Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 179

Thread: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun Mea

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Denio Junction
    Last Seen
    11-13-14 @ 12:09 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,039
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Academia, Media and Govt., probably at the bidding of the elite want a controlled market place from which they enjoy cheap labor and can sell nearly unlimited goods. To keep that in order they need a cradle to the grave element of control. They already do it with 23 to 25%of the so called capitalist society. Once the conversion to socialized medicine is complete its at 40%. A nation with our legal gun owners dependent on the police will require even more govt.


    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    What "socialist agenda" do you see the government pushing? I see a federal government that is just like most others over the history of the nation and particularly so since the Gilded Age of the late 19th Century - basically controlled by the "powers that be"

  2. #102
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Your emotionalism and insults are unwelcome. You retaliation with insult is symptomatic of the whole problem. Your initial response to attack rather than use reason.
    Oh c'mon Guy, I was just joking with ya. You know I like you. I'm sure you were very awake during civics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    And you're also wrong. We're talking about civil rights. You are the one who needs a civics lesson.
    Me? Wrong? Sounds to me like you guys were talking about both. Bet I can quote both subjects in your posts.

    I quite clearly quoted you talking about reactions from perceived gun rights violations did I not, to keep and bear arms is an individual right not a civil right. Perhaps you should have read my post rather than getting all bent out of shape because I joked that you fell asleep in civics.

    Calm down Guy, you've already demonstrated you have nothing to teach me on civics by stating something that is false regarding civil rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    But I have neither time nor inclination to give it to you.
    Why Guy does this mean we can't be friends anymore? Well Guy if I thought we weren't friends I don't think I could bare it. (In my best Doc Holliday)
    Last edited by Spartacus FPV; 01-13-13 at 01:38 PM.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  3. #103
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,695

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by RLN View Post

    Oh, yeah, that Executive Order thing. If he does do anything concerning that, I'm willing to believe that it will be elements that will address the following things that the courts will uphold:

    • He should end the "gun show loophole" to force people who buy guns at a gun show or through private sales and online shopping to have a background check: 92% of Americans favor this position per Gallup, while PPP puts support at 76%.
    • Obama should seek to ban high-capacity ammunition clips that contain more than 10 bullets: CNN/ORC, Gallup, Pew, PPP, and YouGov all show at least 53% of Americans in favor of this policy.
    • Obama should seek to ban high-capacity ammunition clips that contain more than 10 bullets: CNN/ORC, Gallup, Pew, PPP, and YouGov all show at least 53% of Americans in favor of this policy.
    • He should seek ways to ensure that people with poor mental health records do not get a gun: CNN/ORC found that 92% Americans did not want Americans with mental health problems to be in possession of a gun; PPP took it one step farther and discovered that 63% of Americans want people to be required to take a health exam before buying a gun. Obama should obviously prevent felons convicted of a violent crime from owning a gun: 94% and 92% approve of that measure, per PPP and CNN/ORC respectively.
    • Obama should look to ban outright bullets that explode or are designed to break through a bullet-proof vest: Pew found that 56% favor this position.
    • He should try to make sure that guns, even if not recently purchased, would be registered with a government or law enforcement agency: CNN/ORC finds 78% agree with that policy.
    • Obama should try to make it more difficult to buy ammunition and/or guns over the internet: 69% of Americans wanted to ban these practices, according to PPP.


    I do agree with the Guardian on the assault weapon ban using the EO; if he does do it, it should be done legislatively. But Obama needs to do this while having a narrow window to complete this.

    My personal opinion, is that the GOP controlled house is going to go along with the vast majority of those elements I showed you; they are already not standing well with that "fiscal cliff" thing and did not fare well in the Senate in last November's election, so they are sitting in those seats in the House--and sitting nervously.
    Mandating that private citizens conduct background checks before transferring a firearm in a casual sale is, first off, totally unenforceable and secondly, well beyond the powers of the federal government which is only allowed to regulate interstate commerce.

    If he tries to ban "high capacity" magazines he is putting the private citizens at risk because he KNOWS that criminals will not adhere to such a rule and it will be evidenced by police and military having those magazines for the purpose of engaging just such a threat.

    If he wants to address mental health issues that's great but he'd better be careful how those assessments are done to make damned sure that they are only done when reasonable cause exists to do one.

    The very idea that you would put something in your list regarding exploding bullets and armor piercing bullets is a sure indication that you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about.

    Federal registration is a clear red line and is totally intolerable. It is also totally unenforceable and will lead to an underground firearms economy just like banning booze and banning drugs did.

    Making it more difficult to purchase ammo also puts the lawful population at risk and, like registration, will simply create an underground economy.




    All that being said....I don't see one God blessed thing in your list that does anything to address violence. It's all about controlling gun owners and doesn't step so much as a pinky toe into the waters of making schools and shopping malls and movie theaters any safer. Why don't you just admit it, you really couldn't care less about safety as long as you get to mess with some completely innocent lawful citizen. You're a bully and worse than that you're a bully who wants to use the power of the state to sanction that bullying.

  4. #104
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,830

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    I figure if conservatives want to have a reasonable discussion about guns they'll stop bringing up Hitler.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  5. #105
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,830

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    Mandating that private citizens conduct background checks before transferring a firearm in a casual sale is, first off, totally unenforceable and secondly, well beyond the powers of the federal government which is only allowed to regulate interstate commerce.

    If he tries to ban "high capacity" magazines he is putting the private citizens at risk because he KNOWS that criminals will not adhere to such a rule and it will be evidenced by police and military having those magazines for the purpose of engaging just such a threat.

    If he wants to address mental health issues that's great but he'd better be careful how those assessments are done to make damned sure that they are only done when reasonable cause exists to do one.

    The very idea that you would put something in your list regarding exploding bullets and armor piercing bullets is a sure indication that you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about.

    Federal registration is a clear red line and is totally intolerable. It is also totally unenforceable and will lead to an underground firearms economy just like banning booze and banning drugs did.

    Making it more difficult to purchase ammo also puts the lawful population at risk and, like registration, will simply create an underground economy.




    All that being said....I don't see one God blessed thing in your list that does anything to address violence. It's all about controlling gun owners and doesn't step so much as a pinky toe into the waters of making schools and shopping malls and movie theaters any safer. Why don't you just admit it, you really couldn't care less about safety as long as you get to mess with some completely innocent lawful citizen. You're a bully and worse than that you're a bully who wants to use the power of the state to sanction that bullying.
    Why is federal registration intolerable?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #106
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Now you're just drawing an artificial distinction. All rights are civil rights, because they are rights of an individual as against the state. The state doesn't grant any civil rights, it merely recognizes them. Equal protection under the law is a civil right the same as the right to gun ownership is a civil right.

    You're just trying to justify the use of violence where it simply cannot be done. You should be ashamed of yourself. Moreover, you are being foolish. Violent resistance doesn't work. Passive resistance is how to win these sorts of battles, as MLK and Gandhi have shown in the past.

    To repeat, if you have true courage, you will not resist violently, you will resist peacefully, and go to jail if necessary to support your rights.
    Sometimes passive resistance is the correct/effective manner to resist tyrannical infringement of civil rights. Sometimes armed resistance is the correct/effective manner to do so. It depends on the situation, and each situation is unique.

    It is my opinion that passive resistance will be ineffective regarding the preservation of the 2nd amendment at this time.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  7. #107
    Weekend Political Pundit
    Bob N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,821

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    There is a Class III gun store 2 blocks from me. I happen to know of each one in my state.
    Have fun sitting around and looking at it. But that sure is an expensive hobby as far as I'm concerned.
    "The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations." `Thomas Jefferson

  8. #108
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:45 AM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,824

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Why is federal registration intolerable?
    Because it doesn't comply with the Tiarht Amendments that get attached to all manner of bills
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  9. #109
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    Sometimes passive resistance is the correct/effective manner to resist tyrannical infringement of civil rights. Sometimes armed resistance is the correct/effective manner to do so. It depends on the situation, and each situation is unique.

    It is my opinion that passive resistance will be ineffective regarding the preservation of the 2nd amendment at this time.
    I don't agree. You have two choices, either to passively resist, and go to jail to show the importance of the right to gun ownership, or you can, what, fight a civil war? That latter option is clearly crazy. Armed resistance is for fighting Nazis, fighting only the most tyrannical and oppressive governments that is actually out to do physical harm to innocents on an egregious and widespread basis. Violent resistance is not for fighting excessive regulation. It takes something like the holocaust to make violent resistance morally justifiable. Gun confiscation does not make violent resistance morally justifiable. Violent resistance is not worth considering, and although I appreciate your politeness, I do not want to give the dignity of serious discussion to such a suggestion.

  10. #110
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun

    Quote Originally Posted by RLN View Post
    Have fun sitting around and looking at it. But that sure is an expensive hobby as far as I'm concerned.
    A $200 tax stamp isn't so bad. I don't even like full auto though, not all that fun. I mostly shoot 22's, its cheap.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •