Even After Latest Attack, Liberals Refuse to Support Vehicle Control

[Clementine]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Dictators don't fear automobiles. That never stopped tyrants from taking over a country.

Tyrannical governments fear an armed populace, independent thinkers, self-sufficient people and a government by the people, for the people.

Tyrants want to rule and they cannot tolerate dissent. People in living under dictators are routinely imprisoned or given the death penalty for speaking out against government.

There is a reason why every evil dictator has always disarmed the people and it's because they know the time would come when the people would realize what is being done to them and fight back. It's always pushed in the name of safety. Welfare, as in true communism, is always pushed in the name of benevolence and is always favored over self-reliance.

The tyrants know that they must control every need of the people. Energy, food, health care, education and freedom. Of course, they also control the media.

The left has diligently sought to gain control over education and have largely succeeded in rewriting history books. The current media is censoring the present news.

The left has control of healthcare for now. Obamacare was meant to be a failure to pave the way for single payer, which is coming soon unless it's stopped.

Global warming "solutions" are nothing more than a plan to gain control over all energy sources and redistribute wealth.

Government is in bed with Monsanto and have claimed that GMOs are the only solution to make enough food for the population.

The left is always working toward banning guns from the public. Hillary already admitted that she doesn't think it's a right.

Our freedoms are being taken away a little bit at a time. Currently, authorities can take everything you own and empty your bank account just for suspecting you of a crime. Obama and the Dems want to be able to take your gun rights away for being on a list. It's a list that no one can explain the criteria for putting someone on it. They can put anyone on it and if they hand themselves the ability to completely take away our right to due process, you can bet that the majority of Americans would be on the list.

The want people to be defenseless, indoctrinated, dependent and at the mercy of government for virtually everything. Then they can have their One World Order and the scum at the U.N. will basically rule the world.

If Hillary gets in office, she will be another Obama and intends to do as she pleases. Imagine having some of the corrupt, evil rulers in other countries suddenly having a say in your life.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Tell that to SCOTUS, then.

Oh, they know that already.

But they are corrupt to the core.

Has their rulings affected "drug" consumption in these US of A?

Well , neither will their edict preventing us from bearing arms.

.

Congress absolutely has the right to regulate guns. That was decided in the 1930s, and confirmed with Heller.

And if you think the government cannot make you comply with whatever law they make, you're delusional.

They can stop Social Security payments for old farts like you, they can garnish wages for young studs like me, they can confiscate your property, pick you up on your way to buying your Viagra and put you in jail.

The possibilities are endless!

Only for people like you who are too illiterate to read the U.S. Constitution. For the rest of us, everything you just said is 100% false and the asinine ramblings of an idiot.

You know that the 2nd is an 'amendment', don't you? Maybe you should look up that word, because you're babbling.

So if they could amend the Constitution to include a right to bear arms, they can amend it to take it away.

They can....God I hope the democrats are that stupid

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We already have vehicle control. You have to be licensed and insured. Car has to be licensed. Police see your car driving, and they run your plates.

So if you don't have a drivers license, plates and insurance, you won't be able to carry out a mass murder with a vehicle?

 

[Clementine]

We already have vehicle control. You have to be licensed and insured. Car has to be licensed. Police see your car driving, and they run your plates.

So if you don't have a drivers license, plates and insurance, you won't be able to carry out a mass murder with a vehicle?

Every week, the local police log is filled with incidents of people driving while barred, no insurance and usually speeding on top of it. It's common to have many people totally ignoring the laws. Same with guns. The left loves coming up with solutions that never actually address the real problem. All their ideas end up costing tax payers even more and making more laws for the honest people to deal with.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Every week, the local police log is filled with incidents of people driving while barred, no insurance and usually speeding on top of it. It's common to have many people totally ignoring the laws. Same with guns. The left loves coming up with solutions that never actually address the real problem. All their ideas end up costing tax payers even more and making more laws for the honest people to deal with.

Once again I quote Rush Limbaugh "Folks, liberals measure success by intent. Conservatives measure success by results."

Leftists are told what to think by Democrat politicians. They don't even try to calculate what they've been told.....just repeat it.

There may be a lot of educated liberals out there, but education doesn't mean you have logic. Logic can't be taught in a liberal college. You either have common sense or you don't.

The two groups of Americans that buy guns are the law abiding and the criminal.

Law abiding citizens usually purchase their guns through gun dealers, get a background check, and the store takes a sample bullet for ballistics for possible future references. Or they buy them legally through a private owner or even gun shows where most of them perform the same checks as a gun dealer since many of the people who sell guns there are indeed dealers.

The criminals get their guns from the streets which are usually stolen. They also get people who have no criminal record to buy them from dealers, or steal the guns themselves.

Common sense tells us that making laws that only affect law biding citizens will not have any affect on the criminals buying guns. But again, that takes common sense to figure out. Democrat politicians hate Americans that can think for themselves.

 

[ElmerMudd]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

No, it wouldn't, because arms are always arms, and the founding fathers stated that the citizens of America must always be armed. You have to be outright delusional to think they didn't account for advancement of technology, even as it was happening around them. They didn't say "Yo, citizens can have muskets", they said we have a right to bear arms, to protect ourselves from criminals, and oppressive government. A government trying to take our ability to protect ourselves away is an oppressive one.

 

[Contumacious]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

It would be interesting how the Founding Fathers would have handle the creation of the Federal Government if they knew how corrupt the sons of bitches would turn out to be.


.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

They understood fully well that in the future, our weaponry would advance. That's why they included an amendment process; to change the Constitution as times changed.

But a majority of people have to agree with such a change before it takes place. Otherwise our Constitution would be changing all the time with a simple majority. And a majority of people still value our right to bear arms in this country.

 

[boedicca]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Actually, Liberals are doing everything they can to destroy the IC-Engine-Vehicle industry.

Here in CA, the highways are not properly maintained. New lanes are dedicated to Green Energy vehicles or carpools. In cities, lanes in streets are converted into bicycle only lanes.

Of course, the Elite Overlords will still have armed-chauffeur driven, bullet-proof limos and SUVs funded by taxpayers. No public transit or bicycles for them!

 

[Pumpkin Row]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

It would be interesting how the Founding Fathers would have handle the creation of the Federal Government if they knew how corrupt the sons of bitches would turn out to be.


.

They'd have given us a second constitution to protect the first, because Liberals don't understand what "Shall not be infringed" means.

 

[bripat9643]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

It would be interesting how the Founding Fathers would have handle the creation of the Federal Government if they knew how corrupt the sons of bitches would turn out to be.


.

The would never have dissolved the Articles of Confederation.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It would be interesting how the Founding Fathers would have handle the creation of the Federal Government if they knew how corrupt the sons of bitches would turn out to be.

I think if the founders could come back from time, they would rewrite the Constitution. Only this time with big color pictures for the liberals.

I don't think their concern would be about people having guns. Their concern would be how much power we gave our federal government to rule over us. The very idea that the federal government would provide everything to the people via taxation of the working would make them want to go back to their graves.

 

[bripat9643]

It would be interesting how the Founding Fathers would have handle the creation of the Federal Government if they knew how corrupt the sons of bitches would turn out to be.

I think if the founders could come back from time, they would rewrite the Constitution. Only this time with big color pictures for the liberals.

I don't think their concern would be about people having guns. Their concern would be how much power we gave our federal government to rule over us. The very idea that the federal government would provide everything to the people via taxation of the working would make them want to go back to their graves.

They would eliminate the "general welfare" and "promote commerce among the several states" clauses.

 

[ElmerMudd]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

No, it wouldn't, because arms are always arms, and the founding fathers stated that the citizens of America must always be armed. You have to be outright delusional to think they didn't account for advancement of technology, even as it was happening around them. They didn't say "Yo, citizens can have muskets", they said we have a right to bear arms, to protect ourselves from criminals, and oppressive government. A government trying to take our ability to protect ourselves away is an oppressive one.

I agree that the intent of the right to bear arms was all arms. Today, the citizenery cannot possess the majority of weapons the government can possess. Do people feel they will take their AK-47 and hold off fighter jets, drones, nuclear bombs.
The power of government is not being neutralized by gun rights.
There are a few sick people using guns to kill police. Our gun laws make it easier for those individuals to get guns.
And these same sick people are acting out against the government as represnted by Police with guns. The logic of the NRA.

 

[Clementine]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

Considering that our founding fathers, and many others, talked of having the means to fight against a tyrannical government if the need arose, I'd say they would approve. The whole point was that the people should be equal to any evil forces that would seek to oppress them.

Since our military is and always will be superior, we would hope that they would obey the constitution and rise up against any traitor. They take an oath to fight any enemy, domestic or foreign.

I hope our military is more dedicated to their oath than the military in Turkey that stood by an evil dictator.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

The terrorist who used a truck to kill dozens of people in Nice, France, the other day would have been unable to kill so many people without the truck. Furthermore, each year, people use vehicles to deliberately harm or kill other people, and of course tens of thousand of people die each year in traffic accidents. Yet, despite this carnage, and despite the presence of viable alternatives, liberals still refuse to support meaningful vehicle control, much less a ban on personal vehicle ownership. And it's disgraceful.

Let's put the same controls on guns that are on cars.
No more, no less.
Great idea from a NRA supporter

Cars aren't protected by the Bill of Rights, moron.

Cars were not invented at the time the Bill of Rights and the Constitution was written.
Neither were semi-automatic assault rifles.
It would be interesting how the founding Fathers would handle the right to bear arms if the arms of today were around in the 1700's.

No, it wouldn't, because arms are always arms, and the founding fathers stated that the citizens of America must always be armed. You have to be outright delusional to think they didn't account for advancement of technology, even as it was happening around them. They didn't say "Yo, citizens can have muskets", they said we have a right to bear arms, to protect ourselves from criminals, and oppressive government. A government trying to take our ability to protect ourselves away is an oppressive one.

I agree that the intent of the right to bear arms was all arms. Today, the citizenery cannot possess the majority of weapons the government can possess. Do people feel they will take their AK-47 and hold off fighter jets, drones, nuclear bombs.
The power of government is not being neutralized by gun rights.
There are a few sick people using guns to kill police. Our gun laws make it easier for those individuals to get guns.
And these same sick people are acting out against the government as represnted by Police with guns. The logic of the NRA.

Our gun laws do not effect criminals in the slightest, there's the black market, they can steal them, they can get them from other countries, they can buy the parts and build them, they could even just use bombs, which is what terrorists have been doing. If someone wants to break the law, laws won't stop them.

Certainly would make it easier to fight them if we had AK-47s to defend ourselves from the government, terrorists, and criminals, rather the the hand guns Democrats think are all we need. Even then, I don't doubt they want to take those away, too.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I agree that the intent of the right to bear arms was all arms. Today, the citizenery cannot possess the majority of weapons the government can possess. Do people feel they will take their AK-47 and hold off fighter jets, drones, nuclear bombs.
The power of government is not being neutralized by gun rights.
There are a few sick people using guns to kill police. Our gun laws make it easier for those individuals to get guns.
And these same sick people are acting out against the government as represnted by Police with guns. The logic of the NRA.

So what laws make it easier for criminals to get guns? Better still: what laws would stop criminals from getting guns?

The answer is there are no laws that can stop criminals from getting guns if they wanted them. It's the same kind of mindset that says laws and penalties against recreational narcotics will stop people from using illegal drugs. Our problem with those drugs are worse today than ever before. People are killing themselves left and right.

Here is the plot: The democrats say we need this law or that law. They know those laws won't work, but it's one more step in government intervention with all gun users. Then when the new laws don't work, they say "Ooops, well we'll have to try something else" and then it's off to the next intrusive law.

Their goal is to take all guns away from all Americans. But these are patient people who will get there taking baby steps, baby steps. It's how Democrats have always worked and will always work in the future.

 

[Wilbur Right]

The left loves coming up with solutions that never actually address the real problem.

While those on the right stick their heads up their ass and go; problem? What problem? Ain't no fucking problem that getting rid of liberals won't fix. Don't need no solutions..just need less liberals. Liberals are the problem.

The mind of a right winger is a mess.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Their goal is to take all guns away from all Americans.

Does it feel good to write the stupid shit you write? It must. You do it so damned often.