Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,215 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#20066 Dec 30, 2012
Redd wrote:
National Firearms Act 1934
Acknowledging the rise of gangster machine-gun violence during Prohibition, which lasted from 1920 until 1933, the federal government sought to regulate sawed-off shotguns and machine guns. The law levied heavy taxes on the manufacturing and transfer of those weapons. During his congressional testimony on the legislation, NRA President Karl Frederick had the following exchange with Rep. Clement Dickinson, D-Mo.
Dickinson: "I will ask you whether or not this bill interferes in any way with the right of a person to keep and bear arms or his right to be secure in his person against unreasonable search; in other words, do you believe this bill is unconstitutional or that it violates any constitutional provision?"
Frederick: "I have not given it any study from that point of view. I will be glad to submit in writing my views on that subject, but I do think it is a subject which deserves serious thought."
Later, Frederick added: "I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one.... I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses."
So what's the point of this post? That you agree with some dude you don't know that some dude I don't know either should have the right to tell me I should have no way to defend myself against some big violent dude that weighs 100 pounds more than I do?

Screw you and all you anti-gun libs. I do carry and always WILL carry. Don't like it? Tough.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#20067 Dec 30, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Although the freedoms enjoyed in this country must be protected and upheld, statistics show that personal security within the United States is greatly hampered by lenient gun control laws.
It provides the greatest security in MY life. Whether at home alone, driving through the city or walking in the wilderness. My cell phone sure won't hurt a bad guy or a mt lion that's attacking me.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#20068 Dec 30, 2012
Guess Who wrote:
<quoted text> the conneticuit shooter had access to mental health. His monther had plenty of money. She bought rounds of drinks at a local bar. loaned people money ect. This whole terrible disaster was the mothers fault. She knew he was mentally disturbed and yet she gave him access to guns, She waited until he was 20 before trying to get him commited to the looney bin. He killed for revenge. He was mad at the school officials that he shot because they where helping his mother petition the court so she could put him away. he killed the children because his mother vollentiered with that class. and he was jealious of them. Stop blaming the gun,s and blame the mother who was the responsible adult.
The 20 year old adult that committed every act, from going in her house.... to taking her guns.... to driving to the school.... and to finally pulling the trigger, takes sole responsibility for it. Come on Churm, only a lib would blame it someone who didn't do it.

Don't we all know individuals we think aren't mentally stable? We can't all have these people put away, can we?
Redd

Little Rock, AR

#20069 Dec 30, 2012
There is no reasonable compromise in Republicans anymore, therefor we will go over the fiscal cliff.

Hope you enjoy your new taxes...make that the old taxes...those before Dubya screwed the pooch for his buddies.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#20070 Dec 30, 2012
Redd wrote:
There is no reasonable compromise in Republicans anymore, therefor we will go over the fiscal cliff.
Hope you enjoy your new taxes...make that the old taxes...those before Dubya screwed the pooch for his buddies.
Why did they get in a position of needing republicans to compromise in the first place? Libs can't handle OPM?
Reality Check

Sherwood, AR

#20071 Dec 30, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"You pointed out one of the major flaws in the liberal line of thinking. That is making decisions based on perception"
Looks like Liberals do not have a monopoly on making "decisions based on perception", do they?
The United States has the loosest gun control laws of all developed countries. In the US, there are virtually as many guns as there are people. According to FBI crime statistics, 8,775 of the 12,996 murders that occurred in the U.S. in 2010 were caused by firearms.
With a gun being the weapon of choice in so many of the homicides in the United States, consider other countries, with stricter gun control laws, and how murders involving firearms there are much lower.
Japan - In Japan, most kinds of guns are illegal, and almost no one owns a gun. Japan is known as one of the strictest gun controlling nation in the world, with only 0.6 firearms per every 100 people. In 2006, there were only two homicides caused by guns in Japan. In 2008 there were 11. The country has nearly eliminated murder by firearms.
United Kingdom – The rate of private gun ownership in the United Kingdom is 6.72 firearms per 100 people. In 2009, only 18 people were murdered with a firearm. Within the last 14 years, the year with the highest number of gun caused homicides was 2004, with 52 people killed.
Australia – Ranked at No. 25 in comparison of number of privately owned guns in 178 other countries, about 15 out of every 100 Australians owns a firearm. Annual homicide rates involving firearms in the country is relatively low, at 0.1% per every 10,000 in 2009.
Germany – Ranked No. 4, in a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 other countries, approx. 30 out of every 100 people in Germany own a firearm. Germany experiences far fewer gun related homicides annually than the United States. In 2010, there was a total of 158 homicides committed with a firearm.
United States – The United States is ranked at No. 1 for civilian gun ownership in comparison with all other industrialized countries. There are approximately 88.8 firearms for every 100 people in the U.S. In the past 14 years, the year with the greatest number of homicides caused by a firearm occurred in 2006, when 10,225 people were killed by the use of a gun. Annual firearm suicides within the United States are high as well. In 2005, 17,002 suicides were committed using a firearm.
The United States far surpasses other countries in terms of gun related violence and death. The numbers above tend to indicate that fewer gun-related homicides is a direct result of stricter gun control laws.
A particular quote by Benjamin Franklin says,“Anyone who will trade freedom for security deserves neither.”
Although the freedoms enjoyed in this country must be protected and upheld, statistics show that personal security within the United States is greatly hampered by lenient gun control laws.
If someone is going to kill someone else then they are going to find out how to do it reguardless. Once again liberals want to take away the instrument used instead of fixing the problem that caused the crime in the first place. Do you really think taking guns away will lower crime rates? I probably already know the answer. This is the same thing as our kids falling behind in math and science in the world so what do we do throw money at it. They fall farther behind, we throw more money at it. The problem is the family structure thus creating a poor learning environment for all students, not a deficiency in technology and teaching methods.
Your gun control scenario is the same thing. The problem is with society and not guns.
Reality Check

Sherwood, AR

#20072 Dec 30, 2012
Redd wrote:
There is no reasonable compromise in Republicans anymore, therefor we will go over the fiscal cliff.
Hope you enjoy your new taxes...make that the old taxes...those before Dubya screwed the pooch for his buddies.
The problem was Obama not compromising. He won the election so he believes that he has the upper hand in this. He does but not near as much as he thinks. Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2% which doesn't even come close to fixing the problem. So the middle class and lower class will not only be crushed by increased taxes but also by the increase in the costs of goods (as if they aren't bad enough) as a result of higher taxes on the upper class that owns most of the businesses in America. It's all a part of Obama's grand plan to destroy capitalism. It would be different if the increase in taxes for the rich would actually fix the problem but it isn't even close.
dont know nothin

Yakima, WA

#20073 Dec 30, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If someone is going to kill someone else then they are going to find out how to do it reguardless. Once again liberals want to take away the instrument used instead of fixing the problem that caused the crime in the first place. Do you really think taking guns away will lower crime rates? I probably already know the answer. This is the same thing as our kids falling behind in math and science in the world so what do we do throw money at it. They fall farther behind, we throw more money at it. The problem is the family structure thus creating a poor learning environment for all students, not a deficiency in technology and teaching methods.
Your gun control scenario is the same thing. The problem is with society and not guns.
lol um the answer to your dumbass question is yes.. countries with not nearly as leineant gun control as we have have far less murders caused by guns... and what the hell do you think is the problem? call of duty on xbox? lol get the hell outta here with that bs... what do you think the problem is? because what i'm seeing is too many damn readily available body armor and assault rifles being used by a bunch of ignorant people but yes i must agree their parents probbably weren't much parents to begin with .. but if you think that horror movies and call of duty is to blame the answer is no .. and the problem with our damn school is the education system needs to be reformed .. with bush's "no child left behind" act making it almost impossible for teachers to fail students... we promote bad habbits and it carries on through life just like the damn GOP promoting their damn campaign advisor to 1st seat behind ryan lol he failed misserably and what do they do ? give him a raise? that only makes sense right?.. what needs to happen with our schools is that kids need to be held accountable for their grades and parents need to be forced to either help their kids or watch them fail.. this holding hands through till high school or even college sometimes is a bunch of bs and lets these damn parents with no interest in helping theirselves pass those traditions on to their kids.
dont know nothin

Yakima, WA

#20074 Dec 30, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem was Obama not compromising. He won the election so he believes that he has the upper hand in this. He does but not near as much as he thinks. Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2% which doesn't even come close to fixing the problem. So the middle class and lower class will not only be crushed by increased taxes but also by the increase in the costs of goods (as if they aren't bad enough) as a result of higher taxes on the upper class that owns most of the businesses in America. It's all a part of Obama's grand plan to destroy capitalism. It would be different if the increase in taxes for the rich would actually fix the problem but it isn't even close.
if you look over every presidential election especially the ones that are won handily then yes he does have a damn mandate... and how the hell do you propose he's gonna "sacrafice 98% of the nation"? he's trying to NOT raise taxes on that percent... LOL and how the hell do you supppose that increased tax rates on the upper income is going to make the cost of consumables go up? tell me how the hell you came to that bright conclusion there genius.. so you think that by increasing taxes on corporate business investors or ceo's is going to do this? lol what ajoke... and who cares about fixing the whole problem .. we can't even get a vote to help fix a part of the problem... republicans just passed their plan B for a vote and didn't even get enough votes on their own damn bill .. there are only a few republicans in the house holding all this bs up and they'll be X'd come 2014 rather it be by a new democrate or independant or a good level headed replublican .. all this TEA party nonsense is over
dont know nothin

Yakima, WA

#20075 Dec 30, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
Why did they get in a position of needing republicans to compromise in the first place? Libs can't handle OPM?
because everything that is passed in congress needs compromise lol where have you been
dont know nothin

Yakima, WA

#20077 Dec 30, 2012
guest 2 wrote:
We are going over the cliff and the mighty fine president some of you lke to brag about ain't doing nothing to stop it. Some of you need to wake up. I guess it's going to take those taxes going up and those paychecks getting a whole smaller to get your attention. And in January when the president pushes his gun control on us. After all if he had his way none of us would have any guns. Do any of you really think this is going to stop the criminals, pretty soon they will be the only ones with guns. For some of you that wasn't paying attention te guy that shot those 20 kids. Didn't get his guns legelly, he stole them from his mother. Why should us law bidding citizens have our guns ripped from us when they can't control the criminals. Some of you better get your eyes open or we will lose all our freedoms. But this what you get when you put a communist in office. It was the most stupid thing voters have done. Because Obama oesn't have a clue how to run this country. We are in a Big Huge Mess.
lol only person that needs to wake up is you. The president had made 2 attempts to compromise with republicans. Then Boehner, the republican house leader, made an attempt with plan B and that even failed to pass with republicans. The leader of his own party cannot even reign in his constituants. It may take the tax rates going up to get something done in congress, but when they go up; democrats will cast an immediate vote for tax rates of 250k and below be cut back to the tax rates of today. The republicans will trip all over theirselves with what to do with newly proposed bill and will inevitably vote to pass it because it does concern over 98% of the country and further damage their chances of getting reelected in 2014. As far as gun control goes; we need it and are on our way to put the ban back into place. There was nothing wrong with the ban when it was in place, it was accepted as law and will once again be accepted as law. As a matter of fact, obama has proposed no such things as you have said about taking away all guns, the NRA only has about 2 million followers that they leech money out of so you cannot believe everything those bumbling buffoons say. All of your ignorant fear mongoring redoric proves just how much of a pathetic gullable low life your sorry excuse for parents truely succeeding in raising. You good sir are no better than the dirt on the bottom of your shoe and your parents should be ashamed of themselves for having such an incompetent fool such as yourself for a son or daughter.
Billy Bob

Oklahoma City, OK

#20078 Dec 31, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
"Now before you fools start throwing the word "liberal" around it should be known that I do not like Obama and I didn't like Romney ether I liked Bill Clinton didn't like G.W.Bush liked John McCain didn't like Serra Palin. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican I'm independent."
This paragraph has LIBERAL written all over it!
Yep that's the blind one eyed reaction i was expecting.
Billy Bob

Oklahoma City, OK

#20079 Dec 31, 2012
Last I herd it was Obama that won the election not John Boehner. And yet John Boehner has done nothing but dictate the lower house of congress not to cooperate. It is so obvious that he is protecting his rich buddy's and not thinking about the country. The Republicans can not get over the fact that they lost the election and there ego has been bruised now instead of working together for the grater good of the country they try to block everything. We will not get "tax hikes" the tax will just go back to when Clinton was President and the last time I checked the USA was doing pretty good under his economics. Now before you fools start throwing the word "liberal" around it should be known that I do not like Obama and I didn't like Romney ether I liked Bill Clinton didn't like G.W.Bush liked John McCain didn't like Serra Palin. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican I'm independent. As I'm not blinded by one side or the other I can see the best and worst from both sides. And for the record get ready as when Obama goes out next election Hillary Clinton is going to be the next President as I can not see anyone in the Republican party that is worthy of doing the job.
Realtiy Check

Little Rock, AR

#20080 Dec 31, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>if you look over every presidential election especially the ones that are won handily then yes he does have a damn mandate... and how the hell do you propose he's gonna "sacrafice 98% of the nation"? he's trying to NOT raise taxes on that percent... LOL and how the hell do you supppose that increased tax rates on the upper income is going to make the cost of consumables go up? tell me how the hell you came to that bright conclusion there genius.. so you think that by increasing taxes on corporate business investors or ceo's is going to do this? lol what ajoke... and who cares about fixing the whole problem .. we can't even get a vote to help fix a part of the problem... republicans just passed their plan B for a vote and didn't even get enough votes on their own damn bill .. there are only a few republicans in the house holding all this bs up and they'll be X'd come 2014 rather it be by a new democrate or independant or a good level headed replublican .. all this TEA party nonsense is over
If Obama keeps the tax structure the same as it currently is then the 98% keeps lower taxes. If he stands firm on his "must tax the rich more" and we go over the cliff then the 98% get crushed. It's that simple. It would be different if taxing the rich would solve the problem but it won't. It would be like bringing 20 gallons of water to a house fire. Sure it will put out some of the fire but your still going to lose the house so what good have you done? You could have just saved someone the $.03 on their water bill and been $.03 ahead because you were going to lose the house anyway only bringing 20 gallons to put it out. You ask how the cost of goods will go up? Surely you understand this. Businesses are owned by those considered to be in the 2%. If you raise taxes on them then they will have two choices, pass it on to the consumers of their products and survive or absorb it and go under. I know you believe that all owners of successful businesses are just rolling in the money but it's not that way. Believe me, I am talking from experience and you are talking from perception and they are a world apart. The sooner you realize that politics is just a game that those at the top play without reguard to the consequences to those below them the sooner you will start seeing the truth. Until then you are going to keep lookig like an idiot that points the finger at the republican party for every woe America faces. You do realize that no one can be right all of the time. As for American politics I would say that politicians on either side are right about 20% of the time which is pathetic.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#20082 Dec 31, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem was Obama not compromising. He won the election so he believes that he has the upper hand in this. He does but not near as much as he thinks. Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2% which doesn't even come close to fixing the problem. So the middle class and lower class will not only be crushed by increased taxes but also by the increase in the costs of goods (as if they aren't bad enough) as a result of higher taxes on the upper class that owns most of the businesses in America. It's all a part of Obama's grand plan to destroy capitalism. It would be different if the increase in taxes for the rich would actually fix the problem but it isn't even close.
If you did not use Right Wing propaganda to rationalize your greed,

you could possibly speak and not leave the impression that you are a greedy Idiot.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#20083 Dec 31, 2012
Good example;

"Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2%"

Other side of that coin;

REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (house) is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation

for the sake of not LETTING TAX CUTS EXPIRE ON THE OTHER 2%".
Guess Who

Ash Flat, AR

#20084 Dec 31, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
The 20 year old adult that committed every act, from going in her house.... to taking her guns.... to driving to the school.... and to finally pulling the trigger, takes sole responsibility for it. Come on Churm, only a lib would blame it someone who didn't do it.
Don't we all know individuals we think aren't mentally stable? We can't all have these people put away, can we?
The mother was the 20 year olds enabler. If the shooter had lived he likely would never went to trial, He would have likely been declared not competent to stand trial. I do think it was a premeditated crime. however even four year olds are capable of doing premeditated things.
guest

Blytheville, AR

#20085 Dec 31, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
Good example;
"Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2%"
Other side of that coin;
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (house) is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation
for the sake of not LETTING TAX CUTS EXPIRE ON THE OTHER 2%".
Considering the tax increase won't make a dent in the deficit, and Obama has admitted that increasing taxes on the wealthy is not about cutting the deficit but about "fairness," your "other side of that coin," is wrong no matter how many times you try to flip it. But then again... you've never been about putting the right thing on here, just your "side of that coin."

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#20086 Dec 31, 2012
Billy Bob wrote:
<quoted text>Yep that's the blind one eyed reaction i was expecting.
Thinking or acting for oneself in a manner in which which others disagree is not independent enough.

Anyone that is not inline with their independent view, well their just a Liberal.

Think Rush, or Hannity or Michael Savage, or any of the others will tell you anything different.

Not as long as they have their minions making them rich following their B.S., you won't.
guest

Blytheville, AR

#20087 Dec 31, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
If you did not use Right Wing propaganda to rationalize your greed,
you could possibly speak and not leave the impression that you are a greedy Idiot.
If you did not use Left Wing propaganda to rationalize your greed,
you could possibly speak and not leave the impression that you are a greedy Idiot.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
smallest wiener in town 2 hr Michael 30
black folk 4 hr I know 32
Randolph County Exposed!!! 7 hr guest 10
birdell Cafe 10 hr trying to behlpful 7
Nicole Zitzelberger- Johnson 11 hr old friend 1
Local corruption 11 hr Intelligent 1
who is up?? 17 hr Guest 1
More from around the web

Pocahontas People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]