Idaho elects a Rapist and he also gets a gun

Yeah...so now we're talking about 2 issues in one post now....because it happened and the Brady backround checks failed.


Meaning, my argument in the other threads that addressed gun control issues, just got strengthened.

I'll provide the link if you guys want one but I expect you to google what I'm talking about here because it's not hard to find in Idaho politics.

It's also why ALL backround checks (need to happen online and offline from licensed gun dealers or individual sales)



http://www.trackinfections.com/idah...tion-then-says-amnesia-g784577008?language=en


http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2013/11/idaho-state-representative-r-boise-lied.html

(First two are blogs I know, but it's the same issue and it's been reported in the news too)


This also proves another side theory I've had: The apathy about voting has real consequences. And it seems those that do vote aren't doing their research.

 

Many politicians have guns. Even a few Mayors who were fighting for total disarmament.

First of all, let me say your sources are really biased- "Americans against the Teaparty." Secondly, he wasn't convicted of rape, he was convicted of "assault with intent to commit rape." Usually, he would receive a paper saying he couldn't own a firearm. But as a government official, they have a lot more lienancy than us. Is it right? No.

But I think Gun Rights were made to extend to everyone, and gun laws just make it harder for people with good intentions to protect themselves or others. Look at the UK shooting in the 90's; They already had gun bans, but a kid got a Semi machine gun and ran around shooting for 8 hours, because no one had firepower to stop him!

Idk why you're acting like this guy is soo awful; I think it's a little worse to execute people with Drones, and tell your advisors "I'm really good at killing people"-Obama-

But then, citizens are the ones that can't be trusted with guns, huh? I notice Liberals/Democrats aren't concerned by government guns or force.

 

Why must you bring up Obama in every thread? I don't see the connection.

And are you seriously making the argument that someone charged with "assault with intent to commit rape" is not an awful person? Or that somehow he isn't as bad of a person because he wasn't actually able to finish the job? I'm just confused in general as to the point you're trying to make.

 

My point is that politicians get away with all types of stuff. Maybe he is an awful person- I don't know him. But Its not worse than murdering innocent kids with drones! My point was exactly as I stated; Liberals ONLY care about dirty politicians when they're Republican. Also, how do you not see a connection, when he's supporting abolishing the second amendment? Firstly, that's Obama's position. If Monk shares Obama's opinion, he should explain why it's fine for police, DHS, EPA and, TSA to hold guns, but not American citizens..

Of course there's a connection. He's complaining essentially saying this guy shouldn't have been voted in. I could agree, but Obama is no better, to murder 16 year old kids!- and I don't see any Liberals or Democrats admitting THAT; Instead they want to attack any Republican, to take the lime-light off of their disasterous leader.

The crime was commited in 74', there is no law barring this guy from being in power. The voters may have been apathetic, or maybe they didn't want the other guy to win. Either way, voter apathy has also brought us Obama, and he is an utter nightmare. And I talk about him, because he is the purple elephant in the room everyone tries to ignore!

 

Oh, my bad, I guess I missed the part in the OP where he mentioned any sort of an opinion about Obama. Good thing you pointed that out, otherwise I might have thought that you have an unhealthy obsession with Obama and 'Liberals' and thus an inability to discuss anything without bringing one or both of those topics up.

 

My only "Obsession" is with freedom. I'm not obsessed with the enemies of freedom, I just love calling them out on hypocrisies. It's actually funny to me how so many people here will FLIP when Republicans do the littlest thing, but Democrats can execute people, and questioning them is an "unhealthy obsession."

I believe in the Constitution; it is the Supreme Law of the Land, here in America. Just because politicians disregard it, doesn't make them Right. I am against tyranny, and the wide spread idea that government is always right.

Just because YOU are complacent with an overblown surveillance government for America, doesn't mean we are. There are serious problems in this country, and most were caused or perpetuated by Obama.

Instead of realizing HIM for the fraud he is, it's all about this nobody Major, who tried to commit rape 40 years ago.

And you don't see how they're connected? It's connected because politicians are NOT above the law. They have a document they are bound by. This Mayor should be treated as any citizen would, but Obama shouldn't be allowed to get away with MURDER by those standards either, so Democrats need to realize they can't have their cake and eat it too!

They're never gonna make Americans think every republican is bad, and every democrat is good. (Especially when so many Democrat virtually represent the same things, with a different twist.) And they certainly wont talk people into giving up their guns, for exclusive GOVERNMENT security.

If someone breaks into my home, I'm not going to hide under a desk for an hour, waiting for government to come with their guns. Plus, government agents can go crazy as fast as regular people. So disarmament makes no sense- it's just Obamas new agenda to leave us defenseless to government agents who are alleged "public servants"


So until you can really converse about these issues, f- off! Seriously, dude. You're not from here, and you don't understand the magnitude of corruption in our Federal Government. The guy we're talking about is guilty of lying; Obama continually lies to us, and he controls drones pilots and the military, and has done nothing except continued the status quo, for the military-industrial complex. One Mayor or Governor owning a gun, is nothing compared to the murderous and corrupt Obama Administration.

And they do tie in, because they both lied for a vote. They both manipulate the law to have their way. The difference is, one attempted rape, and the other has killed countless civilians, in the name of fighting "terror."

Obama is just a face, so people perceive change. Nothing is different. We are the biggest terrorists on this planet, and some people REFUSE to envision Obama, as having any part of it!

 

You are winning your war against an enemy you have invented within your head, congratulations.

 

Dude, shut up. You don't know the last thing about me. You post in nearly everyone of my topics with these snooty ass remarks.

I passively mentioned Obama in the first post, and if you didn't always jump the gun, and rip my head off, maybe you'd realize what I was saying to begin with!

Firstly, his source was totally biased. Which is proven by the name "Americans Against the Teaparty." Secondly, his whole post was concern that this mayor now has a gun. He didn't KILL anyone. But I'm saying Obama does kill people and, is obviously much more dangerous than an Iowa governor with "a gun."

The Government is the "Big Brother" in Orwells "1984," and that's why I'm not "winning," anything. Everyday, more and more freedom is taken away from us. I try to relay information, but the rock and hard place I'm caught between is Party pride and, just plain ignorance.

When the Government; kills citizens without trial, consistently violate our Rights, spy on citizens, harrass people to comply, puts gag orders on court cases against them, takes bribes and, sees protesters as potential "Domestic Terrorists;" we are at the point of tyranny.

The FBI visited a 16 year old student, over writing a paper about Ron Paul. They we're trying to get him to give information about OWS and Anonymous. http://rt.com/usa/fbi-school-report-hallman-076/

Governments abuse of power is disgusting right now! You say I'm fighting a "fake" enemy, but the evidence is everywhere. The US Government is a system of brute force, and those who wish to expand/keep it, are either: crazy, totally unaware or, they support the force involved with government, because it makes them feel "safe."

i am against mindlessly and unquestionably doing things or supporting things people know to be wrong. Most people wouldn't kill dozens of women and children to catch 1 bad guy. Most people wouldn't steal from another person, because that person is well-off. But through government, they have an excuse for this use of force. It's still just as wrong, but it is the excuse that makes it okay- the "Greater good" excuse. But it's only that, as our money goes to an elite few, shipped to other countries or, wasted on expensive programs which would be cheaper on the free market.

I think your problem with me is I'm exposing what you believe, when you just want to believe taking peoples guns and forcing compliance will work. I think everything needs to be done voluntary- and our Bill of Rights should never be negotiable. I don't have an invisible enemy. You always bitch at me for knocking on Obama, but you wont say you're a liberal, or, an obama supporter. You must be one or the other, because both subjects just smash on your buttons.

You can't refute what I say about Obama, the problem with me bringing him up, is because this thread supports his policies of Gun Control, in the meantime, he is much more deadly than 99.9% of Americans. But it's CITIZENS that can't be trusted- not government

 

You type so much yet say so little.

 

He didn't say anything that isn't true.

 

He thinks that because I point out that he repeats the same things over and over no matter the original topic of discussion, that I must believe everything he is against, which is completely untrue.

 

Why wouldn't Obama continue the policies that have gone on for decades? He's just another figurehead passing through. I'm quite sure he was told early on how this place works and to watch his step. Soon, he'll be gone and the next puppet will be "elected" to run the military-industrial show. Same faces--same agendas= $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

you get to choose between a giant douche, and a turd sandwich

 

No choice to be made; just pure judgment on the day of the vote. Oh those were the days of youth. :mickey:

 

So. In your world. A guy intends to rape someone, and we take away his means to defend himself. Totally get it.

 

First off I did conceed that my sources above are biased and from blogs.

But the point is that facts check out, and while he did plead guilty to a lesser charge, that IMPLIES in legalese that it was BETTER for him to take the plea deal instead of going for pleading "innocence". Cheaper for the state of Idaho, and "justice" or a semblance of it was achieved.

Also there was a period of time in which he was not "elected" yet, in which case he did not have the immunity that he has now DURING WHICH at THAT time he should not have been able to get a gun(s).

In past threads you have admitted that you agree that bad people shouldn't have guns STP. This guy fits that criteria and he should've been barred from that purchase UNTIL he was elected, but the reverse happened.

Even then while I am not saying him owning a gun is illegal, I am saying it is immoral and it is a loop that must be closed in existing law in that state or wherever else loopholes like that exist regardless of job title and social status.

---

Egg is right that the tone of this thread is supposed to be this one issue specific and build off of my advocacy for better, consistent, nationwide backround checks for all gun sales online or through individuals, especially given that the Brady Act former President Regan signed into law is about to expire.

@STP your advocacy for freedom is fine, but the problem is that when a thread is made to be narrow in it's discussion topic, you broadened it because "Freedom" is such an umbrella term.

So I would appreciate it if the focus of this thread remained narrow and not reflective of topics that are more foreign policy based and have a different context.

 

I don't repeat the same thing over and over. I may talk about some of the same issues, but, not everyone knows or pays attention to these issues.
If I don't make references, you'd accuse me of making stuff up.

The original topic does relate to what I say, because how much do we allow government to get away with? Being elected 40 years after an attempted rape, is much different than knowingly executing innocent civilians and bragging "I'm good at killing people. " while your in the highest office of the country.

This is about the equivilant to me, as that Republican making himself look black, to win an election. So, I agree with Monk, that voter education and awareness is important. But, no one can act like the Democrats don't lie to get into office, or, that Obama is somehow better than this guy, or less corrupted. It's all the same- and it's a valid point.

I don't think you knowingly and willingly support Government force, Eggs.. What I think is that you really believe it is morally justifiable for government to take total control over our lives. One of those who believe people will "starve on the street," without government robbery and force.
You may not support it, but you inadvertently do by supporting a system which was built around force.

You call yourself a Liberal, Right? You should be able to converse about these issues, instead of wanting to force disarmament, and your will on other people.

That's why you are wrong. That's why Liberals and Republicans are both equally wrong; They both wish to perpetuated this system. I believe in freedom for everyone, providing they are not hurting anyone/damaging anyone's property. Freedom is what America represents, yet we have so little today.

So, I stand by what I said originally, and I'll even go a step further to say that todays government encourages corruption and the continuation of the Walstreet elite, controlling our policies. If someone goes as far to call oneself a "Democrat," you should be able to defend that position. If this Republican is so bad for attempting rape and owning a gun, then Obama is just as awful for Drone striking women and children. That is a fact, whether Liberals like to admit it or not. It's no better than Bushes policies, and it's a little worse than an attempted rapist owning a gun.

That's not to say I don't think Monk should fight for this cause- Write out a petition or something, I'll sign it. But, I don't think it's as dire as Obama's misuse of power. How many innocent civilians have to die, before we realize that they have made us the enemy?

An innocent unarmed women was killed in DC, for hitting a temp. police barricade.

Police shot a family dog in ATL, after searching the wrong house.

And who can forget the 12 year old boy who was shot for holding an airsoft gun.

Yet, there are people like you who ignore this government force, and instead see other people as the enemy. You fell for the oldest trick in the book- "divide and conquer." You seem to ignore most illegal things the government does, that they believe they can get away with.

You're against certain murders, I'm against as well. But I think Obama should be impeached and tried for High Treason, for his Constitutional violations. But I don't think, as a Canadian, you truly understand the Constitution or, Bill of Rights, so you're not one to tell Americans how we should live. We want these freedoms- plus, new ones. Like, the freedom to ingest wtvr one pleases.

But all freedom must be honored. Including the Right to bear arms, and that's why Liberalism is skewed to look like a humanitarian effort, while maintaining the status quo. As I stated earlier, Liberals support government guns, but no citizen guns. Even if self defense is cited as a reason for ownership. People will never go for that, and they shouldn't. It's counter-productive.

Government is the aspect destroying society, why would we trust them being the only people with guns? I bet they'll declare martial law if/when they take guns away.

 

I'm not defending this guy or, saying we're taking his Right to defend himself. But I'm saying that he hasn't killed anyone, unlike Obama.

I'm also saying that disarmament doesn't work, and you're trying to take away my FREEDOM, because of a small minority of guns owners. I also think it's foolish that Obama supporters want to take away guns, yet they allow Obama to get away with killing, with plastic flying death machines, but wont let citizens protect themselves from such an attack.

Sorry monk. But it makes sense. I'm not talking about foriegn policy, but local. We have our Right to bear Arms, and we shouldnt let fear make us give that up.

Monk- Ill get back to you tomo. I just got out of class, and I had to answer these 2

 

25

But right wing libertarian thought is about limiting the ‘freedom’ of the majority but they like to throw out ‘freedom’ whenever challenged over anything - but its only misdirection because to them it only seems to come down, in social and economic terms, to the ‘freedom’ of a few to exploit the majority.

That is why so many of them sneer at the idea of bringing about ‘greater equality’.

As pointed out before the meaning of what freedom means is open to interpretation.

Freedom from harm, freedom from exploitation, freedom from hardship, freedom from sickness.

There is also people’s freedom of choice this can change according to a person’s circumstance and in a monetary based system wealth can dictate those circumstances.

I mean if someone is born into power and wealth which gives them freedom from exploitation and hardship and another is born into poverty which opens them to exploitation and hardship, then there is in that society an inequality of freedom.

And as I’ve said is over 200 years old – if you were sick would you use a 200 year old medical book?

Try

Tear up the US constitution?
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=146334

What should be in a new US constitution?
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=446249

LOL and you talk of the hypocrisy of others – you who refuses to debate or have any real conversation on your idea.

 

monkjr

Could you please restate the argument you talk about? (or give a link to it)

Cheers