New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Guns!

zzigzzag said:
Semantics. When that doesn't work, go for the "2nd Amendment solution". Sharron Angle even said it would be a good way to get rid of Harry Reid and the Democrats.

"Overlapping"...good one. Another way of saying, "Not everyone in the NRA calls for the 2nd Amendment solution to everything from Obama to Trayvon Martin, but most who do are in the NRA". Especially the Republican politicians who have used that phrase. (Hint: It means to kill people and has been gaining popularity in the gunner dialogue.)
Click to expand...


Exactly right. and one other thing: these same NRA Goons, they were all for TORTURE TOO when Cheney and Bush-The-Tard were saying it was just "enhanced interrogation", another slippery term to make the medicine go down easier... Second Amendment option is a nice way of saying we will shoot you in your face!
 
More NRA GOONS:

Republican Scottsdale-Gun-Club-Santa-Chrismas-Holiday3.jpg

Ho Ho HO, we'll shoot your face off! Second Amendment rights. Don't Tread On Me!
 
Dam, they shot Santa!!! He must not have been WHITE enough for Scottsdale:

Republican Scottsdale18.jpg

We are NRA lovin', Obama hatin', LiberTARians and we gonna shoot anyone who says different.
 
Zoar said:
Dam, they shot Santa!!! He must not have been WHITE enough for Scottsdale:

View attachment 24317

We are NRA lovin', Obama hatin', LiberTARians and we gonna shoot anyone who says different.
Click to expand...

It's really scary that martian man and others on here think the adoration of machine guns AND the accepting of the NRA message that the solution is always more guns AND the posing with Santa surrounded by machine guns and assault weapons is "perfectly fine"....
 
marvin martian said:
I've noticed a lot of liberals really start to lose their shit around Christmas time...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Each photo i posted of these uber right wingers with SANTA they have machine guns and enough ammo to kill every man woman and child in Watkins Glen NY and you contend liberals start to lose it at Christmas time!!!! Oh, Martian Man, that is the funniest post of the week so far!!!!
 
Last edited:
Gramps said:
I finally reached a conclusion of what spawns the controversy.

Gun advocates have a need to own and keep guns as an edge against other people who own and keep guns. Under normal circumstances unarmed people are not to be feared while under normal circumstances those who are armed are to be feared.

So, that being the case those who say the problem is people and not guns err because by removi8ng the guns from the controversy there is no controversy.

Evidently fear is what motivates lots of gun lovers to arm themselves to their teeth. So, perhaps, it is neither guns nor people that fan the flames. Emotion must be the source. FDR's four freedoms included "freedom from fear" for Americans at a time when those fears were brought about by foreign powers threatening our lifestyle and NOW we arm ourselves as protection from fellow citizens.

Last year I disposed of my weapons. It was time. I hadn't used one of them in years, just something to take out of the cabinet and clean and oil now and again; having become conversation pieces. And d'ya know what? I haven't spent a single restless night fretting because I have no weapons at hand.

gramps
Click to expand...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...RT3wpBVVCF-T9S3F72UrLpA&bvm=bv.58187178,d.aWc
 
trapdoor said:
I don't regard the internet as a "written or printed form." It is electronic communication, like a telegraph. I used "slanderous" correctly.
Click to expand...

The Internet handles written and recorded spoken words. It's not the medium (Samuel Clemens also spoke) but the method of communication which differentiates libelous and slanderous remarks.
 
Last edited:
Ben Arnold said:
The Internet handles written and recorded spoken words. It's not the medium (Samuel Clemens also spoke) but the method of communication which differentiates libelous and slanderous remarks.
Click to expand...

Matter of opinion. I was a newspaper editor (like Sam Clemens) for years, and I've never regarded the Internet as "print."
 
Zoar said:
Exactly right. and one other thing: these same NRA Goons, they were all for TORTURE TOO when Cheney and Bush-The-Tard were saying it was just "enhanced interrogation", another slippery term to make the medicine go down easier... Second Amendment option is a nice way of saying we will shoot you in your face!
Click to expand...

You have this picture in your mind of "right wing" and it encompasses essentially every behavior you don't like. You don't seem to care that its almost entirely false.
 
trapdoor said:
Matter of opinion. I was a newspaper editor (like Sam Clemens) for years, and I've never regarded the Internet as "print."
Click to expand...

Perhaps that's why papers are sucking wind. I've done some feature articles, been a media buyer, Web, Print, Web Dev, SEO, acquisitions, patent... Some other stuff in 40 years.

Also I have a couple of Web Enterprises, which have organic page one Google ranking on our top industry keywords... which we say in the biz needs to be above the fold. (top 3)

If it's said, slander. If it's published, libel. Web is published.
 
Ben Arnold said:
Perhaps that's why papers are sucking wind. I've done some feature articles, been a media buyer, Web, Print, Web Dev, SEO, acquisitions, patent... Some other stuff in 40 years.

Also I have a couple of Web Enterprises, which have organic page one Google ranking on our top industry keywords... which we say in the biz needs to be above the fold. (top 3)

If it's said, slander. If it's published, libel. Web is published.
Click to expand...

I think newspapers are mostly declining because young people don't read them. Like me, they probably get most of their news from web-based sources now. Being old-fashioned, I pretty much get my news via Associated Press.
 
He said "almost entirely wrong".
See, even they know.
Meanwhile:
Right Wingers are 99.99% wrong about 100% of everything.
 
Last edited:
Gramps said:
I finally reached a conclusion of what spawns the controversy.

Gun advocates have a need to own and keep guns as an edge against other people who own and keep guns. Under normal circumstances unarmed people are not to be feared while under normal circumstances those who are armed are to be feared.

So, that being the case those who say the problem is people and not guns err because by removi8ng the guns from the controversy there is no controversy.

Evidently fear is what motivates lots of gun lovers to arm themselves to their teeth. So, perhaps, it is neither guns nor people that fan the flames. Emotion must be the source. FDR's four freedoms included "freedom from fear" for Americans at a time when those fears were brought about by foreign powers threatening our lifestyle and NOW we arm ourselves as protection from fellow citizens.

Last year I disposed of my weapons. It was time. I hadn't used one of them in years, just something to take out of the cabinet and clean and oil now and again; having become conversation pieces. And d'ya know what? I haven't spent a single restless night fretting because I have no weapons at hand.

gramps
Click to expand...

A person who uses the moniker " Gramps " should have at least a modicum of wisdom to go with it. Unfortunately you do not.

The reverse psychology angle of the post...well....stinks. Add that to the enormous amount of personal presumption...IE: applying one rule to all gun owners...and we have the ' Hero in his own mind " syndrome run amok here.

JO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top