Kerry: US Will Sign UN Arms Treaty

[JakeStarkey]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

 

[TemplarKormac]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

And you repay insults with insults? How exactly does that absolve you?

 

[OriginalShroom]

A. (from your own link, btw): The treaty would require countries that ratify it to establish national regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms and components and to regulate arms brokers, but it will not explicitly control the domestic use of weapons in any country.

B. Treaties with foreign nations cannot override the constitution. It's in the constitution.

Shhhhh.... telling the gun nuts that guns are bad makes them cry.

I am very protective of the Second Amendment and oppose most gun control measures from the Left.

However, the loons who say this treaty violates the Second Amendment are gullible fools who won't even provide evidence for their claims precisely because there isn't any.

BAWWWAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAA

"protective of the Second Amendment" :::: Folded in half laughing :::::::

I can't beleive that you actually said that with a straight face.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

And you repay insults with insults? How exactly does that absolve you?

My first paragraph points out how bigreb is at fault, correctly.

The second paragraph adds to the discussion.

 

[YoungRepublican]

And you say you're a Republican? Man I hate liars.

I am a registered Republican and have voted for the last two Republican Presidential nominees. I also cast a vote for my current Repub governor. I was simply pointing out the irony that these backwards nations oppose this treaty as well as the backwards sub-culture that brews in the GOP.

Most people on this board will tell you that the only thing worse than a liberal to me is a radical fringe conservative. A.K.A the NRA. I believe these people are the greatest determent to the longevity of the GOP and unfortunately a lot of this board is made up of those people. My political affiliation does not stop at the (R) next to my name, unlike many others it goes a little deeper than that.

But then you advocate a woman's right to "choose" on another thread, then you come here advocating advancements on the rights of law abiding gun owners? You can vote for a Republican, but that doesn't automatically make you one. You are willing to let the President further violate the boundaries of his power by signing a treaty without approval from the Senate? Anyone who advocates government excess is either a progressive or a liberal. And how did you vote for McCain in 2008? You would have been only 17 years of age on Super Tuesday of that year. That is only unless you were to turn 18 by election day, or you turned 18 on or before Super Tuesday of course.

My political affiliation changed from far right conservative to Conservative Libertarian in little less than a year, because it wasn't "fringe conservatism" that served as the detriment to the party, it was the unwillingness of the party to find common ground. A party cannot succeed when it so oft divided. Your language tells me that your attitudes towards others of your own party serve as the detriment. This country suffers from the same via the two party system. I merely see the partisan macrocosm existing within GOP as a great example of what goes on between Democrats and Republicans on a daily basis. Therefore I chose to disabuse myself from it.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

-Abraham Lincoln, Republican

Maybe if Republicans were more united, as the name of our country implies, perhaps I would reconsider, but when I hear of people like you willing to give up the core values of their party for the sake of progress, that time isn't now. You can compromise without giving up what you truly believe in. However, you breed derision within the GOP when you refer to people in your party with slightly different viewpoints as a "backwards subculture." I refuse to take part in such behavior. Perhaps if there were more grownups instead of politicians in the Republican party, I would reconsider. But not before.

My birthday is October 15th so yeah.. I was old enough. I support a women's right to choose because, statistics and logic has told me that it is the correct the decision. I don't make up opinions because other Republicans have them, I think about them. Yes, I am socially progressive, much like every other Young Republican out there. We look at things differently as far as social issues are concerned. It is those in the NRA, Tea Party and Koch army that have made me angrier and angrier with those in this party. I do not understand how you people call yourselves Republicans when Reagan, the hero of the party, was more liberal than the majority of these Tea Partiers.

The establishment of the Libertarian Party is probably the best thing for us at this time. This way we can just go our separate ways. Us in the GOP will continue to try and convert moderate Dems to the financial logic we present without having to answer the issues that radicals in our party bring to the table. Keep nominating Gary Johnson or whatever with his 10 k votes and we can go back to trying to win elections.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I am a registered Republican and have voted for the last two Republican Presidential nominees. I also cast a vote for my current Repub governor. I was simply pointing out the irony that these backwards nations oppose this treaty as well as the backwards sub-culture that brews in the GOP.

Most people on this board will tell you that the only thing worse than a liberal to me is a radical fringe conservative. A.K.A the NRA. I believe these people are the greatest determent to the longevity of the GOP and unfortunately a lot of this board is made up of those people. My political affiliation does not stop at the (R) next to my name, unlike many others it goes a little deeper than that.

But then you advocate a woman's right to "choose" on another thread, then you come here advocating advancements on the rights of law abiding gun owners? You can vote for a Republican, but that doesn't automatically make you one. You are willing to let the President further violate the boundaries of his power by signing a treaty without approval from the Senate? Anyone who advocates government excess is either a progressive or a liberal. And how did you vote for McCain in 2008? You would have been only 17 years of age on Super Tuesday of that year. That is only unless you were to turn 18 by election day, or you turned 18 on or before Super Tuesday of course.

My political affiliation changed from far right conservative to Conservative Libertarian in little less than a year, because it wasn't "fringe conservatism" that served as the detriment to the party, it was the unwillingness of the party to find common ground. A party cannot succeed when it so oft divided. Your language tells me that your attitudes towards others of your own party serve as the detriment. This country suffers from the same via the two party system. I merely see the partisan macrocosm existing within GOP as a great example of what goes on between Democrats and Republicans on a daily basis. Therefore I chose to disabuse myself from it.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

-Abraham Lincoln, Republican

Maybe if Republicans were more united, as the name of our country implies, perhaps I would reconsider, but when I hear of people like you willing to give up the core values of their party for the sake of progress, that time isn't now. You can compromise without giving up what you truly believe in. However, you breed derision within the GOP when you refer to people in your party with slightly different viewpoints as a "backwards subculture." I refuse to take part in such behavior. Perhaps if there were more grownups instead of politicians in the Republican party, I would reconsider. But not before.

My birthday is October 15th so yeah. I was old enough. 1. I support a women's right to choose because, statistics and logic has told me that it is the correct the decision. 2. I don't make up opinions because other Republicans have them, I think about them. 3.Yes, I am socially progressive, much like every other Young Republican out there. 4.We look at things differently as far as social issues are concerned. It is those in the NRA, Tea Party and Koch army that have made me angrier and angrier with those in this party.5. I do not understand how you people call yourselves Republicans when Reagan, the hero of the party, was more liberal than the majority of these Tea Partiers.

6.The establishment of the Libertarian Party is probably the best thing for us at this time. This way we can just go our separate ways. 7. Us in the GOP will continue to try and convert moderate Dems to the financial logic we present without having to answer the issues that radicals in our party bring to the table. 8. Keep nominating Gary Johnson or whatever with his 10 k votes and we can go back to trying to win elections.

1. So, what are these statistics you speak of? Logic alone is not an argument, facts supporting that logic, or facts and logic, however; are. Neither of which you have proven to me yet.

2. As stated in my previous response, I will consider your opinions made up until you refute them.

3. I am only three years older than you, even I cannot fathom such thinking as "progress" as so defined by you and your so-called "young republican" friends. Progress is positive, not destructive.

4. Indeed. I think the party should be unified, not rife with division. My father is a member of the NRA, he is as nice as a person you could ever meet, so why should he be blamed for the alleged destruction of the Republican party? Your anger at the NRA is simply anger at their beliefs, not for any other reason. Your anger at Koch is simply anger at their wealth, not for any other purpose. And why aren't you angry at Monsanto?

5. I never said I was a Republican, now did I? As for Reagan, he was anti-abortion, pro capitalism and anti government. He knew the government needed to function, which is why he raised taxes. But not in Liberal tradition, he literally fixed the economy.

6. Your unwillingness to meet in the middle will be your undoing. As well as the GOP's. The cancer in a person's blood does not discriminate against itself, it proceeds in its deadly task. Even a disease has more resolve than the party that calls themselves Republican or Democrat. Please for pete's sake, stop bickering with each other.

7. See No. 6.

8. I didn't nominate Gary Johnson, I voted for Romney and McCain, that is until I found out how fruitless voting for establishment candidates could be. A party that can't meet with everyone at the table is like saying King Arthur sought the Holy Grail with only half of his knights.

 

[YoungRepublican]

But then you advocate a woman's right to "choose" on another thread, then you come here advocating advancements on the rights of law abiding gun owners? You can vote for a Republican, but that doesn't automatically make you one. You are willing to let the President further violate the boundaries of his power by signing a treaty without approval from the Senate? Anyone who advocates government excess is either a progressive or a liberal. And how did you vote for McCain in 2008? You would have been only 17 years of age on Super Tuesday of that year. That is only unless you were to turn 18 by election day, or you turned 18 on or before Super Tuesday of course.

My political affiliation changed from far right conservative to Conservative Libertarian in little less than a year, because it wasn't "fringe conservatism" that served as the detriment to the party, it was the unwillingness of the party to find common ground. A party cannot succeed when it so oft divided. Your language tells me that your attitudes towards others of your own party serve as the detriment. This country suffers from the same via the two party system. I merely see the partisan macrocosm existing within GOP as a great example of what goes on between Democrats and Republicans on a daily basis. Therefore I chose to disabuse myself from it.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

-Abraham Lincoln, Republican

Maybe if Republicans were more united, as the name of our country implies, perhaps I would reconsider, but when I hear of people like you willing to give up the core values of their party for the sake of progress, that time isn't now. You can compromise without giving up what you truly believe in. However, you breed derision within the GOP when you refer to people in your party with slightly different viewpoints as a "backwards subculture." I refuse to take part in such behavior. Perhaps if there were more grownups instead of politicians in the Republican party, I would reconsider. But not before.

My birthday is October 15th so yeah. I was old enough. 1. I support a women's right to choose because, statistics and logic has told me that it is the correct the decision. 2. I don't make up opinions because other Republicans have them, I think about them. 3.Yes, I am socially progressive, much like every other Young Republican out there. 4.We look at things differently as far as social issues are concerned. It is those in the NRA, Tea Party and Koch army that have made me angrier and angrier with those in this party.5. I do not understand how you people call yourselves Republicans when Reagan, the hero of the party, was more liberal than the majority of these Tea Partiers.

6.The establishment of the Libertarian Party is probably the best thing for us at this time. This way we can just go our separate ways. 7. Us in the GOP will continue to try and convert moderate Dems to the financial logic we present without having to answer the issues that radicals in our party bring to the table. Keep nominating Gary Johnson or whatever with his 10 k votes and we can go back to trying to win elections.

1. So, what are these statistics you speak of? Logic alone is not an argument, facts supporting that logic, or facts and logic, however; are. Neither of which you have proven to me yet.

2. As stated in my previous response, I will consider your opinions made up until you refute them.

3. I am only three years older than you, even I cannot fathom such thinking as "progress" as so defined by you and your so-called "young republican" friends. Progress is positive, not destructive.

4. Indeed. I think the party should be unified, not rife with division. My father is a member of the NRA, he is as nice as a person you could ever meet, so why should he be blamed for the alleged destruction of the Republican party? Your anger at the NRA is simply anger at their beliefs, not for any other reason. Your anger at Koch is simply anger at their wealth, not for any other purpose. And why aren't you angry at Monsanto?

5. I never said I was a Republican, now did I?


6. Your unwillingness to meet in the middle will be your undoing. As well as the GOP's. The cancer in a person's blood does not discriminate against itself, it proceeds in its deadly task. Even a disease has more resolve than the party that calls themselves Republican or Democrat. Please for pete's sake, stop bickering with each other.

7. See No. 6.


8. I didn't nominate Gary Johnson, I voted for Romney and McCain, that is until I found out how fruitless voting for establishment candidates could be. A party that can't meet with everyone at the table is like saying King Arthur sought the Holy Grail with only half of his knights.

You have yet to provide any statistics either, but that is because we have been using mostly anecdotal evidence. I support gun regulation because it makes sense. Guns kill twice as many people then cancer does in this country. WE kill more people via firearm than any, repeat ANY other nation in the industrialized world. Heck just take a look at this graph.http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/27091/large/GunHomicideByCountry4_7_13.jpg?1365387268. We have a gun problem and we have a bigger problem, we cant admit it. We love our guns. I live in a nice NJ suburb and have friends with guns, but I also live next to Trenton. A place that kills so many kids via firearms yearly, its absurd. Its even more absurd that they can just go across the border to PA, grab a gun from some random auction, no paper work needed, come back and kill whoever.

Now, progressive in the sense of gay-rights, marijuana, abortion. I have bigger issues to deal with like college loans and the economy to be worried about wether gays get married or not. Socially progressive means moving our society forward, not backwards. Which is what we would be doing if we were to make guns more available

Yes, my anger is with the NRA. The policies they support so that some of their members wont have to wait in line a little longer or can sell their weapons at auction is directly related to inner city violence that kills more kids every year. 70% of our homicides are committed by guns, most other nations like the U.K. hover around 11 percent.

My unwillingness to meet in the middle of people in my party is justified because of the nonsense that they spew on a daily basis. They say that they are Republicans, but if Eisenhower or a Republican from an older generation were running today, heck even Reagan, they would label them as a RINO. You cant do anything with a person like that.

If you don't want to vote for establishment candidates then you are just wasting your vote. Ya, I get it, no vote is wasted, blah blah, but it is. If the Tea Partiers or Libertarians don't want to get on board with a sensible candidate who doesn't go Santorum crazy on social issues or has the foreign policy of crazy ass Rand Paul, then hop off, we don't need you.

 

[Saigon]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

Indeed.

The treaty's quality is reflected in the fact that only terrorists and the NRA support it.

I just put the trolls on ignore mode.

 

[jon_berzerk]

My birthday is October 15th so yeah. I was old enough. 1. I support a women's right to choose because, statistics and logic has told me that it is the correct the decision. 2. I don't make up opinions because other Republicans have them, I think about them. 3.Yes, I am socially progressive, much like every other Young Republican out there. 4.We look at things differently as far as social issues are concerned. It is those in the NRA, Tea Party and Koch army that have made me angrier and angrier with those in this party.5. I do not understand how you people call yourselves Republicans when Reagan, the hero of the party, was more liberal than the majority of these Tea Partiers.

6.The establishment of the Libertarian Party is probably the best thing for us at this time. This way we can just go our separate ways. 7. Us in the GOP will continue to try and convert moderate Dems to the financial logic we present without having to answer the issues that radicals in our party bring to the table. Keep nominating Gary Johnson or whatever with his 10 k votes and we can go back to trying to win elections.

1. So, what are these statistics you speak of? Logic alone is not an argument, facts supporting that logic, or facts and logic, however; are. Neither of which you have proven to me yet.

2. As stated in my previous response, I will consider your opinions made up until you refute them.

3. I am only three years older than you, even I cannot fathom such thinking as "progress" as so defined by you and your so-called "young republican" friends. Progress is positive, not destructive.

4. Indeed. I think the party should be unified, not rife with division. My father is a member of the NRA, he is as nice as a person you could ever meet, so why should he be blamed for the alleged destruction of the Republican party? Your anger at the NRA is simply anger at their beliefs, not for any other reason. Your anger at Koch is simply anger at their wealth, not for any other purpose. And why aren't you angry at Monsanto?

5. I never said I was a Republican, now did I?


6. Your unwillingness to meet in the middle will be your undoing. As well as the GOP's. The cancer in a person's blood does not discriminate against itself, it proceeds in its deadly task. Even a disease has more resolve than the party that calls themselves Republican or Democrat. Please for pete's sake, stop bickering with each other.

7. See No. 6.


8. I didn't nominate Gary Johnson, I voted for Romney and McCain, that is until I found out how fruitless voting for establishment candidates could be. A party that can't meet with everyone at the table is like saying King Arthur sought the Holy Grail with only half of his knights.

You have yet to provide any statistics either, but that is because we have been using mostly anecdotal evidence. I support gun regulation because it makes sense. Guns kill twice as many people then cancer does in this country. WE kill more people via firearm than any, repeat ANY other nation in the industrialized world. Heck just take a look at this graph.http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/27091/large/GunHomicideByCountry4_7_13.jpg?1365387268. We have a gun problem and we have a bigger problem, we cant admit it. We love our guns. I live in a nice NJ suburb and have friends with guns, but I also live next to Trenton. A place that kills so many kids via firearms yearly, its absurd. Its even more absurd that they can just go across the border to PA, grab a gun from some random auction, no paper work needed, come back and kill whoever.

Now, progressive in the sense of gay-rights, marijuana, abortion. I have bigger issues to deal with like college loans and the economy to be worried about wether gays get married or not. Socially progressive means moving our society forward, not backwards. Which is what we would be doing if we were to make guns more available

Yes, my anger is with the NRA. The policies they support so that some of their members wont have to wait in line a little longer or can sell their weapons at auction is directly related to inner city violence that kills more kids every year. 70% of our homicides are committed by guns, most other nations like the U.K. hover around 11 percent.

My unwillingness to meet in the middle of people in my party is justified because of the nonsense that they spew on a daily basis. They say that they are Republicans, but if Eisenhower or a Republican from an older generation were running today, heck even Reagan, they would label them as a RINO. You cant do anything with a person like that.

If you don't want to vote for establishment candidates then you are just wasting your vote. Ya, I get it, no vote is wasted, blah blah, but it is. If the Tea Partiers or Libertarians don't want to get on board with a sensible candidate who doesn't go Santorum crazy on social issues or has the foreign policy of crazy ass Rand Paul, then hop off, we don't need you.

how come those killings are not happening in pa where they get the guns from

like they are in trenton

 

[YoungRepublican]

1. So, what are these statistics you speak of? Logic alone is not an argument, facts supporting that logic, or facts and logic, however; are. Neither of which you have proven to me yet.

2. As stated in my previous response, I will consider your opinions made up until you refute them.

3. I am only three years older than you, even I cannot fathom such thinking as "progress" as so defined by you and your so-called "young republican" friends. Progress is positive, not destructive.

4. Indeed. I think the party should be unified, not rife with division. My father is a member of the NRA, he is as nice as a person you could ever meet, so why should he be blamed for the alleged destruction of the Republican party? Your anger at the NRA is simply anger at their beliefs, not for any other reason. Your anger at Koch is simply anger at their wealth, not for any other purpose. And why aren't you angry at Monsanto?

5. I never said I was a Republican, now did I?


6. Your unwillingness to meet in the middle will be your undoing. As well as the GOP's. The cancer in a person's blood does not discriminate against itself, it proceeds in its deadly task. Even a disease has more resolve than the party that calls themselves Republican or Democrat. Please for pete's sake, stop bickering with each other.

7. See No. 6.


8. I didn't nominate Gary Johnson, I voted for Romney and McCain, that is until I found out how fruitless voting for establishment candidates could be. A party that can't meet with everyone at the table is like saying King Arthur sought the Holy Grail with only half of his knights.

You have yet to provide any statistics either, but that is because we have been using mostly anecdotal evidence. I support gun regulation because it makes sense. Guns kill twice as many people then cancer does in this country. WE kill more people via firearm than any, repeat ANY other nation in the industrialized world. Heck just take a look at this graph.http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/27091/large/GunHomicideByCountry4_7_13.jpg?1365387268. We have a gun problem and we have a bigger problem, we cant admit it. We love our guns. I live in a nice NJ suburb and have friends with guns, but I also live next to Trenton. A place that kills so many kids via firearms yearly, its absurd. Its even more absurd that they can just go across the border to PA, grab a gun from some random auction, no paper work needed, come back and kill whoever.

Now, progressive in the sense of gay-rights, marijuana, abortion. I have bigger issues to deal with like college loans and the economy to be worried about wether gays get married or not. Socially progressive means moving our society forward, not backwards. Which is what we would be doing if we were to make guns more available

Yes, my anger is with the NRA. The policies they support so that some of their members wont have to wait in line a little longer or can sell their weapons at auction is directly related to inner city violence that kills more kids every year. 70% of our homicides are committed by guns, most other nations like the U.K. hover around 11 percent.

My unwillingness to meet in the middle of people in my party is justified because of the nonsense that they spew on a daily basis. They say that they are Republicans, but if Eisenhower or a Republican from an older generation were running today, heck even Reagan, they would label them as a RINO. You cant do anything with a person like that.

If you don't want to vote for establishment candidates then you are just wasting your vote. Ya, I get it, no vote is wasted, blah blah, but it is. If the Tea Partiers or Libertarians don't want to get on board with a sensible candidate who doesn't go Santorum crazy on social issues or has the foreign policy of crazy ass Rand Paul, then hop off, we don't need you.

how come those killings are not happening in pa where they get the guns from

like they are in trenton

Poverty...

 

[TemplarKormac]

My birthday is October 15th so yeah. I was old enough. 1. I support a women's right to choose because, statistics and logic has told me that it is the correct the decision. 2. I don't make up opinions because other Republicans have them, I think about them. 3.Yes, I am socially progressive, much like every other Young Republican out there. 4.We look at things differently as far as social issues are concerned. It is those in the NRA, Tea Party and Koch army that have made me angrier and angrier with those in this party.5. I do not understand how you people call yourselves Republicans when Reagan, the hero of the party, was more liberal than the majority of these Tea Partiers.

6.The establishment of the Libertarian Party is probably the best thing for us at this time. This way we can just go our separate ways. 7. Us in the GOP will continue to try and convert moderate Dems to the financial logic we present without having to answer the issues that radicals in our party bring to the table. Keep nominating Gary Johnson or whatever with his 10 k votes and we can go back to trying to win elections.

I will battle anecdotes with anecdotes until someone uses a factual argument. Plain and simple.

1. So, what are these statistics you speak of? Logic alone is not an argument, facts supporting that logic, or facts and logic, however; are. Neither of which you have proven to me yet.

2. As stated in my previous response, I will consider your opinions made up until you refute them.

3. I am only three years older than you, even I cannot fathom such thinking as "progress" as so defined by you and your so-called "young republican" friends. Progress is positive, not destructive.

4. Indeed. I think the party should be unified, not rife with division. My father is a member of the NRA, he is as nice as a person you could ever meet, so why should he be blamed for the alleged destruction of the Republican party? Your anger at the NRA is simply anger at their beliefs, not for any other reason. Your anger at Koch is simply anger at their wealth, not for any other purpose. And why aren't you angry at Monsanto?

5. I never said I was a Republican, now did I?


6. Your unwillingness to meet in the middle will be your undoing. As well as the GOP's. The cancer in a person's blood does not discriminate against itself, it proceeds in its deadly task. Even a disease has more resolve than the party that calls themselves Republican or Democrat. Please for pete's sake, stop bickering with each other.

7. See No. 6.


8. I didn't nominate Gary Johnson, I voted for Romney and McCain, that is until I found out how fruitless voting for establishment candidates could be. A party that can't meet with everyone at the table is like saying King Arthur sought the Holy Grail with only half of his knights.

You have yet to provide any statistics either, but that is because we have been using mostly anecdotal evidence. 1.I support gun regulation because it makes sense. Guns kill twice as many people then cancer does in this country. 2. WE kill more people via firearm than any, repeat ANY other nation in the industrialized world. Heck just take a look at this graph.http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/27091/large/GunHomicideByCountry4_7_13.jpg?1365387268. We have a gun problem and we have a bigger problem, we cant admit it. We love our guns. I live in a nice NJ suburb and have friends with guns, but I also live next to Trenton. 3.A place that kills so many kids via firearms yearly, its absurd. Its even more absurd that they can just go across the border to PA, grab a gun from some random auction, no paper work needed, come back and kill whoever.

Now, progressive in the sense of gay-rights, marijuana, abortion. I have bigger issues to deal with like college loans and the economy to be worried about whether gays get married or not. 4. Socially progressive means moving our society forward, not backwards. Which is what we would be doing if we were to make guns more available.

1a.Yes, my anger is with the NRA. The policies they support so that some of their members wont have to wait in line a little longer or can sell their weapons at auction is directly related to inner city violence that kills more kids every year. 70% of our homicides are committed by guns, most other nations like the U.K. hover around 11 percent.

5. My unwillingness to meet in the middle of people in my party is justified because of the nonsense that they spew on a daily basis. They say that they are Republicans, but if Eisenhower or a Republican from an older generation were running today, heck even Reagan, they would label them as a RINO. You cant do anything with a person like that.

6. If you don't want to vote for establishment candidates then you are just wasting your vote. Ya, I get it, no vote is wasted, blah blah, but it is. If the Tea Partiers or Libertarians don't want to get on board with a sensible candidate who doesn't go Santorum crazy on social issues or has the foreign policy of crazy ass Rand Paul, then hop off, we don't need you.

1. No. Over 570,000 people died of the disease in 2011 according to the CDC.

1a. Once again, don't doctor the data. Cancer kills more children than inner city violence.

2. Data provided by activist organizations are not acceptable. If you can, research data by the CDC. That chart is disingenuous at best. If we use criteria such as "industrialized" and "overall" we get two completely different pictures.

3. Out of a population of 315 million, you call 11,000 deaths from gun violence "many"? Who are you to say what a law abiding citizen does with his firearms? Unless they are a danger to themselves or others, you have no standing!

4. How can a society move forward when you can't seek unity among members of your own party?

5. You'll have to find better justification than that. Youths such as yourself are still in that "rebel" stage. You are unwilling and uncompromising. Your way or no way. I take heart in believing that you will grow out of that mindset. As I asked before, how does a party succeed or "progress" when it's own members cannot stop bickering with themselves?

6. Is there any reason to insult them? This is absolutely pathetic. There is no need for this kind of behavior. Good thing I had enough sense to grow out of such puerility and leave; spare myself the disgrace. I will vote for whomever I wish, your arrogance is clearly evident when you tell me what candidate my vote would be more effective for. That is out of line, young one. That is the entire problem with your party. If someone doesn't fundamentally agree with your principles, they are outcasts. How rudimentary. How crude. How base. You are naive, and furthermore have a lot of growing up to do before you can go on to lead any political party. Your party should learn to be more accepting of those with so-called "fringe" beliefs. The man who wrote the 13th Amendment? A radical Republican of his day. The 13th Amendment passed overwhelmingly and ended slavery. Don't sit there and lecture other people on things you've barely had enough time to experience.

 

[TemplarKormac]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

And you repay insults with insults? How exactly does that absolve you?

My first paragraph points out how bigreb is at fault, correctly.

The second paragraph adds to the discussion.

Lol. Jake. But you responded in kind. So in reality what you have done is disprove yourself, not the other guy. Bigreb might be bit forceful with his language, but at least he's right about you.

A treaty that is signed without the advice or the concurrence of the Senate is a constitutional violation. It is irrelevant what its aims and goals are.

 

[Rct_Tsoul]

John Kerry is a good man you can trust ................ now all we need is the sheeple to trust in the authorities as in this video:
[ame=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-OpC6tnJ9c&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Trust in the Authorities[/ame]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

John Kerry is a good man you can trust ................ now all we need is the sheeple to trust in the authorities as in this video:
Trust in the Authorities

Hitler was consider by some democrats to be a good man.
FDR
Joe Kennedy

 

[bigrebnc1775]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

dumb ass I call it like I see it if it calls for an insult it's because you deserve it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

bigrebnc is very big on insults, particularly when he is not adding to the discussion. This is what he does. Not a smart person at all.

The discussion is clear: the treaty is good, it limit terrorists from getting firearms, and it is not unconstitutional.

Indeed.

The treaty's quality is reflected in the fact that only terrorists and the NRA support it.

I just put the trolls on ignore mode.

When a person keeps pushing the same thing over and over even when it's been debunked are trolls.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes, we know, that's on the PostIt note stuck on your computer.
Don't forget the one next to it that reminds you to put your pants on.

Are you drunk or is grammar a new thing you're learning?

Ah, so now you're onto the big page of insults on your wall?
The irony of this one is particularly good.

Go back too your sheep she misses you.

 

[idb]

Are you drunk or is grammar a new thing you're learning?

Ah, so now you're onto the big page of insults on your wall?
The irony of this one is particularly good.

Go back too your sheep she misses you.

Hah!
You've used that one already.
You should cross them out as you go so that you don't repeat yourself.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ah, so now you're onto the big page of insults on your wall?
The irony of this one is particularly good.

Go back too your sheep she misses you.

Hah!
You've used that one already.
You should cross them out as you go so that you don't repeat yourself.

It doesn't matter how many times it's used.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, that is what you are doing, bigrebnc, as in #199 above and many before. You are trolling. Now let it go.

Kerry says US will sign UN treaty on arms regulation despite lawmaker opposition

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...eaty-as-it-opens-for-signature/#ixzz2VRWTIkWU

This is a good treaty, it does not affect our 2d Amendment rights.