Moms make case for gun control

Mar 16, 2013 Full story: usatoday.com 9,286

Peg Paulson had never beaten a path through the halls of Congress before or met a U.S. senator's staffer or advocated for a controversial issue.

Full Story
spocko

Oakland, CA

#1708 May 15, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"The essential difference between our system and the Allies, of which the President speaks, in the same message, arises from our asserting, and uniformly acting on the principle on which our Government is erected, that every People have the right to regulate their own concerns in their own way: to live under such a Government as they may choose to establish; to change it at their pleasure, whenever a change is necessary to their happiness and prosperity. This principle is true every where; but, in the maintenance of it in Europe, we have but a remote--in the maintenance of it in America, a direct, interest. The law of self-defence requires us to act, whenever any combination of Powers--Asiatic, African, European, or American--interferes with the domestic concerns of the American States. This was all that was rightfully asserted by the message of 1823. The motive of interference does not enter into the question. If the interference was in a crusade against liberty, it was "not dangerous to our peace," but a direct attack upon us. If the crusade began at Patagonia, it would not end at Mexico. If, for the purposes of oppression, to graify ambition, or to sustain the sinking cause of a cruel tyranny, the interference would be a gross wrong, which we, of right, might arm, and act to prevent."--Mr. John Forsyth, April, 17, 1826,[Debates in Congress By United States. Congress, Joseph Gales, William Winston Seaton. Pg. 2821]
Good Lord man, had you anything even resembling a brain you could actually respond to my posts - clearly your cranium contains a pile of dogshit!

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#1709 May 15, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Good Lord man, had you anything even resembling a brain you could actually respond to my posts - clearly your cranium contains a pile of dogshit!
What would be the benefit of replying to mindless drivel? I'm not the treasonous troll that can't comprehend:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".
spocko

Oakland, CA

#1710 May 15, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
What would be the benefit of replying to mindless drivel? I'm not the treasonous troll that can't comprehend:
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".
Huh? But you do reply like clockwork! With completely irrelevant and unrelated, copy and past, nonsense penned some 200 years ago - you are certifiable ...
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#1711 May 15, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>Explain to me something... how can you put any factual stamp on testimony held a hundred plus years after the event?
Is you basis in fact based on the church never lying?
The fact remains there are no other contenders for being the authors of Matthew,Mark, Luke and John.

"Not that lack of a name on a text automatically equates with anonymous authorship anyway: In this era prior to publishing, and just prior to the advent of the codex, the equivalent to a spine or dust jacket was a tag on the outside of a scroll identifying the work in question -- since there would be no other concrete way to discern what was inside a scroll and differentiate it from other scrolls (other than external appearance). Whenever and by whomever the Gospels were written, it would not be left "unauthorized" or "unidentified" if for no other reasons than practical ones: It would need a title/descriptor at the very least, especially if it was intended to be read by more than one person or small group of people. Hengel notes [Heng.4G, 48]:

"Anonymous works were relatively rare and must have been given a title in libraries. They were often given the name of a pseudepigraphical author....Works without titles easily got double or multiple titles when names were given to them in different libraries."

Since even critics admit that the Gospels were intended for a wide audience (at the very least, a "community" of believers) they must explain why these practical factors would be irrelevant and allow a Gospel to remain "anonymous" and then later not be attributed to multiple authors. Skeptics and critics would have a better case if they could find a copy of Matthew that is instead attributed to, say, Andrew, or to no one at all; or a copy of what is obviously Mark that is attributed to Barnabas. But the titles are unanimous and unequivocal -- there is no variation in them at all, and critics have also not provided any examples of Gospel texts with no title, and cannot: "There is no trace of such anonymity [concerning the Gospels]," and the testimony to their authorship is unanimous across broad geographic and chronological lines [Heng.4G, 54]. It is hard to see why this evidence is not enough for the Gospels when far, far less is accepted for secular works and their attribution.

http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/gospdefhub....
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#1712 May 15, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>Explain to me something... how can you put any factual stamp on testimony held a hundred plus years after the event?
Is you basis in fact based on the church never lying?
Alexander the Great or Alexander Not So Great?

Much of this confusion can be traced to the oldest available sources of information we have about Alexander. None of these sources are primary, but some of them were written by authors with access to primary resources. These main sources were written by Arrian, Plutarch, Justin, Diodorus and Curtius. The works about Alexander which have been written relying upon these sources are understandably inconsistent with one another, because these oldest sources are themselves inconsistent. Of all of these five, it is Arrian whose account is generally considered the best and most reliable.

Only Arrian listed sources for his information and he wrote his history of Alexander in 250 AD , 573 years after Alexander died. By that time myths about Alexander were rampant.

Of the four remaining authors, it is Plutarch who is to be preferred. However, his works are also to be used with caution. Plutarch wrote in the first century A.D.(400 years after the death of Alexander) and relied on such suspect sources as letters which were supposedly written by Alexander but which, in fact, were not. Plutarch also revised his earlier work on Alexander to portray Alexander as having deteriorated later in life, which shows that he had come under the influence of the anti-Alexander propaganda. Therefore, it is necessary to be aware that Plutarch is not an unimpeachable source. He was, in fact, "...a ragbag of a biographer" who didn't like leaving out a good story or distinguishing between primary and secondary sources.The writings of Curtius, Diodorus, and Justin are of dubious worth. All of these authors relied upon suspect sources for their works on Alexander despite the fact that good primary sources were still available to them.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#1713 May 15, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Huh?
"The institutions of law, medicine, and divinity, are in a most flourishing condition, and we count more than half a hundred colleges, with an immense number of minor schools. It is a country full of inventive power, which puts every particle of mind into action. It is also remarkable for enterprise, and the people seize upon all the improvements of other nations. It has a mass of population, which have, more than any other people, sound minds in sound bodies, arising more from its moral and political character, than from any other causes. It is a country that has no national religion, but, within her borders every one worships God in his own way, if he do not disturb his neighbour; a country without grades in society fixed by law, and where and primogeniture and entailment do not exist. It is a country where every one has a right to bear arms for protection and defence, and which could muster two millions of soldiers, if they were necessary, for self-defence. It is a country increasing in population, arts, sciences, letters, and wealth, with the comforts and enjoyments of social life, faster than any other in the world. In short, it is a country that "knows her rights, and knowing, dares maintain" them.

"Should we be content to take this heritage of ours, without being mindful what it cost our ancestors to present it to us, as it is? Or should we examine the subject most minutely, as we have time or leisure?

"Ours is the first nation in the annals of history, that became masters of themselves at once. Freedom has, in
general, been gained slowed, and lost rapidly."

- John Howard Hinton,[THE HISTORY AND TOPOGRAPHY OF THE UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA, FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE PRESENT TIME. COMPRISING POLITICAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL HISTORY; GEOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, MINERALOGY, ZOOLOGY, AND BOTANY; AGRICULTURE MANUFACTURES, AND COMMERCE; LAWS, MANNERS, CUSTOMS, AND RELIGION; WITH A TOPOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE CITIES, TOWNS, SEA-PORTS, PUBLIC EDIFICES, CANALS, &c. &c EDITED BY JOHN HOWARD HINTON, A.M. ASSISTED BY SEVERAL LITERARY GENTLEMEN IN ENGLAND AND AMERICA. A NEW AND IMPROVED EDITION, WITH ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS, BY SAMUEL L. KNAPP. "Much I avail my friends by all the zeal I show the dead" ILLUSTRATED WITH NUMEROUS ENGRAVINGS. VOL I. BOSTON: PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY SAMUEL WALKER... 1834]
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1714 May 15, 2013
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact remains there are no other contenders for being the authors of Matthew,Mark, Luke and John.
"Not that lack of a name on a text automatically equates with anonymous authorship anyway: In this era prior to publishing, and just prior to the advent of the codex, the equivalent to a spine or dust jacket was a tag on the outside of a scroll identifying the work in question -- since there would be no other concrete way to discern what was inside a scroll and differentiate it from other scrolls (other than external appearance). Whenever and by whomever the Gospels were written, it would not be left "unauthorized" or "unidentified" if for no other reasons than practical ones: It would need a title/descriptor at the very least, especially if it was intended to be read by more than one person or small group of people. Hengel notes [Heng.4G, 48]:
"Anonymous works were relatively rare and must have been given a title in libraries. They were often given the name of a pseudepigraphical author....Works without titles easily got double or multiple titles when names were given to them in different libraries."
Since even critics admit that the Gospels were intended for a wide audience (at the very least, a "community" of believers) they must explain why these practical factors would be irrelevant and allow a Gospel to remain "anonymous" and then later not be attributed to multiple authors. Skeptics and critics would have a better case if they could find a copy of Matthew that is instead attributed to, say, Andrew, or to no one at all; or a copy of what is obviously Mark that is attributed to Barnabas. But the titles are unanimous and unequivocal -- there is no variation in them at all, and critics have also not provided any examples of Gospel texts with no title, and cannot: "There is no trace of such anonymity [concerning the Gospels]," and the testimony to their authorship is unanimous across broad geographic and chronological lines [Heng.4G, 54]. It is hard to see why this evidence is not enough for the Gospels when far, far less is accepted for secular works and their attribution.
http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/gospdefhub....
So they win by default based on the conditions you determine to be acceptable????

You don't see anything wrong with your form of vetting?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#1715 May 15, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>So they win by default based on the conditions you determine to be acceptable????
You don't see anything wrong with your form of vetting?
Perhaps it's your LIE-beral perception? I'm thinking; YES, that is most certainly the case.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#1716 May 15, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it's your LIE-beral perception? I'm thinking; YES, that is most certainly the case.
As a 'con' artist, I'm sure you see it from that point son.

“BILLARY 2016 ”

Since: Aug 07

Location hidden

#1717 May 16, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Too bad there is not ONE SHRED of evidence released to this date that supports your claim. And he is not being tried for 1st degree murder, moron. And if the court cannot prove his guilt BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, he will walk. Sucks to be Martin.
Sucks to be Martin? lmao He's dead and has no more worries.

George, on the other hand, had to be on suicide watch. Then the idiot lied about his finances. Juries love liars.

So, lets see;
1st degree murder.
2nd degree murder.
Manslaughter
It doesn't really matter because they ALL COME WITH A PRISON SENTENCE.

George is going to prison (without his little gun) and he will be some big black guys bitch. The irony is delicious.

Have a great day, zippy.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#1718 May 16, 2013
x0x0x wrote:
<quoted text>Sucks to be Martin? lmao He's dead and has no more worries.
George, on the other hand, had to be on suicide watch. Then the idiot lied about his finances. Juries love liars.
So, lets see;
1st degree murder.
2nd degree murder.
Manslaughter
It doesn't really matter because they ALL COME WITH A PRISON SENTENCE.
George is going to prison (without his little gun) and he will be some big black guys bitch. The irony is delicious.
Have a great day, zippy.
And the prosecution's top witness, the girlfriend on the phone, has also been caught lying to the prosecution as to her whereabouts during his funeral.

And you have yet to lay out the prosecution's case that proves Zimmerman guilty of anything based on the EVIDENCE that has been released thus far. Why is that???
spocko

Oakland, CA

#1719 May 16, 2013
A serious reality check for all you gunloons out there!
April 19, 2013. Watertown MA police shootout with two gunmen, one of which did not even have a gun. 8 cops, 6 squad cars and 300 bullets being exchanged almost all of them by the police. One dead suspect, one officer almost dead as a result of friendly fire. So here we have two untrained shooters (one without a gun) and 8 trained policeman, 300 bullets resulting in one dead suspect, one policeman almost dead, shot by one of their own, and the second suspect getting away – plus a number of houses in the neighborhood full of bullet holes. How exactly does this support the gunloon’s claim that any armed civilian can stop a crime let alone a criminal, when 8 cops and 300 bullets can’t?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#1720 May 16, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>I think someone forgot to tell David.
That Hitler was a Christian?

GayDavy is too busy posting spam to read his own posts, let alone others.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#1721 May 16, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
And the prosecution's top witness, the girlfriend on the phone, has also been caught lying to the prosecution as to her whereabouts during his funeral.
Almost caught lying after the fact, wow, that's powerful stuff...

Compared to the pedophile telling four stories (so far) including the boy he assault grabbing his gun.

Of course, the pedophile won't be able to tell any of his stories, he's been caught lying to the COURT already.

His ugly fat lying wife is up next.

Popcorn?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#1722 May 16, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
And you have yet to lay out the prosecution's case that proves Zimmerman guilty of anything based on the EVIDENCE
{click}
.
"Apparent facts discovered through logical inquiry that would lead a reasonably intelligent and prudent person to believe that an accused person has committed a crime, thereby warranting his or her prosecution, or that a Cause of Action has accrued, justifying a civil lawsuit."
Evidence.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#1723 May 16, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Almost caught lying after the fact, wow, that's powerful stuff...
Compared to the pedophile telling four stories (so far) including the boy he assault grabbing his gun.
Of course, the pedophile won't be able to tell any of his stories, he's been caught lying to the COURT already.
His ugly fat lying wife is up next.
Popcorn?
Snicker: http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/06/prosecutors...

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#1724 May 16, 2013
"The woman’s lie demonstrates another hole in the second-degree murder case against Zimmerman.'
Yeah

Honolulu, HI

#1725 May 16, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
And the prosecution's top witness, the girlfriend on the phone, has also been caught lying to the prosecution as to her whereabouts during his funeral.
And you have yet to lay out the prosecution's case that proves Zimmerman guilty of anything based on the EVIDENCE that has been released thus far. Why is that???
The prosecution will lay the case out.

That's the way it's supposed to work.

But you keep speculating son.... like everything else.

“Redhead Phase”

Since: Apr 13

Scappoose, Oregon USA

#1726 May 16, 2013
In other headlines "gun owners make case for child control" (stop cranking out criminals that want to go kill people)

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#1727 May 16, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
That Hitler was a Christian?
GayDavy is too busy posting spam to read his own posts, let alone others.
"The American citizens are intelligent, well educated, and awake to the preservation their liberties; every where armed, and trained to the use of arms, and comprising a militia of nearly a million of free men, Are such a country, and such a people, in jeopardy; as to their freedom, from the existence a standing army of ten thousand men?"

- John Bristed,[THE RESOURCES OF THE OF AMERICA; OR, A VIEW OF THE AGRICULTURAL, COMMERCIAL, MANUFACTURING, FINANCIAL, POLITICAL, LITERARY, MORAL AND RELIGIOUS CAPACITY AND CHARACTER or THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. BY JOHN BRISTED, COUNSELLOR AT LAW. AUTHOR OF THE RESOURCES Of THE BRITISH EMPIRE. PUBLISHED BY JAMES EASTBURN & CO. AT THE LITERARY ROOMS, BROADWAY, CORNHR OF PINE STREET. Abraham Paul, printer. 1818

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 17 min TurkanaBoy 133,654
Ruble crisis could shake Putin's grip on power 23 min Enter 115
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 45 min Enter 294,285
Anti-gay Tenn. billboard stirs religion debate 46 min cpeter1313 3,002
Issa's big dud: No White House connection to IR... 48 min Bob 1
Senate, CIA agree torture program was mismanaged 1 hr Emperor 2
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Guru 182,028
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr johnplustwomore 1,155,536
Obama: Racism, bias in US will take time to tackle 5 hr spocko 447
Ben Carson: Race Relations Have 'Gotten Worse' ... 6 hr barefoot2626 921
US and Cuba move to normalize ties, open embassy 10 hr tha Professor 252
More from around the web