Sooo, ghetto kids and Liberal wackos will storm the steps of D.C. on Saturday..huh?

[frigidweirdo]

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders...they will beg to be protected from themselves and the very same lowlifes they stand shoulder to shoulder with....haha
Think about that...you can’t make this shit up. Do we really need to wonder why nobody sane can take these Loons serious?

Maybe they just want a better country.

Maybe they want a country where your choice is between a corrupt party which doesn't care about the people, or a corrupt party which doesn't care about the people.

Maybe they want a country that tops the crime statistics for First World nations while also topping the prison population for all nations bar one at the last count.

Maybe they want a country that doesn't have the worst distribution of wealth for First World countries.

Maybe they want a country where politicians aren't on the take from large multi-nationals and the top 0.1%

Maybe they want a country where people in Wyoming have three times more vote in Presidential elections than people in California or Texas, or where the votes of people in 38 states don't actually matter in a Presidential election.

Maybe they want a country that actually cares about its people instead of making healthcare more and more corrupt and more about profits.

Maybe they want a country that promotes healthy food and not sugary foods from large multi-national corporations.


Maybe they want something better than the shit they're served up.

 

[OKTexas]

LOL ******* leftists....that's it throw rocks at someone who is shooting at you. Good gawd

Pennsylvania students will be armed with rocks in case of school shooting, superintendent says

SCHUYLKILL COUNTY, Pa. - There’s a rocky controversy when it comes to school safety in one Pennsylvania County.

The superintendent of the Blue Mountain School District is in the spotlight after telling lawmakers in Harrisburg his students protect themselves against potential school shooters with rocks.

“Every classroom has been equipped with a five-gallon bucket of river stone. If an armed intruder attempts to gain entrance into any of our classrooms, they will face a classroom full students armed with rocks and they will be stoned,” said Dr. David Helsel, testifying to the House Education Committee last week in Harrisburg.

Pennsylvania students will be armed with rocks in case of school shooting, superintendent says

It's better than nothing.


.

 

[OKTexas]

The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Is the government attempting to stop them? I must have missed that.

Your position seems to be that you support the parts of the constitution as you interpret it and would deny other parts of the constitution you disagree with.

If you want people to support your alleged 'right' to bear a military style weapon, you must also support the right of people to protest it.

There was once a time when noble people would say "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it."

Nobility is gone. Today people say "I have the right to bear any type of weapon I chose, and you should sit down, shit up and accept that."

Protest away, just don't pretend it's not organized and paid for by hard left organizations.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Mayor of D.C. Proclaims loudly and often that she "hates guns" this is the base of all this, the emotion of hate
I respect guns I hunted and I know what they can do. My perspective is fact.
Little more parenting and would not have very isolated wack job teens running around blasting away but Libs prefer emotion as default

I have a number of guns, and have hunted for over 50 years. And I am of the opinion that no one needs an assault rifle.
Except those that can not shoot straight.

What would you suggest to protect a business in a riot?


.

 

[OKTexas]

Mayor of D.C. Proclaims loudly and often that she "hates guns" this is the base of all this, the emotion of hate
I respect guns I hunted and I know what they can do. My perspective is fact.
Little more parenting and would not have very isolated wack job teens running around blasting away but Libs prefer emotion as default

I have a number of guns, and have hunted for over 50 years. And I am of the opinion that no one needs an assault rifle.
Except those that can not shoot straight.

People who don't hunt, who don't do recreational shooting of any kind, and who will probably never face a threatening situation requiring the use of a firearm technically don't NEED a firearm of any kind. But the second amendment says absolutely nothing about anybody's personal need. It does suggest that when citizens are called to defend their country, they should be allowed arms to do so. In such a case an AR type weapon might come in very handy.

But we don't NEED many things that we like to have. What logic applies for somebody like me to not have an AR-14 rifle? I have never used a gun in any manner to threaten somebody or defend myself and have never harmed a living thing with any kind of weapon except maybe a tree if I missed the target, but if I just enjoy having an AR-15 in my collection, what harm is there in that?

And what principle of the constitution says that my rights to a peaceful outing with my family to visit the U.S. Capital Building or any other site should be cancelled or made inadvisable because the place is flooded with a bunch of angry people most likely practicing poor citizenship and might or might not be dangerous to innocent bystanders?

Yeah, that would be terrible. How does that stack up against a nut case getting an AR and killing tens of people, me boy. Must be much worse. I mean, not having an AR or missing your day at the capital building must be about as bad as those 50 people who were killed. Though, in my humble but correct opinion, you could just not have the ability to shoot an ar and have the results we see in other countries, with no mass killings.

Like France? ROFLMAO


.

 

[OKTexas]

Mayor of D.C. Proclaims loudly and often that she "hates guns" this is the base of all this, the emotion of hate
I respect guns I hunted and I know what they can do. My perspective is fact.
Little more parenting and would not have very isolated wack job teens running around blasting away but Libs prefer emotion as default

I have a number of guns, and have hunted for over 50 years. And I am of the opinion that no one needs an assault rifle.
Except those that can not shoot straight.

People who don't hunt, who don't do recreational shooting of any kind, and who will probably never face a threatening situation requiring the use of a firearm technically don't NEED a firearm of any kind. But the second amendment says absolutely nothing about anybody's personal need. It does suggest that when citizens are called to defend their country, they should be allowed arms to do so. In such a case an AR type weapon might come in very handy.

But we don't NEED many things that we like to have. What logic applies for somebody like me to not have an AR-14 rifle? I have never used a gun in any manner to threaten somebody or defend myself and have never harmed a living thing with any kind of weapon except maybe a tree if I missed the target, but if I just enjoy having an AR-15 in my collection, what harm is there in that?

And what principle of the constitution says that my rights to a peaceful outing with my family to visit the U.S. Capital Building or any other site should be cancelled or made inadvisable because the place is flooded with a bunch of angry people most likely practicing poor citizenship and might or might not be dangerous to innocent bystanders?

Yeah, that would be terrible. How does that stack up against a nut case getting an AR and killing tens of people, me boy. Must be much worse. I mean, not having an AR or missing your day at the capital building must be about as bad as those 50 people who were killed. Though, in my humble but correct opinion, you could just not have the ability to shoot an ar and have the results we see in other countries, with no mass killings.

And what countries would that be? The ones with much higher percentages of households with guns than we have but that are small, homogenous populations with decent shared values and strong emphasis on personal responsibility and accountablility? The ones like Finland and Switzerland have very low crime rates involving guns or anything else.

Or countries like Honduras with rigid gun controls and ranked 88th in the world for the number of households with legal guns but has the highest homicide rate in the world, more than 76% due to gun crime?

The problem is not the number or type of weapons. The problem is a cultural one. Create a society in which personal responsibility and accountability is expected of all citizens, put biological fathers back into the homes, and allow God or religious faith that inspires peace and appreciation for life back into the schools and other public institutions, and I am reasonably certain that within a generation we won't be seeing guns as much of a public issue at all.

How about France, The UK, Germany, Spain, Australia, and many others.
And relative to your argument about culture, perhaps you can tell me how that is going to stop the killers who shot and killed the people in the Florida school, in Las Vegas, In the southern church, and on and so forth. How about Texas. How about Colorado.
Those killers could care less about your cultural dreams and your religions.
Just as in Australia. Where in 1996 there was a mass killings. Here is a recent report on their experience:
"Australia hadn't experienced a fatal mass shooting — one in which five or more people are killed — since the 1996 shooting. In the 18 years prior, 1979-1996, there were 13 fatal mass shootings"
Australia hasn't had a fatal mass shooting since 1996. Here's what it did
No other advanced nation of the world has anything close to the number of mass shootings we have. And all here, and the one in Australia in 1996, So your retort makes no sense. None at all. You see, the one difference between us and the other advanced countries of the world is that in all the others, they ban the sale of assault rifles.

Why do you need to lie?

.

 

[OKTexas]

Because of their track record. I have never seen one of these protests that didn't involve a lot of profanity and civil disobedience. Not here. Not in any other state. And not in DC. I'm sure the ANTIFA and BLM folks are already polishing up their gear.

I know it's a common and unfortunate way to react to a demonstration that one disagrees with. Belittle the demonstrators, dismiss them,as thugs, kooks, loons and, in this case, wet behind the ears know,nothing children. It makes those who disagree somehow feel superior, pushing down others. It's as if every lesson we learned since the playground can be disposed of out of convenience due to lack of conscience.

Why does this sort of criticism meet with the sounds of crickets whenever pro-lifers or those who oppose Gay rights march? I guess it all depends on whose or is being gored. I wonder what it would be like if a counter protest held by gun toting folks who refuse to see nuance and havoc and fear through the smoked glass lens of absolute gun rights? Who would call them less than law abiding citizens and complain of disruption,before the march begins?

Do I object to demonstrations conducted by people who don't block vehicle or pedestrian traffic or entrances to businesses or public buildings, who pick up after themselves,and who are courteous to those who pass by? Nope. I have participated in a number of those myself.

Do I object to people shouting profanity, blocking vehicle and pedestrian traffic, shouting insults and threats to people who don't join them, who commit arson, vandalize, and destroy property, and generally terrify everybody in the area? You can pretty well count on it.
You can also count on me referring to them in very uncomplimentary terms.

The march happens tomorrow, yet you have already accused the marchers of arson, assault and battery, vandalism and general mayhem.

Are you prescient or merely biased?

I cited the history of these kinds of things and that history makes what will happen pretty predictable. Are you deliberately avoiding that argument in order to defend people who I see as violating the rights of the peaceful and law abiding?

If this turns out to be a peaceful, respectful demonstration by courteous demonstrators, I will acknowledge it. But I wouldn't be taking my kids or grand kids there knowing the demonstration was scheduled. I bet you wouldn't either.

Here is the thing, me boy. You are in my opinion not worried about the mass shootings that have happened or the mass killings that will, without doubt, happen in the future. I am worried about all those that have been killed, and who will be. Because, you see, their lives are way more important than anyone of us having access to an assault rifle. You do not need an assault rifle. The people who will be killed in the future with assault rifles do need their lives. Ask their families.

You might want to worry about the other things that kill many more, murders, of all kinds, don't even make the top 10.


.

 

[Lakhota]

Bless the kids! I hope they have a great day!

 

[OKTexas]

The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Until the government takes away their guns...then their Right to peaceably assemble is also going to be taken...all of our Rights are backed up by the 2nd Amendment...without that, we have no Rights....

Did you notice 1. You have no rights to own certain kinds of guns.
2. No one has come to take your guns, it is simply a NRA talking point meant to scare the shit out of you. And as a con, you are easily scared.
Saying that killers are attracted to gun free zones is like saying sharks keep killing swimmers in shallow water. Stupid argument.

Just shows sharks like easy pickings too. LMAO


.

 

[OKTexas]

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders...they will beg to be protected from themselves and the very same lowlifes they stand shoulder to shoulder with....haha
Think about that...you can’t make this shit up. Do we really need to wonder why nobody sane can take these Loons serious?

Beware Loser....many, many of these loons will be voting in November.....Can you say...Blue Wave?

Those loons are lucky to have a 15 second attention span.


.

 

[OKTexas]

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders...they will beg to be protected from themselves and the very same lowlifes they stand shoulder to shoulder with....haha
Think about that...you can’t make this shit up. Do we really need to wonder why nobody sane can take these Loons serious?

Beware Loser....many, many of these loons will be voting in November.....Can you say...Blue Wave?

More teenagers are pro gun than anti gun.

You are missing the point. It is not pro gun verses anti gun. It is pro life verses pro dead. These kids want to stay alive.

I see a perfect storm coming in November. The lack of federal movement on gun regulation will be an issue in some districts. If the GOP candidates turn their backs on these concerns, as they have in the past, they will lose BIGLY. COUNT ON IT!

They have a greater chance of dying traveling to the protest. Oh and DC is not the safest place in the nation either.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Bless the kids! I hope they have a great day!

Of course Time wouldn't include the kids that disagreed with them. One sided leftist bullshit. Someone should buy that bald idiot a new pair of jeans.


.

 

[Nosmo King]

I know it's a common and unfortunate way to react to a demonstration that one disagrees with. Belittle the demonstrators, dismiss them,as thugs, kooks, loons and, in this case, wet behind the ears know,nothing children. It makes those who disagree somehow feel superior, pushing down others. It's as if every lesson we learned since the playground can be disposed of out of convenience due to lack of conscience.

Why does this sort of criticism meet with the sounds of crickets whenever pro-lifers or those who oppose Gay rights march? I guess it all depends on whose or is being gored. I wonder what it would be like if a counter protest held by gun toting folks who refuse to see nuance and havoc and fear through the smoked glass lens of absolute gun rights? Who would call them less than law abiding citizens and complain of disruption,before the march begins?

Do I object to demonstrations conducted by people who don't block vehicle or pedestrian traffic or entrances to businesses or public buildings, who pick up after themselves,and who are courteous to those who pass by? Nope. I have participated in a number of those myself.

Do I object to people shouting profanity, blocking vehicle and pedestrian traffic, shouting insults and threats to people who don't join them, who commit arson, vandalize, and destroy property, and generally terrify everybody in the area? You can pretty well count on it.
You can also count on me referring to them in very uncomplimentary terms.

The march happens tomorrow, yet you have already accused the marchers of arson, assault and battery, vandalism and general mayhem.

Are you prescient or merely biased?

I cited the history of these kinds of things and that history makes what will happen pretty predictable. Are you deliberately avoiding that argument in order to defend people who I see as violating the rights of the peaceful and law abiding?

If this turns out to be a peaceful, respectful demonstration by courteous demonstrators, I will acknowledge it. But I wouldn't be taking my kids or grand kids there knowing the demonstration was scheduled. I bet you wouldn't either.

Here is the thing, me boy. You are in my opinion not worried about the mass shootings that have happened or the mass killings that will, without doubt, happen in the future. I am worried about all those that have been killed, and who will be. Because, you see, their lives are way more important than anyone of us having access to an assault rifle. You do not need an assault rifle. The people who will be killed in the future with assault rifles do need their lives. Ask their families.

You might want to worry about the other things that kill many more, murders, of all kinds, don't even make the top 10.


.

These kids aren't marching for cancer or air pollution or trans fats. They aren't marching for auto safety or knife safety or swimming pool safety.

They stepped over bodies to evacuate their school after 17 people were shot. Others stepped over bodies at Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine High School and dozens more. Some of these people stepped over bodies in Las Vegas, Orlando and Ft. Hood. They stepped over bodies in Aurora, Colorado, Sutherland Springs, Texas and Charleston, South Carolina. They've stepped over bodies in Chicago, Baltimore and Detroit.

Ignoring, dismissing and belittling the epidemic of gun violence walls you off from the debate. If you don't consider it an actual problem, it must be asked, do you have a soul?

 

[Lakhota]

Do I object to demonstrations conducted by people who don't block vehicle or pedestrian traffic or entrances to businesses or public buildings, who pick up after themselves,and who are courteous to those who pass by? Nope. I have participated in a number of those myself.

Do I object to people shouting profanity, blocking vehicle and pedestrian traffic, shouting insults and threats to people who don't join them, who commit arson, vandalize, and destroy property, and generally terrify everybody in the area? You can pretty well count on it.
You can also count on me referring to them in very uncomplimentary terms.

The march happens tomorrow, yet you have already accused the marchers of arson, assault and battery, vandalism and general mayhem.

Are you prescient or merely biased?

I cited the history of these kinds of things and that history makes what will happen pretty predictable. Are you deliberately avoiding that argument in order to defend people who I see as violating the rights of the peaceful and law abiding?

If this turns out to be a peaceful, respectful demonstration by courteous demonstrators, I will acknowledge it. But I wouldn't be taking my kids or grand kids there knowing the demonstration was scheduled. I bet you wouldn't either.

Here is the thing, me boy. You are in my opinion not worried about the mass shootings that have happened or the mass killings that will, without doubt, happen in the future. I am worried about all those that have been killed, and who will be. Because, you see, their lives are way more important than anyone of us having access to an assault rifle. You do not need an assault rifle. The people who will be killed in the future with assault rifles do need their lives. Ask their families.

You might want to worry about the other things that kill many more, murders, of all kinds, don't even make the top 10.


.

These kids aren't marching for cancer or air pollution or trans fats. They aren't marching for auto safety or knife safety or swimming pool safety.

They stepped over bodies to evacuate their school after 17 people were shot. Others stepped over bodies at Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine High School and dozens more. Some of these people stepped over bodies in Las Begas, Orlando and Ft. Hood. They stepped over bodies in Aurora, Colorado, Sutherland Springs, Texas and Charleston, South Carolina. They've stepped over bodies in Chicago, Baltimore and Detroit.

Ignoring, dismissing and belittling the epidemic of gun violence walls you off from the debate. If you don't consider it an actual problem, it must be asked, do you have a soul?

Amen! Thank you!

 

[OKTexas]

Do I object to demonstrations conducted by people who don't block vehicle or pedestrian traffic or entrances to businesses or public buildings, who pick up after themselves,and who are courteous to those who pass by? Nope. I have participated in a number of those myself.

Do I object to people shouting profanity, blocking vehicle and pedestrian traffic, shouting insults and threats to people who don't join them, who commit arson, vandalize, and destroy property, and generally terrify everybody in the area? You can pretty well count on it.
You can also count on me referring to them in very uncomplimentary terms.

The march happens tomorrow, yet you have already accused the marchers of arson, assault and battery, vandalism and general mayhem.

Are you prescient or merely biased?

I cited the history of these kinds of things and that history makes what will happen pretty predictable. Are you deliberately avoiding that argument in order to defend people who I see as violating the rights of the peaceful and law abiding?

If this turns out to be a peaceful, respectful demonstration by courteous demonstrators, I will acknowledge it. But I wouldn't be taking my kids or grand kids there knowing the demonstration was scheduled. I bet you wouldn't either.

Here is the thing, me boy. You are in my opinion not worried about the mass shootings that have happened or the mass killings that will, without doubt, happen in the future. I am worried about all those that have been killed, and who will be. Because, you see, their lives are way more important than anyone of us having access to an assault rifle. You do not need an assault rifle. The people who will be killed in the future with assault rifles do need their lives. Ask their families.

You might want to worry about the other things that kill many more, murders, of all kinds, don't even make the top 10.


.

These kids aren't marching for cancer or air pollution or trans fats. They aren't marching for auto safety or knife safety or swimming pool safety.

They stepped over bodies to evacuate their school after 17 people were shot. Others stepped over bodies at Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine High School and dozens more. Some of these people stepped over bodies in Las Begas, Orlando and Ft. Hood. They stepped over bodies in Aurora, Colorado, Sutherland Springs, Texas and Charleston, South Carolina. They've stepped over bodies in Chicago, Baltimore and Detroit.

Ignoring, dismissing and belittling the epidemic of gun violence walls you off from the debate. If you don't consider it an actual problem, it must be asked, do you have a soul?

No calling something it's not, makes you intellectually dishonest. Anything that only effects about 13,000 people out of 320,000,000 doesn't meet any definition of an epidemic. You're no better than the fear mongering whores Schumer and Palousey. Commiecrat policies have created this situation over the last 50 years, here's a thought, how about we hold people responsible for their actions, stop giving out participation trophies and bust a kids ass when it's called for. That would put a stop to a bunch of what ails society.


.

 

[Lakhota]

Something like this is what I've feared for some time. I've said for many years that the NRA is the greatest threat to my future gun rights. Their never-give-an-inch attitude must change - or the kids will change them.

These kids want sensible gun control just like most responsible gun owners want.

Ban assault weapons. Ban high-capacity magazines. Universal background checks. Address mental health, domestic abuse and reporting issues. Enhanced National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

If NRA gun nuts don't back off - we may end up with severe gun control and a national gun registry.

It's sadly funny that the Justice Department is reportedly going to ban bump stocks. What kind of retards allowed them to be legal in the first place? I realize that bump stocks are easy to replicate - but the penalty for using them should be severe.

73 TEENS GUNNED DOWN SINCE PARKLAND

 

[OKTexas]

Something like this is what I've feared for some time. I've said for many years that the NRA is the greatest threat to my future gun rights. Their never-give-an-inch attitude must change - or the kids will change them.

These kids want sensible gun control just like most responsible gun owners want.

Ban assault weapons. Ban high-capacity magazines. Universal background checks. Address mental health, domestic abuse and reporting issues. Enhanced National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

If NRA gun nuts don't back off - we may end up with severe gun control and a national gun registry.

It's sadly funny that the Justice Department is reportedly going to ban bump stocks. What kind of retards allowed them to be legal in the first place? I realize that bump stocks are easy to replicate - but the penalty for using them should be severe.

73 TEENS GUNNED DOWN SINCE PARKLAND

So how many died because of an AR style rifle or high capacity magazine? How many were intentional? Come on propagandist, give us some stats.


.

 

[Geaux4it]

Wow. You people are terrified of these kids.

That's hilarious.

Actually, we're laughing at them

-Geaux

 

[toobfreak]

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders...they will beg to be protected from themselves and the very same lowlifes they stand shoulder to shoulder with....haha
Think about that...you can’t make this shit up. Do we really need to wonder why nobody sane can take these Loons serious?

ALL HAIL THE ICONS OF THE LEFT!

Curiously, weren't both of these guys RUSSIANS?

 

[Lysistrata]

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders...they will beg to be protected from themselves and the very same lowlifes they stand shoulder to shoulder with....haha
Think about that...you can’t make this shit up. Do we really need to wonder why nobody sane can take these Loons serious?

Beware Loser....many, many of these loons will be voting in November.....Can you say...Blue Wave?

More teenagers are pro gun than anti gun.

You are missing the point. It is not pro gun verses anti gun. It is pro life verses pro dead. These kids want to stay alive.

I see a perfect storm coming in November. The lack of federal movement on gun regulation will be an issue in some districts. If the GOP candidates turn their backs on these concerns, as they have in the past, they will lose BIGLY. COUNT ON IT!

They have a greater chance of dying traveling to the protest. Oh and DC is not the safest place in the nation either.


.

Actually, it's quite safe. I've lived in DC and surrounding suburbs for over 40 years. I certainly don't think that it is any less safe than any city in texas. And we are not imbecilic enough to think that we have to arm ourselves to go to the grocery store like people do in some areas of the country.