This just in....

[Facetious]

What about all the firearm owners who did commit crimes today?

Fucking poachers! I hate gawdamn poachers!!! :hammer: But seriously, firearm ''owners'' don't generally commit crimes, criminals with stolen or illegally possessed firearms do, the statistics speak for themselves.

Would they have done so if there were much more heavily enforced/regulated laws about gun possession?

No. No they would not.

We have fairly severe laws in place for those who drive while intoxicated, yet thousands upon thousands of people still get behind the wheel and kill, what should we do about that? No, it's not a perfect world out there and there isn't a government on the face of the earth that can make it so. Fortunately (for us), an overwhelming majority of firearm owners and motorists alike conduct themselves in a most responsible manner, that's as good as it's going to get.

:twocents: Hey, what happened to the two cents smiley? :dunno:

 

[STDiva]

Awww, c'mon, no fair! Detroit makes Kandahar Province look like Disney World. Besides, the violent crimes in Windsor are all committed by flesh-eating zombies ... they don't even use guns! :zombie: :
Isn't the American Dream great?

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts, but I live in Windsor and there hasn't been one single zombie related death as far as I know.

Also, Sam Doesn't need you to stick up for him. He's got guns, 7000 rounds of ammunition and a sic army jeep. If you don't believe me, do a search. He mentions his gun every 1.6 posts. And on an unrelated note, every 4.2 posts he mentions his love of rollerblading.

 

[Facetious]

Awww, c'mon, no fair! Detroit makes Kandahar Province look like Disney World. Besides, the violent crimes in Windsor are all committed by flesh-eating zombies ... they don't even use guns! :zombie:

Solution from our good friends at Hornady....


Adult Image Hosting


ø:zombie: ø

 

[Rey C.]

correct. But this is why people should vote by all means against daddy o and the clinton bitch during the next presidential elections

As far as I know, Hillary isn't on the ticket - so it would be hard to vote against her (or for her). In fact, she's not even going to serve as Secretary of State if Obama does win a second term. That was announced months ago.

Unlike some on the left and the right, I am not a one issue voter. As you know, I am a gun owner and a Life Member of the NRA. See, somewhat like our pal Sammy, "I like guns. I have lots of them." too (it's quite likely that I have "several" more than Sammy does ). But I'm not all weird about it. They don't give me an erection. At least in public, I try to put on the face of normality. So just saying that you'll protect my gun rights, yet you have no practical plan for improving the economy, domestic infrastructure, education, foreign policy or the other things that I think are at least as important, will NOT get a candidate my vote. And if McCain/Palin had gotten into office, I sure as hell would need my guns, as I'd probably be reduced to hunting for my food by now.

Now Romney might very well win the election (assuming he makes it through the potential of a brokered GOP convention). He seems to have taken every conceivable position on every possible issue. So who knows what he will do, if elected. But no matter who is President in 2013, what some here seem to be forgetting (or just don't know) is that the President/Executive Branch does not make laws in the U.S. Sure, he can sign an Executive Order. But those can only go so far. The President does not have dictatorial powers. He is not Caesar, folks. So the same guns I have now (unless I sell some of them or drop dead), I will have in 2013, 2014 and 2020.

And before I would EVER cast a vote for someone like Santorum, or any other neocon or Evangelical wingnut, I would put my .44 Magnum in my mouth and swallow a bullet. I don't have a PhD in mathematics. I can't quote Shakespeare. And I'd rather watch F1 racing on Speed Channel than Masterpiece Theater on PBS. But I'm not a retard either. And although I may not be very bright, I am smart enough not to believe a politician who just says what he thinks I want to hear. The girl who sits on your lap in the strip club after she spies the Rolex on your wrist and that politician are playing the same game. Are people really so simple and stupid that they can't see that??? :dunno: Almost everything about me screams "Republican!": my background, my gun ownership, income, career, some social beliefs, etc. And yet, with every passing year, I drift farther and farther away from that political brand. Why is that? Because, in my opinion, they now spend an inordinate amount of time trying to appeal to the lowest common denominators among us: the scared, the uneducated, the unrefined, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, the ones who rely more on emotion than facts and data... the haters. Call me a snob, if you want. But those are the people who I was brought up to avoid. So I can't just stop now, right?

I'm not a big fan of Obama. But until the Republicans can come up with a candidate that doesn't make me sick to my stomach, guess who ol' Rey C. is going to be votin' for this year?

In fact, I'm hoping for a viable third party at some point, that will put the interests of the United States and the citizens of this country before the interests of ANY other. I should live so long...

 

[Mr. Daystar]

I'm not a big fan of Obama. But until the Republicans can come up with a candidate that doesn't make me sick to my stomach, guess who ol' Rey C. is going to be votin' for this year?

In fact, I'm hoping for a viable third party at some point, that will put the interests of the United States and the citizens of this country before the interests of ANY other. I should live so long...

Oh man! Dude, I implore you to ponder this. He has no reason to be concerned about a third term, so if he's elected, he really has no worries about pissing off the gun owners, and is currently working with the UN, on a small arms treaty, and has already signed several executive orders that could potentially effect gun ownership, and ammunition sales. I realize that the Republicans haven't fielded a viable candidate in DECADES....but please, please look at the bigger picture.

 

[lurkingdirk]

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts, but I live in Windsor and there hasn't been one single zombie related death as far as I know.

Also, Sam Doesn't need you to stick up for him. He's got guns, 7000 rounds of ammunition and a sic army jeep. If you don't believe me, do a search. He mentions his gun every 1.6 posts. And on an unrelated note, every 4.2 posts he mentions his love of rollerblading.

You forgot to mention that every 1.9 posts he mentions his homo-erotic love of Kevin Bacon, and how hot Kevin Bacon would be if he were holding a gun.

 

[Rey C.]

Oh man! Dude, I implore you to ponder this. He has no reason to be concerned about a third term, so if he's elected, he really has no worries about pissing off the gun owners, and is currently working with the UN, on a small arms treaty, and has already signed several executive orders that could potentially effect gun ownership, and ammunition sales. I realize that the Republicans haven't fielded a viable candidate in DECADES....but please, please look at the bigger picture.

The U.N. cannot even force us to pay our past due payments. How would they enforce an arms treaty within the United States? The fact is, most Republicans, and I'd say a plurality of Democrats, have no desire to even bring up gun control, especially in the face of increasing gun ownership and the generally favorable view of guns now in American society. Ask yourself this, why did George W. Bush use TARP funds to keep GM and Chrysler alive for a few more months? Because no President wants to have a deep, broad stain on his record, if he can avoid it. Bush didn't give a squirt about the automotive companies. But he did care how he'd be viewed in the history books. So no, other than people speculating on what Obama might do, I've seen no evidence that he'd be willing to sacrifice his own legacy, and the future of the Democrat party, fighting an unwinnable war to severely restrict gun ownership in the U.S. Even Di Feinstein admitted that the Dems learned a painful lesson after Clinton tried it.

Who would I vote for? Santorum? Gingrich? Would I vote for these size 14 pair of clown shoes, or a guy with whom I disagree on some, but not all issues? Hell, I have a hard time finding more than one or two issues on which I agree with Santorum or Gingrich. As far as Romney, he seems to agree with everything that I believe. And if I change my position, he'll still agree with me. No matter what I believe, at some point in time, he has agreed with me. Either he's a talented chameleon or he's a mighty agreeable fellow.

Like I said, I am most definitely not a one issue voter. And I consider the risks to my gun ownership minimal under Obama versus the risks to the economy, our foreign policy and the social stability of this nation under the sad field that the GOP has presented us with so far. And the only Jack (or Jill) In The Box that I've heard about so far is the prospect of Sarah P@lin popping out of the woodwork during a brokered/broken convention. And brother, I'd wear a Che Guevara t-shirt and leather sandals to work before I'd see that dizzy bitch even be allowed to mow the White House lawn.

Where the hell are people like Jack Kemp? What the hell has happened to the GOP? I've never been a member of either major party. But now there's one that I can stomach some of the time and the other one that scares me most of the time.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

The U.N. cannot even force us to pay our past due payments. How would they enforce an arms treaty within the United States? The fact is, most Republicans, and I'd say a plurality of Democrats, have no desire to even bring up gun control, especially in the face of increasing gun ownership and the generally favorable view of guns now in American society. Ask yourself this, why did George W. Bush use TARP funds to keep GM and Chrysler alive for a few more months? Because no President wants to have a deep, broad stain on his record, if he can avoid it. Bush didn't give a squirt about the automotive companies. But he did care how he'd be viewed in the history books. So no, other than people speculating on what Obama might do, I've seen no evidence that he'd be willing to sacrifice his own legacy, and the future of the Democrat party, fighting an unwinnable war to severely restrict gun ownership in the U.S. Even Di Feinstein admitted that the Dems learned a painful lesson after Clinton tried it.

Who would I vote for? Santorum? Gingrich? Would I vote for these size 14 pair of clown shoes, or a guy with whom I disagree on some, but not all issues? Hell, I have a hard time finding more than one or two issues on which I agree with Santorum or Gingrich. As far as Romney, he seems to agree with everything that I believe. And if I change my position, he'll still agree with me. No matter what I believe, at some point in time, he has agreed with me. Either he's a talented chameleon or he's a mighty agreeable fellow.

Like I said, I am most definitely not a one issue voter. And I consider the risks to my gun ownership minimal under Obama versus the risks to the economy, our foreign policy and the social stability of this nation under the sad field that the GOP has presented us with so far. And the only Jack (or Jill) In The Box that I've heard about so far is the prospect of Sarah P@lin popping out of the woodwork during a brokered/broken convention. And brother, I'd wear a Che Guevara t-shirt and leather sandals to work before I'd see that dizzy bitch even be allowed to mow the White House lawn.

Where the hell are people like Jack Kemp? What the hell has happened to the GOP? I've never been a member of either major party. But now there's one that I can stomach some of the time and the other one that scares me most of the time.

Ya know, I should have mentioned that I'm VERY much a middle of the road person....I'll vote either way if the guy works for me. Obama does not, will not, never has, never will. That's where that's coming from. I stand by my previous post....but it isn't an anti Dem thing, definitely an anti Obama thing though.

 

[Rey C.]

Ya know, I should have mentioned that I'm VERY much a middle of the road person....I'll vote either way if the guy works for me. Obama does not, will not, never has, never will. That's where that's coming from. I stand by my previous post....but it isn't an anti Dem thing, definitely an anti Obama thing though.

I can appreciate that. In my case, Obama was key to saving the industry where I do most of my work: the manufacturing sector, specifically the automotive industry. I have to give him massive props for how his administration crafted and executed the fast track Chapter 11... that the GOP said couldn't be done. I'm also heavily invested in the stock market. And while I don't believe any President has all that much control or influence over the Dow or S&P 500, their policies do have an effect. Being on that ride from 8,000 to 13,000 hasn't been bad. Next, the health care reform measure. While I do not agree with certain aspects of it, had the GOP gotten on board with the people (and out of bed with the insurance industry), I feel that we could have had a better, more effective bill. If they ever make human hunting legal, I promise you that there are some insurance executives from Wells Fargo that might want to get on their running shoes. Which will just mean that they'll die tired... but at least they'd feel a brief sense of hope before I pop them and mount their heads.

There are issues and topics that I do not agree with Obama on. I don't think we should give Bush's failed crusade in Afghanistan any more time. If it falls, it falls. They may turn bad again. So make plans to make it a glass parking lot and let's get back to our own affairs. I do not agree that the government should make mandates to religious organizations about what types of insurance coverage they have to offer employees in regard to contraception. I don't fully understand the Xcel pipeline debate or hold up. I don't fully understand the issue, so I have to reserve comment (lest I come off like our pal Sammy: talking completely out of my ass). I do know that we already buy a significant portion of the oil produced in Canada. And I know that getting the oil to where it needs to be refined is an issue. But I also know that oil has a globally influenced price level. So it's not as if oil would be $50/barrel in the U.S. and $100/barrel in Europe, even if they could finish that pipeline next week.

Personally, I think Obama should do more to support American manufacturing. But if he is not re-elected, I know full well that Romney, being a globalist/corporatist, isn't going to do squat to support American manufacturing or challenge the Chinese and others with the WTO... just as Bush didn't. So I guess that's my long-winded way of saying that I don't expect things to be all puppies & ice cream under Obama 2, just possibly better than with a Romney... and a damn sight better than with a wingnut like Santorum. That little man REALLY does scare me. He's like a slightly smarter version of Sarah P@lin, just in a pair of pants - and like her, he seems to have no real grasp f economics... just a lot of social bullshit that I don't think the government should be getting into in the first place.

 

[cindy CD/TV]

So sams starts a thread... and guess who is right there to point out his trolling. Yup me and everyone else. And I will continue to do so until he can act like a normal respectful member on here and share his views without shoving them down peoples throat or constantly repeating them.

Exactly, thank you for admitting it. It has nothing to do with sam it has to do with your inability to get over negative rep from a year ago. Now look who is stalking who :surprise:

First, maybe you should follow your own advice and start acting "like a normal respectful member on here." Can you really be so oblivious to your own hypocrisy? Absolutely tone deaf ...

Second, stop lying. The neg rep was from November. Four months ago, not a year. Liar.

Third, I just don't like you. You're an asshole. Neg rep or not, I'd still pick a fight with you -- and enjoy it.

Fourth, I've ALREADY said that if you keep harassing Sam I will harass/stalk you. I'm watching you... :lurk:

If you like, I can repeat all of the above with smaller words that you can understand. :dropdead: :wave:

 

[squallumz]

sam sucks.

 

[georges]

That's funny because I was taking the piss out of Hillary, no need for you to get all macho. :1orglaugh

As for Reagan, you're really showing an ignorance of history if you think Reagan did anything praise-worthy. The deficit spending trend started with Reagan and is wholly responsible for the current sorry state of the economy. If you want to blame terrorist attacks on the commander-in-chief, I suggest you educate yourself about the attacks that occurred during the Reagan administration. Here you go, you can lay those at the feet of St. Ronnie. The AW weapon ban was initiated with the Brady Bill which originated as a result of the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. You can't point at one side for that, as it had bipartisan support all the way through congress. And finally socialism- wow, you just don't understand what a mixed economy is. Look it up and understand why it's necessary. You continually demonstrate a very pedestrian understanding of political issues.

I know very well what happened during the Reagan administration and I am also aware what caused the attempted assassination of Reagan. But fact is that under his presidency, a lot of people had jobs and were able to live decently. I know also very well that your system has a bipartisan party, in France, it is more or less like that because at the end there are in most cases of presidential election, the socialists retards and the right wing. I am also well aware what a mixed economy is, but trying to implement failed policies like free health care and social security over the long run is not going to work. We have seen the change that Obama made, the change for worse. For your information, I am not some undereducated person and I am not new to politics, so maybe you should explain politics to blue collars or people who don't even have a higher degree or master but certainly not to me. I have been voting since I received my electing card when being 18.

 

[georges]

Reagan-era history isn't my strongpoint, but... didn't the Almighty take a piss on the Constitution when he sold weapons to Iran during the Iran-Contra affair? Awesome president he was.

It is so easy to blame Reagan, maybe we should blame Clinton and Obama for their misdoings and lies.

 

[xfire]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Rey C. again.

For posts 44, 47, & 49. Damn near identical politics, brother. Future rep coming your way.

 

[PirateKing]

It is so easy to blame Reagan, maybe we should blame Clinton and Obama for their misdoings and lies.

Funny how you skipped the two Bush's.

 

[xfire]

Georges is so uninformed it's funny. I repped him for it yesterday. :1orglaugh

 

[PirateKing]

Georges is so uninformed it's funny. I repped him for it yesterday. :1orglaugh

When he says misdeeds, he likely means trying to pass evil healthcare or other "socialist" programs. Lying about Iraq? Meh...

 

[georges]

Georges is so uninformed it's funny. I repped him for it yesterday. :1orglaugh

I am not unfinormed at all but you are so "supposedly" and so "well" informed that you believe in all the obama crap and his bullshit promises

 

[georges]

When he says misdeeds, he likely means trying to pass evil healthcare or other "socialist" programs. Lying about Iraq? Meh...

yes, I see everytime there is a war against a rogue regime, it is a bad thing according to youIf Saddam was still here things would have been worse. What about lying over oath in the case of clinton? What about having done nothing during three repeated terrorists attacks during back Clinton's presidency? Also what about cutting defense and military programs for implementing health care and social security so that the ghetto trash can have them and this at the expense of the hardworking honest citizens? I can always find a good reason to point fingers on liberals.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

It is so easy to blame Reagan, maybe we should blame Clinton and Obama for their misdoings and lies.

Actually all the way back to...at least Nixon. The fact is, they've all been a bunch of, filthy, lying, crooked, self serving, treasonous, infected ball bags, of festering cock snot....and we should be damned ashamed of ourselves for electing them, and allowing them to get away with everything they have.