the exception of riling up people , now you should know this , You cannot rile up someone like me who believes that another revolution in America is inevitable . Why , I just know that it is !
  
  America IS on a path towards a major change , it just may manifest itself out as a political movement , that would actually be a good thing in my mind , however , the likelihood of a major revolution "in the streets " is actually pretty good , at this point . I myself would partly wish for THAT to happen rather than some kind of mass liberalization of our young . A mass indoctrination educationally , of the youth of America , that is what IS happening !
  
  AS to the words of the second amendment though , you are much disillusioned , ..........obviously ! Maybe it's simply all the LSD you did back then, like so many other burn outs from that era . But there is definitely something wrong with your interpretive powers of basic English language !
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
The word 'natural' means obvious, god-given and without question. For there to be no doubt about someone's birthright and allegiance that person's citizenship cannot be tainted by mixed parental citizenship or a foreign birthplace. Our founding fathers also didn't want a President who would claim he was royalty and declare our nation for some other dominion.
reply report
67
Doug Cutlerposted 9 years ago
There you have it A Primate and others of similar mindset. The pres. has agreed that we, the average Joe, has the right to keep and bear. No Militia or National guard membership required.

He even toned down the rhetoric and was calm. Just a day or two before sounded angry and spouted off about tens of thousands being mowed down by guns. Even mentioned the facts that 2 thirds of deaths are from suicides. Even mentioned the Chicago problem. Some one must have sat him down and warned him not to use exaggerations and to hide the fact that he is an idiot.

I do have problems with his Sandy Hook references. Especially if Sandy Hook was staged as it looks it may have been.
His insistence that gun violence is rising when the facts show the exact opposite.
His wanting to not allow those with minor problems gun ownership. Big abuses I see here!

As long as they stop here and not try incrementatism, Like frog in soon boiling water tactics
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: So even when you agree with him, he is still an idiot to you? I wish you had a fraction of the brains he has.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Didn't say I agreed. Just willing to let a few things slide. As long it stops. Just like a little brat. You let things go to a point. Then out comes the discipline!
  
  Stay vigilant and watch the other hand.
  reply report
2. 80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Obama's speech devoid of any legitimate data, statistics or observable facts. He simply appealed to the emotions of an ignorant voting base and claimed that he would put laws into place...laws that already exist. Laws like mandatory background checks and fully automatic weapons being illegal. All of which are already on the books.
  
  Duh! .... so what next? Is he going to start enforcing laws he likes to ignore and get the criminals off the streets? I doubt it!
  
  Make no mistake: this IS a Trojan horse, and the man is a tyrant.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Remove his private thug army! Are you kidding? He even said he wanted one a few years back. I think someone nipped that one in the bud or butt, your choice of the word!
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  He was in a snarly mood when he issued his gun fatwa!
  Someone turned him over their knee and spanked him?
  I hope he found his favorite Teddy Bear to cuddle.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Even when you say the laws are already on the books, and he hasn't changed anything, you still criticize him. Even when you state it is not going to affect you. Then you say, it is just a matter of time for him to unleash his tyrannical policies.
  
  In your view, he can never do anything good...period. You people make me sick with your prejudice and racism. You couldn't see the truth if it hit you in the face. And don't say, I'm pulling the race card, because that is the real truth behind your comments and fact-less opinions.
  
  And conspiracy theory is just a mindless game that you play because you are not willing to accept the truth. Osama bin Laden said that he did 911 because of the preferential treatment that we give to Israel instead of the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world.
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Watch Obama lie during his speech today about guns. Liars make me sick, especially when they are leading this country I love. Satan is the father of lies...what's that say about Obama?
  
  "A violent felon can buy a gun over the Internet with no background check, no questions asked," the president said during today's press conference.
  
  Completely FALSE statement by the president! Give me a break...this is what should make every sane American SICK.
  
  http://www.hannity.com/articles/hanpr-e … -14245255/
  
  Then, the Rainbow House tweeted the same LIE!
  
  The law requires all online gun purchases to go through an individual or company with a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Before the purchase can be completed, the FFL holder must run a background check, just as if the person had purchased the firearm in-store.
  
  I feel sorry... ... people are ignorant! This has noting to do with "prejudice and racism". I liar is a liar no matter what color they are.
  Carry on as you were!
  
  Added:
  
  In is feeble speech, Obama used communist China, which has very strict gun ownership laws, as an example for the benefits of enhanced gun control on a population. Lame!
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  If a violent felon buys a gun over the internet from a private individual, how do the feds even know it? Hannity is one of the biggest liars in the world. He makes big bucks by prostituting himself to Rupert Murdoch and broadcasting propaganda.
  
  Doug, Pepper, and Colorfulone, you people have tainted my forum with all your B.S. I'm going to try my hardest to not respond to you people anymore, because you are just regurgitating right wing propaganda. I'll let other sane people deal with you.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Well , here is a sane response . ALL of this babble is simply rhetorical rock throwing from one political camp to another ,and As in all "talk " , it's simply babble . I believe the reality though , with any attempt's at an actual public gun confiscation, will clearly reverberate well across the individual states of America and hopefully right into Washington DC. . An instant and irreversible uprising by otherwise law abiding Americans . once and for all Americans , real Americans , will take back their country from the elected idiocy .
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hello Colorfulone. I agree with you that online gun sales aren't the huge problem, (numerically speaking), that Pres. Obama painted them to be.
  
  And you were almost spot on with this;
  The law requires all online gun purchases to go through an individual or company with a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Before the purchase can be completed, the FFL holder must run a background check, just as if the person had purchased the firearm in-store.
  
  But, the full story is that the FFL requirements do not apply to private sales, (although some states do have private sale regulations on handguns). Sooo... maybe he wasn't exactly lying.
  
  GA
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Where does the typical gang shooter get their weapons from? Where 54% of homicides come from! Shows and private are about 4%. So he gins up fears about legal sales and ignores where the huge problem is from.
  
  if I join a club like the Civilian Marksmanship Program and buy a gun from them they will even send it in the mail. Don't know about background check and such. All this will probably change soon.
  
  Michigan. my state, says none required for regular rifles and shotguns
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
Good answer Doug. It is very difficult to sort the wheat from the tares. The "den of vipers" Jesus referred to must have been the Talmudic Jews and/or those mystics who follow Kabbalah. God's chosen people are in the Jewish-mix somewhere. Luciferians inhabit almost our entire world. They do unspeakable things to non-Luciferians they call the unclean, babies, children and each other. The highest-paid celebrities, political leaders and royalty are all in on it. Their activities are hidden in plain sight such as in schools, churches, Buckingham Palace and funeral homes. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of the Priory of Sion is a must-read as are the Bankers Manifesto of 1892, the Jesuit Oath of Ordination(swearing allegiance to the Black Pope) and the Illuminati-Freemason Covenant. Please also see The Georgia Guidestones!
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
I am so very touched that Obama was emotionally affected by his own speech today , how pure , how patriotic , how fake . This idiocy is pure political horse shyte , He should be half as serious , half as emotional , half as proactive about his own history of doing so little in Illinois and in Chicago .

A real leader wouldn't be brought to tears , he would fire half of his welfare elected justice department social activists for absolutely ignoring the complete lack of enforcement of existing gun laws AND THEN hire real enforcers .

At this pint his emotions would be best directed at his sorrow at being a lame duck . Power to the next president who WILL repeal these constitutionally illegal directives , and who MIGHT have enough ganuchies to prosecute Obama for treason .
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  What are you ranting about? He didn't come for your guns. And the GOP and the NRA have a battle plan to shoot down his directive. Are you a gun dealer? Do you sell guns at guns shows from your car? Then it really doesn't affect you. I know this is just the start, he will come for your guns, whether he is in office or not. You people make me sick!
  reply report
2. 61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Actually ahorseback, a REAL Leader would Man-Up & REJECT Politically Motivated NRA Contributions and do what's RIGHT for America, NOT Remain Emprisoned like WEAK, Impotent Sissy Republican Politicians who apparently NEED a "Gun Phallic Symbal" to try to PRETEND they are Men ~
  
  Do you Honestly believe Congressional Republicans, almost all of whom are Essentially Bribed by the National Rifle Association, actually believe MORE Gunz will make this Country SAFER ? DEEP Down, NOT one republican believes that Nonsense but they have NO choice but to Blatantly LIE & Advocate this Ridiculous Notion for their Greed & Power Hungry BOSSES, the NRA ~ Or, Become JOBLESS the very next Election Cycle ~
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Alternative power , Well , be proud of your fearless , [clueless ] leader , he has single handedly created a new record sales market for new firearm purchases . Imagine that , helping the economy greatly and STILL pleasing the mindless rhetoric of the entire liberally socialist party ! How perfect a leader to actually please both the mindless left and the soulless gun manufacturers .
  
  Hope and Change at the same time - how's that working out for ya ?
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback: How is that working out for you. More guns more inner city crimes. Imagine that! You get to B*itch and complain even more!
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The death of gang members shouldn't even be in the stats. Only the innocent ones they kill! Where was A hole Sharpton and Jackson when that 9 year old was executed by a gang member? No blood money to made there! Bunch of sleazy hypocrites!
  
  I could care less how many of each other they off! Doing us a service. Of coarse Obama would then have to find replacements.
  
  And Biscuits, where is your pic of said 9 year old and condemnations of that gang member?
  Doesn't fit your cherry picked narrative. It was a child after all.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  I am not a simple minded person, Doug. I am more concerned with promoting the cure for cancer than treating the symptoms. If black people were as inherently violent as many of the "good white folk" on this thread would have us believe, then Nate Turner would have been the rule instead of the exception. All things considered, I suggset that the black man in America has been quite patient and forgiving. And speaking of Nate Turner.
  
  I wrote a song about Nate Turner that is sympathetic to his plight. He was driven to kill by the evil Europeans who stole his freedom and turned him into a beast of burden. The so-called innocent people that were killed were no more innocent than the spectators at a bull fight who might get killed by a runaway bull. The rebellion cost the lives of 60 white men, women, and children. The parents who profited from, and participated in the institution of slavery were as culpable for the killing of the children as Turner and the rebellious slaves.
  
  Should such a rebellion rise up today from the inner cities, the blame lies solely at the feet of white supremacy, and an indifferent populace that is more concerned with "American Idol" than the tide of anger that has been building for over 250 years.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The 9 year old boy wasn't innocent you say? Did he have a weapon to protect himself?
  
  I am proof of black animosity. Have been shoved around, slugged several times, attempted robbery resulting in 14 stitches in my head and two days in the hospital. Called all sorts of names. Avoided many other abuses by leaving area as soon as possible. Had property stolen while visiting my grand parents who did not move when area was taken over.
  Passed over for good jobs because of affirmative action politically correct crap. Was ticketed by police who had quotas to fill because it was much safer for them to ticket a skinny white kid than the troublesome blacks.
  
  No group has treated me worse. Until you have personally had similar happen to you then shut the F up.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  I am not accountable for your reading comprehension. I could care less about what happened to you in the hood. There is more at stake here than your pride and humility. Better for people to grow up and deal with the legacy of evil here in the United States. What you described is a symptom of the problem. Grow up. Get over it, and tackle some big issues for a change. You really have no choice, since it's only going to get worse for Archie Bunker & Friends. I hear they're looking for snacks out in Burns Oregon. Maybe you can send your "well armed militia" a care package.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly what I say! Stop giving a group that is responsible for 54% of gun homicides a free pass.
  I am concerned about evil happening to innocent people today and the immediate future.
  Clean up the mess.
  You don't have to be so F'n rude and crude. I don't give a rats about some Turner rant either.
  Like I am responsible for what others do or have done? Why should I care about your rants of things in the far past? I am talking about recent evil! As experienced, not just read.
  Where is your picture of the 9 year old and the condemnation of the one who did it? You are just like Sharpton and Jackson. Cherry pick! Cherry pick! Cherry pick!
  
  Cancer has nothing to do with this hub. Stay on topic.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  No, your side's paranoia that does that. History from 1994 on prove you are wrong time and time again.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Oh yea ,Right , gun sales HAVE increase home protection , hence decreased crime . !
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  So the inner city criminals that have more guns are going to come to your house and you are going to shoot them right. Therefore, less crime. When was the last time you have been to Chicago?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It's like this. kill enough roaches and the problems get less as time goes on. You don't count the invading roaches in the death count.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You sort of proved my point. Since 1994 there were several major gun control laws at both the state and federal level ... YET, 21 years later, y'all still have your guns and have no problem getting them. As I said, paranoid.
  
  BTW, there is no LEGITIMATE proof that guns in homes for self-defense reduce crime; none at all. What there are statistics for is that MORE innocent people get injured or killed in and around the home from people shooting them in self-defense than criminals injured or killed.
  
  e.g., http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ … 114262?o=1 and http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ … 114262?o=1 and from New York - http://nyagv.org/wp-content/uploads/201 … -NYAGV.pdf
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  BTW, Research clearly shows the Right are the Mindless Ones (in other words) you don't think in an analytical way nor do you critically think about assertions from your chosen leaders.
  
  See http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ and the included links to more detail.
  
  If you take the test at http://hubpages.com/politics/An-Analysi … llower-RWA you will score near the top.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  For you education and enjoyment - https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/go … -this-law/
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Not a word about being only for a militia or serviceman! If what you said was true there wouldn't be a 14th amendment either. What a joke you are!
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
To anti- gun crowds , all guns are equal , bless the poor inner city gang crowd as they need guns too . While the other 99.9 percent of gun owners live by the letter of the law .

According to the mindless liberal , " Oh, but if just one life can be saved , it's all worth it ?" , Well , you'd better get rid of bath tubs , base ball bats , step ladders , automobiles , plastic bags , space shuttles and garbage trucks too .

Why don't socialists simply admit it , it isn't even about crime ! Its about the removal of all your parents tried to teach and share with you . Its about the regurgitation of history , heritage , morals and ethics , it's about a utopian entitlement commune that always works out like the Jonestown massacre for everyone else. i.e. Little Hitler's .
reply report
1. 84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, guns ought to be treated like all those other things you list; why. because each one has a set of regulations regarding their safe use. Space Shuttle astronauts and Garbage Truck/automobile drivers need training and drug testing to work as one (garbage truck/automobile drivers need a license to). Bathtubs and step ladders have a host of regulations to make sure they are safe before they can be sold. Not sure what to say about a stick of wood (baseball bats) and plastic bags other than they were designed for the purpose of killing..
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Bathtubs are not safe...if dropped from the third story in an effort to kill someone. Step ladders aren't safe...if steps are cut to hurt someone. Baseball bats aren't safe...if used to bludgeon someone.
  
  And guns aren't safe...if used to kill someone, either. Other than intentionally used to kill with, they are quite safe and there are few lives lost. Certainly fewer than trucks, cars or extension cords.
  reply report
  75
  lone77starposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Bravo! The problem has never been guns, but the people wielding them.
  
  Psychopaths know the difference between right and wrong, but don't care. They don't mind preparing the weak-minded to become "lone" gunmen -- a False Flag to get more people angry about guns.
  
  Selfishness remains alive and well on planet Earth. And some people don't care what they have to do to get what they want. Bankers destroy economies to get more profit and end up getting "bailouts" instead of jail terms (in America, that is, unlike far more sane Iceland). Top military officers responsible for the massive security failures and deaths on 9/11 all received promotions instead of courts martial. And UN climate "wizards" are promoting global cooling in an ongoing Ice Age with the Holocene 500+ years overdue to end (W.S. Broecker, 1998). The madness runs deep.
  
  Former CIA Director, William Casey told then President Reagan, "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" (Feb. 1981). David Rockefeller, in his Memoirs, told the world that he had long conspired against the best interests of the United States and was proud of it. I suppose some of the "brainwashing" of Americans included redefining their words, as in Orwell's 1984. Now "war" means "peacekeeping action," and "conspiracy" means "fantasy." Ironically, there are at least 489 new conspiracies every second, on average -- day-in, and day-out, all year long and every year. And that's just documented conspiracies.
  
  <snipped>
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  BEST comment EVER.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I thought perhaps you had joined your patriotic brothers in Burns Oregon. Nevertheless, your rant is like a broken record, and nobody's buyin it. So when can we expect a terrorist to attack an elementary school with bathtubs? Perhaps you should send a shipment up to your friends in Oregon. But make sure their heated. That way they can serve double duty, as I understand the Feds are cutting the power.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And So are guns ALREADY regulated ! And in THAT lies the collective ignorance of the anti- second amendment crowd !
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
Here's a refreshing perspective: Slavery was already a thriving industry in Africa long before Christopher Columbus was even born and it still continues in Africa even now. Slave-traders from England, Spain and the Americas actually did these people a major favor by rescuing them.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
"Obama tears" would be far ,far better served by stopping out of control crime in these cities . How Quaint though dropping a couple crocodile tears ! Maybe a round of golf will make you feel better Mr.Prez ! Back to Hawaii ?

Mr President .
You want to control the flow of guns to criminals , start with these?
reply report
1. 70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You have posted pictures of Muslims but have ignored the American Terrorists in Burns Oregon. It is humorous how many of you have suggested that a "well armed militia" from the general populace and the military would rise up against the tyranny in Washington. Well, now we have empirical evidence of how that actually plays out in the real world. A group of gun toting morons take over a federal building and call for "Holy Yehawd" across the United States. But all of the arm chair warriors are still here on Hubpages beating the same tired drum while the whole world ridicules the great white hope in Oregon. Seriously, you guys should capitalize on this and take your show on the road. It's hilarious, and getting better all the time.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You did very well! You get a gold star and an atta boy! Recognizing they are Muslim.
  There are no terrorist at Burns Oregon. Just Patriots with a grudge. No one was even threatened. The building was empty. Maybe broke a few minor laws.
  
  Let's pull an Obama and over exaggerate the situation and add false facts.
  
  How about those thugs that Holder did nothing against threatening voters.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Those armed criminals who are illegally occupying federal buildings are just that, criminals. Yes, they are not terrorists, at the moment, but it is laughable to think of them as patriots. If you actually think that, then you must also think all of those unarmed students occupying federal buildings decades ago (or is a gun needed to be called a patriot?)
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The Patriots are not disrupting anything. The building was empty. No one threatened!
  
  The students were very disruptive to other students, staff etc. How threatening they were I don't recall.
  
  Criminals you say? What big crime? Other than a couple minor infractions.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  If the people who took over that building were black, the police would have shot them all the first day, and said they "were afraid for their lives", like they did when the 12 year old boy was playing with a toy gun and the cop drove over the curb and into the park to shoot him.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  That thought has certainly crossed my mind, Jean.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug's Comments REMIND me of an interview with a "Special" CONservative Republican Voter Up in New Hampshire of ALL places ~ She was about maybe 60-65 years old, average looking American lady but when Confronted with ACTUAL Facts, her Complete Ignorance and Obviously "Brainwashed" Attitude came shining through ~
  
  The FACTS given to her in Elementary Queen's English ? Approximately 40 Americans in America have been Murdered by Muslim Terrorists since 9/11 & THOUSANDS Murdered by Christian Terrorists during the SAME Period ~
  
  Her Response to the FACTS in Defense of her CHRISTIAN Brothers ? And I believe this to be VERBATiM ~
  
  "THAT's a DIFFERENT Kind of Gunning DOWN" ~
  
  Yup, believe it or NOT, this poor woman ACTUALLY Said that So, in her perverted Opinion, even though the SAME kind of Coffin will be used to bury ALL Victims regardless of pepetrator, according to her, it's "DIFFERENT" and presumably MORE Palatable when her Christian Brothers & Sisters "GUN Down" an American in America ~
  
  Once AGAIN, unfortunately for America, these are the Un-Reachable CONservative Republican Dum*Bellz we can ONLY Hope DO NOT show Up to VOTE on Election Day ~
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Self defense like that at the peaceful Mohammad cartoon event in Texas can hardly be called terrorism by those protecting themselves from Muslim terrorist. Wall, it was peaceful till.
  
  It is a different type of "gunning down"! if that is what you call self defense from scum!
  
  You are condoning the action of those two that you think have got their 72 ginn virgins?
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Most of the time, like right now, I don't even know what the Hell you're talking about Doug
  
  The Mis-Guided, Brainwashed Woman I referred to in my last post was trying, in her own perverted way, to "Justify" ALL Violent Acts of Christian Terrorism here in the United States versus other Terrorism, as if there's a Difference which of course there isn't ~ But I'm sure in your little Republican "PRETEND-Land" there is ~
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/03/us/mohamm … -shooting/
  
  You call the above terrorism by Christians done to Muslims? I should say Islamics. Most do not know the difference and can relate to the term Muslim. How many other self defense
  actions are called Christian terrorism?
  
  Muslim is a broad brush term that includes all that are trapped in Islam and the radicals.
  
  Islam is the radical ideology.
  
  Just like many Christians believe in reincarnation where Christian dogma doctrine does not.
  Who are the real Christians then? Same with Islam. Those that follow every word in the Koran
  and all the evil it commands them to do. Some are boarder line. Do some commanded but not all.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug, by now, we ALL understand the FACT that Science, Math, & ALL other FACT Based Information DOES NOT Exist in your "Republican PRETEND-Land", but hopefully someday you'll realize that vicious, unjustifiable acts of Terrorism in the Name of Christianity, and or perpetrated by Christians HERE in America, FAR Out-number the same acts committed by other denominations ~
  
  But I understand, this inconvenient FACT will probably NEVER Sink into a Fox Loser Snooze Agenda ~
  
  P.S. ~ What happened to your 2cnd Amendment "Due Process" you and other CONservatives around here have been CRYIN' about ? ~ All of a sudden you proclaim that Isn't how civilized people here in America address a grievance whether justified or NOT ?
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: That may have been a peaceful event for those participating, but they had no idea they were desecrating the flag of what ISIS sees as their nation. Most people don't even know what that flag says. It says this:
  
  The white banner at the top of the flag reads: “There is no god but Allah [God]. Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.” This phrase is a declaration of faith used across Islam, and is known as the shahada.
  
  Underneath is a white circle emblazoned with black writing reading "Mohammed is the messenger of God", which is meant to resemble the Prophet’s seal, similar to that used to close an envelope.
  
  Now, making cartoons of that may not mean anything to you and the people drawing those cartoons, but those are sacred fighting words for Muslims. So you must be careful of who and what you pi** off, and be prepared to fight for it. How would you like the American flag desecrated and cartoons made of you worshiping your god?
  
  You reap what you sow and you better understand your enemy, before you say mindless things like Trump. That is the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives don't take the time to do research and analysis. They just charge headlong under the guise of right wing patriotism, when in fact, they are doing a disservice to themselves and their country. It's not funny and it is very serious. You and your cohorts just don't realize it. That's what happened in France and Belgium. But I'm sure you don't care about understanding things like that because you believe every Muslim is evil.
  
  See that requires critical thinking of which the gun people and conservative are not capable of doing.
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  This would laughable if it were not so sad.
  
  "Conservatives don't take the time to do research and analysis."
  
  Yet it is the liberals that refuse to research the effect of guns on our society. Given the information they ignore it and discuss something else.
  
  "They just charge headlong under the guise of right wing patriotism"
  
  Yet it is the liberals charging along to take guns away in the guise of left wing control. They know it won't help, but charge into the fray to better exert governmental control.
  
  "they are doing a disservice to themselves and their country"
  
  Yes, that's kind of the point, isn't it? The liberal control group is doing a great disservice with constant demands to control the lives of others, without regard to the foundations of our country (freedom, constitution, etc.)
  
  "It's not funny and it is very serious."
  
  Darn right it's serious. When a group that large and that powerful decides it wants control over other's lives "serious", for no more reason than they like the idea, doesn't even come close.
  
  "You and your cohorts just don't realize it"
  
  That's right, too - the liberal mind doesn't even realize what they're doing. As long as the price isn't coming from their pocket (or lifestyle) they don't care.
  
  Yes, it requires critical thinking, which the control freaks and gun haters refuse to participate in.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Widerness: Conservative resonate with sound bites from Fox News. If they fact checked the news, they would find that a large part of it is misinformation to discredit Obama and liberals.
  
  I have researched until I'm blue in the face. It's just you and I come to different conclusions. Talking about discussing something else, what do think all the false equivalence is with banning knifes, fork, trains, planes,, and automobiles and comparing total homicides to gun deaths.?
  
  We don't want your GD guns. When are you going to understand that? You don't have to understand that because if you do, then you have lost the game. So you and your kind just keep harping that we are coming for your guns, until you are old a gray and ready to be buried.
  
  What is a liberal Control Group? Sometimes, more damage is done by doing nothing, like the GOP house and senate and the NRA. How am I and other liberals controlling your life?
  
  Liberals pay their taxes and don't bitch and complain about it. What this really boils down to is conservatives don't like change. That's why they are called conservatives. But liberals do like change and that's why they are called progressives.
  
  The fact of the matter is change is the only constant in the universe. And the rapid changes in technology are causing rapid changes in peoples values and belief systems. The more rapidly technology changes, the more rapidly people have to adapt to those changes to survive. If you can't adapt, then you are not going to survive. That is the natural order of things. I don't care how many times you want your country back.
  
  Critical thinking is not the same as Group think. What the NRA and Fox news has done to you and your kind is make you group thinkers, not critical thinkers. Group thinking by the neo cons is what got us to invade Iraq and made a mess out of the mid-east.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  In the Gun Proposal, where does it say, Obama is coming for your guns. In the second graphic, how much more of the tax payers money is the GOP going to waste on trying to repeal Obama Care 50+ times and get into women's parts again?
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You left out the banning of ammunition for the most popular gun in the country.
  
  And I particularly like the 6th one - do you think that requiring physicians to report privileged health information to government spies, for purposes of taking guns, is going to encourage people to go to a doctor? Ah well - it won't matter anyway as liberals will soon force cameras into all our bedrooms anyway. After all, Uncle Sam must know all for the good of the country - privacy is a forgotten concept under liberal governments.
  
  But where does this wonderful missive guarantee that guns will not be confiscated or banned? I missed that part, I think.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Looks like Obama is well on his way to divide this country so's he can declare marshal law before election day.
  
  Just look at Credence2 threatening post along with the other wacko jobs here.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Paranoia raised to the power of paranoid in an alternate reality.
  report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Besides, it is impossible for him to divide the country now, your side did that starting in 1994.
  report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am sure that you are not hallucinating, Doug. I don't recall threatening you. Yes, I said that your thoughts and ideas were so much bunk, but it is never personal. We could both sit down with cup of coffee and watch the 'The Great Escape' together..... As long as we don't talk about politics.
  report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you for pointing this out, The GOP congress is a do nothing congress, history repaeats itself, that is what Harry Truman called it, as well.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Al this rhetoric from the left is simply maddening and sickening , what more do you want , One " Oh stay home and just collect your welfare check", stimulus program ?
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And there is more coming for ya bud, so brace yourself!
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Indeed we must brace ourselves for the terrible events fast-approaching: crash of the dollar, World War Three, martial-law, natural disasters, plagues and famine. Antichrist Obama & False Prophet Francis will oversee the New World Order until Jesus returns in less than a decade. Not even a great man like birther-Trump and our precious right to own & carry can save us from The Tribulation. Get ready!
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  How do you like my new one ? Couldn't help it , it was such a steal ! By the way bring it !
  report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "We don't want your GD guns. When are you going to understand that? "
  
  When you quite trying to take them. For no more reason than you don't like people having guns. When you quit pretending that reducing gun deaths will reduce deaths - that tired excuse has run it's course and we all understand all too well that it IS only an excuse.
  
  "But liberals do like change and that's why they are called progressives. "
  
  Wonderful. Take something that you want then, and leave the rest of us alone we prefer useful change - something more than just exerting power and control because we can. "Progress" to something other than controlling others needlessly and uselessly.
  
  "What the NRA and Fox news has done to you and your kind is make you group thinkers, not critical thinkers."
  
  Sorry - neither played even the tiniest part in the research and critical though required to some to a conclusion. Something you obviously haven't don, but then liberals aren't know for critical thinking, are they? Just government control of the people. On a side not - that the constitution was written to control government, not the people, really bites, doesn't it?
  reply report
  85
  GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "...On a side not - that the constitution was written to control government, not the people, really bites, doesn't it?"
  
  Ouch!
  
  GA
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Entrapped Muslims are fleeing that Islamic sicko group. They don't want to be under the strict adherences of their laws. Same with Muslims in other parts of the area and world.
  
  Don't give a rats about what their rag says. Evil is what evil does! There is absolutely no excuse for the evil they do and condone.
  
  The WWII Germans flags where good looking too. It is the murdering evil ideology these flags represent that is so bad.
  
  Read some of that filthy groups pamphlets. What they say about how to treat captured women. And their stated war with anyone who even speaks out against their evil.
  Why don't you go and bring your women there and offer your and their services?
  Where is their love and tolerance?
  
  Our flag and Christian symbols are continuously desiccated. Our response isn't even close to what evil Islam deals out for just speaking out. Cherry pick away!
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It is absolutely amazing how you can so easily 'cover' for these people. I read an article this as 'white privilege'. I say hypocrisy and double standard. I say they are nothing more than arrogant thugs led by the son of biggest jerk of all, from Nevada. I say poppycock.
  
  Patriots, my a**!
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  What article? One written by the likes of Biscuits? Cherry picked to suit his own hateful ideology? Was any black, or other minority ranchers forbidden to join in?
  
  I am about fairness. And I will counter unfairness when it applies to people today. The past is just that. Now is a new world.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Were not whites ask to join in the festivities at Ferguson or Baltimore? They are no black or minority ranchers, and if they're were, they would take a more civil approach to this issue.
  
  The past is never just the past, today is the result of yesterday, just like acts taken today can explain what will happen tomorrow.
  
  You were assaulted by blacks over your lifetime, I can certainly see how willing you are to forgive and forget and not castigate an entire people due to your unfortunate experiences.......
  
  Obviously, you can't, so how do you expect anyone else to 'let bygones be bygones'?
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  Cred, "Were not whites ask to join in the festivities at Ferguson or Baltimore? They are no black or minority ranchers, and if they're were, they would take a more civil approach to this issue."
  
  Okey, then...
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Over some grazing thing, I doubt, no one is out of work. Black or minority RANCHERS do not have association with anti-government nuts.
  
  I am not justifying what happened at Ferguson or Baltimore, I say that to pretend that whats happening in Oregon is completely innocent is BS.
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  There is a lot going on and my first comment on that thread was... http://hubpages.com/politics/forum/1346 … ost2789267
  
  All BS aside...Ferguson or Baltimore were not very civil.
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
We need our Second Amendment to "Keep & Bear"(own and carry) now more than ever with thugs and Moslems roaming our city streets and a tyrannical usurper in OUR White House.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
OBAMA'S GUN CONTROL PROPOSAL IS ACUALLY A PROPOSAL FOR LEGISLATION WHICH ABSOLUTELY AMOUNTS TO THE SAME ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF- NOTHING -THAT HE HAS ALREADY ACOMPLISHED , in many other forms ! Sad but true , I just wish that he had so perfectly timed the tears for some of his other major malfunctions of leadership . Ben Ghazi , immigration , health care , Obama Care has increased costs , increased charges ,re-enforced the monopolizing dynasty of the whole health care system ..........The man should just admit it , he's been a lame duck leader from the start .
reply report
1. 80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Even George Soros is sorry he funded Obama, but that was a good thing! heehee Otherwise, he would have funded Hillary and things would be much, much worse now.
  
  13 Hours: 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi 13!
  reply report
2. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback: If it amount to nothing, then you win. What is your problem? Again you have done nothing, just like the GOP. It's called passive resistance. As far as tears goes, he was talking about all the students that were killed at Sandy Hook, you insensitive ******. Watch this video and you will see where you got your insensitive information from. You, Fox News and your kind should be ashamed of yourselves. But I don't think you are capable of those types of human emotions. It's all about putting down Obama and the liberals at any cost.
  
  Start the clip at 4:53, if you don't want to watch the whole thing.
  
  http://on.cc.com/1kOg321
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

Gun Control from a president that says that "terrorism is caused by global warming ".

Is that the twin towers or is it a gun making factory ?
reply report
1. 84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Ahorseback, why do you keep passing on such stupid, untrue statements by some Right-wing blogger or talking head. Since Obama never said such a thing as ...
  
  Since I couldn't find a reliable source that said those words came out of his mouth, I found a statement where Obama-haters were able to twist, something that makes all of the sense in the world ... FOR THE FUTURE -
  
  "In a CBS This Morning interview, he asserted that global warming will put people in desperate straits. And when “human beings are placed under strain,” he added, “then bad things happen. And if you look at world history, whenever people are desperate … that’s when ideologies arise that are dangerous.”
  
  I suspect the same exact quote attributed to Sen Bernie Sanders also has been reformulated from something he said.
  
  Shameful of you to pass on such absurdities.
  reply report
60
The daily juiceposted 9 years ago
Guns don't kill people....People kill people. Bottom Line.

If guns kill people...then let's ban SPOONS for making people fat.
reply report
1. 84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Agreed, and let's do what we can to prevent people who shouldn't have guns from getting them. Doesn't that make sense? Please don't extend that logic to objects which were not designed to kill people. People who use guns to kill other people are using a device meant for that purpose.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hold on a minuet! Have you not heard of varmint guns, elephant guns, target pistols, one of Biscuits' favorite, buffalo guns, etc. These guns where not designed to kill any one!
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I can't believe your statements. Given: Something is alive. You shoot it. It's dead. You killed it whether it is human or not.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The gun people in this forum live in a world of paranoia including, but not limited to, the fear of tyranny, conspiracy, apocalyptic events, gun confiscation, total control of their lives by liberals, the re-writing of the constitution, the nanny state, having to pay taxes, big brother is watching you, the end times, agenda 21, and aliens from outer space, just to name a few. If I have left anything out, please feel free to add to the list.
  
  Oh I left some out, knifes, forks, planes, trains, and, automobiles, that are all equivalent to guns when they can be used for killings.
  
  However their focus is on Obama, his fake tears, and reducing violence in Chicago and other inner cities. It will solve all of their problems.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  We just want that Kenyan-born POS gone and erased from our historybooks and our memory.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt. Pepper: Thank you for displaying your ignorance and your prejudice.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Can't leave out the imminent threat of our Sun going supernova, while Obama sits and does nothing?
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The Antichrist Obama is always busy lying and destroying. It is just what he does.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt. Pepper: Thank you for that. I'll add it to the list.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt. Pepper, just added this to the list.
  
  "The Antichrist Obama is always busy lying and destroying. It is just what he does."
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  PEOPLEPOWER, Pinocchio syndrome?
  
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Colorfulone: Just added the fear of the Pinocchio Syndrome to the list. He has a fear of the Liar in Chief. He even posted a picture of Obama with a Pinocchio nose. Thank you Colorfulone.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Why is it that the cry for armed militias got so much louder after a black President got elected? I know that I'll be attacked for "the usual left wing argument." The NRA shouldn't have so much power, and people can't just take over buildings, or decide they don't want to pay taxes, or take land back from National Parks, just because they don't like this President. And it's not everyone who dislikes him, he did win two elections. Now look who the R's have to choose from. It can only get worse.
  
  If one of the "Christian Conservatives" is the R nominee, they don't want the U.S. to be a secular country anymore. It will become just like the Middle East. When religious fundamentalists take over a country, that's when crazy people take control.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "The usual left wing argument", that's ok Jean, you won't get any beef from me.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Kenyan-born, gay, commie, Moslem Barack H. Obama, aka: Barry Soetoro, has a named and legal(biological?) father who had a 100% Arab-Bedouin grandmother hence BHO isn't even HALF-black.
  The Bible refers to Obama as 'the man of lawlessness" and the "great destroyer".
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Credence2, this is for Sgt. Pepper, who possibly dropped too much acid back in the day--The POTUS was born in the U.S., for the millionth time. It's a shame you don't like facts. In previous generations, many people changed their ethnic sounding names to sound more "American", and in my generation, and successive ones, it's more common for people to embrace their given names no matter how "foreign" they may sound. This is true of many American born citizens.
  
  I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion the POTUS is gay, so I won't comment on that one. It makes no difference to me.
  
  He and his family attend Christian churches, mainly the one at Camp David, because they realized when they attended services at other churches, their presence disrupted the sermon for others.
  
  The Bible is a collection of parables and other stories, written decades after the supposed events took place. Bible scholars know that even the four evangelists did not write the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Reza Aslan has written a great, factual book about the Bible called Zealot. You won't like it, but he has several degrees in religions and philosophy, and traces the Bible back to it's origins. While I admit there is some good advice in both Testaments, I fail to see how Obama's personality and characteristics were discussed in the Bible.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I think Pepper and Cutler are having a joke on everybody, for nobody in America could possibly be that obtuse. I have stopped responding them.
  
  Just across the wire, 67% of Americans in a CNN/ORC poll support PBO's gun initiatives.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You don't have to believe anything. I am writing for the benefit of others.
  
  Well, the thing that Pepper is referring to is the anti-chirst. Obama is not the anti-christ because too many people don't like him.
  
  The real anri-christ will be liked by everyone and will be deceiving all but a few.
  
  You are correct about the 4 books being bastardizations of the originals. The whole new testament is. Mostly in 325, the Nicene Council by 318 bishops, about 290 bought out by Constantine and his power hungry wife. The opposing side only had about 28 or so. Had a lot of Roman emperor worship dogma pushed by Constantine.
  
  Obama is just a puppet of the New Wold Order. They got his nuts in a vice and that is why those tears. He knows Sandy Hook was a Fema exorcise. Lanza's death certificate said he did himself in on the 13th. They just used him as a scape goat. The real fake shooter was??. Not dead at all! No one died but maybe Lanza and someone may have offed his mom. More likely she is living high on the hog somewhere far away
  
  Why let a good fake school killing go to waste? Use it to try a gun grab!
  
  Do some research! They can't even decide if they should have his rifle that supposedly killed the kids near where he killed himself with a hand gun or locked in the trunk of his car!
  Far too many inconsistencies in the reports.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: You flying saucer is waiting for you. It's over in Area 51. It's time for you to beam on over there and go back to the planet you came from. Starting on paragraph 5, that is most insane thing I have ever heard.
  report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Here's the thing. The saucer had an old world computer so that in case we had a problem we could go to a Radio Shack or such and pick up one. My computer guy, john Titor choose the IBM 1500 because it was popular. If you know where I can buy one with NWO dollars let me know.
  
  Just like that guy forgot to get the rifle out of the trunk of the Honda before they put all those 223 cartridges all around inside the school. Do some research before running your mouth.
  report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug: Just because you heard it some place or read it on the internet, does not make it true or factual.
  report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  I can't stop laughing since I read this. Too funny.
  George Bush is no longer bringing more and more power into the executive branch and ignoring Congress. President Obama is.
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol … re-facing/
  
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  colorfulone: That was seven years ago and was written by a guy who wants to sell books. Here is the chart that shows all the presidents executive orders and Obama is three less than Bush. So now you have a fear of Obama and his executive orders?
  
  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ever … one-chart/
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I have no fear..."Fear not...!" Isaiah 41:10
  
  Bushs, Obama, Carter and Clinton are thick as thieves. Yikes!
  
  No more Bush or Clinton in the WH!
  
  These guys should not be allowed armed security!
  reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
The world is a beautiful civilized place and we do not need weapons of any kind.
That would be so true if humans all killed themselves off.
Let 'em have at it, pp73!
reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
This treasonous usurper and Antichrist BHO is the one who really needed a background check.
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt. Pepper and Doug: I'm very curious to know why you think Obama is the Antichrist and where did you get this information? Please educate me. I tried googling it and there are so many different versions all throughout various religions and history. Some of them deal with the end times.
  
  That is scary to me, because if that is Obama, then that means the end times are here. I also found that some evangelicals believed that George W was the Antichrist, but they must have been wrong, because his time has passed and the end time didn't occur. How about all the people that thought many of the popes were the Antichrist...that didn't happen either, so why now and Obama?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Your reading skills leave much to be desired. I said what Pepper is referring to and I said I did not believe Obama was the anti-christ because there are far too many that don't like him. Obama is just a bumbling underling puppet of the real anti-christ, who has the world fooled but not all.
  
  His gig is to dis-arm the U.S. He has failed. And the NWO is turning the screws, thus the tears, to force him to finish the job.
  An armed populace makes it nearly impossible to take the U.S. The biggest deterrent to their world conquest.
  
  If he was truly concerned about gun violence he would go after the gangs. Not a tiny portion of the gun violence segment. The next group, or first if you want to get the most bang, would be suicides. Education and ethics should be pushed instead of gun restrictions.
  
  "No one knows the time only the Father. Be vigilant lest you are caught unaware, by a thief in the night." or similar.
  reply report
61
Alternative Primeposted 9 years ago
At a GLANCE, as usual, I just see more Republican Retardation & NONSENSE so to be honest, what's the use ?

HOW does anyone expect to make progress on the SERIOUS Gun Problem we face when most CONservative Republicans for whatever reason, CANNOT even Comprehend or "ACCEPT" the FACT that the "BULLET" launched from the GUN is the object that ACTUALLY does the KILLING ~ ONLY in "Republican PRETEND-Land" is this NOT the case ~

REALITY ?? ~ PEOPLE Don't Kill People, GUNz & Bullets KILL People" ~

Until somebody here can produce an AUTHENTIC "Death Certificate" and or "Autopsy Report" which states "Cause of Death" as "Murderous Intent Caused Excessive Bleeding", or "Perpetrator's MIND Penetrated Victims Torso" i'll continue to believe the Real TRUTH that "GUNz & Bullets" Kill, NOT People ~
reply report
1. 67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Then Obama needs to preach to the guns and bullets! Or at least encourage the gangs to do so. Make smart bullets like in Roger Rabbit. Education and ethics. With some moderation thrown in!
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  As usual Doug, I don't really understand your point but from what I can gather, you're simply WRONG Again ~
  
  If Violent Gangs were ARMED with Popsicle Sticks or Toaster Ovens, or Rocks, or even Knives instead of GUNz, which are far too plentiful in the United States, they would be FAR Less Lethal and far less likely to Commit Violent Acts ~ The Reckless CONservative Republican Plan is to FLOOD the Streets with even MORE Gunz so Gang Members have virtually ZERO problems buying a firearm, otherwise Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnel, Marco Rubio , Ted "The Carpet Bomber" Cruz and other Republicans would get Whacked by the NRA and most would be in the Un-Employment LINE within months ~
  
  Preaching a Different, more PRODUCTIVE Lifestyle to Young Impressionable Individuals COMBINED with a Robust, Comprehensive Gun Control Plan is one component to solving the GUN Violence Problem ~
  
  But unfortunately Doug, given your past history, I really don't expect you to Understand nor Agree with this Common Sense Strategy ~
  reply report
80
colorfuloneposted 9 years ago
This meme is too cute not to share!

Hope it made you smile or laugh!
reply report
1. 67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Good thing I read what you said. Was going to report you as a spamer. Every bullet should have a coating of bacon fat. Why should the Islamics get all the virgins? Save some for the rest of us! Where is your love and tolerance?
  reply report
  80
  colorfuloneposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  BREAKING NEWS! ... CNN
  
  reply report
70
wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years ago

First of all, an object cannot exist without an action. In this material universe there is no object produced by man that can exist prior to intent, followed by action, followed by the manifestation of the desired object. That is the natural order that must be followed. Consequently, the intent of producing a firearm is primarily to kill something. The object is naturally imbued with the ability to realize that original intent.

Furthermore, comparing firearms to alcohol is not a fair comparison. A man doesn't commonly come home after a hard days work and say to his wife, " Honey, I've had a really rough day, I think I'll go out and kill somebody just to take the edge off." On a Saturday night it is still not common for a man to say, " Hey Mike, let's go pick up some girls and then kill a couple of innocent people!" But we can easily replacing the "killing" in these examples with "drinking", and understand that there is really no comparison in the real world.

A banning of guns would not bring us to the same state as prohibition, simply because guns do not play the same role in our society. It is the paranoid individual, the sadist, and the sociopath that has elevated the gun to god-like status. Such men are in the minority, and they are all suffering from a mental illness.
reply report
80
Missy Smithposted 9 years ago
I just found this on FB, and I mean this lady just puts the point out there so well. I haven't commented on this post in quite a while, but I thought about it and how it is an ongoing debate when I saw this post/ picture on FB. I don't know this lady, but she makes it as clear as I have ever heard it. I will not comment again I'm sure, but I wanted to show this, it was a brilliant way to lay it all out on the table!!
reply report
1. 59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Driving is a privilege. Owning and carrying firearms equal to those carried by law enforcement and soldiers is our God-given right.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Where is the God given right stuff? Yes, Jesus running around with an Ak-47, silly, isn't it?
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Independence, self preservation, right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Jesus said "Sell your cloak and buy a sword!" In Luke 11:21 He said "When a strong man well-armed keeps his palace(homestead) his goods are in peace.".
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  But then there is
  
  "38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
  39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
  40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.
  41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
  42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
  — Matthew 5:38–5:42 KJV"
  
  and
  
  27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
  28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
  29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also.
  30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
  31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
  — Luke 6:27–31 KJV
  
  And
  
  "Put up again thy sword [one of two swords Jesus was talking about in Luke 11:21] into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."(Matthew 26:52)
  
  And Finally -
  
  Motyer, Stibbs and Wiseman in New Bible Commentary:Revised Third Edition states:
  35-38- Finally, Jesus spoke of the new situation. Formerly, when the Disciples had gone out, on mission, they had not lacked anything. Now they would need a purse, a bag and even a sword. The saying is heavily ironical, for Jesus knew that now He would have to face universal opposition and be put to death. But the disciples misunderstood Him and produced weapons. 'That is enough', said Jesus to end a conversation which they had failed to understand. The way of Jesus, as they should have known, was not the way of the sword, but of love.[4]
  
  So, Prepper, try again.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am soooooo glad one of you brought up 11:21] into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."(Matthew 26:52) all means all.Unless you can find the original, original before the bastardization of said originals.
  
  I looked up those that actually used a sword in WWII by the Japs, A lot of these are dying from sword deaths! No! old age! old age!
  
  Even the most famous snipers of WWI WWII are not dying violent deaths.
  
  You do not know of what you quote!
  
  Now there is an explanation that fits this perfectly. That is reincarnation and karma of the spirit. If you believe in neither than you are wrong. should I say "dead wrong"?
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
This argument is more than over , The one thing liberals Do Not Even WANT to understand is that the liberties of this free county have already more than been infringed . the rights of the constitution have ALREADY been threatened , squeezed and shrunken , Yet liberties of the people aren't as important to the left as they are to the right ,to begin with and understandably so.

There are ALREADY thousands of laws against gun or other violence in America and THEY ARE NOT BEING LEGALLY UTILIZED . But even that doesn't matter because the left wants a nanny state and federal government .

Liberties , to the left , are simply about "please do all you can to take care of me " , and the one single right that's so important TO the left is that of freedom of speech ! No others matter except perhaps the constitutional amendment for medical marijuana .

The right is about , quite simply , the less government the better , the less restrictive laws the better , . And any argument to imply that the right gives little to the debate is horse- manure . As a matter of fact , the right demands more of the justice system than the left ever has . The right believes in prosecution , judgments and incarceration more than the left . So all the argument in this thread -from the left -is simply bunk!
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback:
  
  "This argument is more than over , The one thing liberals Do Not Even WANT to understand is that the liberties of this free county have already more than been infringed . the rights of the constitution have ALREADY been threatened , squeezed and shrunken , Yet liberties of the people aren't as important to the left as they are to the right ,to begin with and understandably so."
  
  What liberties have been infringed upon? Please name them all.
  
  "There are ALREADY thousands of laws against gun or other violence in America and THEY ARE NOT BEING LEGALLY UTILIZED . But even that doesn't matter because the left wants a nanny state and federal government ."
  
  The right wing propaganda teaches the people on the right that the left wants a nanny state.
  
  " Liberties , to the left , are simply about "please do all you can to take care of me " , and the one single right that's so important TO the left is that of freedom of speech ! No others matter except perhaps the constitutional amendment for medical marijuana."
  
  You are full of more B.S. than a Christmas Turkey So therefore all people on the left are all on welfare and collecting food stamps right? No body on the left has ever had a career or made it on their own. Is that right? So freedom of speech is not important to the right?
  
  "The right is about , quite simply , the less government the better , the less restrictive laws the better , . And any argument to imply that the right gives little to the debate is horse- manure . As a matter of fact , the right demands more of the justice system than the left ever has . The right believes in prosecution , judgments and incarceration more than the left . So all the argument in this thread -from the left -is simply bunk!"
  
  Your opinion, can you give me examples?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Peoplepower , You seemingly understand very little about the true ideologies of left and right . And , I understand this ,sometime along in your life , you have chosen the left path . That's fine , but if you cannot see that the left in America , and I won't even insult that left , is all about entitlements . You are a fool .
  
  These visionary entitlements are based upon pseudo socialism ! . You want more government , you want more taxes , more involvement of socialism in all forms of government , local , state , and federal . You want the government to be the hero in your life that saves you from the frailties of humanity itself . Fine ! I get that , but when you degenerate the debate for those who want less government in their lives by lying about the motivations of the right ; you expose the reality of your convictions . You sir are a hypocrite ,
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  What Ahorseback and others thrash Liberals forget what liberalism stands for - BY DEFINITION a liberal is one who believes every citizens can act as they want, so long as it does not hurt someone else and all people are equal, in terms of access to liberty).
  
  As opposed to a Conservative is, BY DEFINITION, someone who believes society is naturally stratified into groups with unequal access to liberty, e.g., the wife is naturally subservient to their husbands as ordained by God.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I like that, it seems pretty rational to me. Under that definition, what decent sentient human being wants to be a conservative?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Peoplepower You say you want ," Examples "..........But what you're really saying is " Give me reasons to keep barfing up leftist rhetoric " .
  
  This argument has been all but consistently played out in the supreme courts ; AND the left has lost !
  
  My advice ; Get Over That and Yourself !
  
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback: Don't tell me what I'm really saying. I asked for specific examples and you can't give me any. Unlike you, I always give specific examples, not just ranting about anti-constitutional liberals which you made up as a term. Like many of the terms that you make up that are not based on fact. They are effective though because they do pi** people off. And the photo shopped picture that you put up of the President, I wish you could go to jail for defaming him...so good job. All you do is rant in generalities most of them are made up in your mind.
  
  I am going to give you specific examples why I don't like the right wing. When I say you, I mean the generic you. This is addressed to all of those who think like you. Do you know the difference between micro-economics and macro-economics? While you are focused on the nanny state, inner-city crime, less laws, and less government, the right wing is ripping you and me off economically. This chart is from the Office of Budget and Management.
  
  Less than 2% of the total budget goes to the welfare program. Even if you look at the total Safety Net program it is 11% of the budget.
  
  On the other hand, according to the environmental law institute, 3 percent of the total federal budget is for regular welfare and $92 billion, 5 percent of the total federal budget, for corporations. So, the government spends roughly 50% more on corporate welfare than it does on these particular public assistance programs.
  
  If you want more information on it, here it is:
  
  http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-sp … tatistics/
  
  I get it, you want less laws and you want to be left alone. You think the right wing is for less laws and less government. Here is a self-evident truth, The federal government by its very nature is not self-purging. How many departments of the government do you know of that have been removed from either sides of the aisle? The term less government is right wing code for getting rid of those 2% of the welfare programs.
  
  The right wing removed the Glass Stegal Act which caused the biggest financial meltdown, since the 29' crash. Businesses went down the tubes, people left their homes, banks and investment companies crashed, There was a 700 billion bail out that you and I are still paying for. World economies crashed because of a 600 trillion derivatives market that was entangled with our markets.
  
  You think the right wing doesn't like laws. How about, the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court that makes corporations the same as people. It allows corporations and big money interest to donate undisclosed amounts of money to candidates, tax free. And the NRA is included in that. There is no representation left for the people. You don't like the violence int the inner-cities, try contacting your congressman and see how far you get...unless you are a super PAC.
  
  The right wing wants to defund Planned Parent Hood, because abortions are morally wrong. At budget time, they even shutdown the government to make their point. That's all well and good, but they don't give a damn after an unwed mother gives birth to a child she can't afford to support. But they don't want her on the nanny state.
  
  They want to privatize social security, so that brokers and dealers can rip off people who are not very well educated in investing. Social Security is an insurance that is solvent until 2037 and then it can make 70% of it's payments. It can make 100% if the annual limit cap is removed. It's that simple.
  
  They want to repeal Obama care for the 50+ times, so that insurance companies can rip us off with no regulations for premiums and prior conditions.
  
  The NRA and the right wing enacted the Tiahart Amendment to cut funding for the ATF so that they can't do their jobs effectively.
  
  You think that registering your gun is a burden. How about all the black people that could not vote because they had to have a registered driver's license?
  
  Have you ever heard of ALEC? It stands for American Legislative Exchange Council. Reagan created this.
  
  ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through the secretive meetings of the American Legislative Exchange Council, corporate lobbyists and state legislators vote as equals on ‘model bills’ to change our rights that often benefit the corporations’ bottom line at public expense. ALEC is a pay-to-play operation where corporations buy a seat and a vote on ‘task forces’ to advance their legislative wish lists and can get a tax break for donations, effectively passing these lobbying costs on to taxpayers.
  
  Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve “model” bills. They have their own corporate governing board which meets jointly with the legislative board. (ALEC says that corporations do not vote on the board.) Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations.
  
  Participating legislators, overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, then bring those proposals home and introduce them in statehouses across the land as their own brilliant ideas and important public policy innovations—without disclosing that corporations crafted and voted on the bills.
  
  ALEC boasts that it has over 1,000 of these bills introduced by legislative members every year, with one in every five of them enacted into law. ALEC describes itself as a “unique,” “unparalleled” and “unmatched” organization. We agree. It is as if a state legislature had been reconstituted, yet corporations had pushed the people out the door.
  
  If you want to more about ALEC go here:
  http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/What_is_ALEC%3F
  
  So you see my friends, you keep focused on the little peep hole that the right wing wants you focused on while they rip you off. When Obama took office, Sean Hannity said you are gong to see the largest transfer of wealth, you have ever seen. He was right, but it's not from the top to the bottom. It's from the bottom to the top.
  
  Speaking of Hannity, Regan also repealed the Fairness Doctrine which gave equal time to both sides in the media. It was fair and balanced. Because of the repeal of that law, today you have Fox News, which is the right wing attack machine against the liberals and democrats. It's also owned by a foreigner Rupert Murdoch.
  
  So you think the right wing is all about less laws and less government? No they remove laws and add other laws that benefit corporations and big moneyed interest and allow congressmen to get re-elected time after time. They just want to keep you looking through that peep hole instead of seeing the big picture.
  
  And you have the ba**s to call me naive many times.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, this was as eloquent as it was comprehensive. But the mistake that you make is these people are not interested in reason. They function from the emotion of sheer rage and resentment, the actual facts on the ground mean nothing to them.
  
  Over centuries of time and variety of locations, the Right has always been the troublesome effluent that every society has to contend with that wants to move forward and improve life for its citizens. Who wants to negotiates with effluent?
  
  The Right, by its very nature, is not interested in the truth. So, you waste your time with most of them. The only way to 'negotiate' with them is to continue to expose them for the frauds that they are and decimate them at the polls. Then, they will have to learn to like it..
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  credence2: Thank you. I know it's an exercise in futility. I just wanted to show people that things are not always as they think and that I can give verifiable specifics of my claims. It's not just B.S., insults and rants.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sic Lerner on them! Truth hurt? What happened to free speech? Yet, you think it OK for the likes of BLM to take over the stage of Sanders. And other groups to threaten voters on their way to voting booths. Recent history pease, not years ago.
  
  Sounds like you want a dictator type gov. as long as they are on your side.
  
  Another thing, learn what an assault rifle is. There is none in that pic!
  reply report
  0
  Onusonusposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And the second that right is taken away we will truly have tyranny.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, that just about right!
  
  The rightwinger has yet to learn that real courage of standing up for what you believe in through discourse and reasoning on all sides is a far greater than hiding behind a gun.
  
  Such posturing and bravado on the international scene has brought the world to the brink of annihilation. The Rightwinger is the ugly face of that reality, that lives among us, with the same sabre rattling attitude.
  
  This has been a record thread in regards to participation, you ought to be proud.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I guess burning down Ferguson and Baltimore and ............is the right way!
  reply report
  0
  Onusonusposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The left is notorious for shutting down all discourse when it comes to debating any topic. College campuses are a prime example of how the left systematically shuts down all opinions or ideology that does not conform to their world view. They protest and shout down any events which headline conservative speakers, They have created free speech zones to segregate any opposing form of thought to a small secluded area on campus, and they have invented "trigger warnings" in order to sway the ignorant masses into believing that what they are about to hear will be offensive before they have even had a chance to hear it.
  
  So, you're dead wrong. Again.
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Then why did the NRA not show up for the town hall with Obama? Sound like they're chicken, or do not want to expose their views to a national audience, which was it?
  reply report
  0
  Onusonusposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Here's why.
  
  A town hall event with President Barack Obama set to take place at George Mason University on Thursday is closed to students and the general public, according to an email sent to students by a university administrator.
  
  “CNN is hosting a Town Hall with President Barack Obama on Thursday, Jan. 7, in the Johnson Center. This is an invitation-only event. No tickets are available,” wrote Renell Wynn, vice president of communications and marketing.
  
  Closed to the public, invitation only. The NRA wasn't invited. Sounds more like Obama was the chicken.
  I'm sure the NRA would love to have a debate with the guy.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  onusonus: Sorry but you have it wrong. Did you even watch the town hall meeting? Obama told Anderson Cooper that the NRA was sent an invitation and declined the offer. He also said their headquarters are right down the street from where the meeting is to be held. I think you are the chicken not Obama. Please verify your information before you go off spouting what you think and not based on fact.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I never watch any program with gay people such as Cooper, Obama or Ellen Degenerate. They are evil perverts and to be avoided.
  report
  0
  Onusonusposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yes they were sent an invitation. And were given the option of asking one pre-screened question, after which the president gets to lecture them for five minutes on what a great idea his anti-second amendment measures are. So why don't you answer to any of the facts that I've presented, instead of capitalizing on a single error?
  report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  No, the NRA is just a worthless little yellow chicken. The event was televised, was it not. What an opportunity for the NRA to explain itself to the general public. HOw could they run and miss this opportunity to face the President' and forces of moderation on national television? I guess the NRA are big on the guns, but short on courage? You may have at least received some respect for having the courage to appear. Many people sitting on the fence in regard to this issue may have learned something, or even have been sympathetic toward the NRA. But, this did not happen.
  
  When asked President of the NRA said that there was nothing to speak with the President about, except basketball. Pretty lame excuse.......
  reply report
  0
  Onusonusposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It would be a great opportunity to have a discussion if they were able to have an actual discussion. Instead the people were given a short pre screened comment followed by a lecture from our idiot in chief. No teleprompter this time though.
  Democrats always avoiding an open discussion so they don't have to deal with too much reality. I wonder if any tough questions were screened for trigger warnings. I would hate to see that pansey start crying on national television again. Last time was a puke fest.
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yet , its the left winger who constantly rants ! The right , at least , are for a "leave it alone" mentality while the left constantly adjusts , changes , whines , rants and rants some more till it comes around to where they began , again . Used to be an old saying at the bottom of the business ladder , if all you do is constantly change ; pretty soon you're right back where you began . And THAT is what happens with laws , restrictions and more restrictions . The United States and all its ideologies of liberty began from the escape of tyranny , leave it to the leftists ; and here we are , right back where we began . Over regulated by a government of fat , lazy non-performers .
  Congratulations .
  
  I wish the left actually believed in the liberties and utopia that they constantly rant of while in truth , they [you ] want a purely nanny state government , one that supports you and is the answer to all your entitlement needs .
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Peoplepower , You ask for facts ; you wouldn't know a fact from a farce ! But the left has never needed nor wanted truths to begin with , truths tend to kill the lefts constant rants and demean your real mission , The creation of a utopian Nanny state ! . If you and the other leftists really wanted the truth about the second amendment , you would look up and fully understand the supreme courts constant vigilance , it's constant role in it's total and absolute protection !
  
  So , rant on ! We're all sure that you know more about laws than the supreme courts do ! Not !
  
  I'm really not surprised though , that even though you took an oath to protect and preserve the constitution of the United States while in service to the country that you actually accepted a paycheck for it , doesn't that make you a hypocrite ?
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback: I asked for specifics and this is the best you can do is to defame my military service? Did you even serve in the military? I think I asked you that once before and you never replied.
  
  I give you tons of verifiable facts as to why I don't like the right wing and all you can do is insult me and tell me what I and liberals think based on your own agenda. That's a great ploy that politicians use. They are asked a question and they avoid the question by saying. "This is the question you should be asking." To tell you the truth, I didn't expect much more from you. It's true to your form. But I don't have to insult people and make up all these jargon words to make my point. I give you facts.
  reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
Specifically what is the Right fighting on this thread? The idea of loss of liberty as in too many restrictions.
The left is fighting the of idea too much liberty as in not enough regulations.
So perhaps the issue is this: too tight restrictions vs too few regulations.
The unknown is this:
The future.
Is it possible … IS IT POSSIBLE for some presently unknown reason, that we independent people might need the guns which the left wants to regulate?

The Right: Yep ... IT IS POSSIBLE !
The Left: Nope ... IT AIN'T!
Who is right?
We will never know until the future arrives.
~ so this thread should last until that time.
Yay!
reply report
1. 61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Here's the Problem Kathryn ~ Almost every CONservative Republican in Congress was in FAVOR of & Supported ALL President Obama's Executive ACTIONs Until the President ACTUALLY Filed them ~
  
  The NRA has Congressional Republicans LOCKED Up with what could be described as "Bribe Money" which means even though they don't even believe their OWN Words, they must COMPLY with the National Rifle Association which PROFITS after the SALE of each and every GUN ~
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Why do we allow the NRA to gain a cent?
  and how do they?
  http://money.cnn.com/infographic/news/t … s-we-know/
  
  OH.
  It is a problem.
  Yep.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  The NRA is funded by mostly membership fees, secondly donatoins and thirdly ads on there sites and magazines. No gov. funds that I know of. Not like that baby killing planned parenthood factory the libs love.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  but the NRA shouldn't be bribing republicans and republicans shouldn't be voting based on money, but the good of the people.
  and then what is the "good of the people?"
  Having access to high powered mag type weapons?
  
  I, as a civilized member of society, think allowing high powered weapons is going a little far.
  One of these guns in the hands of the wrong nut job and thirty people are maimed or killed. It is a risk.
  Oh, what would the founding fathers say?
  Did they have nut jobs in those days?
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  But if you FOLLOW the Money you'll see a "Crystal Clear Connection" between NRA Contributions & Favorable CONservative Republican Support of said Organization ~
  
  Believe me, if the NRA & Wall Street didn't exist, there would be VERY Few if any Republicans in public office ~
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I suspect the Republican's that are elected would be like those prior to Gingrich; i.e., sensible ones.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "Almost every CONservative Republican in Congress was in FAVOR of & Supported ALL President Obama's Executive ACTIONs" AP
  
  Really?
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  How come President Reagan supported background checks? The answer, because he thought them effective in reducing death by gun. Here is a message from President Reagan, your political god, to your anti-gun safety side regarding gun safety laws.
  
  http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/29/opini … -bill.html
  reply report
2. 67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  A huge contradiction isn't it? Liberal means to be free to do. Yet they want to restrict the right to keep and bear and protect ourselves. A continually restrictive gov. Hypocrisy!!
  They are very liberal a negative way: drugs, baby killers, sex in the schools etc. With our money on pet programs at the expense of national security.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  It gets down to only allowing us the personal freedoms they want us to have, (according to their ideals.)
  
  Regulations are for the sake of some good.
  That good has to consistent with personal liberty. The boundary must be connected to freedom and must facilitate liberty / independence.
  
  Laws benefit society and individuals.
  
  If they can't be enforced, that's also a problem.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I really don't care about the NRA. The gun buyers are willing to pay.
  The big picture is personal and national security. Regardless of the NRA.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  So, despite the possibility of a nut job getting ahold of a high powered weapon, we should not in any way regulate guns or restrict the freedom to own and carry them.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  That is entirely up to your STATE government.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yes. Thank You. As it SHOULD be!
  reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
PS This is why understanding human nature and knowing history comes in handy.
The future is kind of predictable in the light of these issues.
The Left sees human nature in an idealistic way.
The Right sees human nature in the light of HISTORY which provides undeniable proofs of the true nature of humans.
The left thinks human nature can change/improve and should change for the benefit of all.
The right pretty much knows it ain't gonna happen. They know individuals need to look out for themselves. No one else CAN and / or WILL do it for them.
And NO ONE, (POTUS's etc.) should hamper our ability to take care of ourselves.

PSS Hamper means to IMPEDE
impede verb
hinder, obstruct, hamper, hold back/up, delay, interfere with, disrupt, retard, slow (down), hobble, cripple; block, check, stop, scupper, scuttle, thwart, frustrate, balk, foil, derail; stymie, throw a (monkey) wrench in the works of; cumber. ANTONYMS facilitate.
reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
" National Rifle Association ... PROFITS after the SALE of each and every GUN ~" AP
Really?
reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
The problem is whatever is causing nutjobsism. And it always has been.
reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
"As opposed to a Conservative is, BY DEFINITION, someone who believes society is naturally stratified into groups with unequal access to liberty, e.g., the wife is naturally subservient to their husbands as ordained by God."

HUH?
Not really.
reply report
1. 81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, really
  
  Conservatives have always resisted granted rights and privileges to larger portions of society
  
  1. 1820's progressive or their counterparts pushed to grant full suffrage to all white men over 21, disregarding old conservative ideas of property owning prerequisites.
  
  2. Freedom for the slaves and citizenship in the 1860's was resisted by conservatives and extended by progressives with an eye for having the nation live up the lofty rhetoric. Lincoln was certainly not conservative by the standards of the time.
  
  By the 1920's was it conservatives that supported women's suffrage?
  Getting away from the conservative perception that women were property subservient to the whim of their husbands.
  
  Regardless of political party, it was not conservatives that supported civil rights for minorities during the last half of the 20th century.
  
  It wasn't conservatives that fought for equal treatment and service at public accoomodations for everyone regardless of race.
  
  It was not conservatives that conceived and supported Title 9 of the CRA
  
  In the 1970's who was pushing to get the franchise for the 18-21 year old group, the men of whom were shedding blood in Vietnam, it wasn't the conservatives
  
  In the 2010's it was the progressive that fought for the rights of homosexuals.
  
  It would take a book to touch on everything in between
  
  Conservatives have a history of being opposed to the general granting of rights beyond their chosen elites. Liberals say rights are for all and the more that have access, the better and more truly representative system of government we will have.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You would like this publication established in 1914. Have you ever read it's articles?
  
  "The New Republic is (was) very much against the Bush tax programs, against Bush Social Security 'reform,' against cutting the inheritance tax, for radical health care changes, passionate about Gore-type environmentalism, for a woman's entitlement to an abortion, for gay marriage, for an increase in the minimum wage, for pursuing aggressively alternatives to our present reliance on oil and our present tax preferences for gas-guzzling automobiles. We were against the confirmation of Justice Alito."
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Republic
  
  Today: http://www.poynter.org/2015/the-new-new … ns/364679/
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am familiar with the 'New Republic' as a prestigious and credible source of responsible journalism. I will check the articles.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Well said. Even when laws are passed, like the civil rights laws of 50 years ago, conservatives continue to hang onto their old, racist views. They think laws don't apply to them, but are hypocrites, and say it's liberals who don't believe in the constitution or laws of any type. They don't care if their neighbors are sick or starving, through no fault of their own. Even if said neighbors work two jobs. Most conservatives are mostly concerned with money, and how to protect theirs, much of which they never worked for, but inherited.
  
  And who can watch the news and say gun violence isn't getting worse? Conservatives only see what they want to see, and ought to try looking around them once in a while. They are too busy listening to the lies spewed from talk radio. Even Ben Carson was confronted with FACTS in an interview, and just answered, "I really don't see it that way." All of a sudden when Obama became POTUS, facts didn't matter anymore, any conservative lie was accepted by their ilk. Hitler's buddy Goebbels said, "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "They don't care if their neighbors are sick or starving, through no fault of their own."
  
  It is precisely this kind of remark that destroys any credibility so many liberals might have. Conservatives donate as much as anyone - any such statement is an obvious falsehood.
  
  Anyone that does any research at all can watch the news and say gun violence is NOT getting worse. All we have to do is look at actual numbers and compare them to what were seen in the past.
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I have read that crime statistics are lower, but we have seen a rise of police brutality where white cops are shooting black people and killing them. I admit sometimes the black people are committing crimes, but they are petty ones, none worth dying for. And most of them are pretty young.
  
  I don't like to argue with you wilderness, because you are a nice guy. We just don't agree on a lot of things.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Goebbels said, "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
  
  Exactly: Obama told some big ones. Gun violence is increasing! Obama care will save the average family over $2,000 a year. Unemployment is only 5%. Please use work force participation rate and not that phony crap the Dems use.
  reply report
  84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You embody that Goebbels statement, Doug; I'm surprised you used it.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Funny one! What have I lied about? Just because you don't understand. Or are so wrapped up in your lib ideology.
  
  Follow your Pied Piper!
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, Jean, the conservative mindset is the protection of the status quo, no matter how unjust. These days economics, how wealth is acquired and held in this society is the linchpin. The ones the Trump attracts, the high school dropouts, have only their resentment left. Always fearful of what will come with next sunrise that, like Obamacare, they would like to block.
  
  Elitism, is a conservative idea that started with King George III. The elites say I have what I have because I deserve it. They all say that they earn it, but that is not true, the table is rigged in their favor so that they can keep taking more than their fair share. The money changers have their tenacles in among Washington politicians.
  
  The reality is that if this capitalism is going to survive in the long term, a bridle needs to be placed upon those that would not be satisfied until the middle class and all below lie prostrate before them, at their tender mercies.
  reply report
85
Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago
RE Larger portions of society

1. 1820's: Progressive types supported the right to vote for all white men over 21.

2. 1860's: Freedom for the slaves and citizenship was extended by progressive types.

3. 1920's Progressives supported women's right to vote.

4. It was progressive types that supported civil rights for minorities during the last half of the 20th century.

5. Progressives fought for equal treatment and service at public accommodations for everyone regardless of race.

6. Progressives conceived and supported Title 9 of the CRA

7. 1970's: Progressives pushed to get the vote for the 18-21 year old group.

8. 2010's: Progressives fought for the rights of homosexuals.

Progressives say rights are for all.

The more truly representative system of government we have, the more will have these rights.
The sad thing is, laws, laws, and more laws.
Why do we need so many laws when all we have to do is follow The Golden Rule?
reply report
1. 81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  As for the "Golden Rule' it is in actuality, he who has the most gold rules. It is easier for many to 'look out for number one'. If everyone operated on the Golden Rule as it was intended, we would not need all of these laws. But, such is not human nature and never has been.
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

Peoplepower , Alternative Prime, Credence , just to name a few ,

I offer anti-constitution liberals this , If every home in America had one of these AND the homeowners knew how to use it , there would be far ,far less property crime in America . and property crimes are probably the biggest reason for gun crimes , that there is . Crime deterrence by definition , is all about being prepared for the eventual .

And , the idea behind THIS image is exactly what the founding fathers who wrote the second amendment had in mind when they wrote it . That the , "We the People ", should always be vigilant , just as liberties , laws , politics and human behavior evolves , SO TOO should the weaponry of the patriot !
reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
Our Second Amendment was not written for "another time". It was written exactly for these times with a tyrannical usurper in our White House, militant homosexuals, Moslems and inner-city thugs on our streets. Arm up and get ready for The Rapture!
reply report
1. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Sgt Pepper: The only rapture is in your head!
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  No Kiddin'......And it looks like that Raptor already "Pecked" a few Brain Cells outta his SKULL...... ........Wait a minute, did you say "Rapture" ??......
  
  ANYWAY.....In that case, believe me, a GUN will do no good to DEFEND yourself and ALL other Unscrupulous Backward Republicans from the wrath of "GOD & Jesus".....NOT with ALL your Pending "SINs Against Humanity" to be Evaluated and Adjudicated,,,,,....For "GOD & Jesus" are "Holy GHOSTS" not Flesh & Blood, into which a Projectile shall NOT penetrate.....
  reply report
67
Doug Cutlerposted 9 years ago
What happened to that: "Who is Lerner?" Post?
Typical low information voter response!

Who is the vice president? " I don't know man! I just voted for Obama! He gonna give me a cellphone , pay my bills...................."
This is the typical Obama voter and why he got elected. I would be ashamed as hell if this is how my guy/girl got elected. Most of those new voters never voted in their life? But then the libs don't care how!
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
I believe I heard on BrietBart ,Sirius radio that the NRA representative would only be allowed one question of the president , That is why they declined the town hall event . They wouldn't be required though , the audience pretty much destroyed Obama anyways .
reply report
1. 81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  More chicken*** excuses, eh ahorsback?
  
  Brietbart has ZERO credibility in the mainstream, you will have to do better...
  reply report
59
Sgt Prepperposted 9 years ago
Notice in the pic of BHO with the shotgun he is left-handed just like John Kerry, Netanyahu, Abbas, GHWBush, Ross Perot, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Sarkozy, Putin, Jonathon Edwards, Bob Dole by default, John McCain and a surprisingly large percentage of world leaders and past presidential candidates. Only ten-percent of the population is left-handed. Doesn't something seem odd about this? Unbelievably Obama, Queen Elizabeth, John McCain and the Bush-family are related to Vlad the Impaler. The only right-handed U.S. President since Carter was GWB. Most of these people are RH negative having daughters predominately. What's up with that?
reply report
1. 81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And your point....?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Hypoxia (the lack of oxygen to the brain) may well be one of the culprits. It's also been shown that mothers who smoke during pregnancy, which causes hypoxia to the fetus, are more likely to produce left-handed offspring.
  
  https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4310
  
  His ma ma like to toke!
  reply report
  81
  Credence2posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug, here is a link to psychology today so that we can dispense with unsubstantiated biases.
  
  https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/br … ft-handers
  
  According to the article, there is no significance difference in intelligence between left and right handers.
  
  So, am I going to give credibility to a distinguished scientific journal or to your opinion, do you have to guess?
  So, as I said before, "So What"?
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  And I am supposed to believe a bunch that don't know how the brain works over something that is measured?
  
  regardless, his ma ma like to toke. and more
  
  And I am supposed to believe a lying president who said gun violence in the U.S. is raising?
  All other sources say the opposite.
  
  The NRA this, the NRA that! You would think they controlled the world! They give to the parties.
  
  I am going to use your answer: So what?
  reply report
2. 92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  A larger percentage of the population is ambidextrous now, mostly because of all the technological toys we use so often. I write with my left hand, but do a lot of other things with my right hand, and probably you see more of that than you used to. I came by this fact while discussing carpal tunnel syndrome with a pain management doctor.
  
  I still don't see what this has to do with anything.
  reply report
  59
  Sgt Prepperposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Funny but the percentage of RH-neg blood types has doubled since records have been kept too.
  reply report
  85
  Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  "Most of these people are RH negative having daughters predominately."
  
  Rh negative:
  Lacking the Rhesus factor.
  
  Rhesus factor:
  An antigen occurring on the red blood cells of many humans (around 85 percent) and some other primates. It is particularly important as a cause of hemolytic disease of the newborn and of incompatibility in blood transfusions.
  
  An antigen:
  A toxin or other foreign substance that induces an immune response in the body, esp. the production of antibodies.
  
  Hemolytic:
  Relating to or involving the rupture or destruction of red blood cells.
  
  So, Rh negative blood is lacking the antigen which apparently only affects newly born Rh negative babies. Also, negative and positive blood don't mix so if the baby is Rhesus Positive and the baby's blood gets into the mother's bloodstream at birth, its is a dangerous situation for the Rhesus Negative mother.
  Evolution fixed the problem at some point by supplying an antigen to prevent the destruction of the red blood cells at birth, but the blood without the antigen is still being distributed genetically by the babies who survive.
  Genetics and evolution are very interesting.
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
The most obvious point of all of his discussion is that in the dream -world eventuality of gun confiscation on US soil , liberals will be far, far from that confrontation ! Not much bravery on the part of liberal whiners .
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago

History repeats itself.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
I wonder how it feels as liberals begin to realize that Obama's great " accomplishments " from his La -La ideologies will be re-pealed as soon as he leaves office .

And yet , what are they to begin with , we are all asking ?

His love affair with the European- Muslim-ization of America ?

Gitmo's - thirty percent recidivist resurrections of Islamic terrorist troops ?.

Trading military deserters for terrorist's ten to one ?

Ninety five million Americans leaving the work force giving him his 5% unemployment rate ?.

Black American men in inner cities - 50 % unemployment ?

More concerned with eliminating a" Assault Rifle " that's never even used in gun violence to begin with?

His "Gun Free Zones " on military bases and other places virtually giving a green light to gun violence ?

His closing of Gitmo virtually paving the way for the prosecution / sentencing of foreign terrorists on American soil - ?

His paroling of felon prisoners from U.S. prisons ?

His stance against the isolation of America from foreign oil ?

Yea , his accomplishments are so great , it will take decades to undo them , But oh well this is the blank where liberals can throw in the R word, instead of counting those failures like the rest of us .....................................!

"Racist" , the usual one word defense of his total non- performance ?
reply report
1. 84
  My Esotericposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  How does it feel to you far-Right conservatives to know that Hillary is going to be your next President and won't repeal a thing. What won't she repeal? She won't:
  
  * Reverse the Stimulus and the plethora of job creating acts that went with it
  * Repeal Obamacare
  * Reverse Don't Ask, Don't Tell
  * Return an American soldier to the enemy
  * Bring back the economic disaster brought on by the major recessions and depressions the Conservatives repeatedly, at least 21 times in history, visit on American citizens
  * Repeal the limited gun safety measures PBO had the authority to make
  * Resurrect Osama bin Laden
  * Bring bin Lanen's al Qaeda back to life
  * Reverse policies to find alternatives to the earth destroying and disheartening oil.
  * Stop trying to restrict easy access to assault rifles used in several mass shootings
  * Reverse the tax cuts for poor and middle class Americans
  * Bring back the huge deficits brought on by the Conservatives near-Depression
  * Reverse implementation of the portions of the bi-partisan Senate immigration reform plan which the law allows a president to do.
  * Let Iran get nuclear weapons by repealing the Iran nuclear deal
  * Reverse the Trans-Pacific Free-Trade agreement
  * Reverse the credit card Bill of Rights
  * Reverse the Dodd-Frank Consumer Protection Act
  * Defund the Violence Against Women Act
  * The increase in special operation and civil affairs forces
  * Reverse increase in family incomes which were destroyed by conservative economics
  * Reverse the historically long string of strong, real declines in unemployment after conservative economics increased it to 10%
  * Give back chemical weapons to Assad
  * and so on.
  
  While, from a historic perspective, I don't think PBO will go down as one of the Great Presidents, mainly because of his inability or refusal to work with Democrats in Congress, but will be seen as one of the best because he did accomplish so many good things in spite of 1) a "no compromise" GOP, 2) a pre-planned, single-minded, full-court press by conservatives to destroy him and his presidency, and 3) the conservative decision to hurt America in order to achieve his destruction.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  My Esoteric: Thank you. I like the way you stated Obama's Accomplishments despite the GOP's single-minded mission to destroy his presidency.
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am the one who started this forum and after 3,424 posts, I have come to some conclusions. First let me apologize for not stating my opening better. I said this about the 2nd amendment:: "It is causing mentally ill people to commit mass killings." I should have said the 2nd amendment gives everybody easy access to guns, including the mentally ill. Thus, allowing some of the mentally ill to commit mass killings.
  
  This forum includes people from all walks of life with many values and belief systems. However, there are some, mainly conservative gun owners, who live in constant fear of tyranny, the end times, the rapture, conspiracies, and confiscation of their guns. It must be terrible for you to wake up in the morning with these fears in your mind. How do you even sleep at night? There are others mainly, liberals who don't have to worry about any of those fears, because they simply don't believe in them.
  
  It is a matter of the glass being half full or half empty. For liberals, the glass is half full. For conservatives, the glass is always half empty. Because they are preoccupied with the fear of someone always infringing on their property and rights. They live with a self-fulfilling fear that things are always trending towards what they fear. They justify it by saying it hasn't happened yet, but it is trending in that direction. How can you argue with trends, when the people that fear the event, know it will happen someday? How can it be proven either way until it actually happens?
  
  So while liberals sleep well at night and don't have those fears, we know that we are being protected by gun loving conservatives that have armed up because they are just waiting for the next thing they fear to take place. Liberals are not worried about getting shot because, the chances of that happening are very low based on the statistics that conservatives have provided in this forum.
  
  How sad is that when you live in constant fear and paranoia that your government is just around the corner to to take away your rights and your guns and/or the end times are here and we are all going to die because Obama is the Antichrist?
  
  Sleep well my friends because the conservatives and conspiracy theorist have enough fear and paranoia for all us. Have a great day!!
  reply report
  75
  wildernessposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Outside of the ridiculous notion that gun owners predominately own guns because of a fear of government tyranny, you do have some nice points here.
  
  The glass I like, but have to wonder why liberals insist on continuing to add to the level, a drop at a time? When is it enough - when the glass is finally full and the guns are gone? You complain that gun lovers always thing the glass is emptying and think it will be emptied, but those fearful of guns continue to fill it! (And yes, I've reversed the full/empty associations).
  
  I also like the acknowledgement that the statistics pretty clearly show that you won't be shot. That even liberals needn't be afraid of gun violence, and aren't (that's very questionable, though). So why the continual barrage of new gun limitations? There isn't a need to fear guns, or gun owners, so why continue the battle, particularly when it never changes anything? Wouldn't our limited resources be better used for something else - perhaps cleaning up the ghettos or better mental health treatments? Without the fear of being shot, what is the reasoning behind attacking the 2A?
  reply report
  92
  Jean Bakulaposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Better or any treatments for people with mental health issues would be a big help. Many of the people who shoot helpless people do have mental problems that are not being addressed. Even when a person is purchasing a gun through legal channels, how does the seller know the person isn't sick?
  reply report
  85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  wilderness: You wrote:
  
  "The glass I like, but have to wonder why liberals insist on continuing to add to the level, a drop at a time? When is it enough - when the glass is finally full and the guns are gone? You complain that gun lovers always thing the glass is emptying and think it will be emptied, but those fearful of guns continue to fill it! (And yes, I've reversed the full/empty associations)."
  
  You did more than reverse the full/empty association. You developed a trend by saying" liberals continuing to add one drop at a time." I never said anything about emptying the glass. Thanks by making my point even clearer.
  
  Why is it that conservatives can believe trends like you just made up, but when it comes to the real trend of global warming/climate change they disclaim it? Even though we are now feeling the effects of it and it has been proven by many scientist, not politics.
  
  I know I digressed, but i'm just curious about the conservative mind set.
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  One extreme to the other! All or nothing. Moderation is called for here.
  
  Get rid of the worst first. That be Obama care! Then go to the second worst. Some may be OK as is and others a teak or two.
  
  Not like the ass backward approach of the regime! Go pounce on a tiny portion of gun violence and ignore the the far worse area. Gangs! Or even start with the area of most deaths. Suicides.
  It appears to be a gun grab agenda of sorts to many. But not to brain dead Pied Piper libs.
  
  We would have been far ahead if the regime would have come up with a plan to give low income people medical help without the billions spent on some lame Obama care. And the public would still have their old preferred plans.
  
  Same with Q this and Q that. The banks kept most of the money the public was supposed to get in the form of loans, grants etc. Both parties are at fault on this one. I have written hubs on how things should be.
  
  The $15 dollar an hr. will fail too that the libs want. Even the $10 hr. Mr O wants will. Every time wages go up food and energy go up faster. Look at what the average car cost now! Was $2,500 for average cars in the 60's. The lib unions think they are worth 3 1/2 times more than min. wage. Wrote a hub on this too. Much talk of machines replacing low skill jobs in the fast food industry.
  reply report
  61
  Alternative Primeposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  Doug ~ Like many Conservative Republicans, I truly don't think you fully understand EXACTLY what you're saying, because if you did, I'm Confident you wouldn't be saying it ~
  
  Your "Beloved Backward Radical Republican Politicians" don't even believe in what they say, they only say it because they are FORCED to by the NRA & Greed Driven Wall Street Corporations ~ So unless you are affiliated with either or, ALWAYS Remember that ~
  reply report
  67
  Doug Cutlerposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  I am saying I don't belong to any group. Religious or political. As an outsider I can see the evil and lies of all groups. Some groups have far more evil than others.
  
  The NRA is your buggy man. I am mostly indifferent and even called them out right here on this hub about their insistent hype about the mentally challenged as the major offender. Just like I called out the regime's inaccurate rant about mass murders being the biggest problem. Roughly: 66% suicides, 18% gangs, all others 16%.
  
  I very seldom mention the democratic party. But do mention the libs that are mostly democratic. There are liberal Reps too. So, it is more about ideology then what party it is.
  As I have mentioned several times we should abandon parties and go back to as intended by the founders. That being electing the best for that position.
  
  Bottom line: You don't know anything and ass-ume way to much.
  
  I believe in the constitution. The right to keep and bear. Along with other rights.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  You really need to read a history book or three , You opinions are so rant with bias and bologna that they reek , In a way it's cute because in truth , it almost perfectly reflects the whole leftist approach to discussions of ...........well anything . In other words scream the loudest , push the furthest , rant the most abstract amount of horseshyte that you can .All the while not listening , not learning and not elevating the debate to a level of any intelligence what-so -ever and ALL OF IT , without making any sense !
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 9 years agoin reply to this
  
  You are certainly not the one to admonish anyone to read a history book. It appears all that you know about American History was gleaned from episodes of "All In The Family" and the racist commentary on Fox News. If you hate the United States so much why don't you take Merle's advice and leave? You could at least take your beloved guns to Oregon and show support for Billy Bob and Goober.
  reply report
2. 85
  peoplepower73posted 9 years agoin reply to this
  ahorseback: Here is your republican conservatives at work repealing too much government. Good luck with that. I hope you have deep pockets to pay for that. Oh that's right, you want to be left alone. You can probably take care of your own health problems.
  
  reply report
0
Onusonusposted 9 years ago
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 2 … 6 7 8 910 11 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

The outdated 2nd amendment.

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

The outdated 2nd amendment.

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies