 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Shooting tragedies and guns
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:23 PM Militias...okay... "Nobody else needs guns." (Yet again.) Ya just fouled yerselves up again. THAT attitude won't never get yas or any of us NOwhere with the problem. NObody listens. None of yas. Youse are the biggest part of this terrible problem. You feed the ammo to the NRA and shoot yerselves in the foot too. 800 posts and youse antis still don't get it? You are the majority... you have the power... and you piss it away with an inane approach to solving the problems. And then you piss and moan? Sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:31 PM No, we don't have the power... The folks who have corrupted our system do... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:41 PM gnu, who other than hunters and livestock farmers in the US would need to have guns? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:53 PM bobad... sweet Jaysus man! That is not what was discussed or what was said. IT'S NOT! It was said, "NOBODY." other than militias. Your question is WAY off the point I was making. I just can't do this again. Not tonight, anyway. NObody listens. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST Date: 03 Jan 13 - 06:03 PM Let's get this straight. People who make bombs kill people. The gun nuts keep twisting the language around. People who shoot guns often kill people. Many kill themselves. The weapon is one of the worst inventions in the depraved minds of mankind. There is no excuse for semi-automatic weapons for any reason. LaPierre and Scott Walker want to arm school teachers. That is insane. You don't put out a fire with more fire. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Jan 13 - 06:26 PM Jeeze gnu, I wasn't trying to imply anything I was just trying to get your position on who you think should be allowed to own guns in the US since you obviously don't believe in banning them all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:09 PM I think Gnu and I are in broad agreement on this issue. Those who hunt and eat what they kill need rifles to do so. Bolt action single shot rifles, because if you miss a deer with the first shot, you ain't going to need a second. Farmers who have to deal with vermin (varmints, call them what you will) need a shotgun, but not a multi shot pump action (that's for police officers). People who transport valuable items like diamonds may have a case to carry a handgun. All of the above should be issued with licences when, and only when, they have demonstrated their ability in a properly conducted firearms training course. Joe public doesn't need the means to kill a neighbour who comes to his door to borrow a cup of sugar. And nobody needs a military style semi auto for any purpose other than the murder of fellow human beings. Survivalists, with their paranoid delusions about the apocalypse, should be locked up for the protection of the public. Don T. P.S Sorry Jeri, I stayed out as long as I could in good conscience. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:27 PM I pretty much agree with your position DonT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 03 Jan 13 - 08:49 PM Me, too... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:20 PM "Bolt action single shot rifles, because if you miss a deer with the first shot, you ain't going to need a second." That makes NO sense whatsoever. NObody reads my posts! NObody on either side gives a shit as far as understanding how to fix the problems. It's been said ad infinitum by me and by others but youse all just don't listen. Bolt action??? Look up Mauser. I tried to explain that stuff to youse BEFORE but you just don't READ my posts and you just don't understand why the NRA is kicking your asses. READ this WHOLE thread and all the other gun threads. I am tired of repeating myself. I have been doing so for years and none of you pissers and moaners have gotten fuck all done in all those years because you just won't listen or get off yer asses and get the job done. Don't address me herein anymore and don't ask me to repeat myself. Read my past posts on this thread and SO many others. It's all there if you want to read it... if you really care. If not, lay down like sheep and let the NRA mow you down. Your call. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:36 PM Crazies usually don't buy guns from legit FFL dealers, they steal them from dumb fucks that don't know how to secure their weapons at home, or they buy them in a want ad from the paper. You see like I said, personal transfer of a long gun (not handgun) is legal everywhere without BG checks ... or gun shows .. again no BG checks. In many states however a personal sale of a handgun is ok also without BG checks. Pennsylvania being one of them. Many of these fuckers would never be able to buy a legit firearm from a dealer. The laws vary so much state by state that it is impossible to control. Hence a defined Federal standard would help a lot. I have no problem with firearm registration. I have my handguns all registered in this state .. but it would do nothing but add more nonsense if the personal transfer and gun shows are not closed. And Gnu, I have written to every one of my reps for years and it still sits there wide open. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:43 PM and me, well I am going to get my FFL class III license. If I apply I will get it in a heartbeat with my background. Then I can own a full auto machine gun ... a full auto .45 cause I reload my own. Do I need it, no .. but I do like shooting the things. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jan 13 - 05:29 AM ""That makes NO sense whatsoever."" Of course it makes sense Gnu. If you fire and miss, that animal is a small blue streak in the distance. You won't get a second shot at it unless you are the kind of idiot who takes the chance of wounding an animal and leaving it to bleed to death. You'll have plenty of time to reload, because it'll be some time before the wildlife settles down. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 04 Jan 13 - 09:13 AM Crazies ain't stupid, they buy them at gun shows... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 04 Jan 13 - 09:59 AM I think this thread has grown too long for genuine discussion, as people are now merely re-stating their positions or yelling at other contributors because they are tired of re-stating their positions. Could we move on, please? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 04 Jan 13 - 10:32 AM We have armed police. We have an armed National Guard. If we have armed citizens who own those arms in order to "protect us from tyrannical government", we are expecting them (intending them!) to be used against fellow Americans. In fact, we are expecting them (intending them!) to be used against first responders and "the troops". Aren't we constantly exhorted to support the troops and honor the first responders? Why the fuck are we arming people so they can shoot them?... And incidentally go nuts every once in a while and shoot just plain folks (and kids). But that is apparently an acceptable risk in the service of being sure we are armed so that we can shoot the first responders and shoot the troops at some future point. Seems to me that Timothy McVeigh's *only* mistake as a member of "a well regulate militia" (ha!) was that he used a bomb rather than a gun to attack the federal building. Because attacking the feds with a gun is *exactly* the reason we have a Second Amendment. Right? Does this not sound crazy to *everybody*!??!?!?!? And don't think for a minute that my only actions related to this are pissing and moaning. I have been actively working on violence and weapons related issues since the 1970s. Some may disagree with me, but nobody can claim that I am just talking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,TIA Date: 04 Jan 13 - 11:07 AM PS I do recognize a legitimate need for guns for certain restricted and regulated uses; e.g. a geologist mapping on Kodiak Island, or deer hunting for subsistence or even sport. But these needs can certainly be met with something well short of preparing everyone to shoot FBI agents when they become disenchanted with the government. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 04 Jan 13 - 04:28 PM You are exactly right, TIA... I mean, if you follow the NRA logic then ordinary people should be able to own bombs, attack helicopters, tanks, nuclear missiles, etc. B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 05 Jan 13 - 06:42 PM I requested that no more posts be addressed to me, but... I do make sense... Ya CAN'T make bad gun laws. Ya can't get a bill passed if it contains bad gun laws. It will NOT happen in the US. In Canada, it happened because we have a different form of government BUT the good gun laws have been repealed here BECAUSE the legislation included BAD gun laws and the new government used that to repeal the GOOD gun laws too (except in Quebec... say what ya want about them Q-becers but THEY got balls). WHY won't anyone listen to me? It's SO simple. FINE... some of youse have GOOD gun laws. We don't and look what happened. Good combined with bad gun laws are being proposed in the US and they will NEVER see the light of day. NEVER! Youse just don't seem to understand the situation. It's plain and simple as the nose on your face. It's NOT about the will... it's about the way. And what bothers me most is the Yanks that say the problems "cannot" be solved. It makes me livid. Almost as livid as those who say NO guns are acceptable... that is innane... insane!... on a number of levels. If that is all there is to say... that is all there is to say.... the NRA wins. Game over. Sad. BTW... PM Harper has just given the go ahead for Canuck companies to sell any fuckin weapon they want to the Columbians... ya gotta love that free trade agreement he signed without Parliament approval, eh? But, we get fresh fruit all winter so it balances out, eh? Oh, yeah... they can now sell assault pistols and rifles wherever they want, near as I know. Fact is, ya gotta do it right and not piss and moan that ya CAN'T. TIA... I don't think of YOU that way. PLEASE don't use my name again. Bicker among yourselves while the NRA laughs at you and people die. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 05 Jan 13 - 07:00 PM The WaPo reports today that the Biden Commission is looking at a very comprehensive bill that deals with lots of issues including registration, a ban of semi-automatic military style rifles, a ban on large clips, close the gun show loophole, better background checks and greater emphasis on mental health... Details will be coming out over the next few days... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 05 Jan 13 - 07:07 PM Applause from the peanut gallery, Bobert! Finally! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 06 Jan 13 - 07:00 AM Ignore the National Rifle Association. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 06 Jan 13 - 09:38 AM It's difficult to ignore the NRA because of the millions of people who have been pumped up with it's propaganda and are the foot soldiers of the NRA shouting everyone down who stands up for gun control... Some of them posting here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 06 Jan 13 - 10:21 AM Ignore the NRA. Stop telling people why they cannot ignore the NRA; of course they can. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:21 AM Maybe you could take a leaf out of the TeaPublicans' book, and start a series of ads going along the lines of: "The NRA is killing your kids, how long will you sit on you thumbs and let 'em do it? Blacken them in the way the TEA Party tried to blacken Obama until the US public is mad enough to stand up and demand stronger laws. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 07 Jan 13 - 08:05 AM Telling folks that are for gun control to just ignore the NRA isn't all that helpful since the NRA pretty much has controlled the entire conversation going back a long time... I think of the NRA more like cancer and if you ignore it then you lose... No, as much as we'd like to ignore them the reality is that we're going to have to out-frame, out-debate, out-punch and out-think the NRA if we are going to get any meaningful legislation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 07 Jan 13 - 09:15 AM BTW, just for some perspective: Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence annual budget.....$7M NRA's annual budget.....................................$250M But there's more... Money spent to influence national elections: Brady + all other gun control groups.....................$3M NRA......................................................$53M B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 07 Jan 13 - 11:13 AM SATIRE ALERT: Since people, not guns, kill people, I think we should reduce the number of people, not guns. Guns can help. Also, people, not WMDs, kill people. So we may need more WMDs. And fewer people. WMDs can help. SATIRE ALL-CLEAR. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Jan 13 - 03:19 PM After all, it's just a modest proposal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Greg F. Date: 07 Jan 13 - 03:51 PM Thank you, Jonathan Swift. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: olddude Date: 07 Jan 13 - 04:05 PM makes me wonder what happened. In the 1950's there were virtually no restriction on firearms except fully auto. Hell you could carry a loaded firearm nearly everywhere without a license. You could buy a .45 colt WWII surplus for 40 bucks out of a magazine and have it delivered to your door ... yet ...no problems. nothing like what we see today ... So what happened? I can't help but wonder why society went to hell in a hand basket |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:23 PM What happened is that America became an armed nation... It wasn't like that in the 50s... Yeah, people had hunting rifles and shotguns but pistols were rare... Might of fact, even though I had been shooting with an NRA shoot club since I was about 9 or 10 I never really saw a pistol until one of the instructors in the club brought in a muzzle loader dueling pistol and let each of us fire it once... That was the first real pistol I saw outside of seeing cops holsters... "Mama said the pistol was the devil's right hand"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:48 AM Finally! Man who shot at attackers to defend home is acquitted Legal experts say case could have implications for self-defence law in Canada THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA - An Ontario man who says he has been cleared of charges stemming from an attack on his home says he is proud of the precedent the case sets with regards to Canadians' right to armed selfdefence. Ian Thomson says a judge in Welland acquitted him on Thursday of firear ms-related charges in connection from a 2010 incident in which he fired three warning shots at a group of men who set his Ontario home ablaze with firebombs. Some experts say the ruling by Justice Tory Colvin could have wide-ranging implications for self-defence law in Canada. Thomson described the 2 1 2 -year legal battle as a 'horrible ordeal.' 'I fir mly believe they wanted to make an example of me, and to put the fear into every Canadian firearm owner that you are not allowed to defend yourself with a firear m,' he said. In August 2010, Thomson was sleeping in his Port Colborne, Ont., home when he awoke to the sound of Molotov cocktails exploding. Looking outside he saw part of his house and his porch ablaze, and four masked men outside. A for mer firear ms instructor, he quickly unlocked his gun safe, loaded a .38-calibre revolver and stepped outside. Thomson fired three war ning shots, which caused the men to flee, before dousing the flames with a g arden hose and calling 911. When police arrived he was taken into custody, and his collection of firear ms - assor ted handguns worth over $10,000 - and ammunition were seized and impounded. Soon thereafter, Crown attorneys charged Thomson with careless use of a firear m. These charges were later dropped, and he was charged with two counts of unsafe storage. Canada's leading firear ms lawyer Ed Burlew represented Thomson, and said the decision is a significant victory for Canadian gun owners. 'We all have a fundamental right to protect out property and our families,' he said. 'You've got to be able to defend yourself without fear of prosecution, and I think that's well established now.' Crown prosecutors argued Thomson had fallen afoul of safe storage regulations because, on the night of the incident, Thomson had a box of .38 Special ammunition in his bedside table. The judge ruled this was irrelevant, Burlew said, since Thomson's guns were all securely locked away in a gun safe. The four men who attacked Thomson were all sentenced to between two and four years in jail. Unless the Crown decides to appeal the case, Thomson's collection of guns must be returned to him within 30 days. Thomson said he came under intense pressure from police to enter a plea and accept a weapons prohibition, but refused due to his belief he was innocent. 'I would not cut a deal because I did not break the law,' he said. 'And - to use a pun - I stuck to my guns.' Thomson said he racked up about $60,000 in legal costs during the trial, but said much of that was donated by members of the National Firearms Association, the Canadian Sports Shooting Association (CSSA) and readers of the popular pro-firear ms online message board CanadianGunNutz.com. Many messages of support for Thomson were posted on the Internet by gun owners following the decision. 'This case is extremely significant and Mr. Thomson's victory is a victory for common sense and freedom for all Canadians,' the CSSA said in a statement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:15 AM Has anyone posted this clip yet from the Piers Morgan show? It takes about 2 minutes for Alex Jones to turn into a ranting lunatic. The gun lobby has GOT to find a better spokesman than this fool. All by himself he's proof that we need to something about guns AND mental health in this country. Alex Jones on Piers Morgan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:22 AM I saw the clip on MSNBC last night and, yes, this is exactly the kinda of hothead we don't want armed... BTW, in the Aurora shooting case a tape was played of a phone call from one of the folks in the theater to the police... You can hear the gunshots in the tape... Holmes was able to get off 30 rounds in 27 seconds... For those of you who believe that these semi-automatic rifles aren't assault rifles please tell us again why not... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: bobad Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:37 AM The fact that Jones owns 50 firearms is really comforting, isn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Elmore Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:39 AM Saw some spokesman (not La Pierre) for the NRA on MSNBC yesterday. He sneered his way through the show, not even trying to hide his contempt for the moderator or the woman taking the opposing position. Is The NRA so powerful that it doesn't have to do public relations? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:57 AM They don't do manners, courtesy, civility or anything else that might make them look like anything but the thugs and bullies that they are... Here's another viewpoint that I've talked about a couple times... Back 15 years ago in Virginia all these small penis/big gun guys got together regularity, strapped on their guns and then would converge on a restaurant in a show of force... Now, I'm sitting there with my 9 year old son and wife and, all of a sudden, not only do I not want to be in the company of so many boorish, loud assholes with guns strapped on, but I don't even want to pay for the meal... Until you are in the middle of one of these small penis/big gun circle jerks you really can't have a clue how these people are completely disrespecting your rights to go into a public restaurant and have a peaceful meal... That's the part that we aren't talkling about... It's the rights of the folks who just want to hang at a mall, see a movie, attend school or have a friggin' meal... I'm sorry, NRA, but your policies and power to inflict those policies on the country violate my rights!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 03:53 PM No comments on my post? Figures. Maybe if I tried to really dumb it down? Here goes. If you tell me I cannot defend my property or my family against any predator with a gun, well, fuck you. And, that IS what you are telling me NOW. Until YOU compromise with GOOD gun laws that protect ALL of us, fuck you. Come take my gun if ya got the balls... better bring a bigger gun when you do and ya had better know how to use it on accounta they don't call me deadeye fer nuthin. If any of youse don't understand you can substitute "law" for "gun" in any of that, you have no crediability in true debate. Good gun laws or NO gun laws. THAT is the line drawn NOW... IF, and only IF you anti gun nuts can understand and support that and stop weening about the NRA. Fuck the NRA. They are a pittance in the real actions that can solve this problem. Can't you see that YOU are the problem when you will not allow a man to defend his property and his family? Don't matter who the predator is... criminals or criminal governments. It don't get any dumber than that. I hope. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:28 PM I'm all for that, Gn-ze... I keep my gun right where I can get to it fast and would have no problems using it if I had to... But I don't need an AR15 to protect myself... I assume that if I had to use my gun to protect myself in my home against a guy with an AR15 that my shotgun would win out because I don't have to aim it all that much to take out someone in close range... And, unlike the folks who say they need an AR15 to protect themselves from the government, that is delusional... If the gov-mint wants to get you they can do it against yer AR15 without workin' up a sweat... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Wesley S Date: 09 Jan 13 - 07:35 PM AR-15 sales have gone through the roof. Most stores around here have sold out. And the gun manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank. Again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 07:39 PM Yup, sold out here in NC, as well... The NRA loves mass murderers... The NRA is in the murder business... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:33 PM Bobert... "But I don't need an AR15 to protect myself..." Why do you keep saying things like that in response to my posts? That had absolutely nothing to do with my post or my arguement(s). If ain't NObody gonna listen to common sense, I'll take my rifle and bullets and go home (fer ye ferriners, that's a play on words regarding a child's game called baseball). Kinda like... I gotta take a seventh inning stretch an have a piss an get another beer... watch my seat. If we get a run... cheer for me, eh? That's what I gotta do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:40 PM Settle down, gn-ze... We are on the same page here... The point is that the NRA wants you to buy an AR-15 or a Glock... Those are the big ticket items that makes the NRA richer... My point is the same as yours... Do what ya' gotta do with what you got... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: gnu Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:57 PM "We are on the same page here..." No, we are not on the same page... you are. And until you turn the page, you are gonna have to read the same old headlines. THAT is my point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 09 Jan 13 - 09:11 PM I don't get what you are saying, gn-ze??? I mean, yeah, I know what is going down with the NRA... They control the discussion... Nothin' new here... What am I supposed to do about that??? I have written my congress-people... I write letter to the Charlotte Observer... I mean, I get it that we're fucked... Don't blame me for that... I'm doin' what I can... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Charmion Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:33 AM Hey, gnu: The story from Welland concerns a man whose house was firebombed; he shot at several men who were throwing Molotov cocktails and had already set fire to his house and garage to drive them off so he could start fighting the fires. I think the judge's rationale was "appropriate use of force." That story sounds outlandish, but something very like it happened to my family about 1962. It was Hallowe'en, which could get very drunk out in our eastern Ontario village back then, and in the shank of the evening the local youth decided it would be very amusing to build a huge bonfire in the middle of Main Street, which was a stretch of the highway from Ottawa to Prescott. At first, kids with pickups brought stuff like bales of straw and old lumber. But they were building the pile right in front of our house, so they started wrenching the pickets off our fence and then somebody spotted our old boat upturned on two sawhorses in the garden. They were hauling the boat into the street when our Dad stepped out on the front stoop with a .303-calibre rifle and shouted at them to cease and desist. There were no police in Manotick back then. The nearest law-enforcement office was an Ontario Provincial Police station 20 miles away in Osgoode, which also had the nearest fire station. Dad shouted again, and raised the rifle under the porch light. Then he worked the bolt. Snickety-snack. The vandals started backing away, then began to run. In seconds, there was nothing but a heap of trash in the middle of Main Street. We kids watched the whole thing from the bedroom window. I was eight years old and did not understand what was going on, but my elder brother did, and he was terrified. Dad never told us if there was any ammunition in the five-round magazine, but I believe it was loaded; he would never have taken it out there if he wasn't prepared to use it. That winter, our parents began planning to move the family to the city. Manotick was developing big-city problems, said Dad, but still had only country ways to deal with them. Driving off vandals with a rifle was not his idea of middle-class life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: Bobert Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:42 AM Last night in Mt. Holly, NC, a drunk woman was arrested for shooting at passing cars... She didn't hit anyone but this is another part of the discussion... In Virginia, as well as other states, it's perfectly legal to carry your gun into a bar where there's a lot of drinkin' and arguing over dumb stuff... Hello!!! B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:34 AM Rush Limbaugh is ranting that Obama is about to sign an executive order to "take guns away from people" in violation of the Second Amendment. Since Limbaugh is a big boy and must know the difference between confiscating people's guns and regulating certain new sales, I assume that he must also know he's lying. Or as we say, "Growing his ratings." As for the Piers Morgan issue, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtyKofFih8Y Alex Jones now has 100,000 signatures on his petition to get Morgan deported for daring to advocate gun control. Those people obviously prefer the Second Amendment to the First, which is another reason we should be worried. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Shooting tragedies and guns From: GUEST,999 Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:44 AM "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." Kierkegaard |
