Congress woman shot along with bystanders

Top ten things that must be banned to stop awful stuff from happening

Top ten things — other than thought, speech, emotions and expression — that must be banned if we are to stop awful stuff from happening.

Jodie Foster – John Hinkley shot Ronald Reagan and James Brady because he wanted to impress Jodie Foster. Jodie Foster must be banned.

Jews – Sirhan Sirhan assassinated RFK because he hated Jews. Jews must be banned.

Twinkies – Dan White’s over-indulgence in Twinkies caused him to kill Harvey Milk and George Moscone. Twinkies must be banned.

Love – Brutus knifed Julius Caesar in the balls because he loved Rome more. Love must be banned.

Gravity – All the passengers of Pan Am Flight 109 died when a bomb on their plane exploded and it fell in pieces on the ground. Gravity must be banned.

Freedom – Nearly a hundred million people died during the 20th century because they would not acquiesce to the slavery that socialists like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin thrust upon them. They wanted to be free. Socialism is incompatible with freedom. Freedom must be banned.

Trees – In 1975 Squeaky Fromm attempted to assassinate President Gerald Ford with a Colt .45 Model 1911 A. Fromm’s potential violence was rooted in her concern for the plight of the noble redwood tree. Trees must be banned.

Directions – John Wilkes Booth fatally shot Abraham Lincoln because he objected to the way he was leading the country and because he had a problem with the North. Booth had issues with directions. Directions must be banned.

Reason – In 1912 psycho John Schrank sought to end the life of, by then, former President Theodore Roosevelt. Schrank never really gave a reason for his actions. Reason must be banned.

Books – After Mark David Chapman assassinated John Lennon he claimed that his defense for the heinous act could be found in the J.D. Salinger book Catcher in the Rye*. Books must be banned.
 
Why is it that the city that has the most restrictive gun control laws also has the highest crime rate?

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-muckrakers/2010/06/chicago-is-three-times-as-deadly-as-nyc-and-twice-as-violent-as-la.html
 
Why is it that the city that has the most restrictive gun control laws also has the highest crime rate?

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-muckrakers/2010/06/chicago-is-three-times-as-deadly-as-nyc-and-twice-as-violent-as-la.html

WOW, your an NRA gun wacko too!
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #155
And what 'it' failed to mention was that in each example cited, the over all murder rate is lower in the US since the gun control laws were put into effect.
 
This such a sad episode. A Federal Judge, a 9 year old girl, and four others dead from a nut with a gun. The nut hated a lot of people.

And some one thinks a laughing emoticon is appropriate when commenting on it.

And so, you have bought into the hypocrisy to the same extent of the left winger's who just couldn't wait...once again... :lol:
 
01-12_11Second_Amend_220110111111902.jpg
 
And what 'it' failed to mention was that in each example cited, the over all murder rate is lower in the US since the gun control laws were put into effect.
Nobody believes you....even when you were a feline. And you have no idea what gun control laws are on the books. You just blather liberal talking points and spew them as facts.

Case in point: Violent Crime Declined As Gun Sales Climbed in 2009

Violent crime continued to fall in 2009, even as gun sales reached an all-time high, according to statistics from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). This is proof positive that gun prohibitionists have been consistently and undeniably wrong.
 
I have had the troll on my ignore list (just discovered that feature)for a few weeks now so I only have to read it's posts if someone does a reply. It's quite a relief not to have to read the trolling posts and insults. I highly recommend it.

You couldn't ignore me if you tried. Only after I shamed you when proving the whole 401k issue to again you ran away in embarrassment. Typical liberal response.
 
This board has a history of being quite biased in its moderation. I had hoped that had changed with the removal/replacement of some of the mods but perhaps that was wishful thinking. They still seem to allow some people to post insult after insult and responses that are completely unrelated to the topic being discussed while others try and ply by the rules. It is what it is I guess. This forum only has a few active members and I suspect that is a large reason why.

I have had the troll on my ignore list (just discovered that feature)for a few weeks now so I only have to read it's posts if someone does a reply. It's quite a relief not to have to read the trolling posts and insults. I highly recommend it.

BTW, here are two more homicides and one attempted homicide by a 14 yr old that received a gun for a present.

14yr old and a .22


Dell,

Just curious. How do you define 'arms' as stated in the COTUS? Is it just fire arms (guns) or does it refer to all types of munitions? Do you believe there should be any limitations of the type of arms (guns) that should be owned? Should a person be allowed to posses a .50? How about riffles or hand guns with silencers? Ceramic or other advanced composite weapons that cannot be detected by current x-ray or metal detectors?

The COTUS does not give free reign. They are restrictions on nearly everything. Even free speech has some limitations.m I'm just trying to figure out where you stand to see whether or not we are close enough to have a conversation about the issue.

It isn't how you/ I define the term 'arms' but how SCOTUS defines it.
You can own a 50 BTW...I know several that have them.
Also, silencers are allowed with the proper permit....so whats the big deal?
The only reason free speech has ' some limitations' is because they haven't been heard before SCOTUS.
The only reason a lot of these stupid reg's are legal is they haven't been challenged.

A small borough near me called WHitehall recently became aware of an obligation that is very unconstitutional by its very action, but if you don't comply, you will be fined and spend your life savings proving you are protected under the USC.

My link
 
You two can continue your mental masterbation with your right wing facist zealotry. I am beginning to wonder if this is just one poster under different names posting trash just to get a response. When you can post offensive cartoons with impunity, but someones post questioning it is pulled, thats called censorship. Maybe your a monitor so you can pull opposing views, but that just makes this board a joke, See you at the next book burning Adolf.


Where did your salutation to the mod's go hot dog?

Its still visible in my reply to your attack...... :lol:

Is this like "Lost in Space"?

My link
 
The Man has meltdown in the AM and Keith Olbermann (gets thrown out) quits MSNBC in the PM.

Coincidence?

One of the same?

Kind of like them birds falling from the sky?
 
Back
Top