• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Ricin' sent to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg

sangha said:
When Muslims engage in terrorism, it's their religion's fault

When right wingers engage in terrorism, it's the governments fault
Click to expand...

The last one many times is true to some degree, sorry. Look, if abortion was ever banned again I have little doubt the left would be rioting and burning **** to the ground and someone from the left might just take a shot at a government official for it. This stuff happens and when the government is out making people angry it happens a great deal more.
 
sangha said:
When Muslims engage in terrorism, it's their religion's fault

When right wingers engage in terrorism, it's the governments fault
Click to expand...
And when left wingers engage in terrorism, it's nobody's fault.
 
Henrin said:
When people have their rights threatened or worse violated by the government it should surprise no one that some of decide to fight back.

I realize you want to make this all about guns laws and how crazy the right is, but like it or not we have a right to bear arms and some people will do something about it when they feel that right is threatened. The same is really true for any right that the government acts on. Someone somewhere might just fight back and if that happens no one should be surprised.
Click to expand...
Seen this reaction from many, and it reads as soft apologism from my perspective.

On the contrary, the left has a more than ample amount of crackpots (9/11 truthers, environmentally motivated terrorists), but that's not the point. To deny the overwhelming propensity for those willing to take such action based on restrictive gun laws to reside on the fringe right is naive. Also, the letters themselves referred to gun laws.
 
humbolt said:
And when left wingers engage in terrorism, it's nobody's fault.
Click to expand...

that's because the left excuses individual pathologies as being caused by society. Criminals cannot help their violence-society made them do it
 
a351 said:
Which fringe at the current moment seems more likely to threaten or assassinate public officials on the count of restrictive gun laws?
Click to expand...






How do you know that some wacko isn't upset because s/he is afraid that Bloomberg will block access to huge soft drinks?
 
TurtleDude said:
he's an ever widening asshole who is a joke and a conspirator against our second amendment rights
Click to expand...
Asshole is ample description. Terrorist is not. Simple as that.
 
a351 said:
Seen this reaction from many, and it reads as soft apologism from my perspective.

On the contrary, the left has a more than ample amount of crackpots (9/11 truthers, environmentally motivated terrorists), but that's not the point. To deny the overwhelming propensity for those willing to take such action based on restrictive gun laws to reside on the fringe right is naive. Also, the letters themselves referred to gun laws.
Click to expand...

You can think of it as however you want, but what I'm telling you is the truth of the matter. When people feel threatened they will fight back. It's part of our nature.
 
a351 said:
To some apparently. To deny the likely politics of extremists willing to assassinate public officials on the count of restrictive gun laws is absurd.
Click to expand...

Your irrational reaction proves my point.:mrgreen:
 
shrubnose said:
How do you know that some wacko isn't upset because s/he is afraid that Bloomberg will block access to huge soft drinks?
Click to expand...
The letter specifically referenced gun laws.
 
Jack Hays said:
Your irrational reaction proves my point.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...
But yeah, on the real, which political fringe is currently invested in batting back against restrictive gun laws? One can be objective without being completely obtuse you know.
 
Jack Hays said:
And wacko letter writers always think logically and write truthfully.:lamo:lamo
Click to expand...
The attempt to take an elected officials life is the punishable offense, the reasoning behind it is largely immaterial. I'm struggling to see any potential motive behind masking his true intentions, especially when the individual was apparently seeking to curb legislation he saw as unacceptable with said threat.
 
a351 said:
But yeah, on the real, which political fringe is currently invested in batting back against restrictive gun laws? One can be objective without being completely obtuse you know.
Click to expand...

OK. If I have to pick, lefties are more likely to be dangerous on this issue. From Mother Jones:

How the Left "Blew It" on Gun Control
Author Dan Baum says liberals should start listening to "Gun Guys" if they want to end the bloodshed.

—By Deanna Pan
Mon Mar. 11, 2013 3:00 AM PDT

Dan Baum is a self-professed "weirdo hybrid"—a card-carrying liberal from suburban New Jersey whose affinity for firearms places him firmly in the opposite camp. For his latest book, Gun Guys: A Road Trip, the former New Yorker scribe embarked on a 15,000-mile cross-country journey to figure out why millions of Americans—himself included—instinctively cling to their guns.

His timing was notable. For this past December, just as Baum's book was going to press, news began pouring out about a horrific incident at an elementary in Newtown, Connecticut. Months later, Democrats and Republicans are clashing over gun-control at every level of government, and Baum worries that the voices of ordinary gun owners are being tuned out of the debate.

Over a dubious cell-phone connection—Baum was driving in the Montana boonies—the author took me inside the mind of a gun guy as we discussed the lure of the NRA, the left's screw-ups, the merits of the AR-15, and why the "guns don't kill people" refrain makes sense—at least to a gun guy.:mrgreen:
 
a351 said:
The attempt to take an elected officials life is the punishable offense, the reasoning behind it is largely immaterial. I'm struggling to see any potential motive behind masking his true intentions, especially when the individual was apparently seeking to curb legislation he saw as unacceptable with said threat.
Click to expand...

Of course you're struggling. It is a fool's errand to expect logic from such a person.:cool:
 
Jack Hays said:
OK. If I have to pick, lefties are more likely to be dangerous on this issue. From Mother Jones:

How the Left "Blew It" on Gun Control
Author Dan Baum says liberals should start listening to "Gun Guys" if they want to end the bloodshed.

—By Deanna Pan
Mon Mar. 11, 2013 3:00 AM PDT

Dan Baum is a self-professed "weirdo hybrid"—a card-carrying liberal from suburban New Jersey whose affinity for firearms places him firmly in the opposite camp. For his latest book, Gun Guys: A Road Trip, the former New Yorker scribe embarked on a 15,000-mile cross-country journey to figure out why millions of Americans—himself included—instinctively cling to their guns.

His timing was notable. For this past December, just as Baum's book was going to press, news began pouring out about a horrific incident at an elementary in Newtown, Connecticut. Months later, Democrats and Republicans are clashing over gun-control at every level of government, and Baum worries that the voices of ordinary gun owners are being tuned out of the debate.

Over a dubious cell-phone connection—Baum was driving in the Montana boonies—the author took me inside the mind of a gun guy as we discussed the lure of the NRA, the left's screw-ups, the merits of the AR-15, and why the "guns don't kill people" refrain makes sense—at least to a gun guy.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Your article doesn't support that. At all. Did you read it perchance?
 
a351 said:
Your article doesn't support that. At all. Did you read it perchance?
Click to expand...

It makes clear that the lines are blurred. That's my only point. In a world that has seen the Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhof gang and the Weather Underground it's an absurdity to claim that political violence is the exclusive property of the right.:mrgreen:
 
Jack Hays said:
It makes clear that the lines are blurred.

That's my only point. In a world that has seen the Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhof gang and the Weather Underground it's an absurdity to claim that political violence is the exclusive property of the right.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Hardly. Your article clearly points to the subject being an extremely rare example. It also fails to indicate any propensity for violence.

Which is why I've made no such claim. You don't read well. :mrgreen:
 
a351 said:
Hardly. Your article clearly points to the subject being an extremely rare example. It also fails to indicate any propensity for violence.

Which is why I've made no such claim. You don't read well. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Tsk tsk. Getting defensive. Is it your claim now that your posts have not had the aim of emphasizing violence from the right? Really? You want to go with that?:lamo
 
Jack Hays said:
Is it your claim now that your posts have not had the aim of emphasizing violence from the right? Really? You want to go with that?:lamo
Click to expand...
Yep. I've made no claim that political violence or violence in general is an arena dominated by the right, only that the current political climate obviously points to anti gun-control activists residing nearly exclusively on the right. Go ahead and dig up some quotes that would suggest otherwise. :lamo
 
TurtleDude said:
still stuck on that stupid lie that Loughner-a democrat-was a tea bagger? in fact most of the well publicized recent attacks were perpetrated by left wingers

You have made that moronic claim several times and have constantly been tattooed on it yet you continue.
Click to expand...


No matter how much evidence is provided, you choose to live in this delusion that loughner wasn't a bagger. You are in denial and refuse to accept the truth. Face it. Loughner was a bagger.
 
99percenter said:
No matter how much evidence is provided, you choose to live in this delusion that loughner wasn't a bagger. You are in denial and refuse to accept the truth. Face it. Loughner was a bagger.
Click to expand...

numerous posters have commented that your claim about loughner is nothing more than hysterical bald faced lies



back up your claim-you cannot


He was not a republican or a tea party member.

Jared Loughner, Suspect in Giffords Shooting, Was Registered as an Independent


Jared Lee Loughner a Registered Independent; Didn't Vote in 2010 - Political Hotsheet - CBS News


Jared Loughner Independent | Arizona Shooting | Media | Mediaite
NOw you have been educated yet again. Smart money suggests that you will continue to spew this silly lie however

Face it, you are completely dishonest on this issue
 
a351 said:
The letter specifically referenced gun laws.
Click to expand...






Does that tell us that this wacky correspondent isn't actually more upset over the huge soft drink ban kerfuffle?

No.

We won't know the full truth until after this evildoer is captured and interrogated under extreme rigor.

Until then, many possibilities are open.






"If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there." ~ Lewis Carroll
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Why do people automatically assume it is a right-wing nutjob?
Click to expand...

Progressives. While they protest in the streets, destroy property, steal property, assault people, worship Marx, idolize Ernesto Guevara, defend Islamic terrorists, defend violent "direct action" groups and champion for a socioeconomic socialist coup of our country while they call everyone else radicals.

Besides, I didn't know knocking off a traitor was considered "right wing." Were the Bolsheviks "right wing?" was Kim Jong Il "right wing" was Pol Pot "right wing?" was Ernesto "Che" Guevara "right wing?" was Castro "right wing?"

All used fascist methods as a means to take power or dictate.... Hey much like Bloomberg attempting to play dictator.


We've as a society have gone way beyond the "right wing/left wing" bull****. Today all we have are fascists and they come mostly from the left but plenty still come from the right.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Progressives. While they protest in the streets, destroy property, steal property, assault people, worship Marx, idolize Ernesto Guevara, defend Islamic terrorists, defend violent "direct action" groups and champion for a socioeconomic socialist coup of our country while they call everyone else radicals.

Besides, I didn't know knocking off a traitor was considered "right wing." Were the Bolsheviks "right wing?" was Kim Jong Il "right wing" was Pol Pot "right wing?" was Ernesto "Che" Guevara "right wing?" was Castro "right wing?"

All used fascist methods as a means to take power or dictate.... Hey much like Bloomberg attempting to play dictator.


We've as a society have gone way beyond the "right wing/left wing" bull****. Today all we have are fascists and they come mostly from the left but plenty still come from the right.
Click to expand...

Facism is right wing. If you are a fascist you aren't a left winger. Plain and simple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom