| Author | Message | ||
     Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/media/ricochet/mad-d ogs-englishmen-guns-comics It's refreshing to hear an expat Englishman speak truth. Short form, If you want to take away our guns, go for it. Do it legally. Pass laws. AND, explain how you can't get rid of 11 million illegal aliens, but want to go door to door and steal the property, at gun point, of 130 million+ Americans. Some of whom will shoot people in authority who show up and threaten to kill them if they don't give up their property. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423183/rant- second-amendment-repeal And, a historical perspective on gun control. http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ngn-download-view.htm Here's a nice little essay to show people and ask their opinion. ( I agree, pretty much in total ) http://jpfo.org/articles-assd02/marko.htm | ||
| Aesquire |
http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/jp_seven.htm Interesting essay on who is in favor of sending armed men ( not themselves, of course, but some nice tame storm troopers ) to your house to steal your stuff at gunpoint. | ||
| Rick_a |
US gun control origins: Global gun control history: *Warning* GRAPHIC IMAGES The truth about gun control: Gun control in Australia: Gun control in the UK: I don't care if you like guns or not, but gun control and the anti 2nd folks do not care about public safety. The goal is simply for common people to not have guns. That is the truth and if you don't believe it you're completely blind to the facts of the issue. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Just had time to watch that first one. It's well done, and matches a first hand historical account I read from somebody who was there organizing during the civil rights movement. The Deacons of Defense (and groups like them) were, to a large degree, armed black veterans who had discipline, military training and experience, and who asserted their second amendment rights to enable others to pursue all their other constitutional rights. | ||
| Dragonslayer |
Thanks for sharing those. Guns have only two enemies: rust, and politicians. If we don't stand up for our rights we could lose them. | ||
| Thumper74 |
Crazy question... As a gun owner, who embraces everything, tacticool, deer hunting, self-defense pistols, clay pigeons, etc. I'd like to defend our freedoms, but have a hard time with the NRA. It seems like the Salvation Army of gun not for profits... How do I support this without open carrying my AR? | ||
| Mnscrounger |
Q: How do I support this without open carrying my AR? A: With your membership. Yes, the moment you join, they offer to extend your membership "for just a few dollars more", and letters for this initiative or that need money every three weeks. You can ignore all of those appeal letters if you wish. But the reality is, (and we all know it) money buys lobbyists, and lobbyists run Congress. The primary difference between the NRA lobbyists, and the Brady Campaign lobbyists, is over four million NRA dues paying voters. If you support your 2A rights, the only thing that keeps the congressional votes going the way you want them, is politicians' memory of the 1994 elections, and the NRA lobbyists reminding them how many votes they deliver. They may seem extreme to some, to quote Barry Goldwater, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." If there were really one Million Moms marching, we would need ten times that to keep our rights. It's an open secret that the anti self defense lobby has only money, and sways few voters. NRA members never forgive a betrayal, even by a life long friend. Example, (just one of many), here: http://www.actionamerica.org/guns/swbetray.html That's the kind of clout that keeps Congress from destroying your civil rights with a middle of the night vote. Join. Like your friends, you don't have to agree on everything, but you can trust they've got your back. | ||
| Zac4mac |
It looks like I'll get to be the rich uncle I wished I would get. I hope my nephew keeps the guns he gets out of the hands of the gubmint. Z | ||
| Pwnzor |
Waiting in the Orlando airport, watching the news. They have the father of that piece of shit in Oregon telling the reporter that the GUNS are at fault, THEY are the killers. What a f*cking idiot. I can't imagine being that completely stupid to suggest that an inanimate object is to blame for anything. How about your son, buddy? How about the fact that he lived in your house and had 13 guns you didn't know about? I know, the solution is to let the government control everything, come into the house and conduct regular searches, because we as individuals cannot be expected to act responsibly, or even control what's going on in our own houses. | ||
| Ducbsa |
I had the impression that Dad had little contact with the shooter. Of course, the MSM would hide that since it doesn't fit the Narrative. | ||
| Sifo |
MSM alter the truth to hammer it into fitting their agenda? How could anyone ever think the media could even consider such a thing? It's not like they would ever try to make a black guy in to a white guy?  http://www.infowars.com/cnn-turns-mixed-race-oregon-shooter-into-a-white-man/ Well perhaps they would. Funny thing, but it's hard to find the truth on some basic facts, such as was UCC a gun free zone. Near as I've been able to figure out, and there are conflicting claims on this, would be that Oregon law allows CC on school grounds, but the policy of UCC was that guns are not allowed. I'm not sure how much of this... http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/10/02/the-curious-case-of-oregon-shooter-chris-harper-mercer-a-social-media-profile-shaped-modified-and-deleted/ to believe, but some interesting points are made. Is it really possible that this pathetic A-hole was in fact riled, in part by the black lives matter crowd that BO himself supported? It is interesting that a lot of what's know about the shooter hasn't been released yet. BO was despicable. He was making a speech about politicizing this even, for the purpose of gun control, literally while the bodies were still warm. As horrific as something like this is, it pales in comparison to everyday life in heavily gun controlled Chicago. It's not like someone could ever do such a thing with a knife, right... At least 50 reported to have died in attack on coalmine in Xinjiang in September | ||
| Sifo |
I just tried an experiment. I loaded the above image into a photo editor just to see if I could get the original picture to look like the CNN one by simply adjusting the brightness and contrast. Couldn't even come close. Then I noticed a few other details. The upper lip has been thinned. The nostrils have been narrowed. They actually did some extensive photo-chopping to make him look less black. | ||
| Reepicheep |
You are right Sifo. That's really depressing. | ||
| Hootowl |
http://m.snopes.com/cnn-altered-photo-umpqua-shoot er/ | ||
| Oldog |
None of this surprises me. Some other relevant questions. 1. why does the government permit alteration of the facts in news reporting? 2. why do any of us watch any station that is caught "spinning the story", to "fit the narrative" 3. why not find out what companies support the programming and broadcasters that disseminate LIES, and contact them, support the ones who take a stand against this. 4. putting the grieving father on, whores.. Write your congressmen I do this regularly We know that gun free zones do not work. We know that gun control leads to confiscation. We know that a Disarmed public is a vulnerable public. Why tolerate it? Refuse to do business with anti 2nd A policies, and those that support dissemination of LIES via mass media outlets. Oh and support the NRA. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Thanks Hoot. I stand corrected. | ||
| Hootowl |
If the media hadn't been caught doctoring photos and documents in the past to further their agenda, no one would have believed it in the first place. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
It's false because Snopes said so ?? | ||
| Aesquire |
1. I have no opinion since I have not seen CNN coverage. 2. CNN has lied before. A lot. Their denial is meaningless. 3. Slopes has been wrong. They have a bias on politics. Call it 60/40 to 70/30. 4. People with an agenda will lie. Right or left. Conclusion? Probably fake. Totally Believable. Gun confiscation is an emotionally loaded subject. anti freedom anti gun folk lie all the time. No. More. ALL the time. | ||
| Sifo |
3. Slopes has been wrong. They have a bias on politics. Call it 60/40 to 70/30. Well snopes is either wrong or showing bias in linking the source of this wrong report (assuming it is wrong) to Fox News. It's not very hard trace it back to Conservative Treehouse, who I am not at all familiar with. http://www.dailypundit.com/?p=108092 http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/10/cnn-alters -photo-of-umpqua-killer-chris-harper-mercer-to-mak e-him-look-white/ But if you can say Fox News in the "origins" of it, apparently snopes will. Glad to hear CNN hasn't sunk to this low. I would only expect this sort of thing from MSNBC. | ||
| Hootowl |
I looked for a while before I posted the snopes link. I couldn't find any corroborative evidence that this was ever on cnn. I think snopes is right on this one. | ||
| Sifo |
Wrong to attribute the origins to Fox News though. | ||
| Hootowl |
The only reference to fox was noting that one its employees posted it on her web site. They did not say fox made the claim. | ||
| Sifo |
The only reference to fox was noting that one its employees posted it on her web site. They did not say fox made the claim. When you put them under the heading of "origins", it's a bit more than simply pointing out that an employee posted it.  | ||
| Hootowl |
So...origin, the personal site of fox news' megyn kelly. Pretty sure that's what I said. I don't understand why you think they said it was on fox. They clearly didn't. You just reposted the evidence. | ||
| Greatlaker |
"Gun confiscation is an emotionally loaded subject."---for a nut bar like Aesquire who has posted 11800 times on BadWeb to date. "Not only would gun confiscation be unconstitutional, but nearly 300,000,000 firearms in the hands of private citizens are logistically impossible to seize." Read more at: http://www.forwardprogressives.com/4-gun-nut-talki ng-points-debunked/ http://www.forwardprogressives.com/4-gun-nut-talki ng-points-debunked/ | ||
| Rick_a |
Greatlaker, your links point to an ignorant, ill informed individual. First of all...  The boy just don't look right. How can someone who owns a .243 bolt action rifle demonize another style of firearm? History has shown repeatedly that a skilled shooter with a bolt action rifle can be effective against a vastly superior force both in numbers and equipment. Again, it's the shooter not the equipment. The guy talks like a real neophyte. | ||
| Aesquire |
Lies, damn lies, and statistics. What do you expect from a religious web site for regressive authoritarians? New York and other states already have gun confiscation laws using cosmetic features based on lies. The crime "stats" the regressive cites are false. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Snopes is definitely a little liberally biased. But they are also generally careful in their research and thorough in their citations. I ignore their opinions, and they aren't perfect, but their facts are correct more often then not. |
