SO GLAD the Newtown Parents Are Coming Forward

[JoeB131]

If present trends continue, by 2015, there will be more people in US killed by guns than by automobiles.

Far too many times in the past few years we have seen multiple people killed by a looney with a war weapon. For that is what the rapid fire semi-automatic weapons are.

Now we have a situation where, because of the NRA and other fruitloop organizations actions, we have a vast proliferation of these kinds of weapons in the general population. All too many of whom are not safe handling a single shot .22. The inevitable result is going to be more 'Sandy Hook' type of slaughters, and then the screaming of the people that created the situation that guns don't kill people.

Well, fruitloops, guns do kill people. That is what they are designed to do. And when you put them in the hands of the crazies they slaughter innocent children. As has been proven from coast to coast, and sundry point in between.

I think it's a bit worse than that.

If one were to make a comparison, it would like when people finally figured out that smoking causes cancer, the Tobacco companies doubled down by marketting their products to children and making them more addictive.

As less people are keeping guns in their homes or hunting, the Gun Manufacturers are doubling down by marketting their product to the kind of people who you probably don't want to have guns. People like Nancy Lanza who are crazy "Preppers" stocking up like the Zombie Apocolypse is next week.

 

[bayoubill]

If present trends continue, by 2015, there will be more people in US killed by guns than by automobiles.

Far too many times in the past few years we have seen multiple people killed by a looney with a war weapon. For that is what the rapid fire semi-automatic weapons are.

Now we have a situation where, because of the NRA and other fruitloop organizations actions, we have a vast proliferation of these kinds of weapons in the general population. All too many of whom are not safe handling a single shot .22. The inevitable result is going to be more 'Sandy Hook' type of slaughters, and then the screaming of the people that created the situation that guns don't kill people.

Well, fruitloops, guns do kill people. That is what they are designed to do. And when you put them in the hands of the crazies they slaughter innocent children. As has been proven from coast to coast, and sundry point in between.

gotta admit, it's sorta fun to read stuff from shit-for-brains anti-gunners like Old Rocks...

 

[Geaux4it]

[

Do you actually concede that Jefferson did Rape his Slave?

Do you concede you actually have no argument against gun rights?

No, I've made my case quite clearly.

.

And counselor, your case is destined for defeat like the ones before, and the ones to come after.

It's quite apparent the slight majority of Americans who put the communist regime in Washington were low information voters looking for some 'Change'. Problem is, it's just not your spare change they want, they want your sovereignty. Even the before mentioned uneducated, and or ignorant demographic, is not completely sold on your assessment of our founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence.

This leads me to review a conversation I had with an Electronic Engineer the other day who was born and raised in Cuba. At 12 years of age his parents made the choice for liberty. His parents house was paid for but they didn't own it. His dad was 'assigned' the job he would take after college. That would be after the mandatory 'Education Camps' youth are/were required to attend from ages 13-15. Then there is a mandatory military component immediately following. They left everything there. They had nothing because they owned nothing, the state did. Sorry, we will not allow you and your kind to take us there.

Really?

Story is very similar to those who fled Vietnam in the mid-late 70's.

You see, I'm a veteran and defended this country, including the weak such as yourself. That will never change for the fighting man. We are only as strong as our weakest link- that is until we rebuild the chain. It's at that point you'll need to be very careful.

Your on the wrong side of America here Joe. And to think 'Joe the Plumber' made 'Joe's' look stupid according to the left. You, Joe, are taking it to an all time level.

When John, LeRoy, Hector, et al from the conga line of criminals comes to your home for a visit, I hope your bat and ample urine are enough to convince the criminals that you take crime seriously. Surely they will go somewhere else as your line of defense is formidable.

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

[

And counselor, your case is destined for defeat like the ones before, and the ones to come after.

It's quite apparent the slight majority of Americans who put the communist regime in Washington were low information voters looking for some 'Change'. Problem is, it's just not your spare change they want, they want your sovereignty. Even the before mentioned uneducated, and or ignorant demographic, is not completely sold on your assessment of our founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence.

I think you are looking for "aforementioned". They didn't cover that in your "Home Skule" I'm sure. But the point is, yeah, we don't have an honest discussion about the founding of this country. We have all these cute stories about the Tea Party and Paul Revere's Ride and Crossing the Delaware, and don't discuss the Genocide and the Slave Rape and other nasty stuff.

Of course, this is noting to do with Freedom. Most of the other industrialized democracies limit or restrict who can own a gun, and they are every bit as free as we are.

[
This leads me to review a conversation I had with an Electronic Engineer the other day who was born and raised in Cuba. At 12 years of age his parents made the choice for liberty. His parents house was paid for but they didn't own it. His dad was 'assigned' the job he would take after college. That would be after the mandatory 'Education Camps' youth are/were required to attend from ages 13-15. Then there is a mandatory military component immediately following. They left everything there. They had nothing because they owned nothing, the state did. Sorry, we will not allow you and your kind to take us there.

I am always amazed about how you wingnuts talk about Cuba. A country we have been punishing for the last 50 years because they rejected us. We are like a Stalker Ex-girlfriend. The only thing missing is the Midnight Drunk Dialing.

"Casssstroooo you dick!"

Really?

Story is very similar to those who fled Vietnam in the mid-late 70's.

You mean the people who threw in with us, and then wondered why their neighbors wanted to take it out on them after the Americans left? No one like a collaborator, guy.

Maybe if we stopped sticking our noses in other people's business, we'd stop getting punched in it.

You see, I'm a veteran and defended this country, including the weak such as yourself. That will never change for the fighting man. We are only as strong as our weakest link- that is until we rebuild the chain. It's at that point you'll need to be very careful.

Guy, I'm a veteran too. But I don't delude myself into thinking I wasn't doing anything but protecting the interests of the wealthy. Which was fine, as long as I got something out of it, which I did.

Your on the wrong side of America here Joe. And to think 'Joe the Plumber' made 'Joe's' look stupid according to the left. You, Joe, are taking it to an all time level.

Actually, public opinion is turning against you gun nutters. We are tired of watching kids being dragged out in body bags because crazy people can get the same weapons the military uses.

When John, LeRoy, Hector, et al from the conga line of criminals comes to your home for a visit, I hope your bat and ample urine are enough to convince the criminals that you take crime seriously. Surely they will go somewhere else as your line of defense is formidable.

-Geaux

Guy, when I was in the Service, it was Hector and Leroy who were in uniform with me, being promised that they could get a college degree if they signed up.

None of this has much to do with guns, which are almost never used in self defense. I've never known a person who used a gun to chase off a crook, not even once. I have known two people who have buried family members who killed themselves with that gun they bought for protection.

 

[Geaux4it]

Vietnam and Cuba policies had nothing to do with those there who seek Liberty. No cost was to high.

It's the 2A that ensures our right to 1A remains strong, well, unitll the recent AP debacle. So keep spewing, it's your right

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

Vietnam and Cuba policies had nothing to do with those there who seek Liberty. No cost was to high to obtain it.

It's the 2A that ensure our right to 1A remains strong, well, unitll the recent AP debacle

-Geaux

Again, you mistake, "Being on the wrong side of history" with "liberty".

Those who fled Vietnam or Cuba after the communists won were just on the wrong side of history. History we probably made inevitable by our bumbling. Castro and Ho Chi Mihn threw in with the USSR because we backed Batista and Diem. Dumb move on our parts, we picked the wrong sides in a civil war.

This has nothing to do with gun ownership. There were plenty of guns in those situations. And when the smoke cleared, one side won. The other side was riding on a leaky raft hoping America would take them in.

Guns don't ensure your liberty. It only puts you at the mercy of chaos.

 

[Geaux4it]

Vietnam and Cuba policies had nothing to do with those there who seek Liberty. No cost was to high to obtain it.

It's the 2A that ensure our right to 1A remains strong, well, unitll the recent AP debacle

-Geaux

Again, you mistake, "Being on the wrong side of history" with "liberty".

Those who fled Vietnam or Cuba after the communists won were just on the wrong side of history. History we probably made inevitable by our bumbling. Castro and Ho Chi Mihn threw in with the USSR because we backed Batista and Diem. Dumb move on our parts, we picked the wrong sides in a civil war.

This has nothing to do with gun ownership. There were plenty of guns in those situations. And when the smoke cleared, one side won. The other side was riding on a leaky raft hoping America would take them in.

Guns don't ensure your liberty. It only puts you at the mercy of chaos.

We disagree.

Nothing is 'ensured' in war. One can only hope to have the tools available to defend his self and family from any outside influence not in the best interest of MY family, not that of my neighbors.

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

[

We disagree.

Nothing is 'ensured' in war. One can only hope to have the tools available to defend his self and family from any outside influence not in the best interest of MY family, not that of my neighbors.

-Geaux

Here's the reality, guy-

If the majority of your neighbors think you are a dangerous gun nut and want you disarmed, you are going to be disarmed, one way or the other.

The fact is, in the case of Vietnam, our own intelligence agencies told the politiicians that Ho Chi Mihn was a vastly popular war hero, having fought the Japanese and French. Diem was seen as French Collaborator who was putting the interests of the small Catholic Minority over the interests of the Bhuddist majority.

But our politicians didn't want to be the ones "who lost Vietnam", like it was ours to have. So we kept dumping guns into the place, and bad things happened. So we stood by when the military killed our designated guy, and then watched as the place fumbled about from one military thug to another.

Same thing in Cuba. After we defeated Spain, we turned the place into our playground where we could do all the things they wouldn't let gangsters and corporations do in the good old USA. And lo and behold, people got fed up and threw our thugs out.

ANd we've been punishing Cuba ever since for it. Because we're good like that.

 

[Geaux4it]

[

We disagree.

Nothing is 'ensured' in war. One can only hope to have the tools available to defend his self and family from any outside influence not in the best interest of MY family, not that of my neighbors.

-Geaux

Here's the reality, guy-

If the majority of your neighbors think you are a dangerous gun nut and want you disarmed, you are going to be disarmed, one way or the other.

.

Really? Um, OK.. BTW- Will DHS and FEMA be carrying out this duty? Just curious

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

[

We disagree.

Nothing is 'ensured' in war. One can only hope to have the tools available to defend his self and family from any outside influence not in the best interest of MY family, not that of my neighbors.

-Geaux

Here's the reality, guy-

If the majority of your neighbors think you are a dangerous gun nut and want you disarmed, you are going to be disarmed, one way or the other.

.

Really? Um, OK.. BTW- Will DHS and FEMA be carrying out this duty? Just curious

-Geaux

Probably the local police.

The best argument for gun control is a conversation with a gun nut.

 

[squeeze berry]

[

Do you actually concede that Jefferson did Rape his Slave?

Do you concede you actually have no argument against gun rights?

No, I've made my case quite clearly.

1) The Second Amendment was about Militias, not guns.

2) The reason you whacks give for wanting guns- that you need to defend yourselves against all the scary criminals- is undermined by the fact a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

3) The other reason you whacks give- that you might have to fight the mean old Gummit, is destroyed by the fact they have tanks, planes, artilery and nukes.

1. if all other amendments apply to individuals so does the 2nd

2. it's no one's business why someone wants a gun. Wanting one is reason enough

3. see above

 

[martybegan]

[

Do you actually concede that Jefferson did Rape his Slave?

Do you concede you actually have no argument against gun rights?

No, I've made my case quite clearly.

1) The Second Amendment was about Militias, not guns.

2) The reason you whacks give for wanting guns- that you need to defend yourselves against all the scary criminals- is undermined by the fact a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

3) The other reason you whacks give- that you might have to fight the mean old Gummit, is destroyed by the fact they have tanks, planes, artilery and nukes.

And still using that hack 43 times number from one study in one county in Oregon from 20 years ago....

HAAAAAAAACCCCCKKKKKK.

 

[martybegan]

If present trends continue, by 2015, there will be more people in US killed by guns than by automobiles.

Far too many times in the past few years we have seen multiple people killed by a looney with a war weapon. For that is what the rapid fire semi-automatic weapons are.

Now we have a situation where, because of the NRA and other fruitloop organizations actions, we have a vast proliferation of these kinds of weapons in the general population. All too many of whom are not safe handling a single shot .22. The inevitable result is going to be more 'Sandy Hook' type of slaughters, and then the screaming of the people that created the situation that guns don't kill people.

Well, fruitloops, guns do kill people. That is what they are designed to do. And when you put them in the hands of the crazies they slaughter innocent children. As has been proven from coast to coast, and sundry point in between.

So guns should be blamed for shifting demographics, car usage by teenagers, and improved safety devices in automobiles lowering automotive deaths?

 

[JoeB131]

Do you concede you actually have no argument against gun rights?

No, I've made my case quite clearly.

1) The Second Amendment was about Militias, not guns.

2) The reason you whacks give for wanting guns- that you need to defend yourselves against all the scary criminals- is undermined by the fact a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

3) The other reason you whacks give- that you might have to fight the mean old Gummit, is destroyed by the fact they have tanks, planes, artilery and nukes.

1. if all other amendments apply to individuals so does the 2nd

2. it's no one's business why someone wants a gun. Wanting one is reason enough

3. see above

The second clearly calls for Well Regulated Militias. Case closed.

It is my business if that gun is a danger to others.

 

[squeeze berry]

No, I've made my case quite clearly.

1) The Second Amendment was about Militias, not guns.

2) The reason you whacks give for wanting guns- that you need to defend yourselves against all the scary criminals- is undermined by the fact a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

3) The other reason you whacks give- that you might have to fight the mean old Gummit, is destroyed by the fact they have tanks, planes, artilery and nukes.

1. if all other amendments apply to individuals so does the 2nd

2. it's no one's business why someone wants a gun. Wanting one is reason enough

3. see above

The second clearly calls for Well Regulated Militias. Case closed.

It is my business if that gun is a danger to others.

the courts have already decided that the 2nd applies to individuals

CASE CLOSED

PS who the **** are you to decide anything

 

[JoeB131]

[

And still using that hack 43 times number from one study in one county in Oregon from 20 years ago....

HAAAAAAAACCCCCKKKKKK.

The study was done in SEATTLE.

Obviously, you failed geography in Home Skule, Cleetus.

Here, let me help you out.

 

[martybegan]

[

And still using that hack 43 times number from one study in one county in Oregon from 20 years ago....

HAAAAAAAACCCCCKKKKKK.

The study was done in SEATTLE.

Obviously, you failed geography in Home Skule, Cleetus.

Here, let me help you out.

Oregon, Washington, meh. The point is the study is still Old, limited in scope, and not applicable to the real world. You are still a hack loser.

 

[martybegan]

1. if all other amendments apply to individuals so does the 2nd

2. it's no one's business why someone wants a gun. Wanting one is reason enough

3. see above

The second clearly calls for Well Regulated Militias. Case closed.

It is my business if that gun is a danger to others.

the courts have already decided that the 2nd applies to individuals

CASE CLOSED

PS who the **** are you to decide anything

He's a cowardly communist *****, who would probably start sucking the dick of anyone who threatened him just to make them happy.

 

[earlycuyler]

If present trends continue, by 2015, there will be more people in US killed by guns than by automobiles.

Far too many times in the past few years we have seen multiple people killed by a looney with a war weapon. For that is what the rapid fire semi-automatic weapons are.

Now we have a situation where, because of the NRA and other fruitloop organizations actions, we have a vast proliferation of these kinds of weapons in the general population. All too many of whom are not safe handling a single shot .22. The inevitable result is going to be more 'Sandy Hook' type of slaughters, and then the screaming of the people that created the situation that guns don't kill people.

Well, fruitloops, guns do kill people. That is what they are designed to do. And when you put them in the hands of the crazies they slaughter innocent children. As has been proven from coast to coast, and sundry point in between.

Who you quoting on those numbers of yours ?

 

[earlycuyler]

If present trends continue, by 2015, there will be more people in US killed by guns than by automobiles.

Far too many times in the past few years we have seen multiple people killed by a looney with a war weapon. For that is what the rapid fire semi-automatic weapons are.

Now we have a situation where, because of the NRA and other fruitloop organizations actions, we have a vast proliferation of these kinds of weapons in the general population. All too many of whom are not safe handling a single shot .22. The inevitable result is going to be more 'Sandy Hook' type of slaughters, and then the screaming of the people that created the situation that guns don't kill people.

Well, fruitloops, guns do kill people. That is what they are designed to do. And when you put them in the hands of the crazies they slaughter innocent children. As has been proven from coast to coast, and sundry point in between.

I think it's a bit worse than that.

If one were to make a comparison, it would like when people finally figured out that smoking causes cancer, the Tobacco companies doubled down by marketting their products to children and making them more addictive.

As less people are keeping guns in their homes or hunting, the Gun Manufacturers are doubling down by marketting their product to the kind of people who you probably don't want to have guns. People like Nancy Lanza who are crazy "Preppers" stocking up like the Zombie Apocolypse is next week.

No they don't double down. Only you guys with your weird comments like that. Zombies are out joe and not one gun company has marketed guns in the way you claim. As for people not buying them, what the hell ! People are buying them like hot cakes. Your president should be salesman of the last 8 years for every gun company there is.