SassyIrishLass
Diamond Member
- Mar 31, 2009
- 113,772
- 101,590
- 3,605
- Banned
- #21
I wonder if Obama and the gun grabbers realize this shooting took place in....wait for it.... a gun free zone?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"previously held as slaves"?
wtf does that have to do with anything?
"previously held as slaves"?
wtf does that have to do with anything?
People who HAD it and then lose it-----often
DO RESENT the loss. No people gladly
relinquish the loss of a social perk. The south
was a caste society. Some people are
very attached to "caste" issues and all people get bent out of shape when they lose perks------there may have been some
left over stuff in some relative of the jerk.
Obama couldn't care less. This tragedy just gives him another stage. He's the president, he has to act concerned and offer something to the people that lost friends and family. "GUNS" have become a very popular target. "GUNS" have become the whipping boy for all crimes. In other words, "get rid of the guns, and you'll get rid of murder and crimes". Hell, guns are available from the trucks of cars, on the streets, for sale on the internet, and they cross back and forth across our borders. Does anyone really believe that the bad guys are going to turn in their guns? Obama is a clown act, plain and simple. He couldn't stop a puff of wind.I wonder if Obama and the gun grabbers realize this shooting took place in....wait for it.... a gun free zone?
"previously held as slaves"?
wtf does that have to do with anything?
People who HAD it and then lose it-----often
DO RESENT the loss. No people gladly
relinquish the loss of a social perk. The south
was a caste society. Some people are
very attached to "caste" issues and all people get bent out of shape when they lose perks------there may have been some
left over stuff in some relative of the jerk.
the shooter was 21. he never "had it".
the loss of any social perks occurred long before he was born.
Why is it dangerous? Please explain. FYI - It's the people that need watching and controlling, not guns. Hell, my guns harm no one. I know many people with guns and those guns harm no one. The problem is NOT guns, the problem is people. How many responsible people do you believe live in this country? Before you answer that question, please consider that Obama wasn't elected once, but he was elected twice. Now, tell me how many responsible people live in America?The blatant promotion of guns and their use everywhere is dangerous. There is no serious movement to seize firearms. There is massive desire for a higher level of responsibility.
Hell, my relatives talked about planting crops and running moonshine. I never did either, nor wanted to. What difference does it make what was discussed between ourselves and relatives? I talk politics with my relatives, and none of them hold public office."previously held as slaves"?
wtf does that have to do with anything?
People who HAD it and then lose it-----often
DO RESENT the loss. No people gladly
relinquish the loss of a social perk. The south
was a caste society. Some people are
very attached to "caste" issues and all people get bent out of shape when they lose perks------there may have been some
left over stuff in some relative of the jerk.
the shooter was 21. he never "had it".
the loss of any social perks occurred long before he was born.
so? if he had a relative as a child who talked about "the good old days" when
"dem nigras knew their place"-----that would
be enough
So he was an armed crazy? Seems like a background check would have taken care of the that.It's doubtful that he came from a racist family. He came from a family that thought his behavior was controlled by medication. That medication just so happened to be the same kind of medication that so many other mass shooters have been on.
Anything can be the subject of a fixation. The man, just a couple if days ago, fixated on the police and opened fire on a police station. No one suggested that he came from a cop hating family.
Considering the people responsible for conducting background checks, it's very easy to understand how "a crazy" can get a weapon.So he was an armed crazy? Seems like a background check would have taken care of the that.It's doubtful that he came from a racist family. He came from a family that thought his behavior was controlled by medication. That medication just so happened to be the same kind of medication that so many other mass shooters have been on.
Anything can be the subject of a fixation. The man, just a couple if days ago, fixated on the police and opened fire on a police station. No one suggested that he came from a cop hating family.
What symbol was displayed on the front of his car?
Yea, correct. And, he was wearing a hoodie in the month of June in the south. A dead give-away that he was up to something.What symbol was displayed on the front of his car?
Hmm..mmm...I noticed he had a bowl haircut...that must be important.
Hell, my relatives talked about planting crops and running moonshine. I never did either, nor wanted to. What difference does it make what was discussed between ourselves and relatives? I talk politics with my relatives, and none of them hold public office."previously held as slaves"?
wtf does that have to do with anything?
People who HAD it and then lose it-----often
DO RESENT the loss. No people gladly
relinquish the loss of a social perk. The south
was a caste society. Some people are
very attached to "caste" issues and all people get bent out of shape when they lose perks------there may have been some
left over stuff in some relative of the jerk.
the shooter was 21. he never "had it".
the loss of any social perks occurred long before he was born.
so? if he had a relative as a child who talked about "the good old days" when
"dem nigras knew their place"-----that would
be enough
Yea, correct. And, he was wearing a hoodie in the month of June in the south. A dead give-away that he was up to something.
I see. So, since we're no longer allowed to hitch our horses outside the courthouse, it has to effect us in a very angry manner. And, we're no longer allowed to slaughter the American Indians either. We can't even slaughter the bison any longer. We can't steal the American Indian's land any longer. Boy, we've lost a lot of perks over the years. Hell, we can't even buy and sell people any longer, that hurts.Hell, my relatives talked about planting crops and running moonshine. I never did either, nor wanted to. What difference does it make what was discussed between ourselves and relatives? I talk politics with my relatives, and none of them hold public office."previously held as slaves"?
wtf does that have to do with anything?
People who HAD it and then lose it-----often
DO RESENT the loss. No people gladly
relinquish the loss of a social perk. The south
was a caste society. Some people are
very attached to "caste" issues and all people get bent out of shape when they lose perks------there may have been some
left over stuff in some relative of the jerk.
the shooter was 21. he never "had it".
the loss of any social perks occurred long before he was born.
so? if he had a relative as a child who talked about "the good old days" when
"dem nigras knew their place"-----that would
be enough
planting crops and running moonshine is not a social perk. If they talked about the good old days and the PLANTATION ----run by slaves until that DAMN PROCLAMATION----
by that idiot up north turned all the slaves into rapists-----that would be LOSS OF PERK
Presenting firearms as a method of resolving things encourages people to resort to them. If they thought in other ways, they would use other alternatives, so, of course, the promotion of firearms is dangerous. Did that really have to be explained?