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

now?

Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?

Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?
Obama

Maybe this time — finally — the answer will be “no.” Dozens of dead college students weren’t enough. Dead high school kids weren’t enough. Randomly shot citizens weren’t enough. Maybe 20 dead first-graders will be enough.
 
Sadly, not gonna happen.

This country's gun fetish / culture is too deeply ingrained and too deeply entrenched. So much so that no gun control legislation is possible: not now, not ever.

We'll continue to get the Butcher's Bill that is Sandy Hook Shooting for perpetuity. Such is the price of Freedom.
 
Sadly, not gonna happen.

This country's gun fetish / culture is too deeply ingrained and too deeply entrenched. So much so that no gun control legislation is possible: not now, not ever.

We'll continue to get the Butcher's Bill that is Sandy Hook Shooting for perpetuity. Such is the price of Freedom.

His freedom should not come at the expense of my children's life.
[Unwelcome language removed] IT!
 
Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard?

Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?
Obama

Maybe this time — finally — the answer will be “no.” Dozens of dead college students weren’t enough. Dead high school kids weren’t enough. Randomly shot citizens weren’t enough. Maybe 20 dead first-graders will be enough.

So who will be the first dem to call for repealing 2nd amendment to our bill of rights?
 
His freedom should not come at the expense of my children's life.
[Unwelcome language removed] IT!

Point: Did those kids have the always so important "right to life"? A shooter's right is to own the gun...not to use it. The purpose isn't to violate other's people's rights, but to protect one's own...and the right to slaughter isn't among those.

Rights are difficult...as one person's rights come to an abrupt halt when they interfere with other's rights. Perfecting this challenging tapdance is our goal...our dream...and on occasion, our national nightmare.

I'd like to see an effort to actually define the amendment in today's terms. Well regulated appears to mean well trained...and that is something the majority of our citizenry isn't especially involved in.
 
Point: Did those kids have the always so important "right to life"? A shooter's right is to own the gun...not to use it. The purpose isn't to violate other's people's rights, but to protect one's own...and the right to slaughter isn't among those.

Rights are difficult...as one person's rights come to an abrupt halt when they interfere with other's rights. Perfecting this challenging tapdance is our goal...our dream...and on occasion, our national nightmare.

I'd like to see an effort to actually define the amendment in today's terms. Well regulated appears to mean well trained...and that is something the majority of our citizenry isn't especially involved in.

well, modern gun nuts don't want to be "well regulated" do they?
How about follow the Constitution literally than ?
 
Back
Top