|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> 5 year old /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1367461484 Message started by bill67 on 05/01/13 at 19:24:44 |
|
Title: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/01/13 at 19:24:44 A 5 year old boy kills his 2 year old sister with his new 22 cricket. Doesn't that tell you something about guns. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WD on 05/01/13 at 21:29:36 Yep, that his parents weren't paying close enough attention in teaching him how to use it properly. One of my friend's daughters has been hunting since she was 4, got her first deer last year at age 6. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/01/13 at 22:10:59 Bill if you feel that way about guns why do you still have your's. Get rid of your guns and I'll start believing you. Until then you have absolutely no business protesting them. You might as well be an alchoholic protesting beer sales. I'll take your Henry Golden Boy. All that post told me was those kids have complete focking morons for parents. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/02/13 at 05:39:15 Yes we are protesting stupid people owning guns ... and I would put 2 of the gun owners I know in the non stupid category ... the rest of em are either documented criminals or getting there or definitely stupid. Like serow said - we need an IQ test. The parents of the kid need to be tossed in jail ... no trial no nothing no lawyer no rights ... nothing. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/02/13 at 05:43:07 Yes we are protesting stupid people owning guns ... and I would put 2 of the gun owners I know in the non stupid category ... the rest of em are either documented criminals or getting there or definitely stupid. then, and this is no surprise, you hang around with an exceptionally stupid crowd.... |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/02/13 at 05:46:08 The parents of the kid need to be tossed in jail ... no trial no nothing no lawyer no rights ... nothing. ..but if the mother had aborted her child 2 years and 1 month ago, she gets put on a pedestal for exercising her constitutional protected right to choose, right? geez people, how about a little sympathy here? Accidents happen. I'm sure the parents are in agony right now. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/02/13 at 05:53:59 0F3D3A2B2C3D2A15392A33580 wrote:
Says who ? you ? You probably are the only one who would Webby. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/02/13 at 05:54:43 Thats something your mother should have thought about.Web |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/02/13 at 06:00:21 794B4C5D5A4B5C634F5C452E0 wrote:
No ... I dont think so, just that the gun owners have this tendency ... criminals, borderline criminals and illegals tend to have a need to go buy them ... and yes they live in the hood, so maybe they need it ... but they also are part of the hood ... We need loose gun laws in this country ... so that criminals can buy them ... then since criminals have them already we can say we need to buy em cos criminals already have them ... and will always get em ... NRA mantra, market it to criminals ... then market to non criminals saying criminals have em ... looks like the first step has been accomplished ... OK so, Some 5yr old killed a 2 yr old ... yea we need to have a good 5yr old in there with a gun so the 5yr old can be shot before he kills the 2yr old. Hey they said good guy with a gun is all that stops a bad guy with a gun ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/02/13 at 06:11:35 If that had been a semi-automatic he probability would have killed is mother when she yelled at him. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/02/13 at 09:14:53 21203B3C33263A520 wrote:
Now that's a true Marxist!! ;) |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/02/13 at 09:17:39 Srinath is right,And if your pit bull or any dog kills your kid same thing. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Pine on 05/02/13 at 09:35:40 353E3B3B6160570 wrote:
skimmed the other posts: Source? and no it tells me nothing about guns. It tells me alot about 5yo's with guns and possibly something about THIS 5yo's parents. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/02/13 at 09:49:58 If all this BS about the rights to have a gun wasn't going on,This kid wouldn't of had a gun. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by 45acp on 05/02/13 at 09:52:34 he doesnt ever give a source. i think he makes this stuff up. let me try. infant fetus in the womb saves his mother and himself, by drawing his weapon and keeping her from being raped by aids infested crack head. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by 45acp on 05/02/13 at 10:10:34 404B4E4E1415220 wrote:
that makes no sense. i had a gun at 10 and didnt shoot my sister. my daughter had one at 4 and she is 6 now and hasnt shot her sister. your comment doesnt hold water. you cant blame the gun. you can only blame the parents, and a lack of supervision. of course you wont. you will blame the nra, guns , bush, jesus, and the easter bunny |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/02/13 at 12:05:13 Noooo - and this next statement needs to be read out loud with a raspy wheezy voice like windbag John Boenher ... that's what is best. "If we had stricter gun control ... this 5yr old will have just built a pipe bomb to kill his 2yr old sister ... yeaaaa ... blame the doer ... not the tool ... yeaaaaa ..." Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/03/13 at 21:48:54 0A05131305100905120305600 wrote:
LMAO ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/04/13 at 08:12:21 66697F7F697C65697E6F690C0 wrote:
Oooo but ... I thought republicans were pro rape ... or is that only Pro legitimate rape ? Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by scanlory on 05/04/13 at 08:36:29 Shame, he should have been supervised. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by 45acp on 05/04/13 at 19:41:33 60617A7D72677B130 wrote:
Oooo but ... I thought republicans were pro rape ... or is that only Pro legitimate rape ? unCool. Srinath.[/quote] who said that? really i want to know? who said republicans support rape? god your stupid. we are still waiting on that source by the way? |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/05/13 at 11:27:55 I was just asking ... but since you wanted legitimate rape comments from republicans - here it is - http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/26/akin-says-hes-relived-legitimate-rape-remarks-too-many-times/ Former Republican Missouri Senate nominee Todd Akin said on Thursday that he wished he could take back his comments about women not being able to get pregnant from “legitimate rape” because he’s “relived them too many times.” Hey ... I was just asking if they were pro rape or just legitimate rape or what ? In case you were just looking at this and sayig he wants to take it back ... here is what he originally said - Akin, who is attempting to oust Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, also stated that if a women did conceive after a rape, he would still oppose abortion in this case because “the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.” Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79864.html#ixzz2SRbIMmYm Oh gee such a nice old man too ... But wait ... he wants to attack the rapist and not the child ... isn't that just so noble. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/05/13 at 22:49:32 Item: Kentucky 5-year-old gets rifle as gift and shoots 2-year-old sister dead. A 5-year-old boy in Kentucky shot and killed his 2-year-old sister while playing with a child size .22 caliber rifle that he was given as a gift, state police said in a statement. Wife said that the boy had been given the rifle as a gift last year and played with it every day. The the mother had been at home when the shooting occurred. The rifle was normally kept in a corner of the home, but family members did not realize the gun had been loaded. “It’s a Crickett,” the coroner explained. “It’s a little rifle for a kid… The little boy’s used to shooting the little gun.” “Just one of those crazy accidents,” he added. My God...words fail me... <snip> With gun guys around the country trying to put the hunting age as low as four years old, it’s almost predicatable that one gun store in Texas has actually created a kids’ section. You’re never too young for a gun, says owner Beverly Melton. “A lot of guys come in and want to buy a Crickett as soon as they find out their wives are pregnant,” she said, showing off small-caliber rifles in the “Kids Corner” of the Garland, Texas, gun shop she owns with her husband, Steve. <end snip> ...a hot pink gun for a baby girl birth present? Blue for a baby boy. These mini guns are easier for smaller hands to hold on to. The shortened RRA "Tactical Entry" butt stock is a nice touch. "Hot pink .22 child sized rifle" ??.... Dude, I am soooo getting one of those for my neice's baby girl!!! So Has The NRA Been Taken Over By The Tea Party? Or has the Tea Party been taken over by the NRA? ...Fair question. They both talk about 2nd Amendment solutions to overthrow the democratically elected government of the United States of America. Polling shows a plurality of Republicans expect it may be necessary for armed rebellion in a few years - with the presumption that it would be needed to overthrow the democratically elected government. These people are certifiably nuts. And the Glenn Beck's and Rush Limbaugh's are whipping them into a frenzy as they endlessly shout fire in a crowded theatre. There are far to many people here on this site, and in America in general who buy into this gun insanity that makes me wonder how long I can remain in this phucked up country while looking at Canada, every day, right across the river from here. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/06/13 at 05:11:42 I was just asking ... but since you wanted legitimate rape comments from republicans - here it is - Dear moron; you said republicanS as in plural; yet you offered only one. Secondly; his comments were roundly condemned by the GOP party and they pulled money from him. Your attempt to take his comments and apply broadly them broadly is pathetic. Now, if you want to get into a tit-for-tat game; given the history of the jackass party and the absolute jokes they have elected; I’d be glad to play along but it would be like taking candy from a baby. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/06/13 at 05:14:32 Polling shows a plurality of Republicans expect it may be necessary for armed rebellion in a few years - with the presumption that it would be needed to overthrow the democratically elected government. These people are certifiably nuts. And the Glenn Beck's and Rush Limbaugh's are whipping them into a frenzy as they endlessly shout fire in a crowded theatre. Yet whenever there is widespread violence in this country; it is always liberals / Democrats who are responsible…. There are far to many people here on this site, and in America in general who buy into this gun insanity that makes me wonder how long I can remain in this phucked up country while looking at Canada, every day, right across the river from here. Please cross that river dude. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by RatdogWillie on 05/06/13 at 06:38:58 7F7471712B2A1D0 wrote:
No, it tells me that children are not responsible enough to own weapons. It tells me that the parents are irresponsible for giving a child such a weapon. Responsible parents would not even give a young child a knife, little less a real gun. Real guns are tools that serve useful purposes. None of which include serving as a child's toy. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by dinsdale on 05/06/13 at 09:54:20 7C4E49585F4E59664A59402B0 wrote:
We don't want him. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/06/13 at 10:01:59 Those little 22's are cool. I see them as a great Teaching Tool. I dont care HOw cool a kid is, a kid is a kid & Can NOT be trusted to even KNOW how dangerous that little rifle is. Its small & light & looks a great deal like a toy. Nothing about it is intimidating or scary.Its just a 22, so, we all know it doesnt kick hard or make so much noise a kid would back away from "playing" with it. My grandson is showing signs of being able to drive at an early age. Lets say I let him sit in my lap & he proves to me he can keep it between the ditches. Does anyone here think Id be fool enough to toss him the keys when he was tall enough to reach all the pedals? Leaving a gun out where a kid can lay hands on it is STUPID. Mom & Dad & the kid will all live with this. Can you imagine the grief that kid is gonna go thru for the rest of his life? KNOWING he killed his baby sister? How will Mom & Dad feel toward him? Toward themselves? What a tragedy, & OHH How easily prevented it would have been... Those little guns are awesome. If my girl was still a kid, Id get one for her. It'd make teaching her to shoot so much easier. But, when it wasnt "At the Range" it would be with me, cleaning it up, showing her how, OR, put away, empty chamber & far enough up & out of her reach I wouldnt have to worry. Perfect time for a trigger lock,, Jerry, tell them about an attractive hazard |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WD on 05/06/13 at 10:10:17 474A4D5047424F46230 wrote:
We don't want him.[/quote] :o Star's not that bad. A bit more British Columbia than your average central Canadian... at least in my experience. Retired, ex-federal law enforcement (granted the ONLY liberal I've met from that crowd, and I know a lot of ATF, Customs, Border Patrol, Secret Service, FBI and military police retirees), doesn't take up much space (look how big his Savage looks next to him)... ::) I do like to mess with him, we're politically polar opposites. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/06/13 at 10:38:49 556760717667704F637069020 wrote:
And his comments weren't even talking about being pro-rape, idiot!! He was talking about the stress hormones that can interfere with insemination during a violent attack. Again, buy a dictionary and use it!! |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/06/13 at 15:37:49 I have 4 kids from 40 to 48 and none have every shot a gun and don't care to.I never had a gun when they were growing up,I was 60 years old when I started buying a few. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/06/13 at 18:45:09 54717E75517C7C757E100 wrote:
And his comments weren't even talking about being pro-rape, idiot!! He was talking about the stress hormones that can interfere with insemination during a violent attack. Again, buy a dictionary and use it!![/quote] Oh gee you want more republicans talking about rape ... OK here - With Republican Party registration at a low of 29% in California, the California Republican Assembly narrowly voted out their President, Celeste Greig, after her Akin-esque comment that pregnancies from rape are rare. And a woman too ... wowee its getting better and better for you guys isn't it ... From - http://www.politicususa.com/bites-dust-inaccurate-rape-beliefs-republican.html And here is this gem - so much for GOP distancing themselves from Todd Akin - Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) defended former Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO)’s claim that women who are victims of a “legitimate rape” can’t get pregnant. Speaking to the Marrietta Daily Journal, Gingrey, a doctor who is co-chair of the GOP’s Doctor Caucus, stuck by Akin’s distinction between “legitimate” and “illegitimate rapes”: And he's a doctor too ... wowee ... http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/11/1435671/republican-congressman-backs-akins-legitimate-rape-comments-hes-partly-right/?mobile=nc And we cant forget this beauty that predated Akin last year if I recall ... Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock became the latest Republican to stir up controversy – and potential trouble for the Romney campaign – when he said during a debate that "even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen." http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/richard-mourdock-rape-comment-puts-romney-defense/story?id=17552263#.UYhcNUotYUU Any questions ? As always happy to oblige. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/06/13 at 19:28:43 Well said Srinath. And now along another line of consideration: WD " Star, he's not so bad. I do like to mess with him, we're politically polar opposites. Thank you WD, that's a nice way to put it, and regarding other comments in your post, believe me there were and are not many other liberals, much less ultra liberals like myself among my peers in the USAF and FLEO's...ahh, but there were a few, and we all had a great time debating one another during slack times....but there was not a man or woman amoung our groups who would not lay down his or her life to protect one another. This how I like to think of us here. We are as different as oil and water politically, but not one person here would hesitate to help another in need. So when you read things like; WM...Dear moron; or DA... idiot!! This seems very nasty, but I think It only reflects enthuseasim, rock solid beliefs and core values. Never hatred or loathing...(I hope). Let us always part as friends, even as we shake our heads and roll our eyes in disbeliefe...it's the American way. :D |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/06/13 at 20:40:15 oh Star; you've said some of the worst things on here so unless you've had a come to Jesus moment; your lament is pretty laughable.... |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/06/13 at 21:14:36 ...sigh, very well Webster, gloves off (concerning you) and your hateful bullsh!t. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/07/13 at 04:42:52 you never had gloves on liar... what's your tag line at the bottom; proud to be everything the right wing hates?.... yea, that's real tolerant....don't try to pull some line of bs on my buddy! bring it on. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/07/13 at 08:37:34 427077666170675874677E150 wrote:
I'm pretty new around here but I didn't fall for that one either. ;D ;D ;D Looks like it's "gloves off" against me too ;) |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/07/13 at 12:26:04 Quote:
Had to come back to this, I like how my respone to being accused of being pro-rape through association with a political party who, in turn was associated with a guy who made a stupid remake to a bunch of liberal reporters who were actively trying to sabotage his campaign to protect the incumbent is being singled out. So, this is probably why you get the responses you get from Web and myself, because you gloss over the most heinous of remarks from your group-think pals and focus on the rightfully angry retorts. You yourself said "Well said Srinath" thus attempting to legitimize his trash talk so it is obvious when one of your side goes too far then you take this false concilliatory "can't we all just get along" approach. At the same time you doube down on the nastiness that started this whole thing. I don't fall for it for a second because I have seen it way to much from my liberal friends and liberal nonfriends alike. You got spooked by one of the heinous and dispicable things Sri said and this is your cover. Let me make this clear, No one person or group of people is pro-rape just because of something one guy said!!! |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/07/13 at 15:47:03 Oooo Dane and webby - It sure looks like these people who are republican senators, guv'nors, congressmen and women are anti abortion regardless of their stance on rape ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/07/13 at 19:41:57 Greetings Dane Allen, was wondering what sewer you recently crawled out of. So, you're another example of right-wing assholery in action eh? I always figured RW assholery was rooted in a genetic inadequacy...you like Webster seem to fit this profile perfectly...snicker.. BTW Daney, like Webster I pretty much figure that you also were too chickensh!t for military service. All gung-ho for war but too chickensh!t to join the military. You two would rather be nameless faces cackling about how great war is instead.. And Jesus God! People like you two are allowed to vote and drive cars?? And breed??? Good God in heaven, the end times must be near. You think your stupid rightwing screeds sway the opinion of intellagent people here?...than you two are dumber than I thought. Oh, and another thing Daney, You like Webster, are just one more ignoramus in a long line of them I have dealt with in the past... Oh wait, I mean "IgnorANUSE" ... (Ignoranus: A person who is both dumb as sh!t AND an not a very nice person.) So, you both think my urging to bring civility and respect to this forum is laughable? (Yes, I should have known better..my bad). You say I doube down on the nastiness?...You aint seen nastiness yet buddy. So fine, bring it on assholes, you are no match for people who believe in reason and truth. When you can post a coherent thought in English, we can have a discussion about the relative intelligence of individuals based on ideology. Until then, F-off. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/07/13 at 20:02:31 all I can say about the coming battle is: sweet...... let's start with how President Hopey-Change killed our ambassador and ran off to drink Champaign with Jay Z and Big Butt Beonce.... what's her name.... |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/07/13 at 20:14:27 6E5C5B4A4D5C4B74584B52390 wrote:
Oh you dont pin that on him that easy ... The Republican communists cut funding, and blamed the next disaster on him. What next, blaming the Iraq war on Obama ? Oh wait ... you already did. And you seem to be learning from the Michelle Bachmann book of history - Like this beauty - "I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out under another, then under another Democrat president, Jimmy Carter. I'm not blaming this on President Obama, I just think it's an interesting coincidence." -Rep. Michele Bachmann, on the 1976 Swine Flu outbreak that happened when Gerald Ford, a Republican, was president, April 28, 2009 Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Paraquat on 05/08/13 at 09:13:45 I'm sure no one is blaming the war in Iraq on Obama. HOWEVER, he promised he would withdraw. It was part of his campaign. At what point does he become accountable for not withdrawing? When does he accept responsibility for his inaction? --Steve |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/08/13 at 09:54:44 6A5B485B4B4F5B4E3A0 wrote:
His 08 promise was to withdraw ... he has started, I believe his time frame has been stretched but its is happening ... wars without exit strategies take time when you try to exit I guess. I'd see progress being made and say OK its getting there ... He also promised to close Gitmo - however republicans have blocked that and NIMBY'ed it. The only way to close Gitmo is to kill those prisoners now ... SC senator Lindsay graham who can southernize any conversation has been instrumental in that ... you can look it up. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/08/13 at 10:09:01 705742514F4A45574651230 wrote:
Ahh, now there's the real you. You are the stereotypical liberal and you have just proved to me what everyone else has said. You are who I thought you were and more so. The raw hate you feel for anyone who isn't like you and who thinks differently from you is now on full display. That's just who you are. Very sad >:( >:( >:( |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WD on 05/08/13 at 10:16:17 The only way to close Gitmo is to kill those prisoners now ... No problem. Just make sure to feed them a nice big batch of ham, sausage or bacon before gathering them at prayers and locking the doors. A couple canisters of insect killer dropped through the ceiling vents... Leave the bodies for the buzzards when we pull our assets back to Rosie Roads (Roosevelt Roads Naval Station in Puerto Rico) or one of the bases in VA. EVERY US/NATO forces casualty (military OR civilian) should have resulted in the dropping of one fuel/air bomb on an Islamic city. Preferably at prayer time... starting with Mecca and working out from there. Islam is a blight on the modern age. I've earned the right to say that, honorably discharged veteran. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/08/13 at 10:24:33 26030C07230E0E070C620 wrote:
Ahh, now there's the real you. You are the stereotypical liberal and you have just proved to me what everyone else has said. You are who I thought you were and more so. The raw hate you feel for anyone who isn't like you and who thinks differently from you is now on full display. That's just who you are. Very sad >:( >:( >:( [/quote] Dane, dont act like you're above this ... you have called me plenty of names to really have this same remark you made returned back to you. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/08/13 at 10:26:24 5F4C080 wrote:
They are on hunger strike ... let em starve. The problem is the mild and non severe cases are the ones on hunger strike. The Taliban/AQ ones are happily eating their and the ones starving too. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/08/13 at 14:49:59 797863646B7E620A0 wrote:
Ahh, now there's the real you. You are the stereotypical liberal and you have just proved to me what everyone else has said. You are who I thought you were and more so. The raw hate you feel for anyone who isn't like you and who thinks differently from you is now on full display. That's just who you are. Very sad >:( >:( >:( [/quote] Dane, dont act like you're above this ... you have called me plenty of names to really have this same remark you made returned back to you. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] Nice try but I'm no ones falling for that, I've already responded to this more than it deserves and I am sure the rest of the group is getting tired of all this crap. I'm out. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/08/13 at 17:07:07 51747B70547979707B150 wrote:
Ahh, now there's the real you. You are the stereotypical liberal and you have just proved to me what everyone else has said. You are who I thought you were and more so. The raw hate you feel for anyone who isn't like you and who thinks differently from you is now on full display. That's just who you are. Very sad >:( >:( >:( [/quote] Dane, dont act like you're above this ... you have called me plenty of names to really have this same remark you made returned back to you. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] Nice try but I'm no ones falling for that, I've already responded to this more than it deserves and I am sure the rest of the group is getting tired of all this crap. I'm out.[/quote] You dont need to fall for anything, and you dont need to judge what the rest of the group is getting tired about. Out or not, I dont care. And really you can call me names if you like, its your problem not mine. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by 45acp on 05/08/13 at 20:38:09 7063270 wrote:
well said WD. burn them dirty bastards. i also have earned the right to say that. HDV |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/10/13 at 12:04:55 3 year old shoots self in the head.We need more guns more is better. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/10/13 at 12:21:36 595257570D0C3B0 wrote:
What we need is responsible parents! |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by bill67 on 05/10/13 at 12:47:27 05212C26212F203C3A212C2D3A480 wrote:
What we need is responsible parents![/quote] My parents were responsible and so was I no guns at all when I grew up or my kids grew up. My wifes family didn't have guns.Some how we all made it. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/10/13 at 22:01:24 545F5A5A0001360 wrote:
Hell no, like the NRA guy said ... the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun ... since the bad guy here is shooting himself, the good guy with the gun has to shoot the bullet before it hits the good guy ... in normal cases he can shoot the shooter before the shooter shoots, but in this case, he cant ... just shoot the bullet. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/11/13 at 11:14:11 And as for that silly NRA meme concerning we must bear arms in case we have to overthrow the government... YOU CAN'T BE ARMING YOURSELF AGAINST A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT AND PRESIDENT. AND CLAIM TO BE PATRIOTIC. WHAT YOU ARE AT BEST, IS A SORE LOSER. AT WORST A TRAITOR. Source: "One Million Moms and Dads Against Gun Violence" |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by 45acp on 05/12/13 at 19:57:22 the NRA never told any one to arm themselves to overthrow the government. the fore fathers were traitors against england, and that worked out pretty well i think. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/12/13 at 20:18:36 The NRA said that even in their recent meeting about how big govt wants the people unarmed so they can wield unfettered power and we cant over throw them. Search for the recent one - the 2013 NRA comvention speeches. 2-3 weeks ago in Dallas or somewhere. Cool. Srinath |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/12/13 at 20:24:09 5D7A6F7C6267687A6B7C0E0 wrote:
A democracy is when a majority of people get what they want. That's not happening anymore. Our elected officials are lying and turning against us. Presidents are sending troops overseas to kill innocents without Congressional or our approval. Was Bengazi an embassy or a CIA outpost? No one in Washington no longer speaks the truth or caters to the wishes of the people who elected them. Everyone in Washington has commited a crime you or I would be inprisoned for. The country for all practical purposes is bankrupt. We treat our returning veterans like sh!t. The Federal Reserve needs to be destroyed and our currency needs to be based once again on precious metal. Monsanto needs to disappear off the face of the earth. I would fight if I had to to see this change. Does that make me a Traitor or a Patriot? |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/12/13 at 22:06:48 The flaws are systemic though. Replacing the Idiots on top wont do anything ... we need to start over - and no we cant have the constitution and cling to it, that would lead us right back here. Like 2 senators per state - and right there Vermont with 600,000 people = CA with 35 million. Like Have a baby here and its a citizen = anchor babies. So on. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/13/13 at 00:02:45 Sri the trouble started when Washington tried to take away our 1rst, 2nd, 4th and 5th amendment. They should be locked up for traitors. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/13/13 at 06:48:05 There is a few more in there they are trying to take a bite out of. However these have not been taken away from lets say "non felons". They have managed to squeeze the people out of the picture without breaking these and the other network of laws. Or in other words - Where is the amendment that says you cant have a swordfish gene, a cricket gene and a little bit of arsenic in your corn ? Plenty of room to walk through the holes in the nets. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/16/13 at 10:15:33 YOure not serious in that"wheres the amendment that says no odd genes in food", thing are you? Wheres the amendment that says I cant poison you? |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/16/13 at 10:44:52 203F393E23241525152D3F33784A0 wrote:
Thou shalt not kill ... ? No. But you see it doesn't kill you ... it affects some people ... gee you just had to have the random assignment of genes that made you not affected. Which is why I am saying they didn't break the constitution. The constitution has a million holes cos we have invented so much crap. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/16/13 at 12:04:56 It only has to hurt 1 person to be wrong.. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/16/13 at 17:26:39 Hurting people means nothing when there's MONEY to be made...don'cha know? |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/16/13 at 21:43:20 I bought my 2 year old grandson a Henry 22 and wrote happy 13th birthday on the box. Its been put up out of sight. With my health like it is I doubt if I'll be around for his 13th birthday. I know his dad real well and he wont give my grandson the gun until he's ready for it and he will be trained safely and properly. His backyard is practically a shooting range. I want him to grow up hunting with his dad like I did.Does that make me a bad grandparent? |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/16/13 at 22:20:18 35342F2827322E460 wrote:
Thou shalt not kill ... ? No. But you see it doesn't kill you ... it affects some people ... gee you just had to have the random assignment of genes that made you not affected. Which is why I am saying they didn't break the constitution. The constitution has a million holes cos we have invented so much crap. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] It doesnt have to be unconstitutional to be illegal,,&, AFAIC, its Illegal. \Its illegal because it causes illness. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Paraquat on 05/17/13 at 09:12:25 41656862656B64787E6568697E0C0 wrote:
Not in my book. That's really depressing though. That's part of why I hate these pointless bans so much. Not only are they not going to accomplish anything they prevent any potential offspring I may yield from having similar experiences that I had as a youth. Responsibility, consequences, a lot of characteristics that are missing today can be learned on a range. I want to, if I ever have children, share with them the range that my father took me to; that my cousin is, uncle was, and grand father was president of; that my grand father helped build, the range my great grand father went to. Now if a projectile leaves a barrel it's banned here in CT and I'm worried I won't get those chances. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/19/13 at 09:32:56 Does that make me a bad grandparent? Ohh, quite the opposite here.. & a Henry? Man,, ya did the boy right,.,. & see of you can round up some of those powderless cartridges. In my Henry, when I shoot one of those its so quiet I can actually hear the hammer fall, like a dry fire. Its absolutely silent as far as the bullet goin off. That would still take a squirrel or rabbit at short range. Great training cartridge. NO worries about a hunk of lead flying a mile,, ya know? |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/19/13 at 09:48:04 Rabbit, squirrel yea those were the days. The cats have got em all, we cut the woods and put in condo's, the people that moved into the condo's have cats, the cats kill several 100 rabbits and squirrels and birds a month. I had a lovely burrowing rabbit nest with 3-4 babies. Neighbors cat got em all. 1 was alive. The neighbors took it and a few days later, the cat got him again. I dont think I'd ever want to shoot one ... the cats have killed em all. Rabbits, squirrels, Blue jays, cardinals, sparrows all of em. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/19/13 at 10:18:24 WEll,, KNock some O them cats down & Maybe the wildlife will return,, |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/19/13 at 11:00:35 Jesus was a vegetarian (albeit he ate fish). ;) |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WD on 05/19/13 at 12:45:10 If it never went "moo", it's a vegetable at my house. With the exception of venison, which I do not eat because no matter how it is prepared it tastes like rotten meat. I don't eat "aged' (pre-rotted) beef either... |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/19/13 at 15:38:49 352A2C2B3631003000382A266D5F0 wrote:
Dude I'd shoot the owners of such "feral" domestic cats before I shoot the cat. Its not quite the cats fault. The stupid people feed the cat. Then stupid people take the dead animals the cats bring. Obviously the cats think the food they are eating is from the animal they killed. I'd punish the cat or feed the dead rabbit to the cat, not toss the rabbit in the trash and reward the cat. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Midnightrider on 05/20/13 at 12:30:16 I captured a feral cat and after I tamed her she is one of the best pets I've ever owned. At first she was a handful but now she's one of the most loving animals I have ever owned. I love to shoot but now my shooting consist of punching holes in paper. After raising so many animals from the wild I've lost my killer instinct. My wife and I are raising 2 baby squirrels now. I'm having a ball playing with them. A hawk got their mother. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/21/13 at 19:22:18 I cant do that either. Its called stealing a cat. They are owned by people who feed them. These cats are come of the fattest you've seen. They kill for sport. Its babies and fledglings and defenseless only. The birds that can fly, do. These stupid things wont even run across the road when the rabbit does. They will kill and drag around the baby rabbits. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Starlifter on 05/21/13 at 19:32:40 Well that's true Sri, but it's not a moral failing on the cat's part, it's in their chemistry. That's why responsible cat owners keep their cats indoors. Cats and dogs should not be roaming about unsupervised. I'm with Midnight on this. My five cats were all rescues, and they are all very sweet companions. Indeed, I would rather spend time with my cats than 90% of the people I'm obligated to share the planet with. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by WebsterMark on 05/21/13 at 19:35:05 I would rather spend time with my cats than 90% of the people I'm obligated to share the planet with. I'll bet 90% of the people on the planet are glad you do...... |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/21/13 at 19:52:37 340601101706112E021108630 wrote:
That's 91% of savage forum he means (once we calculated 91% of this forum was republicommunists). 90 became 91 with Dane if I recall. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/22/13 at 18:20:16 So, because someone feeds a cat that destroys natural wildlife its not okay to shoot it? If they wanted to go shoot all the baby birds & poison all the squirrels you like seeing, would you stop them? If the answer is yes, then their cat is nothing more or less than the killing & poisoning you wouldnt allow THEM to do freely. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Paraquat on 05/23/13 at 09:19:10 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/Nictuku/2012/269286_389075017819340_984561354_n.jpg ...and now I stir controversy based off JOG's post while tying it in to destroying an "ecosystem" of animals. No air quotes there. Some of these savages really are animals. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/23/13 at 11:12:49 Right, and where was this wisdom when Bush made the biggest expansion of the food stamps program eligibility ever ? Obama has just handed out more food stamps than Bush did - that's due to an economy that was in recession. Here is proof - courtesy USDA. USDA data from January 2001 indicate that during the Administration of President George W. Bush, the number of SNAP recipients rose by 14.7 million people. President Clinton in 1998 and President Bush in 2002 expanded SNAP eligibility as well. During their Administrations, reforms were enacted that permitted for more children, disabled individuals, seniors and some immigrants to receive food stamps. During President Obama’s Administration, enrollment has increased by 14.2 million people — a lower number than during President Bush’s tenure. This is due to the ongoing economic recession, which caused rates of food insecurity in 2009 to reach the highest levels since 1998. There is some indication that SNAP enrollment levels and rates of food insecurity are beginning to decrease. In October 2011, when the economy started to improve, SNAP enrollment declined by 43,528 individuals and from 2009 to 2010, food insecurity dropped from 21.3 percent to 20.2 percent in households with children. Therefore, while it is true that current SNAP enrollment is at a historical high with more than 46 million people in the program, it is incorrect to characterize President Obama as the “Food Stamp President.” Instead, the current increased enrollment reflects the high unemployment rates during the current economic recession, the temporary increase in eligibility for families, and the countercyclical design of the program. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (The Stimulus Act) did expand eligibility for SNAP by removing a three-month time limit on food stamp participation for unemployed adults without children. However, this change was meant to last only during the years 2009 and 2010. Nonetheless, 46 states have obtained special waivers to sustain the new rule because of high unemployment rates. The stimulus legislation also increased average benefit amounts for all program participants; however, this increase will expire in 2013. So, The eligibility criteria expansion was Bush. Welfare and snap recipients are all republican's biggest voting block. Pat McCrory the new republican governor of NC cut unemployment duration to 25% and the maximum benefit amount to 60% os its pre 2013 amount. He did not touch welfare or food stamps or any other hand out's. Working people are not republicommunist. CEO's and big business fund republicommunists. The welfare recipients make the numbers for republicommunists. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by srinath on 05/23/13 at 11:14:39 332C2A2D30370636063E2C206B590 wrote:
Dude I am not going to go shoot my neighbors cats. One of em got run over last year. Another one 1/2 way down the block died from something it ate (I think). But stupid people keep getting more cats and letting em loose in the hood ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by Dane Allen on 05/29/13 at 08:28:51 787962656A7F630B0 wrote:
That's 91% of savage forum he means (once we calculated 91% of this forum was republicommunists). 90 became 91 with Dane if I recall. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] Whoo Hoo!!!! :D ;D ;) |
|
Title: Re: 5 year old Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/29/13 at 08:39:30 Well,, it FEELS like Im surrounded,, |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |