Which of Your Rights Will They Go After....

[PoliticalChic]

You're both a liar and a moron.


The Democrat Party has always ....ALWAYS.....been the party of slavery, segregation, and second-class citizenship.



You're a government school grad, aren't you.

And the Reps are what? Shining examples of gub'mit servitude to the masses?

~S~

Did you imagine that your post was a cogent response to my statement?

This:
The Democrat Party has always ....ALWAYS.....been the party of slavery, segregation, and second-class citizenship.



Pretty vapid response on your part.

Partisans invented cognitive dissonance PChic

It's a denial mechanism seen and heard ,and basically outs them every time

It;s also how the elites of any given insane disparity manage the flock

When are you finally going to figure out that you, I, and 99.9% of folks posting here are squabbling over crumbs from their table , and blaming each other for having a bigger crumb?

~S~

Actually, in not recognizing the significance and correctness of this statement....

The Democrat Party has always ....ALWAYS.....been the party of slavery, segregation, and second-class citizenship.



....identifies you as the biggest crumb.

As yes, dueling crumbs....why not?

Parsing out 'slavery' ,'segregation' as well as '2nd class citizens' would take some time PChic

Oh yes, the concept does exist , in fact i'll even go as far as to say the Gub'Mit has institutionalized them

But to point them out to you as Gub'Mit snafu's would beckon a Gub'Mit remedy for what you view as Gub'Mit dealings.

If you're imagining the reps manning white horses in some litigant 'charge of the light brigade' redux , i wouldn't hold yer breath

They could care less if we're subjugated any more than thye Dems

~S~

How 'bout this, crumb......the party working assiduously to end free speech is the Democrat Party.


Still no difference?????

 

[Humorme]

People that want to play that card are tools Humorme

~S~

Does that mean you have NO legitimate response? I'm not "playing any card." I've never voted for a Democrat but, when I put my plan to deal with mass shooters before the violence could begin, the Republicans were calling me names without even bothering to read the ideas.

I gave a short synopsis on this board (about twelve to fourteen paragraphs) of my own plan and some right wing hack spent over 200 paragraphs denouncing me and anyone with an IQ the same as their shoe size could see that the hack had not bothered to read beyond the first paragraph.

I'm glad I haven't wasted time on you. You're willing to do the same thing. This is a discussion board. What are you afraid of? If you're afraid to answer a question, maybe you should leave the Internet and talk to yourself in a mirror. It's just a thought.

 

[Humorme]

Let me add to that:

"At least fourteen recent school shootings were committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs. It is important to note the following lists cases where the information about the shooters psychiatric drug use was made public. To give an example, although it is known that James Holmes, suspected perpetrator of the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting, was seeing psychiatrist Lynne Fenton, there has been no mention of what psychiatric drugs he may have been taking—though it is highly probably he was taking psychiatric drugs considering he was under a psychiatrist’s “care”. Also note that all these mass shootings didn’t just occur in the United States.

Of these 14, seven were seeing either a psychiatrist (5 of them) or psychologist (2 of them). It is not known whether or not the other half were seeing a psychiatrist, as it has not been published.

1. Huntsville, Alabama – February 5, 2010: 15-year-old Hammad Memon shot and killed another Discover Middle School student Todd Brown. Memon had a history for being treated for ADHD and depression. He was taking the antidepressant Zoloft and “other drugs for the conditions.” He had been seeing a psychiatrist and psychologist.

2. Kauhajoki, Finland – September 23, 2008: 22-year-old culinary student Matti Saari shot and killed 9 students and a teacher, and wounded another student, before killing himself. Saari was taking an SSRI and a benzodiazapine. He was also seeing a psychologist.

3. Dekalb, Illinois – February 14, 2008: 27-year-old Steven Kazmierczak shot and killed five people and wounded 21 others before killing himself in a Northern Illinois University auditorium. According to his girlfriend, he had recently been taking Prozac, Xanax and Ambien. Toxicology results showed that he still had trace amount of Xanax in his system. He had been seeing a psychiatrist.

4. Jokela, Finland – November 7, 2007: 18-year-old Finnish gunman Pekka-Eric Auvinen had been taking antidepressants before he killed eight people and wounded a dozen more at Jokela High School in southern Finland, then committed suicide.

5. Cleveland, Ohio – October 10, 2007: 14-year-old Asa Coon stormed through his school with a gun in each hand, shooting and wounding four before taking his own life. Court records show Coon had been placed on the antidepressant Trazodone.

6. Red Lake, Minnesota – March 2005: 16-year-old Jeff Weise, on Prozac, shot and killed his grandparents, then went to his school on the Red Lake Indian Reservation where he shot dead 7 students and a teacher, and wounded 7 before killing himself.

7. Greenbush, New York – February 2004: 16-year-old Jon Romano strolled into his high school in east Greenbush and opened fire with a shotgun. Special education teacher Michael Bennett was hit in the leg. Romano had been taking “medication for depression”. He had previously seen a psychiatrist.

8. Wahluke, Washington – April 10, 2001: Sixteen-year-old Cory Baadsgaard took a rifle to his high school and held 23 classmates and a teacher hostage. He had been taking the antidepressant Effexor.

9. El Cajon, California – March 22, 2001: 18-year-old Jason Hoffman, on the antidepressants Celexa and Effexor, opened fire on his classmates, wounding three students and two teachers at Granite Hills High School. He had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting.

10. Williamsport, Pennsylvania – March 7, 2001: 14-year-old Elizabeth Bush was taking the antidepressant Prozac when she shot at fellow students, wounding one.

11. Conyers, Georgia – May 20, 1999: 15-year-old T.J. Solomon was being treated with the stimulant Ritalin when he opened fire on and wounded six of his classmates.

12. Columbine, Colorado – April 20, 1999: 18-year-old Eric Harris and his accomplice, Dylan Klebold, killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 26 others before killing themselves. Harris was on the antidepressant Luvox. Klebold’s medical records remain sealed. Both shooters had been in anger-management classes and had undergone counseling. Harris had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting.

13. Notus, Idaho – April 16, 1999: 15-year-old Shawn Cooper fired two shotgun rounds in his school, narrowly missing students. He was taking a prescribed SSRI antidepressant and Ritalin.

14. Springfield, Oregon – May 21, 1998: 15-year-old Kip Kinkel murdered his parents and then proceeded to school where he opened fire on students in the cafeteria, killing two and wounding 25. Kinkel had been taking the antidepressant Prozac. Kinkel had been attending “anger control classes” and was under the care of a psychologist.

Note: Psychiatric Drugs Can Also Cause Severe Withdrawal Symptoms— Violent and Suicidal Thoughts – Watch This 2 Minute Video



There have been 22 international drug regulatory warnings issued on psychiatric drugs causing violence, mania, hostility, aggression, psychosis, and other violent type reactions. These warnings have been issued in the United States, European Union, Japan, United Kingdom, Australia and Canada."
Columbine | CCHR International

Virtually all mass shooters (except those who are political jihadists) have been under the care / supervision of a psychiatrist and most on SSRIs.

It's easier to blame guns than to get to the root of the problem. Our country's problems with the government prescribing drugs for non-existent conditions, promoting drug use, and ignoring those who desperately need help is THE major cause of violence in America.

Clearly, no laws pertaining to guns are the solution. Banning these are:

a. Gun Free Zones

b. psychotropic drugs

c. Democrats

When any 'gun control' law is met with...'the law won't help' , then there is no legislative solution

Cyclical logic , it's what's for dinner!


~S~

You are presuming that the only laws that will help are gun control laws. You can reduce gun violence with preventative measures that do not include gun control.

Well that would mean more Gub'mit , think on it...~S~

My ideas would shrink the size, power and scope of government. It's time that government be held accountable to the same degree that they hold us accountable for. Think about it. When Nickolas Cruz was not pursued by the FBI, those agents got to say oooops we're sorry. If you were working a job and your negligence led to the deaths of 17 people, what would happen to you?

 

[OnePercenter]

Wonder which books they ban first?

Since FDR put a KKKer on the Supreme Court as his first choice, they've pretty much banned the Bible.

Keep in mind that FDR was a pre-60's Democrat.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Virtually all mass shooters (except those who are political jihadists) have been under the care / supervision of a psychiatrist and most on SSRIs.

It's easier to blame guns than to get to the root of the problem. Our country's problems with the government prescribing drugs for non-existent conditions, promoting drug use, and ignoring those who desperately need help is THE major cause of violence in America.

Clearly, no laws pertaining to guns are the solution. Banning these are:

a. Gun Free Zones

b. psychotropic drugs

c. Democrats

When any 'gun control' law is met with...'the law won't help' , then there is no legislative solution

Cyclical logic , it's what's for dinner!


~S~

You are presuming that the only laws that will help are gun control laws. You can reduce gun violence with preventative measures that do not include gun control.

Well that would mean more Gub'mit , think on it...~S~

My ideas would shrink the size, power and scope of government. It's time that government be held accountable to the same degree that they hold us accountable for. Think about it. When Nickolas Cruz was not pursued by the FBI, those agents got to say oooops we're sorry. If you were working a job and your negligence led to the deaths of 17 people, what would happen to you?

"When Nickolas Cruz was not pursued by the FBI..."


Let's be clear.....the FBI was restricted by Obama policies.

a. "The [Obama] Justice Department already has sued school districts in Florida, South Carolina and Mississippi for implementing allegedly racist disciplinary policies."
Holder's Anti-Discipline Push May Threaten Students | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD


b. "The Obama-era Departments of Education and Justice – under education secretary Arne Duncan and Attorney General Eric Holder –issued school guidelines in 2014 that claimed students of color are “disproportionately impacted” by suspensions and expulsions, a situation they said leads to a “school-to-prison pipeline” that discriminates against minority and low-income students.

According to the Obama administration’s 2014 “Dear Colleague” guidance, any school district whose disciplinary measures showed “disparate impact” – meaning a disproportionately greater number of minority students are affected – is open to investigation by [Obama] the Departments of Justice and Education, regardless of whether the behavior leading to the discipline is unacceptable."
Broward County Likely ‘Inspiration’ for Obama School Discipline Policy to Report Fewer Arrests, Suspensions | Breitbart


c. "Cruz assaulted students, cursed out teachers, kicked in classroom doors, started fist fights, threw chairs, threatened to kill other students, mutilated small animals, pulled a rifle on his mother, drank gasoline and cut himself, among other "red flags."
Threatening to kill someone is a felony. In addition to locking Cruz away for a while, having a felony record would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.
Cruz was never arrested. He wasn't referred to law enforcement. He wasn't even expelled."
The School-To-Mass-Murder Pipeline


d. Obama warned schools not to discipline school children, no matter their actions, if they were members of an authorized minority....meaning, the group voted Democrat.
As a result, Nikolas Cruz was given a pass....multiple passes.....and that unblemished record allowed him to avoid being identified as a possible homicidal maniac.



e. Liberals are responsible for
creating Gun Free Zones
prescribing psychotropic medicines to children
and for the moronic idea behind the "school-to-prison pipeline" policy that allowed Nikolas Cruz to remain free and obtain a weapon.


f. This primitive, stone-age thinking was made official Broward County policy in a Nov. 5, 2013, agreement titled "Collaborative Agreement on School Discipline."

The first "whereas" clause of the agreement states that "the use of arrests and referrals to the criminal justice system may decrease a student's chance of graduation, entering higher education, joining the military and getting a job."

The agreement's third "whereas” clause specifically cites "students of color" as victims of the old, racist policy of treating criminal behavior criminally.'"
The School-To-Mass-Murder Pipeline



g. "The new policy resulted from an Obama administration effort begun in 2011 to keep students in school and improve racial outcomes (timeline here)..."
https://www.realclearinvestigations...cipline_policy_and_the_parkland_shooting.html





Gun control folks regularly bring up background checks.

Why?

Obama’s Promise Program resulted in Nikolas Cruz not having an arrest record…..nothing that a background check would reveal.

So…..he could buy weapons legally.


Obama, Liberal policies that favor criminals, was responsible for the massacre....Democrat policies.



Now.....what will happen to the one responsible for 17 deaths....Obama?

 

[Cecilie1200]

.....first.

1. Based on the recent massacre, and the full-court press by the Left, ....
"Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment
More than a third of the Democratic party would do away with the Second Amendment, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed."
Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

....one might think that your right to bear arms is first on their list.


Nay, nay......not so.




2. First on the list for Communists, Fascists.....and Liberals......is Free Speech.

Case in point, CNN news-speaker, and grad of..."Yale University, where he obtained an undergraduate degree, and Fordham University where he obtained his Juris Doctor (J.D.). He is a licensed attorney.
He currently works at CNN,[1][2] and has previously been the ABC Newschief law and justice correspondent and the co-anchor for ABC's 20/20."
Chris Cuomo - Wikipedia


One smart Liberal, huh?


3. With all that supposed education, Liberal Democrat Cuomo said this:

"Chris Cuomo is a law-school graduate. He was once the chief law and justice correspondent for ABC News. He is a host of a show on a network that bills itself as “the most trusted name in news.” Given all that, he really ought to know better.

Chris Cuomo is a law-school graduate. He was once the chief law and justice correspondent for ABC News. He is a host of a show on a network that bills itself as “the most trusted name in news.” Given all that, he really ought to know better.


Cuomo’s tweet, and his stubborn campaign to defend it in the wake of a merciless assault from the Twitterverse, errs in two ways. First, it’s ludicrous to state that “reading” the Constitution will reveal that hate speech is “excluded from protection.” There is no such language anywhere in the Constitution."
Chris Cuomo Won’t Walk Back His Ignorant Tweet About Hate Speech





Again???

"it’s ludicrous to state that “reading” the Constitution will reveal that hate speech is “excluded from protection.” There is no such language anywhere in the Constitution."


Here....Fredo Cuomo:



Fredo….I’m not stupid like everybody says….I’m smart.





For the Founders, for Conservatives, for classical liberals.....and for Americans....there is no such thing as
"hate speech."

There is only speech.

And the Liberals are about chipping away at what you can say.

I kinda figured they were just doing a multi-pronged approach at all of the ones which I don't use to their liking . . . which is all of them.

 

[OnePercenter]

I own two Glocks. Nobody wants to take those away.

If I had a small penis I'd be concerned about my AR-15's and machine guns.

 

[PoliticalChic]

.....first.

1. Based on the recent massacre, and the full-court press by the Left, ....
"Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment
More than a third of the Democratic party would do away with the Second Amendment, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed."
Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

....one might think that your right to bear arms is first on their list.


Nay, nay......not so.




2. First on the list for Communists, Fascists.....and Liberals......is Free Speech.

Case in point, CNN news-speaker, and grad of..."Yale University, where he obtained an undergraduate degree, and Fordham University where he obtained his Juris Doctor (J.D.). He is a licensed attorney.
He currently works at CNN,[1][2] and has previously been the ABC Newschief law and justice correspondent and the co-anchor for ABC's 20/20."
Chris Cuomo - Wikipedia


One smart Liberal, huh?


3. With all that supposed education, Liberal Democrat Cuomo said this:

"Chris Cuomo is a law-school graduate. He was once the chief law and justice correspondent for ABC News. He is a host of a show on a network that bills itself as “the most trusted name in news.” Given all that, he really ought to know better.

Chris Cuomo is a law-school graduate. He was once the chief law and justice correspondent for ABC News. He is a host of a show on a network that bills itself as “the most trusted name in news.” Given all that, he really ought to know better.


Cuomo’s tweet, and his stubborn campaign to defend it in the wake of a merciless assault from the Twitterverse, errs in two ways. First, it’s ludicrous to state that “reading” the Constitution will reveal that hate speech is “excluded from protection.” There is no such language anywhere in the Constitution."
Chris Cuomo Won’t Walk Back His Ignorant Tweet About Hate Speech





Again???

"it’s ludicrous to state that “reading” the Constitution will reveal that hate speech is “excluded from protection.” There is no such language anywhere in the Constitution."


Here....Fredo Cuomo:



Fredo….I’m not stupid like everybody says….I’m smart.





For the Founders, for Conservatives, for classical liberals.....and for Americans....there is no such thing as
"hate speech."

There is only speech.

And the Liberals are about chipping away at what you can say.

I kinda figured they were just doing a multi-pronged approach at all of the ones which I don't use to their liking . . . which is all of them.

This is not a pro-America party.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I own two Glocks. Nobody wants to take those away.

If I had a small penis I'd be concerned about my AR-15's and machine guns.

Wrong.

"Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment

More than a third of the Democratic party would do away with the Second Amendment, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed."
Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

 

[Cecilie1200]

1) High has zero influence on anyone or anything. He is a kid. Just a kid.
2) speech is protected. If one is going to use ingrahan as an example well she had the right to say what she wants. He then replied. Tit for tat and it's the advertisers who pulled out who are to blame. Why did they stick it out and adhere to principles?
3) My gun rights are safe and no march or anything else has a bit of influence on them.
4) illegals should become citizens before voting I agree.
5) These are reactionary anxiety filled times. People need to relax. The vast majority of people are so tied down to their jobs they dont have time to worry about this stuff. Division is always healthy and this nation is clearly divided by a long list of topics therefore the nation will be fine.

1) If he's "just a kid" with "zero influence", what the fuck is he doing all over the media? Why are we constantly being told how brilliant and admirable he is?
2) There's a difference between speech being legally protected, and speech being ACTUALLY protected, which is rather the point. And no, the advertisers are NOT to blame. The people who have made trying to bludgeon any opposition into silence and out of business THE go-to move are to blame. Three guesses who that would be.
3) If you really think that the safety of your rights in the past means they're safe forever, you really haven't studied world history.
4) How about illegals stopping the commission of their crime (ie. going back home) and becoming citizens the CORRECT way?
5) Division is not always healthy. It depends entirely how you approach it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Both parties are attacking our rights by creating and taking advantage of different kinds of outrage. I hope people notice before it's too late.

Nice to see the hot air contingent checking in.

You words mean less than nothing.
Get off your lazy duff and put some effort into it.....with supporting documentation.

Anybody that's been paying attention the last 20 years knows my words are true. You're a pure bred partisan hack if you think the Republicans are not guilty of attacking our rights too.

Once again, your battle to make this board playtime for infants is on display.

Why can't we have adults who are able to put together a cogent post???

Government school????

The tipping point, in my opinion, was when people started to be PROUD of their ignorance.

 

[OnePercenter]

I own two Glocks. Nobody wants to take those away.

If I had a small penis I'd be concerned about my AR-15's and machine guns.

Wrong.

"Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment

More than a third of the Democratic party would do away with the Second Amendment, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed."
Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

I know many Democrats. None want to "do away" with the second amendment. What Democrats and any rational person wants is responsible gun regulations. NOT, "Learn CPR" as the answer to school shooting which Republicans embrace.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Laura Ingraham never had free speech on her commercial broadcast. The broadcast was paid for by sponsors. Nothing free about it. Folks paying for the broadcast decided she was a bad spokesperson for them and quit paying. Laura is free to keep on spewing her speech, she just needs to find new sponsors. She can stand on a soapbox in the park and speak all she wants.

Riiiiiiight. They just decided, in a complete vacuum and of their own free will, that they just didn't like her and had no desire to sell things to her listeners. Uh huh.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Both parties are attacking our rights by creating and taking advantage of different kinds of outrage. I hope people notice before it's too late.

Nice to see the hot air contingent checking in.

You words mean less than nothing.
Get off your lazy duff and put some effort into it.....with supporting documentation.

Anybody that's been paying attention the last 20 years knows my words are true. You're a pure bred partisan hack if you think the Republicans are not guilty of attacking our rights too.

Once again, your battle to make this board playtime for infants is on display.

Why can't we have adults who are able to put together a cogent post???

Government school????

The tipping point, in my opinion, was when people started to be PROUD of their ignorance.

It is astounding, isn't it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I own two Glocks. Nobody wants to take those away.

If I had a small penis I'd be concerned about my AR-15's and machine guns.

Wrong.

"Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment

More than a third of the Democratic party would do away with the Second Amendment, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed."
Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

I know many Democrats. None want to "do away" with the second amendment. What Democrats and any rational person wants is responsible gun regulations. NOT, "Learn CPR" as the answer to school shooting which Republicans embrace.

I see. So we can't speak to what we hear Democrats saying, because you anecdotally don't know any Democrats who say that, but then YOU can tell US what Republicans want, and that's supposed to be gospel.

We don't "know many Republicans". Many of us ARE Republicans, and your little "Learn CPR" remark is 300% more bullshit than the idea that there are Democrats in the nation that you don't personally know, and THEY might actually want something your personal friends haven't mentioned to you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Both parties are attacking our rights by creating and taking advantage of different kinds of outrage. I hope people notice before it's too late.

Nice to see the hot air contingent checking in.

You words mean less than nothing.
Get off your lazy duff and put some effort into it.....with supporting documentation.

Anybody that's been paying attention the last 20 years knows my words are true. You're a pure bred partisan hack if you think the Republicans are not guilty of attacking our rights too.

Once again, your battle to make this board playtime for infants is on display.

Why can't we have adults who are able to put together a cogent post???

Government school????

The tipping point, in my opinion, was when people started to be PROUD of their ignorance.

It is astounding, isn't it.

Like I keep saying, people have the right to be imbeciles, but that doesn't mean they need to exercise it quite so vigorously.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I own two Glocks. Nobody wants to take those away.

If I had a small penis I'd be concerned about my AR-15's and machine guns.

Wrong.

"Over a Third of Democrats Would Repeal Second Amendment

More than a third of the Democratic party would do away with the Second Amendment, a survey by The Economist and YouGov revealed."
Repeal the Second Amendment? Almost Half of Democrats Say Yes | National Review

I know many Democrats. None want to "do away" with the second amendment. What Democrats and any rational person wants is responsible gun regulations. NOT, "Learn CPR" as the answer to school shooting which Republicans embrace.

1. The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'

2. Licensed gun owners are, by far, the most law abiding of our citizens.

1. Example: “Of the 51,078 permits that have been issued by the state since the law took effect in 2007, 44 permit holders have been charged with a crime while using a firearm through late October, according to records provided by the Kansas Attorney General’s Office.”
2. Few crimes committed by concealed-carry permit holders in Kansas
3. http://www.kansas.com/2012/11/17/2572467/few-crimes-committed-by-concealed.html ( .00086%)

3. The answer to the elimination of the sort of mass murders as per Florida:
a. Forbid 'gun free zones' by law
b. Restrict the use and prescribing of psychotropic drugs.
c. Forbid any Democrats from having a position of power in government.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nice to see the hot air contingent checking in.

You words mean less than nothing.
Get off your lazy duff and put some effort into it.....with supporting documentation.

Anybody that's been paying attention the last 20 years knows my words are true. You're a pure bred partisan hack if you think the Republicans are not guilty of attacking our rights too.

Once again, your battle to make this board playtime for infants is on display.

Why can't we have adults who are able to put together a cogent post???

Government school????

The tipping point, in my opinion, was when people started to be PROUD of their ignorance.

It is astounding, isn't it.

Like I keep saying, people have the right to be imbeciles, but that doesn't mean they need to exercise it quite so vigorously.

The problem, largely, is government schooling.
Full disclosure: we are a home school family.

 

[sparky]

Virtually all mass shooters (except those who are political jihadists) have been under the care / supervision of a psychiatrist and most on SSRIs.

It's easier to blame guns than to get to the root of the problem. Our country's problems with the government prescribing drugs for non-existent conditions, promoting drug use, and ignoring those who desperately need help is THE major cause of violence in America.

Clearly, no laws pertaining to guns are the solution. Banning these are:

a. Gun Free Zones

b. psychotropic drugs

c. Democrats

When any 'gun control' law is met with...'the law won't help' , then there is no legislative solution

Cyclical logic , it's what's for dinner!


~S~

You are presuming that the only laws that will help are gun control laws. You can reduce gun violence with preventative measures that do not include gun control.

Well that would mean more Gub'mit , think on it...~S~

My ideas would shrink the size, power and scope of government. It's time that government be held accountable to the same degree that they hold us accountable for. Think about it. When Nickolas Cruz was not pursued by the FBI, those agents got to say oooops we're sorry. If you were working a job and your negligence led to the deaths of 17 people, what would happen to you?

Grand, then let's add in all the numbskulls that knew 9/11 was coming, and dropped the ball too Humorme

and that's just a start.......how many times has the Gub'Mit gone broke?

We've a better chance of seeing slick willy bring hillary to full climax on CNN than actually achieving any real world clarity and accountability from the Gub'Mit


That one 'party' is constantly trying to insist it of the other should be a clue they're playin' us for fools

~S~

 

[PoliticalChic]

Clearly, no laws pertaining to guns are the solution. Banning these are:

a. Gun Free Zones

b. psychotropic drugs

c. Democrats

When any 'gun control' law is met with...'the law won't help' , then there is no legislative solution

Cyclical logic , it's what's for dinner!


~S~

You are presuming that the only laws that will help are gun control laws. You can reduce gun violence with preventative measures that do not include gun control.

Well that would mean more Gub'mit , think on it...~S~

My ideas would shrink the size, power and scope of government. It's time that government be held accountable to the same degree that they hold us accountable for. Think about it. When Nickolas Cruz was not pursued by the FBI, those agents got to say oooops we're sorry. If you were working a job and your negligence led to the deaths of 17 people, what would happen to you?

Grand, then let's add in all the numbskulls that knew 9/11 was coming, and dropped the ball too Humorme

and that's just a start.......how many times has the Gub'Mit gone broke?

We've a better chance of seeing slick willy bring hillary to full climax on CNN than actually achieving any real world clarity and accountability from the Gub'Mit


That one 'party' is constantly trying to insist it of the other should be a clue they're playin' us for fools

~S~

Seems to be a role you're accomplished at playing.