1. You don’t know what you are talking about.
2. Do you know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic? I seriously doubt it.
3. Kids have committed suicide from cyber-bullying? Shall we have a background check to post in the comments section of articles and require that people be 18 or 21 to exercise freedom of speech as well?
Ah, there it is, #3 – whataboutism. Safe to say these 2 NRA members not wanting to receive nasty emails and calls are just a couple of snowflakes, huh?
What ever happened to the days when parties could have a disagreement on a subject without fear of physical reprisal? Just more of the intolerance of tolerance.
I have also noticed in recent history that it would appear to be the most liberal among us at the forefront of these threats and intimidation. One could probably draw an analogy between the individuals in the KKK or Nazi party actions and those of the far left, we demand to have our way or else generation.
In the immortal words of Rodney King, “why can’t we all just get along?”
I don’t know that the legal age of drinking is protected by the Constitution, Bill of Rights, nor the amendments to the constitution. Maybe it’s there somewhere ?
I am a law abiding citizen. I served in the armed forces of our country. I am a member of the NRA. I am for reasonable laws to slow the flow of weapons if there is a way that could be done that would help eliminate people with mental issues from being able to buy guns, but by the same token, doesn’t infringe on my right to do so.
I’m not sure how to do that, but given the amount of and ability to gather and disseminate information, surely there must be a way.
Bullying seems to be a cause that crops up over and over in these shootings that involve kids. And the number of young black men/ boys that are killed annually don’t seem to make it to these statistics at all. I guess most of the weapons used in those killings are obtained illegally.
Anyway, put me down for: I’m all for utopia.
Jax – Just to answer your question…There is no constitutional protection to consume alcohol. The constitutional prohibition was repealed, obviously, but it’s still not guaranteed. What the Constitution says is that any rights not specifically enumerated in the constitution are reserved for the people and for the states. So states can do whatever they want so long as it’s not specifically prohibited by the constitution. There is no constitutional guarantee that the right to consume alcohol shall not be infringed. So a state can actually ban alcohol if they want, but the federal government can’t unless they bring back the prohibition amendment. While the constitution says that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, the liberal contention is over the first part of that which says “a free militia being vital to the security of a free state…” That leaves open the argument that the intent was to allow police and sheriffs (maybe even neighborhood watch) to bear arms, and not necessarily everyone. Not saying I agree or disagree just saying that’s where the interpretation gets a little contentious. Regardless of the result of this case, the police need to hunt down and arrest every one of these nutjobs making threats. No matter what your opinions are, if you try to silence your opposition to get your way, you don’t deserve to call yourself an American.
Sad that we live with a legal system that rewards users of baby powder tens of millions of dollars, yet provides immunity for liability to the manufacturers of AR-15 murder rifles, full well knowing that their rambo/military design will encourage nefarious use by the mentally unstable
Explain in detail with facts and data how ‘rambo/ mil design’ encourages nefarious use by the mentally unstable. I don’t agree with your ‘full well knowing’ assertion, made as if it were a fact. Nor should anyone else with an open mind.
Yogi, according to you, Boonedoggle doesn’t have to do what you are asking for.
APRIL 17, 2018 AT 9:15 PM
DNCs Coll(F)usion GPShip Strzok an IceberGowdy says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
0
1
I and anyone else posting here DO NOT have to justify our comments as being valid. If that were the case, I and everyone else could simply create rabbit holes by questioning the relevance of ANYTHING ANYONE writes.
you’d think people would be more embarrassed by having their hypocrisy shown I would be.
May 7, 2018 at 3:19 pm
Cut the Bias says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
NRA should be embarrassed, mocked, and scared.
They are about to (or already have?) appoint Oliver North, a literal traitor to America, and democracy in general, who criminally mishandled and misappropriated guns to those who never should have had them, to be their president.
This is who you choose to get into bed with while under increased scrutiny as a result of alleged ties back to a Russian Oligarch? LOL, good luck with that.
could someone on the right tell me why Oliver North is considered a hero? I”m being serious: I’ve never understood it. If anything, I’d think he’d be persona non grata.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Automatic rifles are already illegal. Try being informed and know that an AR-15 is semi-automatic
1. You don’t know what you are talking about.
2. Do you know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic? I seriously doubt it.
3. Kids have committed suicide from cyber-bullying? Shall we have a background check to post in the comments section of articles and require that people be 18 or 21 to exercise freedom of speech as well?
Ah, there it is, #3 – whataboutism. Safe to say these 2 NRA members not wanting to receive nasty emails and calls are just a couple of snowflakes, huh?
What ever happened to the days when parties could have a disagreement on a subject without fear of physical reprisal? Just more of the intolerance of tolerance.
I have also noticed in recent history that it would appear to be the most liberal among us at the forefront of these threats and intimidation. One could probably draw an analogy between the individuals in the KKK or Nazi party actions and those of the far left, we demand to have our way or else generation.
In the immortal words of Rodney King, “why can’t we all just get along?”
I don’t know that the legal age of drinking is protected by the Constitution, Bill of Rights, nor the amendments to the constitution. Maybe it’s there somewhere ?
I am a law abiding citizen. I served in the armed forces of our country. I am a member of the NRA. I am for reasonable laws to slow the flow of weapons if there is a way that could be done that would help eliminate people with mental issues from being able to buy guns, but by the same token, doesn’t infringe on my right to do so.
I’m not sure how to do that, but given the amount of and ability to gather and disseminate information, surely there must be a way.
Bullying seems to be a cause that crops up over and over in these shootings that involve kids. And the number of young black men/ boys that are killed annually don’t seem to make it to these statistics at all. I guess most of the weapons used in those killings are obtained illegally.
Anyway, put me down for: I’m all for utopia.
Jax – Just to answer your question…There is no constitutional protection to consume alcohol. The constitutional prohibition was repealed, obviously, but it’s still not guaranteed. What the Constitution says is that any rights not specifically enumerated in the constitution are reserved for the people and for the states. So states can do whatever they want so long as it’s not specifically prohibited by the constitution. There is no constitutional guarantee that the right to consume alcohol shall not be infringed. So a state can actually ban alcohol if they want, but the federal government can’t unless they bring back the prohibition amendment. While the constitution says that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, the liberal contention is over the first part of that which says “a free militia being vital to the security of a free state…” That leaves open the argument that the intent was to allow police and sheriffs (maybe even neighborhood watch) to bear arms, and not necessarily everyone. Not saying I agree or disagree just saying that’s where the interpretation gets a little contentious. Regardless of the result of this case, the police need to hunt down and arrest every one of these nutjobs making threats. No matter what your opinions are, if you try to silence your opposition to get your way, you don’t deserve to call yourself an American.
So we’re protecting those who threaten but it’s question if we should be protecting those threatened. Sounds liberally reasonable.
Sad that we live with a legal system that rewards users of baby powder tens of millions of dollars, yet provides immunity for liability to the manufacturers of AR-15 murder rifles, full well knowing that their rambo/military design will encourage nefarious use by the mentally unstable
Explain in detail with facts and data how ‘rambo/ mil design’ encourages nefarious use by the mentally unstable. I don’t agree with your ‘full well knowing’ assertion, made as if it were a fact. Nor should anyone else with an open mind.
Yogi, according to you, Boonedoggle doesn’t have to do what you are asking for.
APRIL 17, 2018 AT 9:15 PM
DNCs Coll(F)usion GPShip Strzok an IceberGowdy says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
0
1
I and anyone else posting here DO NOT have to justify our comments as being valid. If that were the case, I and everyone else could simply create rabbit holes by questioning the relevance of ANYTHING ANYONE writes.
these verbatim quotes never get old
you’d think people would be more embarrassed by having their hypocrisy shown I would be.
NRA should be embarrassed, mocked, and scared.
They are about to (or already have?) appoint Oliver North, a literal traitor to America, and democracy in general, who criminally mishandled and misappropriated guns to those who never should have had them, to be their president.
This is who you choose to get into bed with while under increased scrutiny as a result of alleged ties back to a Russian Oligarch? LOL, good luck with that.
could someone on the right tell me why Oliver North is considered a hero? I”m being serious: I’ve never understood it. If anything, I’d think he’d be persona non grata.