So Only Cops And Crooks Can Have Assault Weapons In California?

[2aguy]

"States rights" at work

State rights do not trump the Constitution.

If they did the Darkies would still have separate drinking fountains. Ah, the Good Old Days.

Yeah, when the democrats were in power. Fire hoses and axe handles. Lynchings. Oh for the GLORY DAYS of democrats what would this nation do?

Why the Negro may have never gotten the vote. They would be burning his churches like islamic state. Throw them off buildings and set them on fire. They DID you know. Rape their women {sounds familiar huh?

You know really the ONLY thing that truly changed was the hood color {White to Black} and which gender wore it. Same show different costume maybe?

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

 

[2aguy]

Bravo! Such weapons belong in the hands of a well regulated militia, not on the streets.

I can tell you are well informed about firearms. Idiot

Your lack of a cogent, responsible reply betrays much about you intellectual standing.

Play ground responses such as yours have no credibility in serious debate.

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

No......it just means 4 or more people were killed in a public place. The same number of people can easily be killed with a shotgun or a revolver...or several revolvers...

Magazine capacity and AR-15s have little to do with mass public shootings other than the fact that you anti gun nuts keep making them "cool...." for these shooters.

 

[2aguy]

Bravo! Such weapons belong in the hands of a well regulated militia, not on the streets.

I can tell you are well informed about firearms. Idiot

Your lack of a cogent, responsible reply betrays much about you intellectual standing.

Play ground responses such as yours have no credibility in serious debate.

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

The AR-15 is a great weapon for civilian defense....both men and more importantly women, can use it because it has no recoil....the magazine capacity means you don't have to change magazines and the bad guys know you have a lot of ammo to deal with them....the small round size means it breaks up in drywall...which means it won't kill your neighbor....it has the ability to have a light, a laser and good optics........which makes hitting the bad guy in low light, like a home at night, easier if it comes to trigger pulliing, and the fact that you have 3 points of contact with the weapon also means you have more control over it.......

Also.....in various places in the country, where there is less access to police and high risk to normal people....like the border on a ranch, or in a national park on the border...where you might have to hold off drug killers.....an AR-15 with standard magazines may save your life....

Just ask the 46 teaching students murdered by the drug cartels and mexican police in Mexico....oh...you can't...they were tortured and murdered by the cartels and their government minions.....

 

[2aguy]

I can tell you are well informed about firearms. Idiot

Your lack of a cogent, responsible reply betrays much about you intellectual standing.

Play ground responses such as yours have no credibility in serious debate.

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

Look dimwit the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting ducks you stupid fool. The 2nd is about defense and if the bad guys have guns with magazines and higher rates of fire then we citizens are entitled to own the same damn weapons. OH SNAP!!!!!!!

The second amendment does not guarantee a civilian arms race. It does not guarantee your right to a rocket propelled grenade launcher, a fighter jet or an aircraft carrier.

You seem to prefer to pepper your posts with insults. One day you will learn, mature and leave that behind. You don't have to cite your own intellectual and emotional shortcomings in order to make a point.

Yes...it does....we get the same weapons as our military, at a minimum.......

 

[2aguy]

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

Look dimwit the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting ducks you stupid fool. The 2nd is about defense and if the bad guys have guns with magazines and higher rates of fire then we citizens are entitled to own the same damn weapons. OH SNAP!!!!!!!

The second amendment does not guarantee a civilian arms race. It does not guarantee your right to a rocket propelled grenade launcher, a fighter jet or an aircraft carrier.

You seem to prefer to pepper your posts with insults. One day you will learn, mature and leave that behind. You don't have to cite your own intellectual and emotional shortcomings in order to make a point.

So typical of dimwit gun control advocates, they lose the argument on small arms AR15 style rifles so they deflect with their rocket propelled grenades and fighter jet stupidity. AR15 style rifles are the modern equivalent of the type of arms the 2nd amendment protects. Do these bunch of dumb asses even have a clue as to the deadly type of arms available to the people in the late 1700's? They owned some nasty weapons in the 1700's that would be illegal today. Tune in next week when these idiots try to ban Daisy BB guns.

The civilian arms race must stop. No one needs a BAR, a Thompson machine gun, a flamethrower or any other military weapon. I submit that the semi-automatic firing system coupled with high capacity ammunition magazines are weapons designed for a battlefield, not for use on our streets.

Some gun lovers, in fact all gun lovers, have had what may be described as a pleasurable experience with guns. Too many other American citizens have had utterly tragic experiences with guns. All I ask is those gun lovers bear simple respect and acknowledgment of the tragic outcomes of gun violence. Gun lovers in their zeal to be the hero gunslinger must also bear some of the responsibility for the deaths and injuries wrought by gun violence.

At one time, no too long ago, the NRA was an organization that promoted sporting use of guns and hunter safety. Today, the NRA and those who show blind alleigence to the guns at any cost agenda of the NRA have fallen short in their understanding of the consequence of flooding our streets with military weapons. Have any of those gun lovers ever considered the consequences of unfettered and unlimited access to guns by each and every citizen, in spite of the mental and emotional and criminal circumstances of that citizenry? Why is it so easy to dismiss not only gun violence and a fact, but those who argue for common sense gun legislation?

What is the higher noble purpose of the semi-automatic firing system and high capacity magazine? Does it make you a true 'sportsman'? Are they designed as hunting and sporting weapons? Or are they simply designed to run up a body count?

Gun lovers in their zeal to be the hero gunslinger must also bear some of the responsibility for the deaths and injuries wrought by gun violence.

Wrong...completely wrong...the only ones responsible are the criminals who pull those triggers and we are not allowing you to blame us for that......we however blame you for disarming law abiding people with your gun free zones....and your prosecutors who release violent gun crimnals back into society...that too is on your head....

What is the higher noble purpose of the semi-automatic firing system and high capacity magazine?

Freedom from violent attack...and having enough ammo that you don't have to reload if you are injured or facing more than one bad guy.......


You guys don't study history....you don't understand mass murder, ethnic cleansing or genocide.....and your grandchildren may pay the price....

 

[2aguy]

These are proposed measures reflecting the will of the people of the state of California, introduced at the behest of the people by their elected representatives.

And the people are at liberty to oppose the proposed measures through the political process, or if the measures become law, through the judicial process with a court challenge.

In addition, however unwise or unwarranted these measures might be, they are nonetheless Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, in no way 'violating' the Second Amendment.

Last, the inconsistency and hypocrisy common to most on the right haven't gone unnoticed: if the states have the 'right' to compel a woman to give birth against her will, or the 'right' to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law, in accordance with the 'will of the people,' then so too does California have the 'right' to regulate firearms as it sees fit.

Conservatives can't have it both ways.

Nope, murder is a crime...owning a gun is not.

 

[2aguy]

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

Look dimwit the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting ducks you stupid fool. The 2nd is about defense and if the bad guys have guns with magazines and higher rates of fire then we citizens are entitled to own the same damn weapons. OH SNAP!!!!!!!

The second amendment does not guarantee a civilian arms race. It does not guarantee your right to a rocket propelled grenade launcher, a fighter jet or an aircraft carrier.

You seem to prefer to pepper your posts with insults. One day you will learn, mature and leave that behind. You don't have to cite your own intellectual and emotional shortcomings in order to make a point.

So typical of dimwit gun control advocates, they lose the argument on small arms AR15 style rifles so they deflect with their rocket propelled grenades and fighter jet stupidity. AR15 style rifles are the modern equivalent of the type of arms the 2nd amendment protects. Do these bunch of dumb asses even have a clue as to the deadly type of arms available to the people in the late 1700's? They owned some nasty weapons in the 1700's that would be illegal today. Tune in next week when these idiots try to ban Daisy BB guns.

The civilian arms race must stop. No one needs a BAR, a Thompson machine gun, a flamethrower or any other military weapon. I submit that the semi-automatic firing system coupled with high capacity ammunition magazines are weapons designed for a battlefield, not for use on our streets.

Some gun lovers, in fact all gun lovers, have had what may be described as a pleasurable experience with guns. Too many other American citizens have had utterly tragic experiences with guns. All I ask is those gun lovers bear simple respect and acknowledgment of the tragic outcomes of gun violence. Gun lovers in their zeal to be the hero gunslinger must also bear some of the responsibility for the deaths and injuries wrought by gun violence.

At one time, no too long ago, the NRA was an organization that promoted sporting use of guns and hunter safety. Today, the NRA and those who show blind alleigence to the guns at any cost agenda of the NRA have fallen short in their understanding of the consequence of flooding our streets with military weapons. Have any of those gun lovers ever considered the consequences of unfettered and unlimited access to guns by each and every citizen, in spite of the mental and emotional and criminal circumstances of that citizenry? Why is it so easy to dismiss not only gun violence and a fact, but those who argue for common sense gun legislation?

What is the higher noble purpose of the semi-automatic firing system and high capacity magazine? Does it make you a true 'sportsman'? Are they designed as hunting and sporting weapons? Or are they simply designed to run up a body count?

Have any of those gun lovers ever considered the consequences of unfettered and unlimited access to guns by each and every citizen, in spite of the mental and emotional and criminal circumstances of that citizenry

Americans use guns 1.5 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and to save lives........

Criminals use guns to murder each other 8,124 times in 2014....

Can you tell which number is bigger...? And have you considered the consequences of unfettered and unlimited access to guns by the Americans who used them to stop violent criminals? The lives saved, the lives kept from ruin by those normal, gun owning Americans and the money saved because they used their guns to stop rapes, robberies and murders?

Try thinking about that sometime....

 

[2aguy]

State rights do not trump the Constitution.

No constitutional issue here.

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
-- Antonin Scalia; from District of Columbia v. Heller

So you would not be opposed to a state limiting the access to abortion. One thing about those laws imposing conditions it only affects law abiding citizens

I didn't even say I supported the laws in question. I just pointed out that there isn't a constitutional issue with banning the sale of this or that class of weapon.

Correct.

To acknowledge the fact that such measures comply with current Second Amendment jurisprudence – are in no way 'un-Constitutional' – is not to agree with or endorse the measures.

Indeed, if residents of the state believe the laws manifest as an undue burden on the Second Amendment right, they're at liberty to challenge the measures in Federal court.

Yes. I actually think that going after guns based on having a pistol grip, etc, is a waste of political energy. I'd rather see them spend that energy on banning the sale of high capacity magazines, and limiting the trade of existing high capacity magazines.

Do you realize that the high capacity magazine meme is just stupid....and is just being used as a way to ban certain models of rifle and pistol.....that high capacity magazines made no difference in any crimes or mass shootings? Do you realize that?

 

[2aguy]

"States rights" at work

State rights do not trump the Constitution.

No constitutional issue here.

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
-- Antonin Scalia; from District of Columbia v. Heller

So you would not be opposed to a state limiting the access to abortion. One thing about those laws imposing conditions it only affects law abiding citizens

It is a settled and accepted fact of 14th Amendment jurisprudence that the states may not violate a woman's right to privacy by compelling her to give birth against her will through force of law; women who are law-abiding citizens.

As the Heller Court correctly observed, the Second Amendment right is not absolute, it is subject to reasonable restrictions by government – where current Second Amendment jurisprudence considers measures such as those proposed in California to be reasonable and Constitutional.

That may very well change in time, but is currently the law.

And should such measures be invalidated by the courts in the future, laws such as those proposed in California would be un-Constitutional, a violation of the Second Amendment right.

The states do not have the authority to deny citizens their Constitutional rights – the right to privacy, the right to equal protection of the law, or to prohibit citizens from possessing firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense; but just as a woman's right to privacy is not absolute, where abortion may be unlawful in certain circumstances, so too may restrictions and limitations on the right to possess firearms be enacted.

Again, if residents of California perceive those laws as being invalid because they impose conditions which only affect law abiding citizens, then they're at liberty to file suit in Federal court.

And so the 14th amendment should be used to strike down taxes on guns and ammo....the same way Poll Taxes and literacy tests were struck down with the 14th Amendment.....

 

[2aguy]

I can tell you are well informed about firearms. Idiot

Your lack of a cogent, responsible reply betrays much about you intellectual standing.

Play ground responses such as yours have no credibility in serious debate.

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

A gun for self defense should have the capacity needed to protect one and one's family period

And that capacity is for the gun owner to decide upon not you

If you cannot hit a target inside you house with six rounds, perhaps you are not competent to be trusted with firearms.

Yes....and when you have 3 home invaders 6 shots is not enough......

 

[2aguy]

The anti gun loons are only going after magazines as a way to get guns......

http://bearingarms.com/kleck-magazine-size-limits-effect-mass-shootings/

Criminologist Gary Kleck is a legend in his field, and a thorn in the side of gun control supporters for his rigid insistence on listening to what the data tells us, instead of attempting to twist the data to suit his political agenda. His latest study looks like it will crush the gun control conceit that magazine size limits have anything at all to do with casualty counts.
Magazine size limits are irrelevant in mass shootings.

Kleck identified and examined 88 mass shooting incidents in which more than six people were killed or wounded for the 20 year period from 1994 through 2013. He looked at incidents with more than six victims because six or fewer people could be shot with a traditional six-shot revolver with no large-capacity magazine needed. So he wanted to look at those events in which possession of large-capacity magazines would be most relevant.
Even with this restrictive definition of a mass shooting, Kleck found that large capacity magazines – defined as holding over 10 rounds – were used in only 21 of the 88 incidents (24%). So, in 76% of the incidents, a large-capacity magazine ban would have made no difference in any event.
Kleck then goes on to analyze further the 21 incidents in which a large-capacity magazine was used. In every case, the shooters carried either multiple guns or multiple magazines. Therefore, even without a large-capacity magazine, the shooters could easily switch guns or magazines.
Kleck also marshals evidence to show that the rate of fire of most mass shooters is so slow that having to change guns or magazines more frequently would not diminish their casualty counts.
​

 

[2aguy]

And here you go.....defensive gun fights where the victim fired more than 2 rounds......

Woman shoots 12 times, has to reload....

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/crime/2015/01/14/home-invasion-shooting/21764037/

********************************

http://americanhandgunner.com/enemy-within-the-jim-patterson-incident/

hit guy 5 times to stop...

Also....prosectued though cleared by police

*************************************

Masaad ayoob mag ban hearing testimony includes 3 cases where more than 3 rounds fired...

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2014/0626/20140626_032508_062614-Krieger-Opinion-Outfitters.pdf

Massad Ayoob, identified only three anecdotal instances in which individuals engaging

28Case 1:13-cv-01300-MSK-MJW Document 159 Filed 06/26/14 USDC Colorado Page 29 of 50

The first incident involved a gun shop owner who lived next door to the shop. One night, carloads of people drove through his storefront to steal guns. In defending his property, the shop owner used a fully automatic M-16 and a fully automatic 9mm submachine gun to fire over 100 rounds. One perpetrator was killed, others were injured, and all were captured and convicted.

The second incident involved a man who owned a watch shop in Los Angeles and who had been involved in a series of “gun fights.” (Presumably, he had been robbed repeatedly.) The shop owner began keeping multiple pistols hidden in his shop. Mr. Ayoob recalled that at least one of the gun fights “went beyond” 17 or 19 shots before the last of the multiple perpetrators was down or had fled.

The third incident involved a Virginia jewelry store that was robbed by “two old gangster type guys.” The two brothers who owned the store successfully defended themselves and their property using multiple revolvers (not semiautomatic weapons) that were kept behind the counter. Mr. Ayoob did not specify how many rounds were fired in that incident.

********************************

Dr who brought gun into gun free zone shoots patient 3 times

http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/breaking-armed-doctor-opens-fire-and-stops-active-shooter-in-pennsylvania-hospital/

******************************

Woman shoots home invader 5 times...

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/

clerk shoots robber 10 times after robber shoots him in leg

http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/armed-robber-shoots-store-owner-in-the-leg-store-owner-then-shoots-robber-10-times/

Home invasion....30-40 rounds fired...

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/need-ar-15-30-round-magazine/

20 rounds vs. 2 robbers....

http://concealednation.org/2015/04/armed-robbery-victim-shoots-back-20-rounds-fired/

Uber driver fires 6 shots hits 3 times...low and outside....

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-83337910/

 

[2aguy]

We need to start pushing back on these anti gun loons as they attack ammo and magazines.....as well as AR-15s.....this is getting old and I am tired of it.....let's kick out the gun grabbing politicians and teach them that a Right is a Right and that keeping blacks from voting the way the democrats did is not going to be switched to denying all Americans their Right to self defense.....

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"States rights" at work

State rights do not trump the Constitution.

If they did the Darkies would still have separate drinking fountains. Ah, the Good Old Days.

Yeah, when the democrats were in power. Fire hoses and axe handles. Lynchings. Oh for the GLORY DAYS of democrats what would this nation do?

Why the Negro may have never gotten the vote. They would be burning his churches like islamic state. Throw them off buildings and set them on fire. They DID you know. Rape their women {sounds familiar huh?

You know really the ONLY thing that truly changed was the hood color {White to Black} and which gender wore it. Same show different costume maybe?

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

Yep,and now the south is GOP and racist as ever.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Your lack of a cogent, responsible reply betrays much about you intellectual standing.

Play ground responses such as yours have no credibility in serious debate.

While I would certainly not call you an idiot...we've debated this often and I know better...I'll never understand the lefts fixation with ARs and AKs.

A semi-automatic is a semi-automatic is a semi-automatic.

Whoopi Goldberg thinks they are fully automatic.

You don't believe that too I hope.

One trigger pull, one bullet...just like every other commonly owned firearm in the United States.

Why are 'mass shootings' 'mass' shootings? Could it be the rat of fire and capacity of the weapon? What is the noble practical use of such weapons? To be a more effective sportsman, or to run up,the body count?

Look dimwit the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting ducks you stupid fool. The 2nd is about defense and if the bad guys have guns with magazines and higher rates of fire then we citizens are entitled to own the same damn weapons. OH SNAP!!!!!!!

The second amendment does not guarantee a civilian arms race. It does not guarantee your right to a rocket propelled grenade launcher, a fighter jet or an aircraft carrier.

You seem to prefer to pepper your posts with insults. One day you will learn, mature and leave that behind. You don't have to cite your own intellectual and emotional shortcomings in order to make a point.

Yes...it does....we get the same weapons as our military, at a minimum.......

Nope.

 

[2aguy]

State rights do not trump the Constitution.

If they did the Darkies would still have separate drinking fountains. Ah, the Good Old Days.

Yeah, when the democrats were in power. Fire hoses and axe handles. Lynchings. Oh for the GLORY DAYS of democrats what would this nation do?

Why the Negro may have never gotten the vote. They would be burning his churches like islamic state. Throw them off buildings and set them on fire. They DID you know. Rape their women {sounds familiar huh?

You know really the ONLY thing that truly changed was the hood color {White to Black} and which gender wore it. Same show different costume maybe?

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

Yep,and now the south is GOP and racist as ever.

Nope....the democrat party is the party of racism...in the past and today....all of the core groups that make up the democrat party are openly and proudly racist...the leadership of the democrat party is racist...in particular obama...who sat in an openly, and proudly racist church for 20 years, and had the openly and proudly racist pastor, jermiah wright marry him and michelle and baptized their kids.........

So nope....the democrats have been racists from the beginning of their party....and are today........they have just changed tactics...and goals...they now want to enslave all Americans...not just blacks...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If they did the Darkies would still have separate drinking fountains. Ah, the Good Old Days.

Yeah, when the democrats were in power. Fire hoses and axe handles. Lynchings. Oh for the GLORY DAYS of democrats what would this nation do?

Why the Negro may have never gotten the vote. They would be burning his churches like islamic state. Throw them off buildings and set them on fire. They DID you know. Rape their women {sounds familiar huh?

You know really the ONLY thing that truly changed was the hood color {White to Black} and which gender wore it. Same show different costume maybe?

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

Yep,and now the south is GOP and racist as ever.

Nope....the democrat party is the party of racism...in the past and today....all of the core groups that make up the democrat party are openly and proudly racist...the leadership of the democrat party is racist...in particular obama...who sat in an openly, and proudly racist church for 20 years, and had the openly and proudly racist pastor, jermiah wright marry him and michelle and baptized their kids.........

So nope....the democrats have been racists from the beginning of their party....and are today........they have just changed tactics...and goals...they now want to enslave all Americans...not just blacks...

The GOP is the party of whitey, the party of racism, nothing like the Party of Lincoln, whom you hate. The GOP is the KKK and the South. Own it, bigot-boy.

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, when the democrats were in power. Fire hoses and axe handles. Lynchings. Oh for the GLORY DAYS of democrats what would this nation do?

Why the Negro may have never gotten the vote. They would be burning his churches like islamic state. Throw them off buildings and set them on fire. They DID you know. Rape their women {sounds familiar huh?

You know really the ONLY thing that truly changed was the hood color {White to Black} and which gender wore it. Same show different costume maybe?

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

Yep,and now the south is GOP and racist as ever.

Nope....the democrat party is the party of racism...in the past and today....all of the core groups that make up the democrat party are openly and proudly racist...the leadership of the democrat party is racist...in particular obama...who sat in an openly, and proudly racist church for 20 years, and had the openly and proudly racist pastor, jermiah wright marry him and michelle and baptized their kids.........

So nope....the democrats have been racists from the beginning of their party....and are today........they have just changed tactics...and goals...they now want to enslave all Americans...not just blacks...

The GOP is the party of whitey, the party of racism, nothing like the Party of Lincoln, whom you hate. The GOP is the KKK and the South. Own it, bigot-boy.

Do you realize the democrats started the kkk...what a twit you are......and again...all of the core groups of the democrat party are openly and proudly racist.....racists of all colors now control the democrat party, they want to use the consolidated power of government to push their individual racist agendas......they can't use the Republican party because too many republicans want limited government power and the Republicans aren't racists......

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, when the democrats were in power. Fire hoses and axe handles. Lynchings. Oh for the GLORY DAYS of democrats what would this nation do?

Why the Negro may have never gotten the vote. They would be burning his churches like islamic state. Throw them off buildings and set them on fire. They DID you know. Rape their women {sounds familiar huh?

You know really the ONLY thing that truly changed was the hood color {White to Black} and which gender wore it. Same show different costume maybe?

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

Yep,and now the south is GOP and racist as ever.

Nope....the democrat party is the party of racism...in the past and today....all of the core groups that make up the democrat party are openly and proudly racist...the leadership of the democrat party is racist...in particular obama...who sat in an openly, and proudly racist church for 20 years, and had the openly and proudly racist pastor, jermiah wright marry him and michelle and baptized their kids.........

So nope....the democrats have been racists from the beginning of their party....and are today........they have just changed tactics...and goals...they now want to enslave all Americans...not just blacks...

The GOP is the party of whitey, the party of racism, nothing like the Party of Lincoln, whom you hate. The GOP is the KKK and the South. Own it, bigot-boy.

I think Cruz, Rubio, Carson, Nikki Haley, Bobbi Jindal, Mia Love, Herman Cain, Allen West...would disagree with you.....Senators, Governors and Presidential Candidates....

You are such a freaking twit.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Tell us, are you of the party of Lincoln, who still hates his ass? Here's the map. Tell us, was that an issue for the Dems, or the South?

Last I checked, most of the green parts still hate that ****** Obama eh...

It was the democrats in the south that fought to keep slavery...the republicans fought the democrats and then freed the slaves.

Yep,and now the south is GOP and racist as ever.

Nope....the democrat party is the party of racism...in the past and today....all of the core groups that make up the democrat party are openly and proudly racist...the leadership of the democrat party is racist...in particular obama...who sat in an openly, and proudly racist church for 20 years, and had the openly and proudly racist pastor, jermiah wright marry him and michelle and baptized their kids.........

So nope....the democrats have been racists from the beginning of their party....and are today........they have just changed tactics...and goals...they now want to enslave all Americans...not just blacks...

The GOP is the party of whitey, the party of racism, nothing like the Party of Lincoln, whom you hate. The GOP is the KKK and the South. Own it, bigot-boy.

I think Cruz, Rubio, Carson, Nikki Haley, Bobbi Jindal, Mia Love, Herman Cain, Allen West...would disagree with you.....Senators, Governors and Presidential Candidates....

You are such a freaking twit.

That fact that you have a few tokens is what proves the party is racist, dumbass. Your celebrated house-******* don't change a thing.