sandyhook shooting
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
teamster

London, KY

#1 May 3, 2013
Just laying it out there that I'm sick and tired of hearing all the negative input about the shooting. It's done and over with and has been blown way out of proportion. Sure, it's a horrible thing that happened but seems to me that all the media scrutiny has made it one-sided. Enough is enough. It comes down to the old saying guns don't kill people, people kill people. Give it a damn rest. Pro-gun, before its too late and something really big happens and nobody in this country can defend theirselves and we end up getting our asses handed to ourselves. Don't say I didn't warn you. #bury your guns till its time to rise up to the communism. HUA
Whateverrrr

United States

#2 May 4, 2013
You must not be a parent then, am I right? I don't want peoples guns taken away either, but hell yeah I am all for making it more difficult for someone that is not mentally stable to have one. I personally think they should test people to see if there mentally stable enough to have weapons when they go to purchase one, and if there not they don't get the weapon. But like I said that is my opinion.

“Gods Curse On Lazy Hillbillies”

Since: Jun 12

Dale City, VA

#3 May 4, 2013
teamster wrote:
Just laying it out there that I'm sick and tired of hearing all the negative input about the shooting. It's done and over with and has been blown way out of proportion. Sure, it's a horrible thing that happened but seems to me that all the media scrutiny has made it one-sided. Enough is enough. It comes down to the old saying guns don't kill people, people kill people. Give it a damn rest. Pro-gun, before its too late and something really big happens and nobody in this country can defend theirselves and we end up getting our asses handed to ourselves. Don't say I didn't warn you.#bury your guns till its time to rise up to the communism. HUA
You Don't Like The Negative Input???.....Can You Point Out Something {Positive} About The Shooting???.....
Ralph

London, KY

#4 May 4, 2013
Whateverrrr wrote:
You must not be a parent then, am I right? I don't want peoples guns taken away either, but hell yeah I am all for making it more difficult for someone that is not mentally stable to have one. I personally think they should test people to see if there mentally stable enough to have weapons when they go to purchase one, and if there not they don't get the weapon. But like I said that is my opinion.
No, you are an idiot.

Are you so willing to give up the "rights" you agree with? How would you like to take a test or fill out paperwork to exercise your right to free speech? Kneejerk leftwing BS is nothing about guns and all about control. Sorry you are willing to trade freedom bought with blood for the perception of security. You deserve neither.
Fox News

London, KY

#5 May 4, 2013
Ralph you are the IDIOT and you are too dumb to know it......PS you prove it ever time you open your stupid mouth.
Ralph

London, KY

#6 May 4, 2013
Fox News wrote:
Ralph you are the IDIOT and you are too dumb to know it......PS you prove it ever time you open your stupid mouth.
I must be doing something right. lol

Go ahead Einstein explain the second amendment to us. We need a laugh.

You should learn history before you attempt to rewrite it.
Ralph

London, KY

#7 May 4, 2013
I didn't think so. lol

The gun store where the Sandy Hook weapons were LEGALLY purchased is now closed. The BATFE found alleged 500 violations over the past several years.

YOUR leader decided it would be the best use of his office to create bloody gun violence on the border for the antigun news coverage. He got caught when BP Agent Terry was killed.

The question every gun grabbing liberal SHOULD be asking is why those FBI/ICE/BP/BATFE agents were not used to investigate the violation of existing laws.

Sandy Hook could have been prevented.

Not by stupid knee jerk reactions but by the utilization of agents to actually protect children and other citizens.
Whateverrrr

United States

#8 May 8, 2013
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are an idiot.
Are you so willing to give up the "rights" you agree with? How would you like to take a test or fill out paperwork to exercise your right to free speech? Kneejerk leftwing BS is nothing about guns and all about control. Sorry you are willing to trade freedom bought with blood for the perception of security. You deserve neither.
No I am not an idiot. What would be wrong for taking some kind of test to prove if you are mentally stable enough to have a gun? & another thing, Did I say I wanted peoples "Gun Rights" taken away? No I never.
Quod Demonstratum

London, KY

#9 May 8, 2013
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
I must be doing something right. lol
Go ahead Einstein explain the second amendment to us. We need a laugh.
You should learn history before you attempt to rewrite it.
No need. It explains it for us:

"reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"

Keyword there, regulated.

Regulation creates, limits, or constrains a right, creates or limits a duty, or allocates a responsibility.

What you think is breaking the Constitution is really giving it regulations, which it's A-OK with.

Regulating what type of guns are legal (what is being pushed forward) is fine. Banning ALL guns (which is not happening), would not be.

Look at me, I can figure it out and I'm not even Einstein.
Ralph

London, KY

#10 May 8, 2013
Whateverrrr wrote:
<quoted text>
No I am not an idiot. What would be wrong for taking some kind of test to prove if you are mentally stable enough to have a gun? & another thing, Did I say I wanted peoples "Gun Rights" taken away? No I never.
Yes you did. "not be infringed" ring any bells? It is a Constitutional Right to own firearms.

You don't seem to be able to grasp that?

It was not a suggestion, idea or whim. It is the law. Regulate one to ineffectiveness and the others shall surely follow. The Second Amendment is the teeth of a otherwise paper tiger.

Ben Franklin- "If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
walt

Whitley City, KY

#11 May 8, 2013
Quod Demonstratum wrote:
<quoted text>
No need. It explains it for us:
"reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"
Keyword there, regulated.
Regulation creates, limits, or constrains a right, creates or limits a duty, or allocates a responsibility.
What you think is breaking the Constitution is really giving it regulations, which it's A-OK with.
Regulating what type of guns are legal (what is being pushed forward) is fine. Banning ALL guns (which is not happening), would not be.
Look at me, I can figure it out and I'm not even Einstein.
Hey Einstein, look at definition #3 and then go back to school.

reg·u·late (rgy-lt)
tr.v. reg·u·lat·ed, reg·u·lat·ing, reg·u·lates
1. To control or direct according to rule, principle, or law.
2. To adjust to a particular specification or requirement: regulate temperature.
3. To adjust (a mechanism) for accurate and proper functioning.
4. To put or maintain in order: regulate one's eating habits.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/regulated

Ralph, you rock.
Ralph

London, KY

#12 May 8, 2013
Thanks Walt. Creating Americans one definition at a time. lol

I think it falls squarely on the educational system. They seem to have the false idea that it is something Congress can do. They can not.

"The first ten amendments to the US Constitution are collectively called the Bill of Rights, because they deal with individual rights and freedoms that can not be abrogated by the government."

New word for the democrits, "inalienable"

in·al·ien·a·ble

/in&#712;&#257;l&# 275;&#601;n&#601;b &#601;l/

Adjective

Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor: "inalienable human rights".


One word at a time Walt, one word at a time.
Quod Demonstratum

London, KY

#13 May 8, 2013
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Einstein, look at definition #3 and then go back to school.
reg·u·late (rgy-lt)
tr.v. reg·u·lat·ed, reg·u·lat·ing, reg·u·lates
1. To control or direct according to rule, principle, or law.
2. To adjust to a particular specification or requirement: regulate temperature.
3. To adjust (a mechanism) for accurate and proper functioning.
4. To put or maintain in order: regulate one's eating habits.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/regulated
Ralph, you rock.
I'm not entirely sure what you wanted me to look at.

"3. To adjust (a mechanism) for accurate and proper functioning."

How are the REGULATIONS that are being put in place going to stop accurate and proper functioning (they're not)? And before you answer that, think about something else. Do we NEED assault rifles to defend ourselves against the government (which is what the second amendment is all about)? If we do, then it's a lost cause already, because I highly doubt many civilians have anywhere near the advanced weaponry as our government. If you want assault rifles to stay legal because we need them to defend ourselves against our government, then we also need drones to be legal, nuclear weaponry to be legal, manpads, dum dum's, chemical weapons, full auto assault rifles, SMG's, MG's, mortars (non black-powder), napalm about a thousand other types of weapons the government and our military have but we don't, because we both know, if there was a revolt and it was going bad for them, they wouldn't hesitate to use a single one.

Now, if we DON'T need assault weapons to stay legal to defend ourselves against the government and you want them to stay legal just because you want them to stay legal because you like them, well then that's just petty. You can't always get what you want.
Quod Demonstratum

London, KY

#14 May 8, 2013
Ralph wrote:
New word for the democrits, "inalienable"
Democrits? Either you misspelled the word or you're trying to put together democrats and hypocrites. Either way, if you think the Democrats are your enemy anymore than the Republicans, you're sadly mistaken. The Republicans are the ones who voted no on the weapons ban, then immediately turned around and said they wanted it but Obama blew it.

Since you apparently don't like democrats, let me give you a brief rundown of what Obama/Republicans have been doing during his presidency.

BARACK OBAMA: Instituted the toughest Wall Street reform since Great Depression
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Passed health reform, what politicians have been trying to do unsuccessfully for the last 60 years
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Stimulus Plan which brought us out of the brink of financial collapse
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA:$100 billion into our embarrassing & crumbling infrastructure – the largest since Eisenhower
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA:$60 billion to create renewable and clean energy
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.
BARACK OBAMA: A huge investment into science and technology; amping budgets at NASA, the National Science Foundation, an experimental energy research agency created by Bush but never funded until now
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Expanded state run health insurance to cover another four million kids
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARRACK OBAMA: Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act – Equal pay for equal work
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Initiated and signed a nuclear disarmament deal with Russia to reduce nuclear weapons by 1/3 by both sides
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Created a new global non-proliferation initiative to keep nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Hate crimes prevention act which had stalled in Congress for years (Matthew Shepard Act)
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: The Food & Drug Administration for the first time allowed to regulate tobacco
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Dismantled the scandal plagued Mineral (mis) Management Services. He broke into three parts so that the same people that collect money from oil leases are not the same ones who are regulating the industry. Now it will actually investigate the industry
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Overhauled the astonishing stupidity of the student loan system. Banks were being subsidized for giving loans that were guaranteed by the government anyway
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Cancelled the bloated weapons program which included the F-22 which is totally irreverent to either of our current wars
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Ending Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and Energy reform by the end of his second year
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Fought to extend benefits to the unemployed..., the single most stimulative way the government can spend tax dollars.
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Lowered Unemployment from13.5% to 9.5%
REPUBLICANS: Fought against his efforts every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Brought back the American Car Industry back from extinction
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

BARACK OBAMA: Ended Military Operations in Iraq
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.

And boy did you eat it up, every step of the way.
Whateverrrr

United States

#15 May 8, 2013
Ralph wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you did. "not be infringed" ring any bells? It is a Constitutional Right to own firearms.
You don't seem to be able to grasp that?
It was not a suggestion, idea or whim. It is the law. Regulate one to ineffectiveness and the others shall surely follow. The Second Amendment is the teeth of a otherwise paper tiger.
Ben Franklin- "If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both."
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
No I said "I don't want people's guns taken away". You need to pay more attention to what was said before you input your opinion! I understand it's people's right to own whatever the hell they want, but before I would see another small child get killed because some sorry piece of crap shot and killed them then hell yeah I would vote (if it ever happens) for people to take a mental evaluation before purchasing a fire arm! Did I state that I would like to see guns be taken away from people? No! I never.
SnuffAGlobalist

Enola, AR

#16 May 9, 2013
Whateverrr,

Here is what you said. Please do not be so hasty in stating that you are not an idiot. I don't think that there is proof that you are not.

You said..

"No I am not an idiot. What would be wrong for taking some kind of test to prove if you are mentally stable enough to have a gun? & another thing, Did I say I wanted peoples "Gun Rights" taken away? No I never. "

This is key... You said..

"What would be wrong for taking some kind of test to prove if you are mentally stable enough to have a gun?"

Now, there is the problem, dummy. A test. I would guess that you are not much of a student of history, that history wasn't your favorite subject in school.

The Soviet Union would declare those who opposed them to be mentally insane and shipped them off the Siberia, or, put them in Mental Hospitals, where they were drugged.

NO ONE but the globalists, or, their trusted stooges would have a gun if we were subjected to a mental test, as you suggest, because everyone who was not a kiss ass of the government, would be judged mentally unfit to own a firearm.

Damn, you are not only an idiot, but you are so, very, very naive, too.
SnuffAGlobalist

Enola, AR

#17 May 9, 2013
Quod Demonstratum,

Damn, glad that I don't have to be around you everyday at work, or, otherwise.

We don't own assault weapons. Assault weapons are full auto rifles. What we have are semi-auto weapons that resemble assault weapons, but are not.

Too tired to explain to you how that socialist POS, FDR, took a guy to the Supreme Court, and his hand picked, Supreme Court decided in his favor. Believe that it was US vs. Murray, but I don't remember at the moment.

Anyway, Murray was too poor to attend the court case before the Supreme Court, so they decided that short barrel shot guns, which Murray had made,were non-military, and that we could not own them.

They took away our right to own full-auto, because gangsters were successfully using them in their activities.

I can own full auto, if I buy an expensive as hell "stamp", that is pay the annul tax, and allow the ATF to come to my house and inspect it any time that they choose, and dance naked for them on my kitchen table.

However, I do not choose to own full auto at this time.

When the coming ARMED REVOLUTION, that 29% of Americans just last week in a university poll said is NECESSARY and COMING to American with in a short period of time arrives, I guess that many Americans won't bother with announcing to a federal agency that they now own FULL AUTO. Full Auto is nice in some situations, but you tend to waste ammo, and ammo, especially now, is in short supply due to your government buying it up to use against you very soon. DHS has bought over TWO BILLION ROUNDS of 49cal hollow point. Hollow point is too expensive to use in training, or, qualifying at the range. Their ammo purchase is for you. When they come, you will wish the hell that you have a semi-auto version of an Assault rifle, or, the real thing to defend yourself.

oh, just FYI, under President Saddam Hussein, every Iraqi could own a FULL AUTO ASSAULT RIFLE, under Iraqi law. Now, under your puppet, stooge government that you and your raping, torturing, murdering troops put in, Iraqis can't hardly own even a cap pistol.
SnuffAGlobalist

Enola, AR

#18 May 9, 2013
Sorry, it is TWO BILLION ROUNDS OF 40 CAL HOLLOW POINT AMMO THAT LESBIAN RUN DHS HAS BOUGHT TO KILL YOU...

49 caliber was a mistype, or, perhaps I was thinking of that other war where our men stood up to federal tyranny, to fight for our freedom, and used 49 caliber rounds to do it.
Quod Demonstratum

London, KY

#19 May 9, 2013
SnuffAGlobalist wrote:
Quod Demonstratum,
Damn, glad that I don't have to be around you everyday at work, or, otherwise.
We don't own assault weapons. Assault weapons are full auto rifles. What we have are semi-auto weapons that resemble assault weapons, but are not.
Too tired to explain to you how that socialist POS, FDR, took a guy to the Supreme Court, and his hand picked, Supreme Court decided in his favor. Believe that it was US vs. Murray, but I don't remember at the moment.
Anyway, Murray was too poor to attend the court case before the Supreme Court, so they decided that short barrel shot guns, which Murray had made,were non-military, and that we could not own them.
They took away our right to own full-auto, because gangsters were successfully using them in their activities.
I can own full auto, if I buy an expensive as hell "stamp", that is pay the annul tax, and allow the ATF to come to my house and inspect it any time that they choose, and dance naked for them on my kitchen table.
However, I do not choose to own full auto at this time.
When the coming ARMED REVOLUTION, that 29% of Americans just last week in a university poll said is NECESSARY and COMING to American with in a short period of time arrives, I guess that many Americans won't bother with announcing to a federal agency that they now own FULL AUTO. Full Auto is nice in some situations, but you tend to waste ammo, and ammo, especially now, is in short supply due to your government buying it up to use against you very soon. DHS has bought over TWO BILLION ROUNDS of 49cal hollow point. Hollow point is too expensive to use in training, or, qualifying at the range. Their ammo purchase is for you. When they come, you will wish the hell that you have a semi-auto version of an Assault rifle, or, the real thing to defend yourself.
oh, just FYI, under President Saddam Hussein, every Iraqi could own a FULL AUTO ASSAULT RIFLE, under Iraqi law. Now, under your puppet, stooge government that you and your raping, torturing, murdering troops put in, Iraqis can't hardly own even a cap pistol.
Quibble over the word all you want, I was just using the term that most Republicans seem to use when describing the "assault weapon ban" that they keep getting scared of.

"However, I do not choose to own full auto at this time.
When the coming ARMED REVOLUTION"

And that right there shows you're just a nutjob that I no longer need to respond to you. There's not anything huge coming within this hundred years, just like there wasn't a hundred years prior when people were yammering the same way.
walt

Whitley City, KY

#20 May 9, 2013
Quod Demonstratum wrote:
<quoted text>
.
BARACK OBAMA: Instituted the toughest Wall Street reform since Great Depression
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.
BARACK OBAMA: Passed health reform, what politicians have been trying to do unsuccessfully for the last 60 years
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.
BARACK OBAMA: Stimulus Plan which brought us out of the brink of financial collapse
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.
BARACK OBAMA:$100 billion into our embarrassing & crumbling infrastructure – the largest since Eisenhower
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.
BARACK OBAMA:$60 billion to create renewable and clean energy
REPUBLICANS: Fought against this every step of the way.
Obama gave $750 billion to Wall Street and six weeks later they didn't have a clue as to where the money went.

Obama's health reform as you call it will destroy the economy and raise taxes to extremes. I am already suffering because of my age.

Obama gave Solindra billions for green energy and withing a few months they went bankrupt and the money gone.

In short, everything you say your king did was a joke and the American people will suffer for it soon.

Obama ignored serious warnings about terrorists in our country and he let them draw our tax money while they built bombs to kill Americans.

Obama lied about Benghazi to cover his ass when he lied about al quaeda being destroyed just before the election, more Americans died.

Obama covered up the "fast and furious" gun shipment to Mexican drug lords and more Americans died. Obama just visited Mexico where he blamed Americans for the murder and carnage there because we buy their drugs. The POS has never defended Americans in any way, he is a fraud and a liar just like he has trained you to be.

You can go back to your free corn now and praise your king, just remember, intelligent people don't buy your load of crap.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Keavy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 50 min Solina 143,054
how is "stealing" baby body parts "woman health... 5 hr iThink 11
Daily Bible Verse (Oct '12) 6 hr Walk with God 938
What choice do I have besides Hillary if Im a d... 10 hr Red2core 5
get out of my class and leave america 10 hr debbie 4
lets ban the rainbow and black power flag now 11 hr debbie 6
Want to buy land in London 21 hr Land looker 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Keavy Mortgages