Liberal hipocrisy and the second amendment

Posted in the Arvada Forum

Comments
1 - 10 of 10 Comments Last updated Dec 29, 2012
Jimbob

Wheat Ridge, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Why are liberals always whining about the second amendment? Aren't liberals all about equality and a level playing field?
Arms are the great equalizer. It means lil miss feminist studies can hold her ground against the big bad man, or grandma can keep the meth addicts at bay when they come to visit at 3AM.
I don't get it, they've been duped into hating their freedoms.

Since: Aug 10

Cathouse Mouse

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

8

8

8

The second amendment was written during a time of alertness during our infant years as a nation when the militia among citizenry was the only defense we had for national security threats against invading nations like the French and the British.

That musket pack'n militia has since been replced and has been long deemed unnecessary. There is no longer any logical reson to maintain a citizen militai to guard our shores from the French and the Britsh.

They ain't coming.

They found out we got nukes and we haven't heard a peep outta them since.

Now, let's address the other two basic reasons gun addicts say they require weaponry to enjoy their life of freedom.

1. Security - Did you know that you can buy the very best security system on the market for less than the cost of an AR-15? Hello? 21st century calling, anyone at home?

2. Hunting - whe you can drive less than 2 miles and purchase any kind of meat including exotic meats from Southern Africa, Austrailia, and New Zealand ... why would you want to go out in the cold after spending thousands of dollars for equiptment and gamble whether you bring home meat based on skill and luck?

The sport you say?

X-Box I say!

hahahahaha
Busty Miss Returns

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Cathouse Mouse wrote:
The second amendment was written during a time of alertness during our infant years as a nation when the militia among citizenry was the only defense we had for national security threats against invading nations like the French and the British.
That musket pack'n militia has since been replced and has been long deemed unnecessary. There is no longer any logical reson to maintain a citizen militai to guard our shores from the French and the Britsh.
They ain't coming.
They found out we got nukes and we haven't heard a peep outta them since.
Now, let's address the other two basic reasons gun addicts say they require weaponry to enjoy their life of freedom.
1. Security - Did you know that you can buy the very best security system on the market for less than the cost of an AR-15? Hello? 21st century calling, anyone at home?
2. Hunting - whe you can drive less than 2 miles and purchase any kind of meat including exotic meats from Southern Africa, Austrailia, and New Zealand ... why would you want to go out in the cold after spending thousands of dollars for equiptment and gamble whether you bring home meat based on skill and luck?
The sport you say?
X-Box I say!
hahahahaha
Cathouse Mouse: Those in my family who hunt do so in order to put food on the table. They do not have the funds to purchase wild game in the markets. Some in my family actually use a bow and arrow to hunt.

Assault weapons are not necessary. The deer, etc. do not fire back.

How should the culling of herds be accomplished?

Please do not think I am speaking against you. Do you also propose all military and police services also have their weapons taken? Where do you draw the line when you consider the lawbreakers have no trouble obtaining weapons?

Since: Aug 10

Cathouse Mouse

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

8

8

7

Busty Miss Returns wrote:
<quoted text>
Cathouse Mouse: Those in my family who hunt do so in order to put food on the table. They do not have the funds to purchase wild game in the markets. Some in my family actually use a bow and arrow to hunt.
Assault weapons are not necessary. The deer, etc. do not fire back.
How should the culling of herds be accomplished?
Please do not think I am speaking against you. Do you also propose all military and police services also have their weapons taken? Where do you draw the line when you consider the lawbreakers have no trouble obtaining weapons?
Allow me to quote Abraham Lincoln;

"There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that may arise, as, for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens, or it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case is the interposition of mob law either necessary, justifiable, or excusable."

I agree with his principles on this issue. I'd remind anyone interested that I am a Democrat, he a Republican.

He is saying that when important nationalized issues arise, sometimes the right answer defies what is current law and laws should be subject to change, without a violent rise up of the minority, or mob rule as he put it.

I am finding it pathetic that gun rights advocates are trying to make themselves the victims of the recent shootings over possible future gun restrictions.

I'm appaulled that educated gun owners have dug into the foxhole with the NRA and it's "not an inch" stand on making efforts to reduce the amount of weapons in this country.

I have ideas that would be nuetral but nuetral doesn't work for those who have no interest in solutions.
Busty Miss Returns

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Cathouse Mouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Allow me to quote Abraham Lincoln;
"There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that may arise, as, for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens, or it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case is the interposition of mob law either necessary, justifiable, or excusable."
I agree with his principles on this issue. I'd remind anyone interested that I am a Democrat, he a Republican.
He is saying that when important nationalized issues arise, sometimes the right answer defies what is current law and laws should be subject to change, without a violent rise up of the minority, or mob rule as he put it.
I am finding it pathetic that gun rights advocates are trying to make themselves the victims of the recent shootings over possible future gun restrictions.
I'm appaulled that educated gun owners have dug into the foxhole with the NRA and it's "not an inch" stand on making efforts to reduce the amount of weapons in this country.
I have ideas that would be nuetral but nuetral doesn't work for those who have no interest in solutions.
If I wanted to learn of Abe's perspective, I would not have asked you for yours.

"I have ideas that would be nuetral but nuetral doesn't work for those who have no interest in solutions." Apparently you've decided NO ONE but yourself is interested in solutions.

It's no wonder people can't reach a compromise.

Since: Aug 10

Cathouse Mouse

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Busty Miss Returns wrote:
<quoted text>
If I wanted to learn of Abe's perspective, I would not have asked you for yours.
"I have ideas that would be nuetral but nuetral doesn't work for those who have no interest in solutions." Apparently you've decided NO ONE but yourself is interested in solutions.
It's no wonder people can't reach a compromise.
Okay- what if all weaponry were required to be registered with a government agency through a "gun title" program designed like automobile registrations. The title must be updated and filed upon the event of any transfer of ownership.

and what if there were a restrictive limit on the number of guns a person can own before being required to bond himself as a dealer. A low number of guns, say 5 and a high $$$ bond like $25k.

and how about requiring gun owners to purchase gun insurance. Not on theft of the gun, that should be restricted due to it's apparent loophole advantages, but to insure the victim and family in case the weapon is ever used in a fatal shooting - even if stolen.

How about we criminalize the manufacturing, selling, and owning certain rifles that have no purpose other than to provide maximum head counts like the AR-15 and multi round magazines for semi-automatic handguns?

I do believe that would leave room for anyone who still requires a weapon for hunting, sport shooting, and home security.
Busty Miss Returns

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Cathouse Mouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay- what if all weaponry were required to be registered with a government agency through a "gun title" program designed like automobile registrations. The title must be updated and filed upon the event of any transfer of ownership.
and what if there were a restrictive limit on the number of guns a person can own before being required to bond himself as a dealer. A low number of guns, say 5 and a high $$$ bond like $25k.
and how about requiring gun owners to purchase gun insurance. Not on theft of the gun, that should be restricted due to it's apparent loophole advantages, but to insure the victim and family in case the weapon is ever used in a fatal shooting - even if stolen.
How about we criminalize the manufacturing, selling, and owning certain rifles that have no purpose other than to provide maximum head counts like the AR-15 and multi round magazines for semi-automatic handguns?
I do believe that would leave room for anyone who still requires a weapon for hunting, sport shooting, and home security.
Excellent and thank you for giving YOUR opinions.

I would like to add that pawning a weapon would no longer be allowed.

As to your comment about a weapon being used in a fatal shooting, do you mean to include if a homeowner were defending their own home/family or something else?

Since: Aug 10

Cathouse Mouse

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 28, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Busty Miss Returns wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent and thank you for giving YOUR opinions.
I would like to add that pawning a weapon would no longer be allowed.
As to your comment about a weapon being used in a fatal shooting, do you mean to include if a homeowner were defending their own home/family or something else?
I mean exactly that. If the dead guy is proven to be a crook, he nor his family gets a dime. On the other hand, if it's Trayvon Martin's family, they get the farm.

I also support the complete closure of gun shows. They are nothing more than a blatant "in our face" farce for selling 40% of the weapons annually in this country and in many cases to the very people who we all agree shouldn't have one.
AND HE IS A DEMOCRAT

Mountain Home, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Dec 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Busty Miss Returns wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent and thank you for giving YOUR opinions.
I would like to add that pawning a weapon would no longer be allowed.
As to your comment about a weapon being used in a fatal shooting, do you mean to include if a homeowner were defending their own home/family or something else?
iT'S ALRIGHT TO TAKE GUNS FROM EVERYONE EXCEPT THOSE THAT WANT TO BAN THE GUNS!
State Senator R.C. Soles (D - NC)

Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, shot one of two intruders at his home just outside Tabor City , N.C. about 5 p.m. Sunday, the prosecutor for the politician's home county said.

The intruder, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, district attorney for Columbus, Bladen andBrunswick counties..

The State Bureau of Investigation and Columbus County Sheriff's Department are investigating the shooting, Gore said. Soles, who was not arrested,declined to discuss the incident Sunday evening.

"I am not in a position to talk to you," Soles said by telephone. "I'm right in the middle of an investigation."

The Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn't hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim.

In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the "Do as i say and not as i do" Anti-Gun Activist Lawmaker picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was a self-defense shooting. Why hypocritical you may ask? It is because his long legislative record shows that the actions that he took to protect his family, his own response to a dangerous life threatening situation, are actions that he feels ordinary citizens should not have if they were faced with an identical situation.

It has prompted some to ask if the Senator believes his life and personal safety is more valuable than yours or mine.

But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can.

“Invisible Pink Unicorn”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Dec 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

AND HE IS A DEMOCRAT wrote:
<quoted text> iT'S ALRIGHT TO TAKE GUNS FROM EVERYONE EXCEPT THOSE THAT WANT TO BAN THE GUNS!
State Senator R.C. Soles (D - NC)
Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, shot one of two intruders at his home just outside Tabor City , N.C. about 5 p.m. Sunday, the prosecutor for the politician's home county said.
The intruder, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, district attorney for Columbus, Bladen andBrunswick counties..
The State Bureau of Investigation and Columbus County Sheriff's Department are investigating the shooting, Gore said. Soles, who was not arrested,declined to discuss the incident Sunday evening.
"I am not in a position to talk to you," Soles said by telephone. "I'm right in the middle of an investigation."
The Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn't hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim.
In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the "Do as i say and not as i do" Anti-Gun Activist Lawmaker picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was a self-defense shooting. Why hypocritical you may ask? It is because his long legislative record shows that the actions that he took to protect his family, his own response to a dangerous life threatening situation, are actions that he feels ordinary citizens should not have if they were faced with an identical situation.
It has prompted some to ask if the Senator believes his life and personal safety is more valuable than yours or mine.
But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can.
Where ya dig up this old news?

Soles pleaded guilty paid a $1000 fine but got out of a felony conviction. He did not run for reelection and is not a State Senator any more.

He is NOT anti-gun this email lies.

NRA pro-gun rating/grade of
B in 1998
B+ in 2000
B+ in 2002
A in 2004
A in 2006
A in 2008
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/soles.asp

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Arvada Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Arvada People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Arvada News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Arvada
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••