Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting

[kaz]

There is NOTHING in the 5th Amendment that answers my question. The law about felons owning guns is a federal law, not included in the Constitution, and the law regarding felons being able to vote is deferred to the states.

I take it you can't read? I posted it.

You took Criminal Justice and you don't know what:

The fifth amendment.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

For god fucking sakes, what is wrong with you? How does a CRIMINAL JUSTICE major possibly have to repeatedly ask that?

Seriously, what is wrong with you? Have you had a stroke?

Yet cops and the judicial system abuse the 5th on asset forfeiture daily and you say not a word about it..

I have no idea if Kaz has ever said a word about asset forfeiture or not. And neither do you. And could this BE any more extraneous to the topic of this thread? Do you have something to say on the subject of school shootings at all?

Thanks. I'm strongly against asset forfeiture. And I've said so. I gave moon bat a couple quotes, you may have seen them already.

He's a liar. Making things up is lying. And in this case, he could have looked less stupid by just typing "asset forfeiture" and "kaz" into the search feature

I probably ignored them, since asset forfeiture isn't particularly relevant to anything I'm talking about, but it doesn't knock me off my chair to think that Moon is lying.

Makes sense. It's just that civil asset forfeiture is a huge issue to me. I call for Sessions impeachment over it. I'm not skimming over that one.

Then Moonglow in his broken English says I don't say anything about it. Yeah, he'll get an answer from me for that.

In addition to not being able to write coherently, Moonglow totally fails to grasp the difference between a Republican and libertarian.

Moonglow: Duh, dar, you're not leftist, so that makes you turtle pies and push pin, I mean six slurpy five, oh, Republican I meant when I was going to do that. Drool.

That's right Moonglow, a libertarian is not a leftist, you got that part right. The rest is just your stupid talking

 

[kaz]

Yet cops and the judicial system abuse the 5th on asset forfeiture daily and you say not a word about it..

I have no idea if Kaz has ever said a word about asset forfeiture or not. And neither do you. And could this BE any more extraneous to the topic of this thread? Do you have something to say on the subject of school shootings at all?

I did sixty pages ago..

Amazingly enough, the topic of the thread hasn't changed since then, nor is it going to. If you don't have the attention span necessary for the long haul, may I suggest moving to another thread, or finding something to do that isn't disruptive to others?

Great point, but in Moonglow's defense, he doesn't have the attention span to write one coherent sentence on a consistent basis. As I mentioned, I had to have him explain TWICE what one of his particularly bizarre sentences said, and still had to guess. Though by that time I had enough clues to guess correctly

In my defense, his deficiencies are not my problem, and I don't care.

I hear that

If I was Moonglow I'd say: That's a pretzel if you think about it because mustard is the fastest way to an alpha amphibians webbed banana back

 

[kaz]

I have no idea if Kaz has ever said a word about asset forfeiture or not. And neither do you. And could this BE any more extraneous to the topic of this thread? Do you have something to say on the subject of school shootings at all?

I did sixty pages ago..

Amazingly enough, the topic of the thread hasn't changed since then, nor is it going to. If you don't have the attention span necessary for the long haul, may I suggest moving to another thread, or finding something to do that isn't disruptive to others?

Great point, but in Moonglow's defense, he doesn't have the attention span to write one coherent sentence on a consistent basis. As I mentioned, I had to have him explain TWICE what one of his particularly bizarre sentences said, and still had to guess. Though by that time I had enough clues to guess correctly

In my defense, his deficiencies are not my problem, and I don't care.

I hear that

If I was Moonglow I'd say: That's a pretzel if you think about it because mustard is the fastest way to an alpha amphibians webbed banana back

I pity the thief who points a gun at Moonglow and says your money or your life?

An hour later he's be weeping on a park bench saying what the hell did he say?

 

[ABikerSailor]

I did sixty pages ago..

Amazingly enough, the topic of the thread hasn't changed since then, nor is it going to. If you don't have the attention span necessary for the long haul, may I suggest moving to another thread, or finding something to do that isn't disruptive to others?

Great point, but in Moonglow's defense, he doesn't have the attention span to write one coherent sentence on a consistent basis. As I mentioned, I had to have him explain TWICE what one of his particularly bizarre sentences said, and still had to guess. Though by that time I had enough clues to guess correctly

In my defense, his deficiencies are not my problem, and I don't care.

I hear that

If I was Moonglow I'd say: That's a pretzel if you think about it because mustard is the fastest way to an alpha amphibians webbed banana back

I pity the thief who points a gun at Moonglow and says your money or your life?

An hour later he's be weeping on a park bench saying what the hell did he say?

Good thing I didn't take a sip of coffee when reading this, because that was FUCKIN' FUNNY DUDE!

 

[Moonglow]

I did sixty pages ago..

Amazingly enough, the topic of the thread hasn't changed since then, nor is it going to. If you don't have the attention span necessary for the long haul, may I suggest moving to another thread, or finding something to do that isn't disruptive to others?

Great point, but in Moonglow's defense, he doesn't have the attention span to write one coherent sentence on a consistent basis. As I mentioned, I had to have him explain TWICE what one of his particularly bizarre sentences said, and still had to guess. Though by that time I had enough clues to guess correctly

In my defense, his deficiencies are not my problem, and I don't care.

I hear that

If I was Moonglow I'd say: That's a pretzel if you think about it because mustard is the fastest way to an alpha amphibians webbed banana back

I pity the thief who points a gun at Moonglow and says your money or your life?

An hour later he's be weeping on a park bench saying what the hell did he say?

That's not how it goes down but I can tell you do like your dime store novels...Was that self explanatory or do you need a guide?

 

[TemplarKormac]

I did sixty pages ago..

Amazingly enough, the topic of the thread hasn't changed since then, nor is it going to. If you don't have the attention span necessary for the long haul, may I suggest moving to another thread, or finding something to do that isn't disruptive to others?

Great point, but in Moonglow's defense, he doesn't have the attention span to write one coherent sentence on a consistent basis. As I mentioned, I had to have him explain TWICE what one of his particularly bizarre sentences said, and still had to guess. Though by that time I had enough clues to guess correctly

In my defense, his deficiencies are not my problem, and I don't care.

I hear that

If I was Moonglow I'd say: That's a pretzel if you think about it because mustard is the fastest way to an alpha amphibians webbed banana back

I pity the thief who points a gun at Moonglow and says your money or your life?

An hour later he's be weeping on a park bench saying what the hell did he say?

 

[Nosmo King]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

Leftists "owe"? Americans have been laying the bullet-riddled corpses of innocent victims on the High Altar of Intransigence and Indifference in the Cathedral of LaPierre of the Sacred NRA for decades and you think you are 'owed' something?

In the last assault weapon debate the gun nuts bogged down progress by haggling over cosmetics. Grips, stocks and flash suppressors have NOTHING to do with the essential problem of the rate of fire.

Surviving kids rally and march and for their efforts they are demeaned, disparaged and mocked by the gun lovers.

Gun lovers say movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings, yet no one has every killed 17 people in mnutes with an XBox.

Gun nuts say the mentally frazzled should not have guns, yet when given the opportunity to make that a reality, the gun lobby said that the rights of the mentally ill was being infringed.

Gun nuts are "owed' something? Perhaps you're right. We owe you our scorn.

We follow your rules, people died and it's our fault. You're a mindless Democrat shill

Your rules ensured the proliferation of unnecessarily lethal weapons and people continue to die. You stood indifferent to the pleas of your fellow citizens to stem the tide of the slaughter, and people continue to die. You're a heartless idiot in the influence of a heartless lobby in a heartless cause.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Social Security is at least a program that requires MOST of the people who receive benefits from it to have put something into it in order to get them, so it is different from welfare in that regard

This is the part of your post that is factually wrong.

The money they paid in was spent as it was received, no money was ever saved.

Welfare: 100% of the amount paid is paid by current taxpayers

Social Security: 100% of the amount paid is paid by current taxpayers

You cannot refute that. It's a fact

I didn't say that wasn't the case. I said most of those who get Social Security have put something in, and they have, the fact that our incompetent government immediately spent it instead of putting it aside like they promised to notwithstanding.

If by "put something in" you don't mean that they ever saved any money, then I don't know what you're taying. You're very precise in your language, I usually do.

Social Security can be a hard one because you want to believe that somehow all the money you're paying into for it makes it somehow justified that they take your children's money and give it to you later, even if as in your case you'd prefer they do away with both.

1) Did I "put something in" when I pay income taxes? It works exactly the same way. They spend the money as it comes in. Why isn't that a savings plan?

2) How can anyone have "put something in" when not one dime of the money they will ever receive in social security checks was their own money? I will get a GE pension. Part of my wages were company contributions to my pension plan. That is saved and invested. Social Security is entirely different. You pay, they steal later from your children

3) Again,

1973 - income taxes, spent as they come in
1973 - social security taxes, spent as they come in

2018 - welfare check, all money comes from taxpayers
2018 - social security check, all money comes from taxpayers.

Two programs that work EXACTLY the same way. How can one be welfare and the other not?

Sure, politicians lied to you. That doesn't change the nature of what social security is.

Our parents gave us a tip. Psst, do the same to your kids. I don't want to do that. Regardless of the decades I've paid social security, I don't want to use that to justify stealing from my children

*sigh* Again, I am well aware that the government operates the Social Security Administration as a giant Ponzi scheme. I have already said that I don't approve of the entire concept. Nevertheless, the money that is taken from people while they work, even though it is used to pay those already on Social Security, DOES still constitute them putting something into the system.

It's not much of a "gotcha!" that both welfare and Social Security money all comes from taxpayers, because ALL money the government has comes from taxpayers. Not the point.

Then why isn't the military a savings plan? Why does money you pay for social security count as "paying in" and military expenditures don't? Should I get a check every month because I paid for the military in 1993?

I know we mostly agree. But I see no possible way to use the term "paid into" for money that was spent like every other tax we paid.

I'll drop it. You're obviously a precise, well spoken and thoughtful person. Noodle it some more and when you're ready, you'll realize what I did. It wasn't easy for me to accept what it really is either, I'm not saying otherwise. But we need to stop listening to all the verbiage (lies) around all our government programs and call them out for what they actually are.

You and I paid into nothing, there was nothing to pay into. Government redistributed our money to our parents, they will redistribute our children's money to us, exactly like every other welfare program

I'm really not sure what the military has to do with anything. Really not following you there.

Bottom line is that Social Security isn't the same as welfare, and it's not fair to people who are simply making do with the system they're stuck with to blame or denigrate them because the system sucks.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I did sixty pages ago..

Amazingly enough, the topic of the thread hasn't changed since then, nor is it going to. If you don't have the attention span necessary for the long haul, may I suggest moving to another thread, or finding something to do that isn't disruptive to others?

Great point, but in Moonglow's defense, he doesn't have the attention span to write one coherent sentence on a consistent basis. As I mentioned, I had to have him explain TWICE what one of his particularly bizarre sentences said, and still had to guess. Though by that time I had enough clues to guess correctly

In my defense, his deficiencies are not my problem, and I don't care.

I hear that

If I was Moonglow I'd say: That's a pretzel if you think about it because mustard is the fastest way to an alpha amphibians webbed banana back

I pity the thief who points a gun at Moonglow and says your money or your life?

An hour later he's be weeping on a park bench saying what the hell did he say?

And it would be an hour later because he'd have had to spend most of that time explaining the choice to him.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

Leftists "owe"? Americans have been laying the bullet-riddled corpses of innocent victims on the High Altar of Intransigence and Indifference in the Cathedral of LaPierre of the Sacred NRA for decades and you think you are 'owed' something?

In the last assault weapon debate the gun nuts bogged down progress by haggling over cosmetics. Grips, stocks and flash suppressors have NOTHING to do with the essential problem of the rate of fire.

Surviving kids rally and march and for their efforts they are demeaned, disparaged and mocked by the gun lovers.

Gun lovers say movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings, yet no one has every killed 17 people in mnutes with an XBox.

Gun nuts say the mentally frazzled should not have guns, yet when given the opportunity to make that a reality, the gun lobby said that the rights of the mentally ill was being infringed.

Gun nuts are "owed' something? Perhaps you're right. We owe you our scorn.

We follow your rules, people died and it's our fault. You're a mindless Democrat shill

Your rules ensured the proliferation of unnecessarily lethal weapons and people continue to die. You stood indifferent to the pleas of your fellow citizens to stem the tide of the slaughter, and people continue to die. You're a heartless idiot in the influence of a heartless lobby in a heartless cause.

Hysterical, melodramatic twaddle.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting.



easy ... the dems MADE RW's join the NRA and fight tooth and nail for assault rifle freedom.

es

Comrade, what IS an "assault rifle?"

Define it!

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting"

No, they don't.

Yes. you do Comrade.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Leftists ??

A guy with a “make America great again “ hat
Shoots up a bunch of kids at a school
In gun nut Florida and the LEFTISTS owe an explanation???

No you lying motherfucker, that is not the case.

 

[Nosmo King]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

Leftists "owe"? Americans have been laying the bullet-riddled corpses of innocent victims on the High Altar of Intransigence and Indifference in the Cathedral of LaPierre of the Sacred NRA for decades and you think you are 'owed' something?

In the last assault weapon debate the gun nuts bogged down progress by haggling over cosmetics. Grips, stocks and flash suppressors have NOTHING to do with the essential problem of the rate of fire.

Surviving kids rally and march and for their efforts they are demeaned, disparaged and mocked by the gun lovers.

Gun lovers say movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings, yet no one has every killed 17 people in mnutes with an XBox.

Gun nuts say the mentally frazzled should not have guns, yet when given the opportunity to make that a reality, the gun lobby said that the rights of the mentally ill was being infringed.

Gun nuts are "owed' something? Perhaps you're right. We owe you our scorn.

We follow your rules, people died and it's our fault. You're a mindless Democrat shill

Your rules ensured the proliferation of unnecessarily lethal weapons and people continue to die. You stood indifferent to the pleas of your fellow citizens to stem the tide of the slaughter, and people continue to die. You're a heartless idiot in the influence of a heartless lobby in a heartless cause.

Hysterical, melodramatic twaddle.

That is commentary, not rebuttal.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

Leftists "owe"? Americans have been laying the bullet-riddled corpses of innocent victims on the High Altar of Intransigence and Indifference in the Cathedral of LaPierre of the Sacred NRA for decades and you think you are 'owed' something?

In the last assault weapon debate the gun nuts bogged down progress by haggling over cosmetics. Grips, stocks and flash suppressors have NOTHING to do with the essential problem of the rate of fire.

Surviving kids rally and march and for their efforts they are demeaned, disparaged and mocked by the gun lovers.

Gun lovers say movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings, yet no one has every killed 17 people in mnutes with an XBox.

Gun nuts say the mentally frazzled should not have guns, yet when given the opportunity to make that a reality, the gun lobby said that the rights of the mentally ill was being infringed.

Gun nuts are "owed' something? Perhaps you're right. We owe you our scorn.

We follow your rules, people died and it's our fault. You're a mindless Democrat shill

Your rules ensured the proliferation of unnecessarily lethal weapons and people continue to die. You stood indifferent to the pleas of your fellow citizens to stem the tide of the slaughter, and people continue to die. You're a heartless idiot in the influence of a heartless lobby in a heartless cause.

Hysterical, melodramatic twaddle.

That is commentary, not rebuttal.

What makes you think you said something worthy of rebuttal? If you're going to spout bullshit, you don't deserve anything more than to have it identified as such.

 

[Nosmo King]

Leftists "owe"? Americans have been laying the bullet-riddled corpses of innocent victims on the High Altar of Intransigence and Indifference in the Cathedral of LaPierre of the Sacred NRA for decades and you think you are 'owed' something?

In the last assault weapon debate the gun nuts bogged down progress by haggling over cosmetics. Grips, stocks and flash suppressors have NOTHING to do with the essential problem of the rate of fire.

Surviving kids rally and march and for their efforts they are demeaned, disparaged and mocked by the gun lovers.

Gun lovers say movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings, yet no one has every killed 17 people in mnutes with an XBox.

Gun nuts say the mentally frazzled should not have guns, yet when given the opportunity to make that a reality, the gun lobby said that the rights of the mentally ill was being infringed.

Gun nuts are "owed' something? Perhaps you're right. We owe you our scorn.

We follow your rules, people died and it's our fault. You're a mindless Democrat shill

Your rules ensured the proliferation of unnecessarily lethal weapons and people continue to die. You stood indifferent to the pleas of your fellow citizens to stem the tide of the slaughter, and people continue to die. You're a heartless idiot in the influence of a heartless lobby in a heartless cause.

Hysterical, melodramatic twaddle.

That is commentary, not rebuttal.

What makes you think you said something worthy of rebuttal? If you're going to spout bullshit, you don't deserve anything more than to have it identified as such.

Q.E.D.

The commentary of a shallow mind.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Uh oh. Nosmo got Cecilie started.

Nosmo, heaven help you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We follow your rules, people died and it's our fault. You're a mindless Democrat shill

Your rules ensured the proliferation of unnecessarily lethal weapons and people continue to die. You stood indifferent to the pleas of your fellow citizens to stem the tide of the slaughter, and people continue to die. You're a heartless idiot in the influence of a heartless lobby in a heartless cause.

Hysterical, melodramatic twaddle.

That is commentary, not rebuttal.

What makes you think you said something worthy of rebuttal? If you're going to spout bullshit, you don't deserve anything more than to have it identified as such.

Q.E.D.

The commentary of a shallow mind.

Yes, your post was that, as well. I thought that was pretty much included in the word "twaddle".

 

[TemplarKormac]

Uh oh. Nosmo got Cecilie started.

Nosmo, heaven help you.

And I mean this in a good way. Cecilie has been punting people in this thread left, right and sideways for most of the week. I wish I had that kind of command of the English language.

 

[Faun]

Yeah you're right... you and Kaz only yell out Due Process when you don't like the law.

So Due Process for a felon to own a gun has to do with the court case for the crime they committed? Yeah, that's a reach that doesn't even come close. You do realize that a lot of felons who are affected by this are convicted of crimes that may not even involve a gun?

Liar. Name any time I don't support due process. Now you're just an intellectually dishonest piece of shit.

Question you continually refuse to answer. Should the executive branch be allowed to remove your Constitutional rights on their own? So?

Oh? What about folks who lose their right to arm themselves when they have a restraining order put out on them? Where’s the due process in those cases?

That would be in the court hearing where the order of protection is imposed by a judge.

Restraining orders are often issued without the target of the order being involved in any court proceedings. Anyone can request a restraining order against anyone they know; and based on the reasons given for the restraining order, can be issued by a court very quickly, not to mention, often fraudulently. The person on the receiving end can certainly challenge the order, but they’ve already lost their 2nd Amendment rights by then — with no due process. And of course, this varies from state to state.

Wrong.

An order of protection is provisionally issued upon receipt of a valid request. The issuance of that order is itself a hearing, by a judge, and involves that judge reviewing the reasons offered and confirming to the extent possible that they are not frivolous.

As per the law regarding due process, the subject of the order is served with a clear notification of the order and its provisions, and also of the steps necessary to argue the order and have it possibly vacated. If the subject chooses to oppose the order, then there is a second hearing, at which both sides present evidence on which the judge can base his determination.

So once again, there is due process of law and respect and observance of the rights of the accused, not simply a capricious vacating of Constitutional rights based on the whims of bureaucrats and doctors and other people outside the legal and judicial system.

Thanks for agreeing with what I said... the individual receiving the restraining order loses their right to own a firearm but can contest the order. And again, it varies from state to state, but there have been cases where people were charged with illegally being in possession of a firearm because they didn’t know there was a restraining order on them.