Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: End the 2nd Amendment -Please share with people

Posted 10 years ago on May 31, 2012, 2:40 a.m. EST by antoniofilmmaker (21)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The killings that happened in Seattle and in Indiana was the tipping point for me. What city is next? New York? Los Angeles? You may lose a loved one tomorrow simply because the NRA has the politicians in their back pocket. Let's stop this insanity now and send a message to Washington and the NRA. I started a page on Facebook. Please "like" page. Thanks!

https://www.facebook.com/EndThe2ndAmendment

253 Comments

253 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 9 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Maybe next we should micro chip everyone so no one can ever be kidnapped. We could track everyone's every move.

We should put cameras on every street corner so no one can flee an accident.

We should put police officers in everyone's homes so we can stop domestic violence.

We should put the TSA in our bathrooms because people have died on toilets.

Sorry no thanks.

1984

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

cameras in every persons pocket ?

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You are a genius. Hopefully no one you know will be killed by some guy that happens to go to a school or restaurant and just starts shooting people. This is happening too often. Hey, let's hope you are not sitting in a restaurant with your wife and kids and this happens.

[-] 8 points by Skippy2 (485) 10 years ago

I carry so the bad guy better shoot me first. oh wait, my wife carrys too and shoots better than I do. There will be no mass shooting to spoil our romantic dinner.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

I'm no gun advocate... but I don't support stealing people's freedoms based on the actions of a few.

I hope no one I know gets murdered either. But unless you want a police state where police control everything like the TSA at an airport... we're just gonna have to live with the risk.

Even if you ban guns... you think people won't still get them? Criminals get guns illegally all the time.

A war on guns would work as well as the war on drugs. Think about it.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Let me ask you, how many people die in Canada from gun related shootings? How about in Europe? Also it depends on the penalty put in place. And I don't want to her that we have a violent history. Europe's history has been even more violent.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

We already have a penalty for Murder and people still commit murder. The penalty for murder is already very harsh.

Also I don't even own a gun. When I hear people talk about banning things it just reminds me of the war on drugs and how that's not the best solution.

I'm iffy on gun control. I like the idea but I also don't like it. But I also don't like the government taking away freedoms.

I think there's a better alternative to banning guns. Not sure what it is... because I do agree... gun violence in our country is extreme. Stabbing people violence is extreme in our country too. But we're not going to ban sharp things.

Let's say you pass a gun ban. What if people have guns illegally and never use them on anyone? Should we throw them in prison with the potheads? That's why i don't like the idea of a gun ban. A lot of good people will still keep them and you're talking about making them criminals.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Is like I posted below. You have to take an extreme position like Republicans do. Thats why they have won mostly even battle in the last 30 years. In the end they end up with what they want. So what is my goal. To band hand guns and automatic weapons. And I understand this talk about freedom used my those against restricting gun rights, but what about my freedom? Some guy can end my life tomorrow by walking in to a restaurant and just shooting.

[-] 3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

If you think that nut cant get his hands on a gun because they are illegal, you should go shop for some drugs or prositutes and see how well we do at stopping demand.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Some guy could end your life tomorrow by stabbing you in the heart.

If everyone was put in a cage with a feeding tube... not only would everyone be safe from harm... but no one would be fat.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree here. Have a good day.

[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You are funny.I have to give you that.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

so what do you think of banning smoking in public places like we have in NY?

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

they ban guns in places too. But you can have a gun on your own property. I don't mind if a privately owned place says I can't have a gun or a cigarette in their establishment. It's their property and I'm free to go somewhere else.

People can still smoke on their own property. I disagree with some ordinates in government smoking bans. Smoking might be bad... but who is the government to tell me I can't enjoy a cigarette in my bar? Employees work at those places on their own free will and patrons service those places the same way.

Are they banned in public areas too? Like a park or on a street corner? I'm not familiar with New York. I don't live there.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

So it means then that I who don't smoke should be at risk to get cancer to protect your freedom. I think it comes down to this. We are in this world together. Right now we have 8 billion people in this planet, don't you think that at some point we are going to have to deal with consumption? Not trying to get off the subject, but it all has to do with "Freedom" Thanks for your comments again.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

The Earth has plenty to go around. It is a wonderful creature.

Don't forget about the billions and billions of other species on this planet.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Remember many of them are becoming extinct.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

So did the dinosaurs.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Also look at what is happening with the price of oil. I really hope soon we will have other sources of energy because if not these 8 billion people are not going to be around long.You obviously know where am headed. I think we need to have a serious discussion in this country about the word "freedom" LOL.Thanks!

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

I would love to see Solar take charge!

It's kind of absurd that it hasn't yet.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

By the way, did you hear that Bloomberg is trying t banned large portions of sugary drinks. I agree. LOL.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Yeah that made me laugh too. That is a prime example of pointless government invasion that will solve nothing. Are they going to ban free refills? People will pay for a refill if they have to. LOL indeed.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Obviously I agree with you there. In that case the individual is doing that to himself. Look am for legalizing drugs. But as you know already guns is a different matter. Obviously it's a very complex matter but we need to have a serious discussion and hear both sides. Not just my point of view is it.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

This is where we should be going: Green Energy we have the technology we just need to use it. This is what I am talking about. A clean future to be implemented NOW!

http://www.hopewellproject.org/

http://ecat.com/

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/all/1

FuelCell Energy http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_id=600

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Thanks I will check it out!!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

This goes way beyond solar or wind. Which I believe are helpful but not the answer.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

I think it was more fair to have two sections. One smoking one not smoking. Was safer for the smoking patrons as well rather then having them step out onto the street or into an alley.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

I do get your point there. But smoking in a small area is going to affect everyone.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

To do so should have proper exhaust ventilation. This I always felt was an oversight. Workers should not be exposed because they have a job to do. Proper active exhaust ventilation should always have been a qualifier.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Thats hard to monitor. I mean I get what you are saying. Think about like you said workers that have to be in environments like that. That must be horrible.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Inspections/testing required prior to approval of indoor smoking.

[-] 2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 10 years ago

If the patrons of that restaurant have a permit to carry they can defend themselves and STOP the shooter. Duh. But hey...just fine the hell out of the guy afterwards...or make him face a stiff penalty instead. THAT makes up for all the people he killed because he had a gun and no one else did. Yep.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Love your logic. Lets all kill ourselves. Kind of like in the film "true Romance"

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 10 years ago

You seem to have a problem with the concept of logic as well as a problem distinguishing between "killing" done by a perp/wacko/nutjob/evil person and "self defense".

[-] 1 points by jbgramps (159) 10 years ago

Depending on whose numbers you believe, there are between 190 and 360 million privately owned guns in America, An estimated 85 million gun owners. Right this minute two major gun manufactures (Ruger and S&W) have over a million gun back order and have suspended new orders. One of the best selling weapons today is the AR-15 assault rifle. Most people who own a gun actually own several different types of firearms.

Gun ownership in America has skyrocketed in the past few years and shows no sign of slowing down. I personnel think this phenomenon this is a combination of people feeling the need for self defense; and people gearing up for when things collapse.

The bottom line is the government can’t find and remove all the guns. Most people will not give up their ability to protect themselves. Generally speaking, gun laws are becoming more liberal. I think every State except Illinois allows citizens to legally carry firearms. Some States even allow open carrying of a gun.

Bottom line> Guns, and gun owners aren’t going away.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Some of us carry guns and are trained on when and how to use them. So chances are we'd have a good chance of stopping the psychopath in his tracks. Why do we carry? Cops always show up AFTER they're needed and a cop is too heavy to carry and too expensive to feed.

I'll take my chances relying on my skills and my gun rather than waiting for a cop to arrive then waiting some more while they figure out what to do....

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by jbgramps (159) 10 years ago

No guns? Then how will we be able tp protect ourselves from the anarchists, black bloc, antifa and other dangerous people?

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 10 years ago

Chips are for identification, NOT tracking. Their range is inches.

Try death penalty for anyone who uses a gun in a crime and anyone whose "lost "gun is used in a crime? Make responsible gun owners, responsible. IF you have to register to vote and to drive a car, should you have to register to kill people? Guns don't kill people, people do.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

This is Progressive ideology in action Trevor. This is the kind of shit that permeates this forum,this kind of insanity only seems to come from the Left side of the field.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 10 years ago

Oh Tupac....

I believe in the 2nd Amend. and do carry.... and I am a leftist progressive

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Good to hear you do,but how can you then vote for politicians that don't share your beliefs and are actively trying to disarm you and dissolve our 2nd Amendment freedoms?

Obama is of this mindset,will you vote for him again?

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

unions are protected under the right to peacefully assemble

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 10 years ago

I no longer vote as I feel that it is meaningless. Corporations with billions have the ears of my representatives.... which is why I have taken to the streets to put pressure on DC through acts of civil disobedience with others who think as I do.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Obama has only increased gun rights and never mentioned trying to disarm anyone. You misrepresent his actions because you are anti Obama?

[-] 1 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 10 years ago

Obama assured the Brady Bunch that his anti gun efforts had to be 'under the radar'. Have you heard of Fast and Furious? Before you say anything about Wide Receiver, that program was done with the full knowledge of, and in partnership with, the Mexican authorities.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

What about fast and furious? Didn't Pres Obama end "fast and furious" Which started under your boy Bush In any event I don't support selling guns to Drugs cartels. Our gun manuf/dealers benefit from an immoral trade that hurst american law enforcement. As such our gun manuf/deal should be punished. Unrelated to 2nd amendment. You disagree?

[-] 0 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 10 years ago

F&F was a direct assault on the 2nd ammendment. It was ended after some ATF whistleblowers came forward after the Terry incident. Totally different from Bush's widereceiver program, which was done in partnership with Mexico.

Punishing gun mfgs is ludcirous. Punish those who misuse guns. I've never heard of a gun committing murder on it's own with malice aforethought.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Manuf/dealers profit from gun sales that wind up arming the criminals who kill/wound law enforcement and innocent citizens. They do not get a free ride. Not from me. I guess you own some gun stocks but profits are less important than disarming criminals. Sorry

[-] 0 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 10 years ago

Yes and they also profit from hunters, target shooters, and your beloved LEO's. Get a grip. Disarming criminals is a LEO issue, there are plenty (too many) local, state and federa; laws that aim to do just that.

I unfortunately unload my stock in Ruger far too soon and Smith and Wesson has a shaky balance sheet.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Profiting from hunters is fine, from target shooters as well. LEO's? Don't know it. But from the arming od criminals? No I can't support that. Maybe it's ok with you. Neither can I support profits from sales to mexican drug cartels. Is that ok with you too? How about military weapons to governments that kill there own people? Can we agree we shouldn't support those profits as well? C'mon, people over profits. Support the freedom to stay alive and unhurt.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

You've learned a new trick,now don't wear this one out okay?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

You retain the one trick I've seen from you. The one trick that has been at the root of Americas weakness from our founding. The insidous virus that is racism. This country is uniquely for all people of the world. It will fulfill that promise despite short sighted neanderthal thinking racists. You are an anachronism. Your philosophy is tired and anti American.

[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Read my other posts my friend. You don't know me so don't be calling me names.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Yesterday tupacsugar used "injun" to describe native americans, and "illegals" to describe immigrant voters. He has also spewed the racist rooted "birther conspiracy" nonsense. Just so you know what kinda person your dealing with.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Thanks now I know. I figure something like that. But I will give him a chance t express his views thats the only way to really know why he feels the way he does.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

good man. good luck. BTW. I think we should at least stop allowing gun manufacturers/dealers to slide when their guns wind up in the hands of criminals. There so many loopholes they exploit for the almighty dollar under the guise of 2nd amendment rights it is offensive. Eliminating the right would be so difficult. I don't know about that.

[-] 3 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

So should we sue GM, Chrysler and Ford when someone drives drunk and kills someone else. The logic behind the argument is EXACTLY the same.

Oh yea, you have no right to drive, but you do have a right to own a gun.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Ahhhhhhhh!. prevent manufactures/dealers from profiting from criminals getting guns!

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

There are already laws in place and required background checks in place to buy guns. Gun makers don't profit from second hand sales just as Ford and GM DON'T profit from used car sales.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

They laws are too weak because guess what millions of guns are winding up in criminal hands. Manu may not benefit from 2nd hand sales but they do from the 1st hand. Profit is profit. And dealers benefit from the 2nd hand sales. This is ok with you? It ain't ok with most police chiefs, it ain't ok with most big cities where those criminals are killing our police and citizens. And cars are not made to wound or kill. (even they have that capacity) You sound ridiculous repeating that nonsense.

[-] 2 points by Stormcrow1 (-25) 10 years ago

Maybe the focus should be on the "criminal element" instead of the method used to kill someone. You see if you place a gun on a table it's not going to do anything unless someone decides to do something with it.

So, to say that we need to repeal the 2nd amendment would be the same as sayiing lets take citizens rights away from them to protect themselves.

The problem is not with the firearm it's with our society.

[-] -2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

We are focusing on the criminal. Do you not see the record number of criminals in jail.? Hello? And I didn't suggest repealing the 2nd amendment. I said lets get the manuf/dealers are benefitting from these guns that wind up in criminal hands. Why protect them. this has nothing to do with 2nd amendment. Does 2nd protect criminals gun rights?

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Like your comment.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Yours too!

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Well,well if it isn't the resident knee-jerk,racist alarmist. My,my you sure get around.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

Racist virus! Go back to your backwoods cross burning. OWS is not about hate. We are about love. The 99% is made up of all people native American, Immigrants, African Americans, LGBT. All people. Except racists. We reject your superiority based ideology!

[-] -1 points by Odin (583) 10 years ago

We can agree on that Loki :-). I am over some friend's home now. They're repubs....but have been able to make inroads with them understanding my involvement with OWS. One of the daughters talked about a friend who was losing her home. I explained the whole irresponsible system that corrupt bankers set up which caused so many people so much pain. People are beginning to understand. My friend's son-in-law R laughed when I told him someone here said I was a repub. Will answer your comms when I get home.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

We may agree on much you and I. I just think we must Vote. Too many people have died for this right. despite the false choices, corruption, the supporters of OWS are the natural supporters of the progressive agenda the country needs. If we aren't counted then anti progressives will gain more control. And all will be lost. It appears this where we might disagree.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 10 years ago

Also my point in telling you about the R family that i have dinner with every week is, the son-in-law who i used to have heated political debates with when i supported the dems....well we no longer have those because of my different approach which was gained through knowlege. We are no longer asked to leave the room, well not as often anyway. lol I know that i am reaching him now. Even so, i do not expect him to join OWS any time soon. :-)

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 10 years ago

OK Modi, I think we agree on almost everything except the tactics to get us to where we want to go. The poster allen articulated it well something like, OWS should remain a protest machine, not a solution one, as that only divides us. Many people in this movement are gentlemanly and lady-like :-), reaching out to the mainstream during the day, and being hell raisers at night. That needed paradox should be a blueprint for all of us

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 10 years ago

I don't disagree with that. In fact I take part in that. I just believe we should encourage voting to prevent the anti 99% powers from gaining more control.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 10 years ago

I just believe that it takes the fire away from our movement and it will eventually render us impotent, if we promote this within OWS. That is my sincere concern Gotta go out now.

[-] -2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

You're giving me a lot of love now,thank you.

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

What "names" might those be?

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You are proof that the Republicans have won the battle so far. They on the other hand take extreme positions or say that they love the country more than everyone else, yet the result is what it is. I just feel bad for those veterans coming home without legs or arms. For what? This is where they have taken the country where someone as reasonable as you makes that comment.

[-] 2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

The comment you are replying to was made in respect to your post here to "end the 2nd Amendment".

Ending the 2nd Amendment,If THAT position is not "extreme" please tell me what is? Now do you say you also love the country more than everyone else?

Of course we all feel bad for those bravest among us who have sacrificed so much in the service of our country,the fact that they are volunteers makes them all that more heroic. These people are the best of what America has to offer and represent the finest qualities of America and we salute them and appreciate them.

I'm getting that you are very confused and are having a hard time staying on topic and are all over the map. I'm trying to address each issue but you really are not very clear or concise.

I'm afraid you don't really know anything outside of Liberal/Leftist dogmatic ideology. You seem to have erroneous prejudged and preconceived notions of Conservatives and don't have an open mind to hearing anything other than your Progressive scripted beliefs.

This is a shame,coming from someone who claims to have been a teacher whom I assume believe's in learning and discovering that which you do not know or understand.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

By the way someone just told me that you were making racist remarks. But hey we are here to have a conversation so I won't judge you.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

By the way before I leave, I want to say that I do know my history on conservatism. All the way down to the father of conservatism Edmund Burke and ironically enough he was arguing against the French revolution. So I will deal with that later tonight, Meanwhile I'm still waiting for your defense on the 2nd amendment.

[-] 2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Reading "The Dainty Kos" and "The Huffing Paint Post" does not give you an education on the history of conservatism.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

I guess you guys don't read. Did you read my post. Tell me about Edmund Burke? What argument he use to argue for conservatism? And don't go google or use wikipedia. You have 2 minutes to answer.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

One more thing, why the Tupac name here? LOL. Do you know hte history of that name?

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You are totally interpreting what I said incorrectly. But I will reply later on tonight to your comment. Hey at least you toned down your insults. Thanks for that.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

If you think the other side isnt as guilty of stupidity, then you need your head examined

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Never said RINO's weren't capable of tremendous stupidity.

Nixon and the executive order creating the EPA comes to mind.

McCain,Feingold,

Boner is a crybaby.

Goober Grahamnesty is an idiot.

[-] 3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

I agree. And the people are fine with it, because the majority of them all will be reelected.

No one is dumber than the voting public.

[-] -2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Yes,we experienced a wave of idiocy in 2008 giving us the Choomer Preezy in Chief.

Hopefully this Nov. America will make amends by voting out Barry and Joe.

[-] 3 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

And select Willard? You are crazy.

[-] 1 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

barack hussein obama, aka barry soetoro, is a complete fabrication. check out barry and the low down club in chicago.

[-] -2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Romney is considerably more preferable to Obama the Destroyer.

[-] 2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Both are bought and paid for by the Wall St bankers, so now what's the real difference between them? Either path leads to the destruction of this nation, you get the same end result, just a slightly different path taken to get there.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

If you think there will be substantial or even minimal change by doing that, you are just as dumb as the rest of em.

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Really now,McCain was a loser,Palin was the person that would have made a huge difference had she been given the opportunity.

Now Romney isn't my first choice by any means and I'm not really happy with that choice....BUT right now anybody other than Obama is most preferable. I believe a real Conservative can make a real difference,Romney isn't that although he is a vastly better and more qualified person then Obama was or is.

[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Now thats funny! LOL. Now I know where you stand. So lets repeat the same mistakes G.W. and company made. That's what Willard is proposing. Like someone said, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Go elect Willard. LOL. Obama hasn't done enough. That's my problem with him. When you look at the health care bill and most of his ideas they were Republican ideas. We really haven't seen a liberal president since LBJ.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

"So lets repeat the same mistakes G.W. and company made."

Obongo has been nothing more than a continuation of the overspending individual rights stripping crap from the Bush Jr. administration, but he's been worse on the debt and just as bad on individual rights.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

There are no power players in the congress/field that are conservatives. Just like there are none that are liberals. ITs all corporatist bullshit that keeps us focused on the other side, the ones WE DONT VOTE FOR.

I think the fact that Palin was willing to sidle up with that clown McCain shows a lot about what she values.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

I believe Palin saw McCain as a vehicle to further her career in politics and to get her closer to maybe a White House run. She is a Conservative and tends to police her own party as well. I have a whole lot of respect and admiration for Sarah Palin. Watch "The Undefeated",the movie about Palin. It will give you a new perceptive on this very intelligent and dynamic person.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Dude do you read?Palin? This woman didn't know where South America was. This is crazy talk.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Actually that was Tina Fey acting like she didn't know where South America was. "I can see Russia from my house" was Tina Fey as well.

Obama is no intellectual either, why do you think he keeps his college records sealed.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Dude Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. Read some articles there and get back to me. Link is below.

http://www.harvardlawreview.org/index.php

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Only b/c of his race. The articles are still edited before publication.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

You need to open your eyes there dumbass. Race is a issue b/c Obummer and Holder make it a issue. They're the real racist for ignoring voter intimidation based on the race of the offender. Letting civil rights violation slide based on race is the most racist thing one can do besides killing another based on their race. So get yourself a clue and open your eyes there antonio b/c you're being used as a "useful idiot."

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Really? How you know that? You were there when the decision was made. Besides killing another human being, I put racism right after that as one of the worst. I'm through with you. You had revealed yourself as that and nothing besides. A racist that is. Instead look inside yourself and examine why you are blaming someone that came from nothing as the reason for your problems. Sad.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Dude,do you employ any kind of individual critical thinking or do you simply subscribe to Liberal group think and never question the party line?

If you have any kind of intelligence of your own you will watch "The Undefeated" with an open mind instead of regurgitating Leftist lies and propaganda.

Do you know how foolish you sound repeating the Liberal media propaganda like it is truth?

If you are a film maker and you only disseminate Leftist propaganda through your product you are no better then Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels,he would approve of that kind of film making.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

You're basing your opinion of Palin on a Hollywood-produced propaganda piece instead of the real person? You can't be serious. That bitch is fucking stupid.

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

You assume enough to make an ass out of yourself but me?.....I know what my opinion is based on however your opinion is based on Leftist propaganda and bullshit.

"That bitch is fucking stupid."

That kind of statement is obviously ignorant and shows me you don't know WTF you're talking about,nor does your knowledge base seem to reflect reality or anything other than Liberal blogs and an overdose of Keith Overbite and MSLSD,so can you blame anybody for thinking you are a fucking dipshit.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

Uh huh. Yeah. You're basing your opinion of someone on a fucking MOVIE. And you call me a dipshit. You're a hater and a moron, tupac. You prove it every time you post. Every time.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Dude I saw her interview on CBS. The woman couldn't put two words together and you wanted this person to represent us. LOL. You are funny,. Seriously, I'm thinking of going to Hollywood and writing comedy maybe I can use you. You are hilarious!

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago
[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

You certainly possess the ignorance,hubris and arrogance to fit right in with the Hollyweird elite. Good luck with that.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

No but I want you to come with me because like I said you are hilarious. You will do great there. And in the process we can help elect Sarah Palin and have Eddie Munster as her vice president. Is he still alive by the way? Last I heard he was dating a porn star.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Someone who is willing to partner with a sell out for her own career is someone that will partner with someone for their own career.

Hence, just another politician.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Dude most of what he has passed have been Republican ideas. 1. The Health care bill was an idea that Bob dole and company came up as an alternative to Clinton's plan back in the 90's and of course Willard put in place in Massachusetts. And I hope you know that the Heritage foundation was the one that came up with the mandate. 2. He extended the tax cuts for the rich. 3. He kept the detention center in Guantanamo. 4. The biggest tax cuts to all tax payers in recent history was provided by the Obama administration during the stimulus package. I ca go on and on. Now do you remember what was happening during the administration of your boy G.W. and the "evil one" Cheney? Remember the economy? Remember the wars they got us in?

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

The tax cut for the average American was about $15 a week. With the huge increase Obummer has helped cause with gas prices, no one noticed....

At least Bush gave us a check DIRECTLY instead of bailing out Bank Of America several times.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

And don't forget, get your facts straight, the first bail out came under George W.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

My friend now I know you don't know what you are talking about. Gas prices has nothing to do with us. Let me tell you what it has to do with, It has to do with countries like China, India and Brazil consuming oil now that they have some money. I hope you know that these emerging economies are the one making the price of oil go up and it will continue to go up, unless we can come up with other sources of energy.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago
[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You guys are simply not well informed.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Actually we are informed, we're just not willing to cover for thr policies of a incompetent boob.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 10 years ago

That's bs.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

We shall see what we shall see come Nov.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

It's "Flimsy Gramnesty"....now get it right....

He is a little "fruity" and he's been hanging around a lot with Barney Frank lately....That won't go over with the people in SC very well...

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

Please let's not get talking about left and right. This isn't Fox News.

[-] -2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Also base on your logic, if you are hit by a car in a highway, we should leave you to die and not call an ambulance. You guys with that stupid libertarian nonsense. That is until you are old and need help or get sick.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 10 years ago

How did you draw that conclusion?

I fully support the push for public option healthcare, medicare, and healthcare for all in general.

Sometimes bad things happen.

A war on guns would work as well as the war on drugs. Millions of people still use "illegal" drugs and there's a huge black market too.

Remember when prohibition failed?

You shouldn't rush to judgement without thinking things through...

Did you know teaching kids about safe sex works better than teaching abstinence? Think about it.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Okay. I do get your point. You id sound like a libertarian with your first point, but I do get what you are saying. I think it can be done. Look at countries like Canada another countries in Europe. Some people will get access to guns yes, but you have to put stiff penalties in place. Sorry for my statement previously about you.

[-] 4 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Dont punish my ability to protect my family due to the stupidity of a few.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Protect your family from what? Are we living in the wild west?

[-] 3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

Have you ever been robbed? Or beaten?

Or if a girl, raped?

I personally want the population able to defend themselves from lunatics on the streets, especially with the way the world is going.

[-] 0 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

i have been robbed at gunpoint, in my home. i now have a gun permit

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

I've been robbed at knife point. Well, he tried. Now I have a nice shiny butterfly knife as a memento of the occasion, and I let the little thug keep his life even though I would have been well within my rights to end his since he pulled a deadly weapon while trying to commit a crime. Since I only have $3 on me at the time I wouldn't have been surprised if I would have gotten stabbed for not having any money if I had not had the pistol with me.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

I cant imagine some lunatic coming into someones house, and that person has no way to defend their family and something really bads happens.

Im glad you are seemingly ok.

[-] 2 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

i had a gun pointed at my head, my hands were tied up behind my back and i was forced to show where i kept my valuables. they police were worthless in this situation. it ws after this incident that i got a permit and learned how to use a gun. thank you for your concern. keep this in mind, when seconds count , the police are minutes away.

[-] 1 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 10 years ago

You obviously haven't been to Chicago outside the Loop.

[-] 4 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 10 years ago

You blame firearms for a violent society, when in fact the fault lies in our glorification of violence.

Consider the American popularity of modern gladiatorial contests, the overwhelming success of violent video games, the box-office numbers of blood-lust movies then tell me with a straight face that guns are to blame. We elevate violence into a desirable, sexual object but act surprised, when someone actually commits such detestable deeds.

Our society defines the desirability of violence, not guns.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Actually you made some great points, but again I don't agree on guns. I'm okay with people having rifles to hunt and so on.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

EXACTLY!

[-] 3 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

OWS is about ending political corruption, enhancing citizen participation in our democracy, and economic sanity. Yes, we stand against racism, and all other sorts of bigotry, and we stand on the side of sanity (and thus against bizarre laws like stand your ground) ... but hopefully we don't lump the second amendment onto our pile of issues. Many Americans view the second amendment as a precious civil right, especially those of us who understand the reasoning behind the second amendment, and the history.

I spent 10 years in the Army (both reserves & active), in combat zones armed to the teeth (with enough ammunition to supply a small army), I've owned firearms privately ... and I've never thought about using a firearm in anger (not even once).

If you want to say the NRA is a bunch of yahoo dick heads, fine (I'm not sure I disagree with that contention), but the second amendment is a civil right, and OWS should not be in the business of endorsing a dilution of our civil rights.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 10 years ago

Reminds me of an old Archie Bunker episode:

Gloria: Daddy, Daddy, 150 people were killed with handguns in the city last year!

Archie: Well, would it make you feel any better if they was all pushed out of windows?


The right for the citizenry to arm themselves in order to protect themselves against governmental abuse is necessary. Violence is a last resort and not a road we want to go down, but to eliminate that option would be unwise.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

I second that .... and I would also say, poorly thought out, populist laws, like stand your ground (emotionalism gone wild), actually puts our second amendment in jeopardy, and threatens our liberty. So people who care about the second amendment should be especially peeved at the Florida legislature for concocting this stupid shit.

[-] 3 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 10 years ago

When only police have guns, it's called a police state.

[-] 2 points by CommonSense2345 (-5) 10 years ago

Thank you! Except the criminals will still find guns. You will only disarm law-abiding citizens who just want to defend themselves.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Is not as simple as that. And what you are saying doesn't hold up. Look at whats happening in Syria. People there are trying to go against the government by using violence. What has happened? You will never compete with an army or government as far as guns go, unless you make all sorts of weapons available. Nuclear and so on. To me this is more about a bunch of guys with nothing else to do feeling powerful by having a gun.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

The Syrian people are generally unarmed, so of course they're getting slaughtered. Having a heavily armed populace gives the threat of force against a corrupt government, which can actually be more effective than the use of force itself.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

And don't give me the example of the American Revolution. We are living in a totally different world.

[-] 3 points by Coyote1983 (61) 10 years ago

And when someone breaks into your house at night with a gun? What do you do then, if you are unarmed? Run away?

That doesn't work for me. The moment someone steps onto my property with violent intent towards me, it's on.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Not really, it's the same violence filled world, it's just that better technology has given us quicker and more efficient ways of killing larger numbers of people.

[-] 3 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

You are just an overly distraught Liberal that is overcome by your emotions and not very educated about the history and reasons for the 2nd Amendment.

People have been killing people before the invention of the gun and will continue killing one another no matter how many freedoms and liberties you seek to deny them. You fail to understand the very basic reasons why someone owns a gun and you sound like you've never had one or even shot a gun for that matter.

What you suggest doing IS insanity.

Guns don't kill people,people kill people,by any means possible.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

I''m not distraught. I actually have taken action doing films and other things regarding my point of view. Forget that stupid liberal nonsense, I'm down to issues my friend. As far as the history of the 2nd amendment, we are not living in he 1700's, 1800's or in the wilderness anymore and actually studies have been done about people protecting themselves with guns, most times is used against them.

As far as citizens having the option of taking down the government which can be another reason for it, Think? What has it done ? So forget that liberal shit.. I think that the reason why OWS has failed after the initial influence on changing the narrative from austerity to the 1% was having a positive massage and believing change can happen. I did a documentary about it. Have to believe in change. Now all we have is negative talk.

[-] 0 points by CommonSense2345 (-5) 10 years ago

If you get a gun and learn how to use I might actually have some respect for you. But since you wouldn't even know how to load a gun I think you no right to call for an end to others' liberties.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Wow,you're a big time Hollywierd Directer? Wow,like I'm so not impressed. You're as ignorant as you are comprehensively challenged. Your sophomoric understanding of this issue is as pathetic as your explanation.

Leftists are all about defeating the 2nd Amendment and you really have no clue as to why that is do you?

Before you waste anymore of your resources or time on trying to "make a film" why don't you become educated and really develop a fundamental understanding about all aspects of this issue instead of going off half cocked,all wee,weed up on Leftist indignation and hubris.

You demonstrate a very limited and flawed understanding of this issue and you're all juiced up on Leftist anti-gun propaganda with all the bullshit fraudulent pseudo-facts that go along with it.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Unlike you that needs to insult people, I know the issue very well. I taught history. But since you know everything and I don't I will just leave it there. Thanks for commenting. Be well.

[-] 1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

I seriously doubt you taught anybody anything except spreading Leftist propaganda. Be well too.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

I can change my mind, since you say you know the issue, lay out your defense for the 2nd amendment?

[-] 3 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Look,that's not how this works. There's no reason to try and defend the Constitution to you. You are the one that wants to alter a fully adopted Amendment to the Constitution and you've already made your case with this post. I've responded already as to why I disagree with your post.

If you claim to know the 2nd Amendment so well and understand this issue completely then you are simply expressing your dissatisfaction with this Amendment.

If you are looking for someone to give you advice or more information to help reshape your opinion and possibly change your mind,I can do that.

I recommend you start by going to a shooting range and sign up for instructional classes in fire arms safety,handling and shooting.

Learn what it is like to handle and fire a handgun. Once you have this prospective you might just find that you actually enjoy target shooting as a pastime. If you come to respect and own a handgun and are capable of firing with accuracy you will become more self empowered with the knowledge....you can defend yourself and your family as well.

Living by the 2nd Amendment is far more fun, gratifying and positively empowering then ignorance,fear and loathing of one of the most sacred rights and liberties afforded to us by our Constitution.

Granted guns are not for everybody but you being a Liberal should make appreciation of the pro-choice environment in this country of owning or not owning a fire arm for personal reasons a point we can both agree upon.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

I was planning to reply to your comment, but I will just leave it at that. Like Bill Parcells says you are what your record says you are and that is not going to change regardless of what I say.

[-] 2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

Well,that's cool but remember railing against our Constitutional rights is not a wise or prudent course to pursue. First,the 2nd Amendment is subverted,then the 1st Amendment will be also degraded or completely deleted.

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Still thanks for your passion regardless.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

That says how ignorant you are. I taught thousands of people. I feel sorry for you. Sad!

[-] 2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Propaganda isn't teaching, it's indoctrinating.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

C -

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

But you haven't demonstrated here that you know enough or fully understand the 2nd Amendment. You seem to only regurgitate Leftist anti-gun rhetoric. So excuse me,I only have your comments to form my opinion of you and it's not a very positive one now.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Let me teach something. As far as point of view, everything is a point of view. Go read Nietzsche's "Genealogy of Morals" read the section on 'we philosophers' So don't give me this propaganda nonsense.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

No you don't, you know FAR less than you think you do. You've proved that over and over.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

And by the way the reason why you are here on this site is because of the actions taken by the Obama administration of going half way. The reason why the Republicans have won every battle for the last 30 years and transformed the country into their image is by taking an extreme position and getting what they want in the end. They have been successful at that, meanwhile Democrats are always caving in and that is why they may lose the White House this coming elections.

Obviously if people want to hunt and do things like that its fine. But there is no need for hang guns or automatic weapons.

[-] -1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

WTF is a "hang gun?" You don't even know enough about firearms to make a valid argument. Also, find the last time a legally owned automatic weapon was used in a crime.......Yea, I hear crickets chirping.......Why is that? It's b/c you have NO CLUE how involved the process is in obtaining a automatic weapon. One has to be finger printed, get permission of the local sheriff on their ATF Form 1, pay a $200 tax, pass a background check that takes appx. 6 months, posess the tax stamp with the weapon, and have the weapon available for ATF inspection if they were ever to ask for it. Not to mention legally acquired automatic weapons often cost in excess of $10,000. How do I know? I've been through the process several times you moron, that's how I know, and that's also how I know that you know less than shit about this subject. So do us all a favor and just shut you pie hole or move to the UK.

[-] 3 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You are a genius. Great way to have a conversation. You can be a lawyer for sure and argue in the Supreme court when the time comes. Your eloquence is amazing!!!

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

None of that changes the fact that you're a clueless fool that's more than willing to hand over what little personal sovereignty he has left and has no idea what he's talking about.

What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not get? It's there for a reason, and apparently you're too dense to understand the true reason why the founding fathers of this nation thought forearm ownership was important enough to place right under freedom of speech in the #2 slot within the Bill Of Rights.

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 10 years ago

personally i think the constitution should give us all the permits and permission to own an automatic gun, and it should be illegal for government to own an automatic weapon seeing as their power is already tilted in their favor.

[-] 1 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 10 years ago

It DOES!!!! The right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. However, we have allowed the Fed, states like IL, CA and NY, as well as cities like Chicago and DC to infringe away!

Why should I need a license to carry when that is a right spelled out by our founding fathers? How can DC and Chicago make it virtually illegal to carry (in DC it's even illegal to OWN) a firearm without having a permit and registering it?

But, hey, the 2nd amd isn't the only one being ground away these days. Probable cause is required for a search warrant, but has been bastardized into all that is required for a warrantless search/arrest. How the hell can you justify cameras on every street corner and stop and frisk if you take our constitution seriously? OWS is facilitating the destruction of the 1st amd.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

This particular "filmmaker" can be kind of clueless and frustrating but on the other "hang" who gives a fuck? Right? Just another youngster you hasn't had shit for experience and reads the dailykos religiously.

[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Tupac Amaru you are hilarious! I need you. We will be rich! Tupac. LOL.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Only Darwinism gets away with fixing stupid anymore, and it's unfortunate that we as a society try to protect people like that from themselves and we don't just let nature take it's course.

[-] 2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 10 years ago

LMAO. Yep,tis be a shame.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

antoniofilmmaker is a plant of the 1%. He's over here promoting ideas that make it far easier for the 1% to subjugate the people while the 0.001% of the 1% who really own everything and posses all the power are meeting in Virginia as we speak to plan the future of the planet.

[-] -1 points by CommonSense2345 (-5) 10 years ago

By the logic of OWS it is more sensible to outlaw cars. They say it because of gun crime but more people die in car accidents. 90% of gun crime is caused by stolen or unregistered firearms. So why should we give up our guns if we just want to defend ourselves? During Prohibition, crime rates soared.

Its funny how people want to outlaw things. People who drive a prius want to outlaw pick-up trucks. People who hate flying want to outlaw air travel. People who couldn't identify let alone replace the upper receiver of an AR-15 want to outlaw guns! They wouldn't be able to tell us the first rule of gun safety so why do they think they know better than us.

[-] 2 points by wellhungjury (296) 10 years ago

Go ahead and give up your guns. I will not stop you.

[-] 2 points by Justoneof99 (80) 10 years ago

"The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing." I carry & support a strong military. Those who are passive in the face of evil are no less guilty than the tyrants. If you don't like that, think of Ali, the 11-year-old who fell to the floor of his home, soaking his clothes with his brother’s blood to fool the killers into thinking he was already dead.while they slaughtered his family.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

guilt is not important the people must resist the abuse violence

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Let me see if I follow your logic, so an 11 year old should have access to a gun?

[-] 2 points by Justoneof99 (80) 10 years ago

If you are capable of following logic, his father & mother should. But they are dead now.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Depends on the 11 year old. Very few are mature enough. But there is always the rare exceptional child.

[-] 2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Kim Jong Ill, and Castro would all agree with the OP..........

[-] 2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

OP is a fucking moron and too short sighted to realize the only reason the rest of the Bill Off Rights can exist is that the ultimate resolution to tyranny is through the use of force and the 2nd amendment guarantees that the people have that right.

Guess we'll go ahead and ban cars, hot dogs, chicken bones, plastic knives, skateboards and everything else that's ever caused a unnatural death. Fuck it, while we're at it, lets ban doctors and medications, doctors and medications kill FAR more people than guns do every year!!!!

[-] -2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

You are a genius!

[-] 2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

It's stupid idiots like you that allow tyranny to take hold b/c you're so willing to give away yours and every one else's rights in exchange for false security. News flash for ya here coolbreeze, even if you tried, you can't get rid of guns, even if you ban ammo you can't get rid of guns. Why? I can waltz into a hardware store right now and leave with everything needed to make a homemade shotgun ad the ammo for it. So are you going to ban plumbing, nuts and bots as well as common household chemicals as well?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

You must have googled 'P.A. Luty.'

[-] 2 points by Coyote1983 (61) 10 years ago

You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

In Texas, California, New York or in any other state - just whyTF do some people think that they are entitled to own and keep - weapons of war at home?!!!

The Original 2A was all about a "citizens' militia" from the time of - NO Standing Army and single shot flintlock weapons - NOT powerful automatic and semi-automatic guns ffs!!

Unlike ANY AND ALL other countries in the world, whyTF do Americans need such Military Weapons?!

As for the fkn RWNJ NRA, as ever, they've No Real Answers to anything at all - bar Even More Guns!

requiescat in pace et per aspera ad iudicium?!

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23620) 2 months ago

Worshiping the 2nd amendment has become like a religion. Reading what the founders said in a fundamental way is ridiculous in this day and age.

Like you say, there is no need for a standing militia. We have the biggest freaking army in the world ffs!

It also begs the question of the rights of the people killed to have lived, and for all of us to not have to live in constant fear of being killed somewhere randomly by some nutter who should never have had access to a gun!

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

"Will the Gun Lobby Block New Safety Laws Again? The NRA Is Imploding - But Its Ideology Still Dominates"!

et spero meliora ...

[-] 0 points by grapes (5232) 2 months ago

I wonder whether you're "American" if you don't already know why but I believe that I may have the answer to whyTF. The Original Sin of "America" is the enslavement of the African captives. The slave owners needed guns to put down any slave rebellions, even at their own beds. Slaves were known to rebel against their masters and masters' households.

That was the origin of the traditional ownership of guns, largely by Whites. Others who own guns are gunned down at a much higher rate than Whites so gun-bearing de facto became a Whites' privilege via evolution (e.g. a Black man defending against a no-knock police search-warrant raid is often gunned down, dead). It's systemic and deeply culturally ingrained. Believe it or not, I researched into this a little bit nearly fifty years ago so we're still traversing on the same old smoke circle. Contrary to Western idea of linear time, experienced time is in a sense circular because of the supreme law of causality.

There were also the "Indians" who might come in the middle of the night to scalp the frontier-living pioneers who had penetrated and settled in the Native American nations' land. Guns were life-saving for the Whites and life-ending for the Red raiders. Western peoples went to a new land with steel swords, guns, boats, trinkets, and explosives, built a stockade or fence around a desired plot of land, displayed a flag prominently, and defended the new colony with guns and trinket trading. Guns were foundational to White European Colonialism worldwide. The U.S. came out of British Colonies so guns figured prominently. Where I was born, on the Kowloon side of the British [Far East] Crown Colony Hong Kong, the daily ritual of the noonday gunshot over Victoria Harbor/Harbour reminded people of the British Colonial-era punishment for the uppity merchant group of Hong Kong. I suspect that my paternal Grandpa probably belonged to this Jardine-Matheson trading group and was involved in running the East China leg to his hometown of Ningpo/Ningbo which had a deepwater port that can serve heavily laden coastal ships (Hong Kong was where the cargoes would be traded and switched over from the warehouses to oceanworthy ships for the hazardous up-to-nine-month(s)-long wind sailing { "steam navigation" achieved a great breakthrough in speed and schedule dependability and thus appeared in the names of companies, including the one of my Grandpa's } voyage round Cape of Good Hope to reach northern Europe's ports probably, { as marked on an old pages-starting-to-fall-apart atlas I was thumbing through as a young child and noted the duck-shaped Africa [I saw downside-up ducks but they had been roasted to a crispy brown color and hung up like that on hooks in markets and restaurants]; the ö intrigued me because it looked like two eyes and a yelling mouth [in König, the German word for King, obviously with a Mouth big enough to suck his own foot] } Danzig and Königsberg.) The "pirates" probably were the gungho Chinese fishermen from the well-positioned-to-raid-the-British-shipping-[¿including trading notorious opium? { My Mom told me the eerie founding story of our new clan out of the old clan by the extremely wealthy adoptee founder with hubris who wasn't allowed by the old clan to put his father's memorial plaque into the ancestral hall; how did he get his extreme wealth ? could it have come from the opium trade ? perhaps his father didn't take up his fatherly responsibility towards the adoptee's mother who might have been a daughter from the old clan ? one or more generations before my Grandpa's time would put the extreme wealth accumulation to the time of the Opium Wars; my Grandpa certainly had business connections with northern and probably southwestern {e.g. bacalao-technology} Europe; how did he form those connections ? one possibility is that the trade through Canton/Guangzhou enriched the new clan's founder who might have been a trade-regulating official sent there from the Ching/Qing dynasty civil service to help modernize China via trade after Canton/Guangzhou, Ningpo/Ningbo, etc. had been forced open by the Opium Wars to become treaty ports accessible to non-Chinese foreigners, especially the opium-selling British } previously outlawed by Ching/Qing China, perhaps enforced by the "pirates" or gungho-Chinese restive "¿Ming-dynasty remnant? patriots" or simply "anti-all-foreigners possibly including the Manchu barbarians' Chinese Emperor ruling from Peiping/Peking/Beijing" after their hot-potato山高皇帝遠 homeland territory had been ditched and leased for 99 years to the British by Peiping/Peking/Beijing's royalties in secrecy]-on-the-Ningpo-leg Sai Kung fishing village to the East of then East Point. "Hong Kong Island was just a big piece of rock without much of anything, with few people but pirates ready to strike at shipping, inhabiting nearby," so said a Chinese history book recounting how the British had been sort-of partially swindled out of their military victory and booties of the Opium Wars. Looking back though, it was indeed a great "fixer-upper" natural mountains-sheltered harbor (our shantytown in the foothills of Lion Rock and Unicorn Ridge survived unscathed the direct hit at Hong Kong by Typhoon{called Hurricane at that time} Wanda on September 1st, 1962 -- it disturbed a big turtle enough that the turtle hurriedly lumbered across our frontyard away from Phoenix Creek/Brook and the two wells on its west bank, probably due to its fear of being drowned; it's a smart turtle; long-live the turtle ! ) with a few deepwater channels that was destined for great global commercial prominence.

These various functions of guns can explain the prevalence of gun ownership in the U.S. South (where the African slaves were instrumental for providing the gruesome labor necessary for producing cash crops -- Whites died like flies from tropical diseases such as malaria but Africans had the gene for producing sickle-cell anemia which when not strongly expressed suppressed malaria) and the more sparsely populated U.S. West (where the "Indians" were largely overrun.) In densely populated metropolitan areas, gun ownership tends to be tightly regulated for obvious reasons but this is one single country with free flow of people and cultures so a double-whammy (previously slave-owning and western-frontier pioneer) state's gun owner such as a well-armed Texan may show up in New York. Of course, the physical distance between New York and Texas is vast so the probability of that happening is low.

Rural areas where law enforcement can't show up quickly also have needs for guns' protection for homesteads. Some use guns for hunting but that's largely culturally inherited from forebears in wooded locales with deer, for example. I therefore think that the regulation of guns needs some play due to varying local conditions. However, there are indeed certain categories of gun ownership which should be outright-banned nationally.

There are so many guns in the U.S. already that a national ban on gun ownership can overnight possibly create hundreds of millions of gun-law-violating criminals in the U.S. I believe that the estimate that the U.S. has more guns than people is probably correct. I know some people who had told me that they owned guns, all of them being Whites, unsurprisingly. Of course, I know far more Whites than Blacks so maybe it's coming from a non-averaged viewpoint but statistics stand.

I'd like to respect local customs so I don't cross a street if I don't like being run over. My free-ranging in my shantytown was fine for my Mom but not my crossing a street, any street. Of course, I have no problem with beating up the thief who had come into my home and stolen change from my Big Brother's trousers' pocket. Crossing a boundary may incur a penalty from me as I didn't read the lunar calendar in the sky like my Mom did to decide what days to eat vegetarian. I always eat nucleons, regardless of pork or beef but regarding whom I was with (this policy has its basis in the Holy Bible.)

One definite benefit of having so many guns in the U.S.A. is that it's extremely unlikely any foreign nation would invade the U.S. homeland and engage in a guerilla war with the citizenry here. After arming every human being in the U.S., we probably have guns left over to arm our pets, too. As one can infer from what I've just said, if and when a person owns guns in the U.S., they tend to own "a few." Die free (unlike Red China's prisoner-executing public-security bureau, the U.S. police don't charge the victims' families for the loose bullets the victims have taken "to their graves") or live next to rabid Russia. "We're all in the hand of the 'hypersonic' satan of D.P.R. Rustia."

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

AGAIN: "Here are the Texas school shooting victims: Loved ones mourn children, family killed in Uvalde" - by Mark Heim:

Don't need 7 paragraphs of your subjective history, I just want explanations for why anyone needs semi-automatic & automatic weapons of war at home these days? Read the fkn links,U blowviating dickhead!

The United States of Amnesia's (Gore Vidal) gun culture can have pistols for self-defense and hunting rifles and even shotguns but wtf is the rational reason for the ownership of: Powerful Weapons of War?!

oremus et 'Pax Americana' - temet nosce!

[-] 0 points by grapes (5232) 2 months ago

White Supremacy's legacy [a Fantasy -- for fighting against oppressive U.S. Government's powerful Military Forces, arguably the strongest in the World by far -- it's why I believe that it's just a fantasy ! Boys with tiny dicks and big egos must have their huge phallic toys prominently sounded and displayed. In order to impress people, portraits and statues being huge, size, and speed of shots matter]. Automated guns industrialized murders. "Guns don't kill people; people kill people."

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

"The United States of Amnesia's (Gore Vidal) gun culture - can have pistols for self-defense and hunting rifles and even shotguns but WTF is the rational reason for the ownership of: Powerful Weapons of War?!" Furthermore, after your typically Freudian (tho' thankfully just 1 para) response ...

STOP spewing RWNJ talking points & NRA slogans at me, as "I just want explanations for why anyone needs semi-automatic and automatic weapons of war at home these days? -- U blowviating dickhead!"

And adding more b-s to the existing b-s above won't help but blowviate away & I'll hand U your RW ass again later but it is very interesting how U continuously refuse to read any of the links ... lest they upset the existing wagon of horse-shit already occupying your already damaged brain! Further note the Arms Race" that U$A is in with itself before U release any further reflexive and reactionary brainfarts in reply!

ad iudicium?!

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23620) 2 months ago

Racist Roots of the 2nd Amendment. See how historian Carol Anderson uncovered those roots with regard to slave owners wanting guns to put down slave uprisings:

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers-the-racist-roots-of-the-2nd-amendment

"It was in response to the concerns coming out of the Virginia ratification convention for the Constitution, led by Patrick Henry and George Mason, that a militia that was controlled solely by the federal government would not be there to protect the slave owners from an enslaved uprising. And ... James Madison crafted that language in order to mollify the concerns coming out of Virginia and the anti-Federalists, that they would still have full control over their state militias — and those militias were used in order to quell slave revolts. ... The Second Amendment really provided the cover, the assurances that Patrick Henry and George Mason needed, that the militias would not be controlled by the federal government, but that they would be controlled by the states and at the beck and call of the states to be able to put down these uprisings."

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

Consider - "To End Mass Shootings, We Need to Change the Deeper Structure of Life in the US"!

From which: "Violence is the oxygen of authoritarianism. It is the symbolic and visceral breeding ground of fear, ignorance, greed & cruelty. It flourishes in societies marked by despair, ignorance, lies, hate and cynicism.

"Violence - and especially the killing of children such as the mass killing that occurred this week at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde,Texas, leaving at least 19 students dead can’t be understood in immediacy of shock and despair, however deplorable and understandable. The ideological and structural conditions that nourish and legitimate it, have to be revealed both in their connections to power and in the systemic unmasking of those who benefit from such death-dealing conditions."

et veritas vos liberabit!

[-] 0 points by grapes (5232) 2 months ago

In order to prepare for the Race War ! Simple enough ?

I demonstrated in the streets twice in my life: against Japanese altering history books to cover up for Imperial Japan's wartime atrocities against innocent Chinese; against Clinton-era sellout to Red China of the New York garment industry. Both didn't matter a bit ( Japanese children still hold on to their racial-purity naïveté and New York's garment factories in Chinatown were all gone but the Clintons and more are now multimillionaires from "Globalization," aren't they ? Joe Biden has also become a real-estate multimillionaire, too, right ? ) so I don't do demonstrations anymore. China is fucked. The U.S.A. is fucked. Ukraine is being fucked. Russia will also be fucked ( I've never thought that a Farterland as Russia which'd turned transgender from the Soviet motherland to 》ein Vaterland wie Deutschland《 could still be so gay as to solicit for a good fucking over, again.) Maybe lithium toxicity from discarded batteries will "medicate" en masse the bipolar manic depressives on planet Water. Elon Musk needs to blow a Colonel-Austin joint for puffing a new peat-smoke ring to get to New Earth (as Mars the Red Planet is just a Rusty Dusty Deuterotomy Cemetery.)

Who was sent to prison for creating the Great Recession of 2007-2013 ? A [female] Martha Stewart ! Which party was then in charge of the U.S. Department of Justice, eh ? Even under the RWNJ Raygun, thousands of crooks were sent to prison for the Savings & Loans Swindle.

I kind-of like Death-Ray Raygun because he and Mikhail Gorbachev gave us all a way out of our rather stupid silly "boys' racket." The pretty-peaceful ending of the Cold War was something that I hadn't even dreamt of and yet it happened for real. Out of the peace, we got the internet, yay ! It's the first truly pan-Earth-population-centers near-realtime connection enabling planet-level knowledge dissemination and the creation of a global consciousness. The MIT researcher ( possibly from the [interstitial multidisciplinary] ¿Media Lab? -- here's the answer why MIT Bldg. 20 was so innovative: WWII started and defense reasearch work was jammed into the necessarily multidisciplinary almost-anyone/thing-goes-there-for-a-reasearch-abode-thus-making-it-into-a-crammed-nexus-of-innovations older building "to be torn down" [but not so fast at all !] ) was correct: the U.S. worrying ( even into the Halls of the U.S. Capitol and Congressional Testimonies ! ) over Japan's great lead in High-Definition Television sets was simply misplaced; as he had put it, once what the U.S. had in the works was released, HDTV would be dwarved in significance. It's not what it's made of which truly matters, it's what you do with it that may very well be consequential.

One thing does bother me a lot despite my great confidence in the strength of the U.S. Military. It's a command-driven hierarchical organization so it may well be susceptible to the same disease afflicting "中国现在强大啦。[Red] China is now strong !" and Russia is now "strong," too, hahaha, boom, boom, boom, yikes ! Both rabies and zombies are scary possibilities of afflictions because Hong Kong has already been lost by our neonate tending of Herr Narcissus required to prevent a thermonuclear war. There exists the possibility of a single-point fault at the top of the hierarchy leading to a grave error of the command-driven organization, the stronger organization the worse the consequences. "Would that be a good thing ?" so I ask the same old question, asked by my spiritual godfather.

I believe that democracies with orderly genuine elections fare better in the long run than authoritarian regimes simply because there are more frequent chances of changing course as things change. In the latter, we must usually wait until the authoritarian gets inevitably consumed by diseases and old age which can sometimes take decades. Imagine driving a car in the same direction for twenty years without changing the direction because the steering one cannot admit to having made a mistake. The infallible always falls due to the infallibility. Then boom, boom, boom, succession fights start. New revolutions, new civil wars, new riots, etc. give rise to new incompetent leaders who couldn't have worked with the deceased power-hogging ones who had actively cut down any potential new leaders in order to maintain their supremacy.

Try driving for ten years in one single direction and then jerk the steering wheel sharply, and put the gears into reverse.. interesting !!! GPS guided ? Not yet, as in 1983, the Cold War hadn't ended so Google(R) didn't Greta-garble a GPS-guided once-in-a-googol-tic. How many senior-citizen U.S.S.R. leaders died in rapid successions then, to yield power to Mikhail Gorbachev ? For how many years did the U.S.S.R. last ? 1989 - 1917 = 72 years, which is approximately a human lifetime. Is that a coincidence ? The Old Guards who were present at the October 1917 Russian Revolution were nearly all gone ! If we apply the same calculation to Red China: 1949 + 72 = 2021 so nearly all of the Old Guards who were present in 1949 were nearly all gone. There are human lifetime cycles. History runs in smoke rings. Once we forget, we tend to retrace to relearn from the School of Hard Knocks.

Language underpins a culture so the ones speaking difficult-to-learn-from-each-other languages tend to be culturally different & farther apart. If they're willy-nilly thrown together by the globalization élites, they tend to generate sparks for great conflicts. For a native English speaker, the most difficult languages are Arabic, Cantonese(Chinese), Mandarin(Chinese), Japanese, and Korean. Here are the wars the U.S. fought with the folks speaking these languages: Arabic: Gulf War & Iraq War, Mandarin(Chinese): Korean Conflict, Japanese: WWII, Korean: Korean Conflict. There does seem to be a pattern. (The U.S. didn't fight the Cantonese(Chinese)-speaking folks in recent decades so having grown up into a teenager among them, I was indeed a bit naïve believing that China could become a security partner with the U.S. safeguarding East Asia and West Pacific but I no longer harbor such a delusion, as Mandarin was shoved to South China.) At the end where the closest allies of the U.S. share intelligence with each other, there are Canada, U.K., New Zealand, & Australia. Every one of these countries has English as official language.

In the U.S., verbal promises are usually not upheld in a court of law due to the problem of "he said" vs. "she said" and there's nothing objective there for an impartial party to judge. Contracts thus need to be written down and duly executed (with signatures, promulgations, ceremonies, third-party official filings, etc. to solemnize it) while not being under duress. Poo-tin needs to read the Budapest Memorandum and understand why the other parties are furious about Russia's betrayal. Poo-tin may well be illiterate in Legalese but I'm sure that Sergey Lavrov who had signed the Budapest Memorandum himself now representing Russia as its Foreign Minister can explain or find someone who can. Poo-tin will do well to avoid greed, hatred, and delusions (talked of by Buddhists). If Poo-tin doesn't believe the West, what did he want a security guarantee from the West for ? It's disingenuous and stupid. The only reason that I can think of is to create a pretext for starting a "special military operation" to fool D.P.R. Rustia's citizenry. In the U.S., we have many people who need "special e-duc-ation." Poo-tin is 'special'. 山高皇帝远,西瓜大又甜, 不許黄(皇)瓜是青瓜, 不吃荔枝吃龙眼。Xi is 'special'. Everyone is 'special' ! Hahaha !

[Greedy for undersea oil and gas] Red China having militarized the South China Sea under the cover of lies committed a sin to be rectified in due time, not necessarily by military force, as Mother Nature frowns upon unnatural constructions ("Chinese con-Crete !" -- ask the ancient Minoans about what happened to Crete even without the con with Chinese characteristics). Chinese con-Crete is falling down, falling down, falling down.

People who've experienced greatly increased food & fuel prices should remember that Poo-tin started this bout of inflation from February 24th onward, breaking peoples' breadbasket by blockading grain exports from Ukraine. He mustn't defect from pursuing the glory of Juché, "the original, brilliant and revolutionary contribution to national and international thought" by Kim Il-sung, right ? "I pledge allegiance to the Stool-in Poo-tin & to the republics to which it smeared, one great Rus-ting nation under sanctions, being sanctified, with a little tea and just rice for all." Ukrainian foodstuffs were partly stolen and blockaded from export by Poo-tin to stir up potentially wheat-sunflower-oil-shortage.. bread unrests in Lebanon, Egypt, Türkiye, and Red China.

Red China has been hoarding grains in anticipation of the lockdowns to achieve zero CoViD-19 in ¡all of Red China! to glorify the X-out-the-intelligence Xi for continued emperorship. Maybe Xi was actually using zero-CoViD-19 愚民政策 policy to slap down wealthy coastal cities such as Macau/Shenzhen/Hong Kong and Shanghai to move towards "equality of the jellyfish" by freedom-frying the shrimp with seeing eyeballs. Red China's CoViD-19 vaccines may be insufficiently effective against CoViD-19 so Xi was just scared of being found out as a fraud, tauting Red China's [authoritarian] greatness worldwide.

Hong Kong had higher CoViD-19 vaccination rate than the U.S. before its lockdown and it has an excellent universal-medical-care system so a zero CoViD-19 policy resulting in lockdowns was probably unnecessary (unless the vaccines Hong Kong used weren't highly effective.) U.S. has probably exited the pandemic phase and entered the endemic one of CoViD-19 because of now-high vaccination rate & vast number of people who'd caught the highly contagious omicron variants. My wife caught one preemptive CoViD-19.

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

RWNJ "Truth Will Out" in the U$A - eh?! And there is NO question of any further real time attention for your reactionary RW ass, lol - ergo, note:

So racist whites & their co-stupids, irrespective of color are full of fear/guilt for innumerable crimes, eh?! Because the ONLY "Race War", is the 450+ year war waged against 'People of Color' right across U$A!

Most Americans fear the 'Random White Guy Going Postal' BUT just can't admit that to themselves yet! Instead they & their hate-filled corrupt politicians want to continue THEIR RACE WAR, on other people!

White people should STOP feeling guilty for the crimes of their ancestors & start 'de-hating' themselves in the here and now, asap; for the good of all US society & love Class Consciousness, NOT racist crap!

temet nosce et multum in parvo?!


PS: This^reply above was made in response to "In order to prepare for the Race War! Simple enough?", repeated here just in case it is either deleted or worse still - added to, at a later date!, as is gripes' wont!

PPS: Yes the mad fool has started to add crap to his initial 1^line^reply & - to another reply prior to that!

PPPS: If U don't know about Lee Atwater & the "Southern Strategy" then U can't understand the GOP, & so watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_8E3ENrKrQ (99s) and look further, IF U still don't get it!

PPPPS: Further, re. racial animus behind guns: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgg56ZrZOYE (3m)

PPPPPS: Finally, 'US History' with John Oliver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsxukOPEdgg (29m)

quod erat demonstrandum?!

[-] 1 points by ImNotMe (1488) 2 months ago

"After Mass Shootings, Republicans Shield White Supremacists From Scrutiny"! Mike Ludwig

"By killing a domestic terrorism prevention bill .. the GOP sent a clear signal to its white supremacist supporters."

omnia causa fiunt!

[Deleted]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 10 years ago

If the GOP worked as hard to keep people from shooting each other as they do to keep two or three people from voting who shouldn't, we would see violent crime plummet They would do more good requiring sobriety tests before voting, wouldn't they? How about a test for mental illness or belief in science as a voting requirement?

[-] 1 points by linker (-241) 10 years ago
[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Wayne? Like i'm going to believe what he says. Let me tell you something amigo. I'm as informed as anyone you will meet in this world. Not just the United States, but the world. I can have a conversation about just about any subject. At any rate, Wayne would be the last person I would trust on this subject knowing his history.

[-] 0 points by linker (-241) 10 years ago

so pick something from the book or the article you believe to be untrue & debate it. To flatly reject something as you have done is a juvenile unintelligent way to avoid the debate. go ahead - pick something. you can get the ebook for free @ amazon. let me know when you have a specific point you believe is untrue and we'll look into it further. Let me know

[-] 1 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 10 years ago

Did you ever notice there are no flash mob robberies in carry states? The tired old leftist method of using a small example to get big things done is passe. It turns out it wasn't 'for the children' after all.

Too bad WA isn't a carry state, that asshole probably wouldn't have felt so comfortable in casually walking into a cafe with murder on his mind. I'll take a carry state every time.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 10 years ago

No gun control until we have effective mental health care. Period.

[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

I do agree with that.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 10 years ago

That makes you more reasonable than about 70% of the gun rights faction.

Realize, such mental health care exists, government refuses to allow it.

[-] 2 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Actually not to get off the topic, but my opinion is that the health care bill is lacking two things. Of course I want single payer, but I think that covering mental health should have been the most important part of the bill and the second thing I would say is dental. Both are not covered. Tooth decay is linked to many diseases and also think of someone with all their teeth and a healthy mouth, how good they feel. I traveled the country and I see many people with bad teeth.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 10 years ago

My point is that government is blocking the hippocratic oath. Courts and congress are problems so no health care bill will work until that is dealt with.

I've been reading a little here about article v of the constitution. Know about that? Some posters here really have knowledge of it.

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 10 years ago

if men would share the land, they wouldnt need mental health care. Our current system drive people to homelessness, and then says, oh they need mental health. Well ya, put them back in their homes, and they will be just fine!

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 9 years ago

If they had mental health care, they would share the land. The system of greed seeks to degrade the human condition so it can prey on it more successfully.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

The 1% would love all firearms banned, that makes it easier or them to carry out their agenda and subjugate you without your opposition.

[-] 0 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

WRONG. they believe in and support the 2nd amendment

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

No they don't, many are large doners to gun control groups. They know their agenda is easier to accomplish when people are unarmed.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Say what! LOL.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

No, we should get rid of ridiculous and primitive laws like stand your ground, and keep our dirty paws off the second amendment (because nutty laws like stand your ground, have nothing to do with the second amendment).

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Why should people go to jail for defending themselves? So what you're saying is that if I see a psycho with a gun shooting innocent people you don't want me to have the right to stop his rampage and you want me to face jail time if I do stop him?

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

That would be considered defense of a third person, and legal in every jurisdiction. That's not what stand your ground was designed to address.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

If you're in the line of fire its not the defense of a 3rd person. Stnad your ground has been good here, its helped to cut home invasions by over 60%.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

First you said: "if I see a psycho with a gun shooting innocent people you don't want me to have the right to stop his rampage" ... that's a classic case of defense of a third person (and in every jurisdiction defense of a third person is allowable). Now you're talking about home invasions, but even in states that require retreat (if it can be done safely), in most cases, the "home" is an exception.

First of all, I'm not really sure to what extent stand your ground covers Zimmerman, because I don't know all the facts. However, stand your ground is not necessary for ANY of the things you mentioned. If someone is on a shooting rampage, ANY citizen with a legal firearm, may shoot the mother fucker (and it's just that simple).

But if some kid just robbed me on the street, the robbery has concluded, I'm no longer under any threat, no one else is under any threat, stand your ground would allow me to whip out my gun and shoot the robber (rather than simply calling police and letting the professionals handle it). It's nothing more than wild west vigilantism. It gives license to people who aren't properly trained to do more than merely defend themselves, it allows them to take revenge. It puts other innocents at risk, and if Florida wanted to give homeowners the right to defend their homes, they could have simply modified their self-defense statute to make clear that a crime victim never has to retreat from their home.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

indeed 11 year old children can handle fire arms

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

You guys may always presume that my remarks contain an implicit assumption of "reasonableness" :)

Nevertheless, in some cases, sure, an 11 year old can handle a firearm. I remember in basic training (back in the day), there were plenty of 18 year old southern dudes who could shoot better than the drill sgts (because they started hunting at like 9 or 10 years old). As a New Yorker, I had to learn from scratch (not that shooting is all that difficult, and I was always a good shot, notwithstanding my yankee upbringing) ... but anyway, a minor cannot legally own a firearm. They can go hunting with dad, and handle a firearm under close adult supervision, but that's about it.

The real issue is the second amendment, and yes, I do think a well armed citizenry is the last line of defense against tyranny (but that does not require a "stand your ground" law).

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

If you're in view of someone shooting random people then you're in the line of fire so it is a stand your ground issue. I tnink you're confused on what stand your ground laws really are. In short, if I feel tnreatened that you're going to do "great bodily harm" to me or kill me, then I can use deadly force. That does not cover you standing there and yelling at me, or threatening me w/o a weapon. That means if you attack me I can respond with force to end the situation rather than having to retreat.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

Again, what you're describing is a conventional self-defense justification, which exists in all jurisdictions. If I'm in the line of fire, there is no safe opportunity to retreat (assuming the shooter has at least basic shooting skills). But Trayvon Martin was unarmed. There's no allegation that Zimmerman saw a gun or anything of the sort. He saw a guy who looked suspicious, and the only discernible reason for the suspicion, was based on a racial stereotype. The kid was visiting his dad's fiancee, he wasn't a thief, he didn't assault anyone, he was walking down the fucking street, and yet, there will be a stand your ground hearing.

[-] -1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

If he didn't assault anyone then who gave Zimmerman a broken nose and lacerations on the back of his head? News flash for you, when I see suspicious people in my neighborhood, regardless of their race, I pack heat in my back pocket when I ask them what they're up to. My neighbors do the same, since we all started paying attention, break-ins and car thefts have ceased. Also stand your ground is a good thing, it makes thugs think twice and empoweres the innocent against the criminal class. It's time we stop worrying about the rights of the criminals and uphold the rights of the honest over the criminals for once. Also as for the Zimmeeman case, all the facts aren't in, so making any judgement is premature. If martin was stopped by a cop and refused to remove his hand from his pocket or under his hoodie and got shot, guess what, it would be a clean shoot, so bottom line, we don't know if martin may have presented himself as armed. Anyway, who the fuck wears a hoodie in south Fl when it's 70 degrees unless they're trying to hide their face or hide something in their waistband

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

My theory is, hicks have some sort of genetic defect that makes them predisposed to high brain dopamine levels (explaining the endemic of paranoia among your people), not to mention, low IQ.

[-] 0 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

You comment proves that once logic is introduced your arguement falls apart.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

I'm always amused when the crud at the bottom of the IQ scale tries to play smart. I suppose it wouldn't be quite as amusing if I didn't know you guys actually believe this quackery.

[-] -1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

So you're saying that the basic human right of self defense is "quackery?" You know that most people would agree that if you wanted to see the bottom of the shallow end of the gene pool that you wouldn't need to look any further than the closest mirror. Again the introduction of logic destroys your arguement.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

What you call logic, people with gray and white matter between their ears, call incoherent gibberish. Now run along and go say something in tongues, maybe your invisible friend will lend you some axons and neurons :)

[-] -2 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

All you're doing is proving that you have no grounds for your stance other than emotions and bullshit, neither of which can validate a arguement. The basic human right of self defense isn't gibberish. Come over here, let's see if you're true to your beliefs, I'll beat the shit out of you and you just sit there and take it while you contemplate the stupidity of your beliefs.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 10 years ago

You'll "bet" the shit out of me :)

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 10 years ago

wrong.. lets be like wyoming and oklahoma.. permit to carry openly. thats the only way to stop this sort of thing from happening. if the people doing the shooting were normal, maybe.. but mostly they are already law breakers and would still have a gun with or without a law. how would a law change anything?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

Banning firearms will not eliminate firearms or murder. Besides black-market firearms (already a reality), there's always creative individuals that will supply the demand, one way or the other. Google a guy named "P.A. Luty." He has a number of books on how to build firearms, including automatic weapons, using basic tools and supplies, i.e. no metal lathe or machining skills needed.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by freewriterguy (882) 10 years ago

well, i think you got it backwards, i think again its the governments fault for infringing upon our right to own a gun, or carry a gun. Case in point, if everyone was carrying a gun, and someone pulled a gun and started shooting innocent people, then everyone around them would just shoot the person and justice would be served.

Case in point #2. If everyone on those passenger jets that flew into the world trade centers had a gun, then those four hijackers wouldnt have suceeded, and trillions of dollars wouldnt be wasted, and our contitutional right wouldnt be infringed upon by illegal searches at the airport.

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 10 years ago

Punish the innocent for the sins of the guilty. This is the big Gov solution to all problems.

Next thing you know they will ban big sugary sodas.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by PeterKropotkin (1050) from Oakland, CA 10 years ago

I appreciate the sentiment of this post but as far as guns go the genie is out of the bag in this country. This is a gun culture and the only way for this to change is for the culture to change. It won't be legislated away.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

If it happens that congress passes a law banning hand guns and automatic weapons, it will be because of the will of the people. This is the only way it can happen. So I think that answers your question. What you are saying about this being a gun culture is something similar to me saying everyone like sports or likes baseball. Obviously we know that is not the case.

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

Uh, no it won't. The will of the people is in the defense of the Constitution.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105721/public-believes-americans-right-own-guns.aspx

70% believe the Constitution guarantees the individual the right to own guns. 35-50% of US households own guns and there are more guns than people in this country, and plenty of people willing to use them to defend their rights... So GOOD LUCK!!!! You'll look real cute with a .45 slug between your eyes.

[-] -1 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

Is this what Occupy Wall Street is about. Again you are a genius and your eloquence is just amazing!

[-] 1 points by DaMan (14) from Asheville, NC 10 years ago

70% of the 99% also know that you're an idiot.

Ever wonder why the cities with the toughest gun control laws always end up #1 and #2 when it comes to firearm deaths, you know Chicago and Washington D.C.

[-] 1 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

the will of the people? a majority of the people in the usa did not want obamacare. it was passed anyway. the left does not like the populace being armed, it's very hard to subjugate people when they can fight back.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 10 years ago

Well, we are subjugated and how hard was it? And all of you guys with guns stood around with your fingers up your breeches and did what? Exactly nothing.

You were armed to the molars and let all of the profits go to them and you got nothing, no increase in income over the last decade So much for that idea. And you even keep voting for the politicians that they own. The 1% won't have to take your guns, you will give them to them.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

My friend I hope you don't get sick. Or if you do pay cash at the hospital.

[-] 0 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

i pay for my own insurance. all of it.

[-] 0 points by antoniofilmmaker (21) 10 years ago

So when you are in your 50's and get a pre-existing condition we will see how you will pay. That is really what that health care plan is for. We may use a health plan once a year, but once you are in your 50's and not old enough for medicare insurance can become expensive.

[-] 0 points by adaldk (-11) 10 years ago

as i said , i pay for my own insurance, it isnt cheap, but i pay for it.

[-] -1 points by freewriterguy (882) 10 years ago

I think microchipping our children would be a great way to catch predators!

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 years ago

give them all cell phones with cameras