Liberal gun bullshit

Bfgrn said:
Some would call you a zealot. As we have gone around again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again...

You are saying citizens have the right to own nuclear weapons, F-16's, aircraft carriers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, tanks, rocket launchers (that could take down any commercial airliner). Even illegal weapons America has used like white phosphorous (agent orange) in Fallujah etc, etc, etc. THEN, you would have to have public access to any new secret weapons.

Some would call you a zealot. They are being nice...you are a MORON.
Click to expand...

You really need to reread Article 1, Section 8. It's already been posted here but you just seemed to ignore it.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And they were all created in a Republican controlled House of Representatives, a Republican controlled Senate, and a Republican controlled White House.

They were all ushered in during Republican administrations.

You expect Obama to take ownership of failures you believe he's made...take ownership of the Government overreach created by Republicans.
Click to expand...

and dems could have done away with the patriot act when they controlled both houses...but not even obama voted for that, he in fact voted to increase the patriot act's reach.

you're like evince when it comes to politics. you never see a democrat as doing anything wrong.
 
Rune said:
Ask the FBI why I am on a list, and when I leave the country I need to sit at customs for 2 hours longer than anyoe else, while they try to find out why I am on the list.
Ask them why they will not tell me why I am on their list.
Because I have some blogs? So much for the first ammendment, now it's the second, who knows what tommorow.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because other nutters who went "postal" had blogs similar to yours? Maybe they see a correlation?
 
Dixie said:
First of all, "automatic" weapons are already illegal. "Semi" automatic, simply means the weapon has the mechanism to automatically discharge the shell and prepare the weapon for the next shot. This is merely a convenience feature. Next point, the "style" of the weapon is academic, it wouldn't matter if it looked like something Pee Wee Herman would use and was painted pink. The weapon happens to be styled in the manner of a military weapon, this is an aesthetics feature which has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the weapon. It's akin to protesting "fast cars" by claiming we shouldn't paint them red!

We have the right to keep and bear arms, and the perpetrator in CT was not a legal and responsible gun owner, he didn't even own a gun. He did not obey the laws, so there is no law you could put in place that would have prevented him from doing what he did. Had someone at that school been allowed to carry a weapon, perhaps they could have stopped him? If it wasn't nearly impossible to have someone committed for psychiatric evaluation, perhaps this would have never happened? And if we lived in a society that actually respected life and treasured it, along with instilling decent moral values and respect for those who have them, perhaps things would have been different? There are a billion reasons for why this tragedy occurred, and to simply bow up and demand we dismantle the Constitution and deny law-abiding people the right to arm themselves, is NOT the solution here.
Click to expand...

so there is no law you could put in place that would have prevented him from doing what he did.



Yes, there is. A law forbidding people to own guns who have a mentally ill person living with them. He tried to buy a gun and was denied so he just picked up his mother's weapons.
 
Paranoid delusions fuel the rightwing and 3% 'Patriots'...this is a cultural extension of the 'culture war' that's been waged for over 30 years. I think it's 'logical' in it's 'conclusion' and how we came to be here. As usual the 'blame it on the liberals' mindset is encouraged by the 'take responsibility' types. You can't have a rational discussion with people who are so totally irrational.

You lost the election, again. You'll continue to lose elections. Your population is in decline and will continue to decline. You're losing in every arena and you're all scared. Paranoia, delusion and guns are not good combinations.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
which again proves you don't know what freedom is. when one persons rights are violated or ignored, ALL of our rights are violated or ignored. evil flourishes if good men do nothing. History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
Click to expand...

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Where is it written people can do anything they want as long as they don't believe it harms anyone else? Where is it written people do not have to help others or do what is good for the country? Where do people get the idea that something like Obamacare, something that promotes the general welfare and helps secure the blessings of liberty by providing better health, is anti-constitutional? Why did the Founders bother writing all that stuff in the Preamble? Why not just say the Constitution is to ensure everyone can do whatever they want and to hell with everyone else? That would have been a lot easier to interpret if that was their intention but obviously it wasn't.

"And secure the Blessings of Liberty" comes after "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare". In other words things that make the country great come before ones liberty because the things that make the country great is precisely what contributes to ones liberty. A person who is ill and confined to bed is not free and domestic tranquility is not obtained by some having excess while others go hungry.

It appears more than a few do not know what freedom is or how it's obtained.
 
apple0154 said:
so there is no law you could put in place that would have prevented him from doing what he did.



Yes, there is. A law forbidding people to own guns who have a mentally ill person living with them. He tried to buy a gun and was denied so he just picked up his mother's weapons.
Click to expand...

He still could have gotten guns. You would have to ensure that everyone he knew didn't have guns. You would also have to ensure he didn't simply turn to another weapon... like a bomb, to accomplish the same results (or worse)
 
apple0154 said:
so there is no law you could put in place that would have prevented him from doing what he did.

Yes, there is. A law forbidding people to own guns who have a mentally ill person living with them. He tried to buy a gun and was denied so he just picked up his mother's weapons.
Click to expand...
seriously???

like laws that forbid felons from owning guns? or laws making pot illegal???????
 
apple0154 said:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Click to expand...
stop falling back on the preamble. you lose all credibility.
 
There is no need for militarized guns. Automatic and semi automatic weapons with extended clips are the problem. We have gone from an NRA that supported hunters to 3%'ers who are paranoid about the government and white paranoia. That's how insane it's become in this country. This isn't about owning a gun it's about owning militarized weapons with all the accoutrements in what appears to be private armories by paranoid groups of people. Most people don't own guns and aren't interested in owning them. Those that hunt don't use automatic weapons. Some claim they need them to hunt but I question the validity of those claims. We had a ban on these types of weapons that was less than perfect...we need a better law that actually bans these types of guns.

All I see here are wild eyed reactionaries who are incapable of having a rational discussion on this subject. It's an all or nothing 'libertarian' shitfest.
 
Haiku said:
There is no need for militarized guns. Automatic and semi automatic weapons with extended clips are the problem. We have gone from an NRA that supported hunters to 3%'ers who are paranoid about the government and white paranoia. That's how insane it's become in this country. This isn't about owning a gun it's about owning militarized weapons with all the accoutrements in what appears to be private armories by paranoid groups of people. Most people don't own guns and aren't interested in owning them. Those that hunt don't use automatic weapons. Some claim they need them to hunt but I question the validity of those claims. We had a ban on these types of weapons that was less than perfect...we need a better law that actually bans these types of guns.

All I see here are wild eyed reactionaries who are incapable of having a rational discussion on this subject. It's an all or nothing 'libertarian' shitfest.
Click to expand...
why do you hate the constitution? why do you hate freedom? If you don't like what the founders created for you, Cuba awaits you.
 
Haiku said:
There is no need for militarized guns. Automatic and semi automatic weapons with extended clips are the problem. We have gone from an NRA that supported hunters to 3%'ers who are paranoid about the government and white paranoia. That's how insane it's become in this country. This isn't about owning a gun it's about owning militarized weapons with all the accoutrements in what appears to be private armories by paranoid groups of people. Most people don't own guns and aren't interested in owning them. Those that hunt don't use automatic weapons. Some claim they need them to hunt but I question the validity of those claims. We had a ban on these types of weapons that was less than perfect...we need a better law that actually bans these types of guns.

All I see here are wild eyed reactionaries who are incapable of having a rational discussion on this subject. It's an all or nothing 'libertarian' shitfest.
Click to expand...

Care to describe what needs to be banned? I keep hearing leftists through out scary sounding words like "automatic" but damned if any of them understand what makes a gun automatic or not.
 
Sparta said:
Care to describe what needs to be banned? I keep hearing leftists through out scary sounding words like "automatic" but damned if any of them understand what makes a gun automatic or not.
Click to expand...

A gun is an automatic if the bullet kills someone instantly upon being fired. Right?
 
I love the gun afficianados scolding people for having opinions about guns without being experts on gun terminology. Reminds me of the dicks that pulled rank when people criticized how Romeny earned his millions: You don't know how private equity works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top