Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh please, no one is taking your rights away. It's called regulation. And why would I not be allowed to live here since my ancestors on my mom's side were Choctaw...way before your ancestors I'm sure.
...Yes they are, and the fact you and people like you can not or will not understand this does no alter the facts.
We regulated what kind of firearms the Native Americas could own, tell me how did that work out for them Natalie? what happened at the massacre of wounded knee after they were disarmed?
Hey, I want to know why you think people like me shouldn't live here when you obviously think you should over me. And as I said in my previous post, I do believe my ancestors were here before you so maybe you should move if you don't like it here
Because you clearly dont value the founding principals of this nation, you want to tell others how to live all the while demanding you have the right to live your life just the way you want, you think you have the right to tell others what their rights are when clearly the Bill Of Rights spells it our very clearly..
I didn't slaughter anybody. Your beliefs are what is destroying the nation. You just don't realize it. Do you really think Indians all lived in harmony before the evil white man arrived? LOL We just came up with gunpowder first or you would have gotten your wish...........you wouldn't be here.
I disagree. I think they do realize they are destroying the nation, and that is their intended purpose.
Short of circumventing democracy, an effective tactic is brainwashing the next generation of voters. The environmentalists tried to convince school age kids that they were smarter than their parents when it came to environmental issues. This tactic has been tried before. This is all part of the agenda to “fundamentally change America”. If we compare the agenda to squeezing the water out of a sponge, guns are like pins and needles in that sponge.
It is unfortunate Rep Giffords was injured,
however, when you are an elected official you have to accept the risks with the job,
just like her husband accepted risk when on the space shuttle mission, as well as the risks of life, which can never be eliminated.
She can recite anything he places in front of her, knowing that background checks would not have stopped that crazy guy from hurting those people that day in Arizona, Colorado or in Connecticut.
I find it wrapped that they can can use their 1st Amendment right, to infringed on our 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment and 9th Amendment rights.
So is it just me or does that really make a stronger case of School Vouchers, children to a education, not indoctrination on how to given up their unalienable rights.
ITA. Consider the following: Carolyn McCarthy became a one-trick pony, anti-gun NY Rep. after her husband was murdered by a racist nut who shot 25 white people, killing 6 including her husband. Sarah Brady's become a vocal gun control advocate, after her husband was shot and maimed. Gabby Giffords and her husband have traveled around the country in support of restrictive gun legislation. Some Sandy Hook parents vow that they "won't give up" the fight for stricter gun control. Many self-described "9/11 familymembers" (which can include many shirt-tail relatives, BTW) have decried efforts to publicize photos, pertinent information, and release 911 calls because it's either "too soon" or considered an invasion of their privacy, in defiance of the public's right to know. Also, beware of legislation named for any number of victims of crimes who happen to be children.
Clearly, survivors of tragedies and their families can often be one of the biggest threats to freedom in this country.
ITA. Consider the following: Carolyn McCarthy became a one-trick pony, anti-gun NY Rep. after her husband was murdered by a racist nut who shot 25 white people, killing 6 including her husband. Sarah Brady's become a vocal gun control advocate, after her husband was shot and maimed. Gabby Giffords and her husband have traveled around the country in support of restrictive gun legislation. Some Sandy Hook parents vow that they "won't give up" the fight for stricter gun control. Many self-described "9/11 familymembers" (which can include many shirt-tail relatives, BTW) have decried efforts to publicize photos, pertinent information, and release 911 calls because it's either "too soon" or considered an invasion of their privacy, in defiance of the public's right to know. Also, beware of legislation named for any number of victims of crimes who happen to be children.
Clearly, survivors of tragedies and their families can often be one of the biggest threats to freedom in the country.
Hmmm. What should we do with all these pushy survivors? MADD is another one.
ITA. Consider the following: Carolyn McCarthy became a one-trick pony, anti-gun NY Rep. after her husband was murdered by a racist nut who shot 25 white people, killing 6 including her husband. Sarah Brady's become a vocal gun control advocate, after her husband was shot and maimed. Gabby Giffords and her husband have traveled around the country in support of restrictive gun legislation. Some Sandy Hook parents vow that they "won't give up" the fight for stricter gun control. Many self-described "9/11 familymembers" (which can include many shirt-tail relatives, BTW) have decried efforts to publicize photos, pertinent information, and release 911 calls because it's either "too soon" or considered an invasion of their privacy, in defiance of the public's right to know. Also, beware of legislation named for any number of victims of crimes who happen to be children.
Clearly, survivors of tragedies and their families can often be one of the biggest threats to freedom in this country.
So you are saying that survivors who have had their families ripped apart by gun violence shouldn't be heard if their beliefs about gun control differ from yours. And then in the next breath you whine about people trying to take away your freedoms. You are a study in hypocrisy.
ITA. Consider the following: Carolyn McCarthy became a one-trick pony, anti-gun NY Rep. after her husband was murdered by a racist nut who shot 25 white people, killing 6 including her husband. Sarah Brady's become a vocal gun control advocate, after her husband was shot and maimed. Gabby Giffords and her husband have traveled around the country in support of restrictive gun legislation. Some Sandy Hook parents vow that they "won't give up" the fight for stricter gun control. Many self-described "9/11 familymembers" (which can include many shirt-tail relatives, BTW) have decried efforts to publicize photos, pertinent information, and release 911 calls because it's either "too soon" or considered an invasion of their privacy, in defiance of the public's right to know. Also, beware of legislation named for any number of victims of crimes who happen to be children.
Clearly, survivors of tragedies and their families can often be one of the biggest threats to freedom in this country.
And yet they think they can use the lose of their loved ones as a justifiable excuse to limit, alter or abolish our rights...and they think they can just get a free pass out of some wrapped sense of "morality" and "decency" and then say any debate or criticism of their lies and propaganda is "bullying".
These agents of ignore and tyranny are to be fought on any field their every medium and media system, and their every lie debunked and exposed.
So you are saying that survivors who have had their families ripped apart by gun violence shouldn't be heard if their beliefs about gun control differ from yours. And then in the next breath you whine about people trying to take away your freedoms. You are a study in hypocrisy.
Their views will do nothing but create more and more victims. Yes their have the right to grieve, they do not have the right to limit our freedoms.
No know is calling for laws to take away their right to freedom of speech, they are however advocating for laws that have and will infriged upon more and more of our Right To Keep And Bear Arms.
Short of circumventing democracy, an effective tactic is brainwashing the next generation of voters. The environmentalists tried to convince school age kids that they were smarter than their parents when it came to environmental issues. This tactic has been tried before. This is all part of the agenda to “fundamentally change America”. If we compare the agenda to squeezing the water out of a sponge, guns are like pins and needles in that sponge.
It is unfortunate Rep Giffords was injured,
however, when you are an elected official you have to accept the risks with the job,
just like her husband accepted risk when on the space shuttle mission, as well as the risks of life, which can never be eliminated.
She can recite anything he places in front of her, knowing that background checks would not have stopped that crazy guy from hurting those people that day in Arizona, Colorado or in Connecticut.
I find it wrapped that they can can use their 1st Amendment right, to infringed on our 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment and 9th Amendment rights.
Gee, why aren't they using Smiling smirking Robbie Parker from Serco?, or has he gone underground, lol. major fail by the assorted actors ..
Short of circumventing democracy, an effective tactic is brainwashing the next generation of voters. The environmentalists tried to convince school age kids that they were smarter than their parents when it came to environmental issues. This tactic has been tried before. This is all part of the agenda to “fundamentally change America”. If we compare the agenda to squeezing the water out of a sponge, guns are like pins and needles in that sponge.
It is unfortunate Rep Giffords was injured,
however, when you are an elected official you have to accept the risks with the job,
just like her husband accepted risk when on the space shuttle mission, as well as the risks of life, which can never be eliminated.
She can recite anything he places in front of her, knowing that background checks would not have stopped that crazy guy from hurting those people that day in Arizona, Colorado or in Connecticut.
I find it wrapped that they can can use their 1st Amendment right, to infringed on our 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment and 9th Amendment rights.
Gee, why aren't they using Smiling smirking Robbie Parker from Serco?, or has he gone underground, lol. major fail by the assorted actors ..
What ever happened to him?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
