|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> 2 girls shot /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1365865919 Message started by bill67 on 04/13/13 at 08:11:59 |
|
Title: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/13/13 at 08:11:59 The guy that shot the 2 girls just learned to shoot on a police program.The more people that learn to shoot will make a lot more shootings than what we had in the past.If you don't believe that is because you haven't been around long enough. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by WD on 04/13/13 at 08:34:51 Anyone with functional arms and hands can learn how to shoot. I have an autistic cousin who's dumber than bean dip and can shoot the wings off a fly at 50 yards (fly sized/shaped dots on the target paper). No formal training required, it wasn't hard for him to "borrow" one of his older brother's rifles and figure out how it worked. The bigger issue is all the video game/movie addicted loons who think that the real world reflects all the "harmless" gore and violence depicted in their favorite past time. Real world shooting incidents were not all that common when high schools still had JROTC and rifle ranges (instead of, maybe, at best, pellet guns), the BSA was allowed to teach the shooting arts with actual military range officers running the program, people still hunted for food instead of trophies (you can't eat antlers, and a wasted shot would get your ass beat when you got home, ammo is expensive, make every shot count)... It isn't whether or not more people know how to shoot. It is whether or not they have the ability to grasp what the consequences of their actions will be. The entire crop of kids raised with the "touchy feely self esteem before else, can't let them fail at anything because you might damage their egos" sissy mentality have zero concept of personal responsibility, consequences, or proper ethics. Try again Bill. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/13/13 at 12:19:11 Like I said you haven't been around long enough. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/13/13 at 18:28:26 5F5451510B0A3D0 wrote:
Still not a reason to surrender our country to a dictator. If a million people were shot tomorrow it still is not enough justification to strip us of our right to defend ourselves from the government, a right we need all the more desperately these days. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/13/13 at 19:37:16 The government isn't after you.How can you even think something like that.Crazy |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/13/13 at 19:57:51 The solution is easy - they should just have shot the shooter before he shot them. If that fails, they should shoot the bullet. I dont know why they cant remember this simple rule. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/13/13 at 20:26:57 7D76737329281F0 wrote:
you think the government isnt out to get you? you have been brainwashed by the liberal agenda. we already knew that though. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/13/13 at 20:39:17 5A55434355405955425355300 wrote:
you think the government isnt out to get you? you have been brainwashed by the liberal agenda. we already knew that though.[/quote] Dude the govt can crush you any second they please. Your guns are not gonna make any difference. How many times to tell you this. You have a tank ? Not your gas tank, something like an M16 ? Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/13/13 at 23:14:58 5C57525208093E0 wrote:
Because they sure act like it. It's like they've never even heard of the Constitution. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by WD on 04/13/13 at 23:17:27 4A6F606B4F62626B600E0 wrote:
Because they sure act like it. It's like they've never even heard of the Constitution.[/quote] It's the little print they wipe their backsides with every single day... ::) |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/14/13 at 07:33:26 2A2B3037382D31590 wrote:
you think the government isnt out to get you? you have been brainwashed by the liberal agenda. we already knew that though.[/quote] Dude the govt can crush you any second they please. Your guns are not gonna make any difference. How many times to tell you this. You have a tank ? Not your gas tank, something like an M16 ? Cool. Srinath.[/quote] first off an m16 is a rifle not a tank. ::) second, i dont expect to stand one man against the government and survive. i will fight though, and they will know i existed. i wouldnt expect you to understand. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/14/13 at 21:41:23 I learned to shoot in High School in the FFA Program. I haven't killed anyone yet. Someone's gonna get shot everyday, some deserve it, some don't. I don't like it but its a fact of life! Conneticcut had an assault weapons ban. I guess it will work just as wonderful in the other 49 states as it did Conneticut. You're a moron if you think you can do away with guns. We need armed gaurds to kill these crazy pilled up bastards, not more stupid laws that wont work. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/14/13 at 21:55:54 "first off an m16 is a rifle not a tank. Roll Eyes second, i dont expect to stand one man against the government and survive. i will fight though, and they will know i existed. i wouldnt expect you to understand." I understand and believe. Sri hasn't went shopping for ammo lately. Theres none on the shelves. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/14/13 at 21:57:05 5D79747E797778646279747562100 wrote:
A fantastic point and I will add that it is the fault of the law with respect to a false sense of security that this tragedy happened. Had people come to terms sooner with what 45 said then this may not have happened. A placard that says "Gun Free Zone" may as well say "Criminals and Psychos Are Safe Here" because that is what it means. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/14/13 at 22:07:56 All of the major gun manufactuers except Remington are moving to the gun friendly south and southwest. Everyone except Remington has cancelled their government contracts. The gun enthusiast (hunters and target shooters) are going to boycott Remington, even their ammo. I bought a Colt the other day just because it will be one of the last ones made in Conneticut. The whole North is gonna outlaw guns and have hardly no access to them. Be interesting to see what happens. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/14/13 at 22:25:03 474C49491312250 wrote:
They're buying those 1.6 billion bullets, rifles and tanks to target practice with and shoot fish poachers. How many of our boys did George Bush kill and maim? They wanna do away with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to kill off the old people. They're arming the Social Security Offices, ever wonder why. The day is coming soon you wont get another check. They created the Dept. Of Homeland Security. Ever wonder what that's all about? They listen in on our phone conversations and email. Did building #7 fall on its on? Bill you've been around a long time. You should have noticed the change by now. Leave It To Beaver or the Ed Sullivan show is no longer mainstream TV. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by SkyHigh on 04/15/13 at 00:22:55 33383D3D6766510 wrote:
Every form and instance of government since the dawn of man has had a gradual creep toward becoming more powerful than those it governs. At least two factors are responsible for this: 1) those in government always seek more power (perhaps that's human nature); and 2) a large percentage of the citizenry seek safety and solace from government. "Safety and solace" in ancient times came in the form of the king's army defending the town from marauding hordes; in modern times it usually comes in the form of an "entitlement" check. The Founding Fathers knew this and purposely crafted this country as a constitutional republic with checks and balances of power within the federal branch and between the federal branch and the states. What's transpired in this country since at least Woodrow Wilson is the federal government growing increasingly more powerful than the states, the presidency becoming even more powerful than a monarch, and the rights of individuals and individual liberty itself being denigrated and even, at times, ignored. The root of the ascendance of power of the federal government over the states and the individual (every American citizen) is Leftism. Some prefer to call it Liberalism, but it is, nonetheless, on the left side of the political scale. On the Far Left is Totalitarianism; on the Far Right is Libertarianism. To the right of center is Conservatism (the belief in individual liberty and small government); to the left of center is Liberalism (the belief in collective rights over individual rights, and of a strong government over individuals). America is currently a center-right country, with liberals accounting for just 21% of the population. However, with the vast majority of the media (television, magazines, newspapers, movies) and the educational system dominated by liberals, left-wing thought is continuously rained upon Americans since birth. So there is the gradual "acceptance" of leftism over time due to the constant barrage of it. It's obvious that our country is sliding towards a central form of government, with the federal government ruling the roost. Unless we wake up soon -- and I don't think we will -- the U.S. will probably be a fully socialist state within 40 years. The nature of man to chip away at his God-given liberty and inalienable rights seems inevitable. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 01:14:48 Sorry I made a typo - Not M16, M26 - this guy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M26_Pershing And one of these is on display round here - 437B6958797778100 wrote:
Yea I agree and it could have been way sooner if we had elected the communist Mitt "I pay 13% in taxes and want them lowered even further so I can hire your sorry ass and say I am a job creator" RMoney and Paul "my middle name is Money like my kiss ass boss's last name" Ryan. "Government" is not the answer, it is just a better answer than "corporation". In your words we would either be socialists or we'd be slaves to a big corporation. It is just the 2 options we will have. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/15/13 at 02:55:24 We are already slaves to big corporations and banks. The Billionaires pump billions of dollars into campaign funds and determine the outcome of the elections. The big boys create a major fock up twice and the gov. bails them out twice and the Federal Reserve bails them out again behind our backs. I think everyone in the US should get every credit card they can get their hands on, max them all out and not pay a dime back. Its time we stuck together and fight back, take back whats ours!. We can do it without firing a shot. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 07:06:18 We did that ... housing bubble ... They went crying for a bail out and the a$$holes handed it to them. BTW when you buy stuff isn't stuff going to another big corporation ? So what you do is - You should get cash advance, and buy bars of gold. That way you shaft the bank and dont give $ to a corp. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/15/13 at 07:24:03 Gold is risky business right now. We can break the banks and if the gov bails them out this time they'll be riots in the streets, especially with tax hikes, Social Security cuts going on. All we're doing is getting our money back that we never agreed to give in the first place. The tyranny decided that for us. We just have to stick together and become one party minus the 5% who rule and destroy this country.. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/15/13 at 08:57:43 0E2A272D2A242B37312A272631430 wrote:
The problem is not the 5% but the 47% that keeps putting them in power. Welfare is a worse addiction than any drug can put on you and if Obama decides to become President-for-Life or tries to pull a Putin then there won't be much to stop him. There are a couple people on this site who fit the profile of what we free people will be fighting against. It will be a daunting task and there are a lot of sheep the Marxists will be able to intimidate, a huge fight indeed. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/15/13 at 10:28:37 Obama is gonna try his best to run again. He's building a special army, loading up special weapons.He's acting more like a King than a president. Maybe the 47% will realize they'll be the first ones to go, especialy when their Social Security, welfare and food stamps stop. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by SkyHigh on 04/15/13 at 11:02:05 6263787F706579110 wrote:
What is the worst thing that any government can do to any citizen? What is the worst thing that any corporation can do to any citizen? Your answers to both questions will clarify your position. Dhanyawad. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 12:26:25 6F574574555B543C0 wrote:
What is the worst thing that any government can do to any citizen? What is the worst thing that any corporation can do to any citizen? Your answers to both questions will clarify your position. Dhanyawad. [/quote] The answer to both in the non hypothetical sense is "confiscate and kill". The correct question is - in what ratio ? Here is my answer to that. Corporations have a far greater head start inside the USA. Of course the govt has the lead outside ... The proof - we being the "lazy pampered american" had an Occupy wall street - not occupy government or occupy congress. In contrast in the middle east they had - arab spring - well they protested and tossed out the govt/dictator etc etc. As a country we the people mistrust our govt, but we suspect our corporations. Yes Newt Gingrich said Obama will be doing a third term. Read the constitution lately ? Yes yes yes the 47% that voted for RMoney want a communist style govt and Putin is their man they have said. Welfare rolls are not 47% not even in the depths of this recession. Look into this, I dont think there is even 10% of the population on welfare nationwide. Ok these are the stats - Welfare Statistics Total number of Americans on welfare 4,300,000 Total number of Americans on food stamps 46,700,000 Total number of Americans on unemployment insurance 5,600,000 Percent of the US population on welfare 4.1 % Total government spending on welfare annually (not including food stamps or unemployment) $131.9 billion So basically 4.1%. Larger % are on unemployment. This is the site - in case you want to find your own better site - it also has more stats - white vs black vs hispanic vs asian etc etc. http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/ So its not 47% ... Mitt RMoney was wrong ... oh my god, is that even possible ? you could have knocked me over with a feather. All the republicon lies are coming unravelled rather quick ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/15/13 at 12:58:44 45616C66616F607C7A616C6D7A080 wrote:
I don't know about this, there are enough of the rest of us to provide for Obama's 47% base whether it be extortion or work camps. One of the liberal's goals always was to increase poverty and they have done a great job of that. The education system combined with the breakdown of the family has decimated any sense of morality and civic duty. A week ago, someone who shall remain nameless, was pissed because Romney only paid 3 million in taxes and 2 million to charity year before last but this individual was scrounging around for every tax break he could find and probably ended up paying under 10k in taxes. It is this mentality, or the lack thereof, that is destroying our future. I don't think the 47% will go anywhere but will grow to become the 98% of the population that lives under the poverty level. It's never about bringing the poor up but bringing everyone else down. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 13:16:33 I paid a square 23% in taxes for 2012, opposed to RMoney's 13% in 2011. 47% is a lie perpetrated by RMoney. The numbers are listed - its closer to 4%. This 4% grew to 4% from 3% in the recession. An advancing economy will reverse this toward 3, that is if the republicoms will let the economy grow. 47% is the percentage that voted for him. I doubt it is going to grow to 98%. Maybe in his own delusional mind where he paid his fair taxes ... Here is my hypothesis: Reform welfare rolls all you want. The first 10 rounds of welfare reform will remove the ones who deserve it, the veteran with the blown off leg, the pregnant woman with the dead husband, the truly deserving. You will be left with 100% fake and the liars after that. You may lower it to 2%, but that will be all it will go, and those will be the true liars. Liberals have not waged wars in 2 countries unfunded, based on lies and have there fore not had the benefit of getting people off to war. Bringing people back from war has to have them working or they count as unemployed. Lots and lots of lies from the republicommunists, must be devastating to have someone swat them all down. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 13:49:18 16333C37133E3E373C520 wrote:
And more judging, blaming and belittling I see ... Lets get this straight one more time. I paid every penny I owed to taxes. I did not manipulate any one in govt to set my taxes lower than the rest of my fellow citizens. I'll bet RMoney cant say these 2 ... Of course he can, he is a liar. As things stand I paid over 70% more than RMoney did. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by verslagen1 on 04/15/13 at 14:26:57 From your numbers alone... 4% on welfare 6% on unemployment 47% on food stamps There's a large percentage that given up on unemployment cause of the limits. 47% are either unemployed or under-employed, flipping burgers to keep from starving or living under a cardboard box. When my brother finally got on welfare, he died the next year, so it's not easy. And he never collected food stamps. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 14:40:59 6E7D6A6B74797F7D7629180 wrote:
Dude as a percentage 15% are on food stamps, the average length of time for that is 9 months. Here is the number - USDA data released this week shows that the number of Americans receiving food aid from the Supplemental Nutrional Assistance Program (SNAP) hit another all-time high in August. 45.8 million people -- almost 15% of the country -- were enrolled in the program, which replaced Food Stamps in 2008. From - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/number-of-americans-on-snap_n_1074344.html Sorry google seems to be having issues right now, worked like 3 min ago, dunno I had to yahoo it, and it came out like soup, I had to find something relevant. Anyway 15% and 9 month average and you can be on it being unemployed or welfare ... or neither obviously. Not 47%. That 15% probably covers 75%+ welfare + 25-50% of unemployment. Vers - Thanks for staying with numbers and not judging people - not that you ever did, but since I point out when judging is happening, it is fair I point out when its not. On unrelated note: Your tensioner and chain are fixing to be installed later this week after I get the stock FE on. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/15/13 at 15:02:50 7A697E7F606D6B69623D0C0 wrote:
Excellent point, and there is the fact that almost half of the population doesn't pay federal tax at all, I recall that the number not paying exceeding the number paying for the first time in 16th Ammendment history. There are better ways of taking care of the people who really need the assistance and in a timely manner. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 15:29:43 47626D66426F6F666D030 wrote:
Excellent point, and there is the fact that almost half of the population doesn't pay federal tax at all, I recall that the number not paying exceeding the number paying for the first time in 16th Ammendment history. There are better ways of taking care of the people who really need the assistance and in a timely manner. [/quote] Aaaaah we are on to the next lie are we ... No problem I will find details on that and post the site and their conclusion - and not just hypothesize. This is the site - http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3505 - That is center for budget and policy and politics - not some funky site. These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay. As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes. Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009, despite the high unemployment and temporary tax cuts that marked that year.[5] In 2007, a more typical year, the figure was 14 percent. This percentage would be even lower if it reflected other federal taxes that households pay, including excise taxes on gasoline and other items. 14% pay no taxes at all ... and how many of these 14% are in that 15% listed above, not to mention the 4% and 6% ... and remember you can be in more than 1 as most of these people will be. So its not a straight addition - not 14%+15%+4+6 ... There is a lot of numbers and observations in that article. You have to read it. It also covers a percentage of high income earners who paid no taxes at all cos they tax havened themselves in the bahamas or cayman islands. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Trippah on 04/15/13 at 15:33:06 When you look at statistics, please remember that (1) many of the people on welfare are also part time or full time workers - (2) many of the unemployed are not counted because they are either small business folks who folded during the recession or lost jobs so long ago they no longer count. Given that the government back in the 50's felt that 5% unemployment was full employment ...well, :-[ |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/15/13 at 17:17:43 5% is actually very good, vacations, people on maternity/paternity, people moving from city to city for work etc etc theoretically dropping below 5% is almost impossible. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/15/13 at 19:31:36 6C4A5148485950380 wrote:
Bush had 5% for most of his two terms but the problem has always been the changes in measurement. Now you have to look at the labor participation rate to see the real problem. Sure, we are around 9% with the narrowest interpretation of unemployment but those who are no longer looking are not counted, that's just one problem. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/16/13 at 05:27:17 Easy - Unemployment stats - http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/a-decade-of-unemployment/ So apparently it can be under 5%. It was 4% in 2000. 4.7% for 01 (a bad year actually, lots of lay off's I heard on the news, including me), 5.8 for 02, and this was all tech bubble going pop - AKA clinton's era. Then, 6% for 03, 5.5% for 04, 5.1 for 05 (and this was the housing bubble getting pumped and wars being started) 4.6 for 06 and 07, 5.8 for 08 - sharp rise while bush still in office with housing bubble popping, and 9.3 in 09. Deep recession on, bail out's not withstanding. However the theory is that it would have been 25% if not for the bailout. I dont buy that BS. It may have been 25% for a month or 2 before adjusting the right way without us getting deep in debt. Of course I also thought interest rates were going to rise in 08 and the euro was going to just go from strength to strength. Anyway I'd lay down the housing bubble @ bush's door, the wars too. Unemployment and expenses due to vacant/un-sold houses on banks books and people returning from the war - Bush's responsibility. Clinton didn't pump the tech bubble, in fact clinton started the "house flipping" economy in 98 by changing it to 3 years for capital gains. Obama may have his own trail of tears - as yet to be seen, if immigration reform goes haywire and it will, yes, he should have stopped it, If Obama care goes pear shaped and no its not done it yet, but it may, that too should be dropped on to Obama's book. Many more to come. Lost of nuts has been tossed up, lots of fans are running. It remains to be seen. Detroit seems to have missed the sheite with the fan. Its now better than japan. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/13 at 09:32:33 5B5055550F0E390 wrote:
Is there just something wrong with your brain? Feinstein SAID if she could have gotten the votes to take ALL the guns she would have Mr & Mrs America, turn them all in She said that, Bill, BILL, They WANT to disarm us, wake up, accept the facts, stop pretending & for GODS Sake, STOP saying that, its STUPID, Bill.. AND While the people ARE armed, the goobs know they cant do just whatever they want, tho they ARE pushing things pretty hard in spite of the fact that Americans have lots of guns, OUr freedoms are much diminished since the 60's/ |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/16/13 at 09:38:06 Qbama wants to take your guns and kill off all but 10% of the white people.The 10% left will be slaves,ride in the back of the bus.The young white boys will be dragged behind trucks till they die,The young 12 and 13 year old white girls will be well taken care of by their masters. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/13 at 09:40:04 & all that babbling & spittle meant what? Proof youre confused? |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/16/13 at 09:40:34 6F7076716C6B5A6A5A62707C37050 wrote:
Is there just something wrong with your brain? Feinstein SAID if she could have gotten the votes to take ALL the guns she would have Mr & Mrs America, turn them all in She said that, Bill, BILL, They WANT to disarm us, wake up, accept the facts, stop pretending & for GODS Sake, STOP saying that, its STUPID, Bill.. AND While the people ARE armed, the goobs know they cant do just whatever they want, tho they ARE pushing things pretty hard in spite of the fact that Americans have lots of guns, OUr freedoms are much diminished since the 60's/[/quote] Why doesn't the government give up it's guns too? Why do police need high capacity magazines when the public, their employers, aren't allowed to have them? |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/16/13 at 09:42:49 7A656364797E4F7F4F77656922100 wrote:
JOG the sky isn't falling on anybody but you. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/13 at 09:52:22 So, youre saying Feinstein Did NOT say she would have outlawed All guns if she could have gotten enough votes? Are you saying it isnt a Goal of many in government to take the guns? |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/16/13 at 11:08:45 223D3B3C21261727172F3D317A480 wrote:
chirp....chirp...chirp...Huh, the crickets are out in full force... ;D |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/13 at 11:16:16 He knows I can drag up a video of her.. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/16/13 at 11:55:46 It doesn't matter what Feinstein says or what any one person says,Our government doesn't want to take away our guns,They just want some restrictions,Which we should have,Its just common sense. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/13 at 11:58:20 Soo, if she SAYS she wants to take all the guns, it doesnt mean that? |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/16/13 at 12:00:56 She's not the boss,Because she wants to take away the guns really means nothing. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/16/13 at 12:53:35 555E5B5B0100370 wrote:
Ahh, common sense, yes we need more common sense. What religions should we restrict? Do we really need this many different versions of Christianity? And what about the Westboro Baptist church that causes all the trouble? Common sense would say that there are other Baptist churches around and that we won't miss just one. What about Scientology? That is a clear violation of common sense by it's very existence. What newspapers can we restrict? With the internet and environmental concerns can't we hace just one or two national news outlets? Why not restrict people's right to privacy? Let the cops search people if they are suspicious, since we truct the government soo much. If you don't have anything to hide then you won't mind being searched. Anything to save just one child's life. Wouldn't common sense say that we should restrict who people can associate with? I mean, do we really want to have Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts in this day and age? Yeah, let's start restricting people's rights based on the commen sense instincts of a priviledged few. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/16/13 at 13:08:40 Dane restrict and some restrictions are two different things. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/16/13 at 13:41:22 4A4144441E1F280 wrote:
Yes sir, the difference between "restrictions" and "restrict" is time, too short amount of time. And that is why we have the Ammendments to the Constitution, to protect against tyranny in the guise of common sense, restrictions, public safety, public good, public wellfare, etc. I am all for equitable and fair rules, just not the knee-jerk, not-let-a-crisis-go-to-waste, big government, big brother marxists oppression pathway that we are leisurely strolling down now. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/16/13 at 16:29:21 Oh I thought we have amendments to the constitution to have anchor babies, and then have to grant the people who had the anchor baby citizenship ? No ? Huh ... so why the republicommunists running and tripping over themselves to do that ? Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/16/13 at 19:54:40 585356560C0D3A0 wrote:
They want to restrict guns to people without criminal records, and those without a history of mental illness etc ... but the NRA is opposed to that ... cos well what they say is that the second amendment applies to the criminals and the criminally insane too ... but what they mean is that if the criminals and nuts dont have guns they cant induce fear in the population into buying more guns from their real backers - the gun companies. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/16/13 at 20:22:37 The NRA isn't opposed to background checks. There's bills tacked on to the original proposition. I have to report all the guns I own or I'm a felon, no matter how long I've had them. I've got my Grandfathers old shotgun, I'd have to report it or if I get caught with it pull time. If I die my wife or children do not get my guns without paying large taxes and mounds of paperwork.. If I sell a gun without proper paperwork I'm a felon. The government wants to know where every single gun is and who it belongs to in the United States. Sri you might agree with all of the above but remember the criminals aren't going to abide by it and the government will be in the position to disarm every law abiding citizen who wants to hunt and target shoot and protect themselves and their families. The NRA is for stronger background checks only and for the record I'm not a member of the NRA. With utmost respect, Midnight |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by rfw2003 on 04/16/13 at 21:46:55 10110A0D02170B630 wrote:
They want to restrict guns to people without criminal records, and those without a history of mental illness etc ... but the NRA is opposed to that ... cos well what they say is that the second amendment applies to the criminals and the criminally insane too ... but what they mean is that if the criminals and nuts dont have guns they cant induce fear in the population into buying more guns from their real backers - the gun companies. Cool. Srinath. [/quote] I'm gonna break what I said just for this one time. With what they are saying for the background checks they would take your guns away Srinath because you have Aspergers Syndrome, Which is in the category of a social anxiety issue and mental illness. So they wouldn't let you have your firearms and it would be illegal for you to own them. So how do you feel about that now, knowing that little tidbit of information, since it's gonna directly effect your 2nd amendment right to protect yourself and your family? It will also effect those that have had a history of depression or those that have PTSD or even had PTSD even if cured, so that will effect even our military service men that have bravely served our country that have been in an active war zone or police action zone. R.F. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/16/13 at 22:34:21 5F5451510B0A3D0 wrote:
It wouldnt matter what YOU say,, but FEINSTEIN??? Youre Wroing ther, pahdnuh,, when that pregnant & ugly female dawgbitch says SHE wants our guns, & the Brady foundation wants them & Bammythemagicnegra says he is working on it "under the radar" & YOU havent got the guts to admit what it means, well,, you disgust me, Billiam,, youre a vile sack of lying crap, unable to admit the truth,youre not an American,youre a gutless thing, |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/17/13 at 05:42:00 12061752505053600 wrote:
They want to restrict guns to people without criminal records, and those without a history of mental illness etc ... but the NRA is opposed to that ... cos well what they say is that the second amendment applies to the criminals and the criminally insane too ... but what they mean is that if the criminals and nuts dont have guns they cant induce fear in the population into buying more guns from their real backers - the gun companies. Cool. Srinath. [/quote] I'm gonna break what I said just for this one time. With what they are saying for the background checks they would take your guns away Srinath because you have Aspergers Syndrome, Which is in the category of a social anxiety issue and mental illness. So they wouldn't let you have your firearms and it would be illegal for you to own them. So how do you feel about that now, knowing that little tidbit of information, since it's gonna directly effect your 2nd amendment right to protect yourself and your family? It will also effect those that have had a history of depression or those that have PTSD or even had PTSD even if cured, so that will effect even our military service men that have bravely served our country that have been in an active war zone or police action zone. R.F.[/quote] OK I dont think any gun control is going to do anything unless its nationwide. As long as they are leaving pockets like TX or SC, its nearly worthless. I dont agree with "criminals will always get guns" ... they will always get guns if there is holes in the net. The Iron pipe phenomenon is a huge hole. They would do this and that, and leave out TX or SC, we might as well hand over guns to criminals. This stupid thing isn't my idea, this is a 1/2 assed idea that if it works is more luck than design. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/17/13 at 08:19:22 0A151314090E3F0F3F07151952600 wrote:
It wouldnt matter what YOU say,, but FEINSTEIN??? Youre Wroing ther, pahdnuh,, when that pregnant & ugly female dawgbitch says SHE wants our guns, & the Brady foundation wants them & Bammythemagicnegra says he is working on it "under the radar" & YOU havent got the guts to admit what it means, well,, you disgust me, Billiam,, youre a vile sack of lying crap, unable to admit the truth,youre not an American,youre a gutless thing, [/quote] JOG there comes your IQ shining through again. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 04/17/13 at 08:57:27 Bill - You say it's crazy to believe that the gov't wants to seize our guns, but at the same time you have been duped by the nut jobs into believing that 9/11 was a gov't inside job. You can't have it both ways. These nut job web sites and "news sources " exist for only two reasons - to rile up gullible people and to make a handsome profit in the doing. And, yes, I have been around long enough. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/17/13 at 10:38:00 Why would the government want to take our guns. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 04/17/13 at 11:08:13 Because the ultra liberals now in power don't think ordinary people ought to have guns. Why are handguns outlawed in Canada? - same reason - look who runs Canada. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 04/17/13 at 11:11:37 Bill - You've been a Democrat so long that you can't come to grips with what your party is now. I can tell you that it ISN'T the party of Harry Truman, John Kennedy, John Glenn, even Lyndon Johnson anymore. That Democratic party is gone. It's now the party of people who don't like what America is, and they want to change it drastically into something that I don't cotton to one bit. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by bill67 on 04/17/13 at 11:23:48 717E7278737E75797E697C7E691B0 wrote:
I'm retired I watch news a lot,I haven't seen one thing about them taking our guns,They want restriction on them which I want to. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/17/13 at 13:42:23 272C29297372450 wrote:
I'm retired I watch news a lot,I haven't seen one thing about them taking our guns,They want restriction on them which I want to.[/quote] The 2nd ammendment is the most important one, the reason we still have all the others. If the government can put restrictions on guns then what about religion? The press? Jury Trial? Due Process? It's a very bad idea to rush into something without thinking just for the sake of "where the wind blows" and political expediency. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/17/13 at 13:50:47 14303D37303E312D2B303D3C2B590 wrote:
Y'know I thought about this. That is scary ... anyway, I wont jump to the conclusion they want to know where each gun is so they can confiscate it for no reason. My theory - and its only a theory - I'd guess they want to know where each gun is so they can confiscate them in case you go bad. As in you commit a felony with or without a gun. Say you hit someone with your car while drunk. They want your guns out of your hand so that in your downward spiral you dont get to kill people. Just a theory, I know of 2 guys who need to have their guns taken ... one is illegal and far from balanced. The other is a multi DUI depressed alcoholic idiot. They both are well armed. I cant imagine how it would turn out when either of them need to be arrested. And felon's guns easily pass on to other felons, they all know a lot of em ... its called jail. Best place to learn the art of crime. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/17/13 at 13:58:04 registration can only lead to confiscation. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/17/13 at 15:52:55 6B64727264716864736264010 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/17/13 at 16:59:28 Sri the Constitution was created to guarantee us liberty, not safety. The 2nd amendment gauantees all the rest of the constitution.. It was designed to protect us from tyranny, high taxation, the same things the British were doing to us. The politicians are such great liars its almost a waste of time to vote. We all admit to voting for the lesser of the two evils. The 2nd amendment was designed to give the people power to change things for the better. The politicians are supposed to be scared of and respect the people, now its the other way around. We're scared to death they're gonna do away with the 2nd amendment and take away all our power. Without our guns we will be at the mercy of whichever lying crook is in office, his handpicked cabinet and Supreme Court. That scares the sh!t out of me. The 2nd Amemdment gives us the right to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government and to protect ourselves from crazy drunk neigbors. Its all about liberty. The states and the local yocal counties have protection laws. Motorcycle Hemets, speed limits, gun free zones LOL, etc. They're designed for protection. Most of the time they infringe on our liberties. The constitution is all about Liberty and the 2nd amendment give the people the power. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/17/13 at 17:09:01 66677C7B74617D150 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... Cool. Srinath.[/quote] You commit the first crime (felony) you will be jailed, your house will be searched and you will never legally be able to buy a gun again. All we have to do is enforce the laws we already have. I don't know of anyone opposed to background checks when buying a gun, its the bills tacked on to it that I mentioned before the people are against. If I'm a law abiding citizen Big Brother does not have any business knowing everything that's inside my house. This whole deal sux big time, its about as stupid as the war on drugs but the outcome can be a lot worse. Our liberty is at stake. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/17/13 at 17:10:23 1F3B363C3B353A26203B363720520 wrote:
He doesn't want people to have the power, if people have power then they can do what ever they want and we can't have that. No, he wants a dictatorship to control guns and potassium and bats and caves and trucks and felons and freedom and bullets, etc. The funniest one is where the cops will replace your bullet after you shoot someone. Maybe we need a Federal Bullet Replacement Agency. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/17/13 at 17:18:30 6E4A474D4A444B57514A474651230 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... Cool. Srinath.[/quote] You commit the first crime (felony) you will be jailed, your house will be searched and you will never legally be able to buy a gun again. All we have to do is enforce the laws we already have. I don't know of anyone opposed to background checks when buying a gun, its the bills tacked on to it that I mentioned before the people are against. If I'm a law abiding citizen Big Brother does not have any business knowing everything that's inside my house. This whole deal sux big time, its about as stupid as the war on drugs but the outcome can be a lot worse. Our liberty is at stake.[/quote] How do we go from - you will be jailed to your house will be searched. I know of a DUI clown who's not had nothing searched, and he went to jail. You wont be able to buy a gun again ... but what about the arsenal you already have ? And Dane - stop making BS garbage add on's about what I said. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/17/13 at 21:38:36 24253E3936233F570 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... Cool. Srinath.[/quote] You commit the first crime (felony) you will be jailed, your house will be searched and you will never legally be able to buy a gun again. All we have to do is enforce the laws we already have. I don't know of anyone opposed to background checks when buying a gun, its the bills tacked on to it that I mentioned before the people are against. If I'm a law abiding citizen Big Brother does not have any business knowing everything that's inside my house. This whole deal sux big time, its about as stupid as the war on drugs but the outcome can be a lot worse. Our liberty is at stake.[/quote] How do we go from - you will be jailed to your house will be searched. I know of a DUI clown who's not had nothing searched, and he went to jail. You wont be able to buy a gun again ... but what about the arsenal you already have ? And Dane - stop making BS garbage add on's about what I said. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] Sorry, the truth stings a little, don't it... |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/17/13 at 23:30:40 I really dont have a problem with some felons having guns. There ARE " crimes" that are felony level crimes that, IMO, dont necessarily label someone a danger to society. Some guy sellin pot? Phhhhyt,, thats Nothing..\ Now, these criminals working to destroy the Constitution? Aww Hayull YEA,, bust theys asses, take their guns & dismiss their armed guards & slap them in the lockup.. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 05:58:17 7A656364797E4F7F4F77656922100 wrote:
JOG we are pretty lax here about pot. The old timers have seen it all. However there are kids who stone themselves silly. Also a pot dealer, you're assuming he just sells pot. There is always the 90/10 rule. Only 10% of the time someone gets caught. If he was selling pot that day, and he was caught. That is all they get him for. He may have sold something else the day before, or what not. Being caught for something is an indicator of a propensity to break the law. I seriously have a dislike to do so. I'd be riding along going 2-3 over the limit and have some fool ride by tail light ... I'll point to the speed limit sign when we go past it. So I wont call a pot seller harmless. As adults we do alcohol, tobacco etc etc and know its not going to take over our life, a guy selling pot does not have any qualms about selling to a 13 yr old. That cant be justified IMHO. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/18/13 at 08:42:11 Well, if you are seriously wanted to solve the gun problem then take away guns from all registered Democrats. All the mass shootings were by registered Democrats, or in the case of Columbine, children of registered Democrats. Sandy Hook, Giffords, Columbine, Dorner, Movie Theatre, Family Council, JFK, etc. All liberals. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/18/13 at 08:45:54 5F5E45424D58442C0 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... NOT Cool. Srinath.[/quote] i wasnt refering to individual confiscation. i meant confiscation on a national level. why do they need to know how many guns a law abiding citizen has? why do they need to know where i keep my legal guns? why does it bother them that law abiding citezens have detachable magazines? why is it any ones buisiness how much ammo a law abiding citizen keeps for himself? the only reason they want to know, because they want to take it away. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/18/13 at 08:58:02 343B2D2D3B2E373B2C3D3B5E0 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... NOT Cool. Srinath.[/quote] i wasnt refering to individual confiscation. i meant confiscation on a national level. why do they need to know how many guns a law abiding citizen has? why do they need to know where i keep my legal guns? why does it bother them that law abiding citezens have detachable magazines? why is it any ones buisiness how much ammo a law abiding citizen keeps for himself? the only reason they want to know, because they want to take it away. [/quote] Absolutely, you take inventory so as to ensure you don't miss anything when it is time to empty the warehouse. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 09:32:34 232C3A3A2C39202C3B2A2C490 wrote:
And it will - maybe as soon as you commit that first crime ... Unless you want felons to have guns ? Then yes we dont need to register ... NOT Cool. Srinath.[/quote] i wasnt refering to individual confiscation. i meant confiscation on a national level. why do they need to know how many guns a law abiding citizen has? why do they need to know where i keep my legal guns? why does it bother them that law abiding citezens have detachable magazines? why is it any ones buisiness how much ammo a law abiding citizen keeps for himself? the only reason they want to know, because they want to take it away. [/quote] Dude the newtown shooter, the theater shooter etc etc were all law abiding citizens before they shot up crowds. Maybe one or more had other issues of breaking the law. They got out and went on their killing spree. I can easily see a few clowns who need guns confiscated ... they have depressive and a good long list of law breaking behavior and yet they run around armed. If there was a record of all these guns - the cops would have pulled out the "list" and got them guns out of his hands. 7E5B545F7B56565F543A0 wrote:
Says who ? no one who owns 1000's of rounds of ammo and several guns - the Newtown shooter is not a democrat. Neither is his mommy. I'd make the case gun nuts are hardcore republicommunist ... we just need to confiscate guns from republicommunists ... unless you want to be drowned in communism. obviously Communists want the rest of the gentry to be unarmed. So what you said follows from that. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/18/13 at 09:35:01 and the sheep will come to us "gun nuts" seeking safety from the goverment that is gunning them down in the streets. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/18/13 at 09:43:02 Quote:
She was a teacher, a registered democrat and a member of the teachers union. Quote:
No you wont, first of all the term "hardcore repulicommunist" is something you made up from your fantasy dream world. Second, marxists want guns confiscated and those are democraps Third, I've destroyed this foolishness in the first two points and this is to let you know that so we are clear. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/18/13 at 09:44:56 707F69697F6A737F68797F1A0 wrote:
And we won't let them in ;D They will be great shields and use up all that government ammo that was purchased with our tax dollars, well Romney's tax dollars, 23% of nothing is zero. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/18/13 at 09:45:19 republicommunist? Makes as much sense as Islamo-fascist. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/18/13 at 09:45:39 registration will not end mass killing. the police cant read peoples minds. they dont know when people are fixing to get mad and go on a rampage. so what they will do is. get you to register your one peice of crap rifle that some guy gave you 20 years ago. then the next time a rampage happens they will say. we need to confiscate guns to keep this from hapening again. and since you fell for their first stupid idea. you will automatically jump on this one thinking it will keep you safer. which it wil not, because somone will just build a bomb ::) |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 04/18/13 at 10:05:12 Srinath - Law abiding before they went on a shooting spree? Maybe. But certainly and obviously mentally disturbed to anyone who really looked at them. If we'd go back to the old days went people like this were locked up in mental institutions, that is the real solution. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 10:22:56 6A65696368656E626572676572000 wrote:
Jerry: This is the solution correct, however can you imagine the crying from the tea baggers about how much it will cost ? I'd guess 2-3 trillion a year in the first 2-3 years, and then probably 1/2 trillion a year to keep it going. So dane, 45acp you enjoying your own jokes ? good ... still dont remove form the validity of my point. And a pro gun democrat - I think that's called a republicommunist isn't it. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Jerry Eichenberger on 04/18/13 at 10:30:43 Srinath - Actually it was the liberals in Congress about 30 years or more ago who pushed thru a stupid piece of legislation called the Mental Patients' Bill of Rights. I'm not an expert in this field of law at all. But the act made it virtually impossible to lock someone up unless he/she was or became a physical danger to either others or himself. In the old days, the standard was much looser and we locked them up for a few days on suspicious behavior, and then they were examined by a shrink. If the medical diagnosis was mental illness of sufficient gravity, they stayed locked up and were treated. Problem was, and correctly seen, that in those days back in the 1950s and into the 60s, the science of treating mental illness was far from being as good as it is today, so many people literally stayed in the institution for their entire lives. But today, treatment advances would make that a far less often occurrence. Of course, some mental patients can never be treated successfully, and will need to stay in an institution for life. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 10:34:31 57484E4954536252625A48440F3D0 wrote:
JOG - You missed that thread I would guess. I am not going to dig it up and rehash it, because it was really long. But its probably 1-2 pages down. The 2 sentence summary: Communism was characterized by high taxes for the working class and tax breaks and incentives for the executives and management and what not who drove the workers better. The workers also had no voice, and if one of em dropped dead, I guess he was tossed aside and the next guy dragged into his place. So with the working class like me paying 23% in taxes, and RMoney paying 13% and screaming for lower taxes for themselves cos they are "job producers" - it really is taking us to communism. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 10:42:25 7B74787279747F737463767463110 wrote:
30 years ago ? Carter ? anyway, who has a monopoly on stupid ? I however in today's environment can see the supporters for this program being democrats and the opposed being the TEA. Worse yet say we do this, and 5-6 years down we have corralled a few 1000 and we have had a year without a mass shooting ... can you imagine what a "big waste" it will be called by that generation of the TEA. Either way you look at it its a huge expensive govt program. I cant imagine it getting implemented even in today's environment. Gun control is cheaper, not as effective and going to have lots of unintended consequences ... but its almost negligible cost. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/18/13 at 10:44:29 Quote:
I can't remove something that was never there. We make "jokes" because there is no substance that needs refuted so we point our the obvious flaws. You call it a joke, everyone else might call it witty retort. And that you don't get the joke nor learn from it, that is what is funny. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 12:01:54 10353A31153838313A540 wrote:
Owwww if that makes you feel better you can say that to yourself. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Dane Allen on 04/18/13 at 12:35:57 595843444B5E422A0 wrote:
Owwww if that makes you feel better you can say that to yourself. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] Ok, thanks!! |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/18/13 at 14:30:32 who was joking? everytime government takes away peoples guns. the goverment ends up shooting people in the streets. look at any war we have ever entered in too. the goverment tells the people its safer for them to disarm. be it nukes, tanks, or guns. then they invade and gun them down in the streets. what makes you think it will be different here? and dont tell me this doesnt happen. i spent 15 months in afghanistan pulling the trigger with the 82nd airborne division. not that those dirty bastards didnt deserve it. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/18/13 at 15:49:31 The latest estimate I heard was this, we starved and blowed up 50,000 Iraqi children a year. Nobody gives a dam about those children we are directly responsible for killing. W mass murdered those innocent children and no one cares. Obama is directly responsible for killing more innocent children with drones than Lanza. That's the way it will always be unless we become a Marxist State. Then the liberty fighters will be mowed down in the streets.. The 2nd amendment helps guarantee our freedom, in the meantime people, a lot of them innocent will die. Find the cost of freedom, buried in the ground. Mother earth will swallow you, lay your body down. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 18:39:40 What ... you're blaming Obama for the war in Iraq now ? Or the fact that he's put drones in the air instead of soldiers on the ground ? Soldiers were getting killed, maimed and ambushed. If those fools wanted to not have drones over their head, they should have thought of that before they blew us up. I cant believe you're equating collateral damage for our soldiers safety for 1 crackhead's first person shooter game that spilled over into real life cos he was on big pharma juice ... I'd say drone the fools ... if the women and children dont get out of the way ... they are sheilding them. BTW taliban is now in pakisthan, they have taken over the whole of karachi. Arm the Indian army, and give them air cover and let em follow the taliban in pakisthan and they will deliver their heads in duffel bags. We know them by name/face etc etc. Not getting with/behind India was a huge mistake, Bush's mistake that Obama has not corrected. Pakisthan is with the enemy. Well we can drone them ... but there will be collateral damage. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by 45acp on 04/18/13 at 19:06:59 so killings is okay as long as we dont use guns. now i understand. ::) |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/18/13 at 19:16:20 Calm down Sri, I'm blaming Obama for taking out children with the drones he killed Kadafi and that American traitor with. I heard around 30 children got killed, whether its the truth or not I don't know, might be propaganda. Obama could have ended the war the day he took office and the results would have been the same, he has innocent blood on his hands too. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/18/13 at 19:22:59 "What ... you're blaming Obama for the war in Iraq now ? Or the fact that he's put drones in the air instead of soldiers on the ground ? Soldiers were getting killed, maimed and ambushed. If those fools wanted to not have drones over their head, they should have thought of that before they blew us up." Iraq didn't blow us up, sorry! |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 19:26:17 6E4A474D4A444B57514A474651230 wrote:
Not 9/11 blow up, I am talking about IED blow up ... we all know Iraq didn't blow us up ... all of except Bush that is. 76525F55525C534F49525F5E493B0 wrote:
He cant have ended the war on day 1, it would have been back to square 1 by now. We'd have lost the previous 8 years ... He may not have done the best ... but he has done well enough. I'd have liked to see India on our side atleast 2009 and later. 6D62747462776E62756462070 wrote:
Says who ? not me. War zone ... use anything appropriate - dont imagine me to be saying things I am not. Drone em ... gun em ... heck drones have guns. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by Midnightrider on 04/18/13 at 19:29:58 Iraq will be back to square one in less than 2 years. Whoever we help put in office will turn against us, has always happened and it will continue! |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 20:15:28 183C313B3C323D21273C313027550 wrote:
So will afghanisthan and pakisthan ... we should have gone to Libya, it was a war we could have won and influenced the future. Sadly we were too stretched in these 2 useless countries and missed the war we could have won for posterity. I have a crazy off the wall Idea ... america should start playing cricket. India and pak never had normalised relations until we started playing cricket. Over 5 days in the field they eventually learned to respect each other. Sadly every few years pakisthan will become something else, and they would stop cricket ... promptly it will deteriorate ... Now we have several tournaments where the teams are not by country, but a mix and match ... contracted from any country - you find indians, australians, pakisthanis, sri lankans english etc etc in 1 team. We need to get in that mix. We could slowly get those countries to respect each other. They wont take up football - they wont even take up soccer, in fact India and pakisthan played field hockey and it didn't do nothing. Cricket will get them. Far cheaper than war if you ask me. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by houstonbofh on 04/18/13 at 20:51:39 37362D2A25302C440 wrote:
Well, he has been running it for 5 years, so when is it his? |
|
Title: Re: 2 girls shot Post by srinath on 04/18/13 at 21:11:49 797E6462657E7F737E7779110 wrote:
Well, he has been running it for 5 years, so when is it his?[/quote] It would be his as soon as he lies to us and wages a war against say morocco or how about nigeria. Iraq would be listed to Bush - OK if there were errors, like the drones killing the wrong people - not targeting a militant and collateral ... if instead of shooting @ the militant he aimed and shot @ a hospital - intentional by Obama - that will be put into his column as a screw up. It is a war we were lied to and he has had to manage. He has a withdrawl schedule. Essentially it will be a war he schedules us out of. Not one he scheduled us into ... duh ... You blow up your bike not filling oil in it ... You take it to a mechanic to work on it. You turn around and blame the mechanic for blowing it up ? OK you get it back with a dent in the tank yea you blame him. Cool. Srinath. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |