Vote democrat for now on

The reason STP argues that mentally unstable people should be able to buy and possess guns, is because he has a mental illness that would probably prevent him from having guns under such legislation.

Which proves that the legislation is bad, because we can all tell that he is a completely rational, critically thinking individual.

 

I don't have a mental disorder, and why do I almost get kicked off for using the word "liberal," but, Liberals get away with personal insults they pulled out of their ass, like this.

Eggsprog- I know it must be hard for a Liberal to believe, but, some people actually do defend other people's rights.

I think if people only defend Rights that they want/use, it makes it easier for the government to take those Rights one by one. (like they have been doing)


You Liberals are too much. I think the funniest part, is that you think your views are for the "greater good," and any opposing view gets thrown into the same category. During this conversation, I have been mentioning real and many hypocrisies of Liberals, and why guns are available for our protection. It is you Liberals who won't debate, and immediately resort to name-calling and, uninformed statements meant to discredit me (or any other person you're debating with.)

This should prove to spectators, that Liberals wont listen to any opposing views.

My theory is that, they wont because they think they're 100% right, and there is no negotiation to their policies.

Even those of you who don't support Obama. (though, many of you still do.)


You know, you lie to yourself more than anyone? As much as Liberals lie to themselves and say they stand for freedom, they are letting government ban larges groups of people, from certain freedoms, just because of a possible drug charge or, a mental illness. A mental illness does not mean a person is crazy, they are merely irregular releases of brain chemicals. You're bunching a huge group of people, and you're stamping them all as "violent criminals," and denying them their Rights over trivial nonsense.

Civil Liberties should be important even if they don't effect you. Obama supporters refuse to acknowledge the NDAA, HR347, FAA reuthorization act, or any of Obama's other Constitutional violations (and there's many)


I know you don't support Obama as much as Fraggle Rock does. But still, the hypocrisy of Liberalism makes me laugh.

"I don't watch fox"

Oh, yes, you're an individual because you only watch news with a Liberal bias, and not a mainstream republican station. They just don't grasp that Democratic Liberals and, Liberalism generally, is the same exact thing as mainstream republican.

I mean, Obamacare was originally "RomneyCare," they were both sponsored by elite bankers, and, they both supported Obamas unconstitutional laws.

Im just wondering how long it's gonna take Liberals to realize that they're being control like saps by the Liberal Media (ABC, MSNBC, CNN Etc. etc.) and, they are ultimately still going along with the will of the elite, as we cant have an endless supply of fake money, without the military-industrial complex.

And this encourages and allows great government force with guns. While, at the same time, they're trying to put serious restrictions on gun ownership. I even just posted articles of cops raping women and, starting prostitution rings.

The government spies on us to "stop terrorism" but, you're 8X more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist!

Imo- The US Government is the true terrorists, and people that support them, are practically digging their own graves by: asking for more government, more taxes and, more gun laws.


But, it's no skin off my ass what you believe. I learned a long time ago, that to people captivated in the Matrix, that perception is reality.


And most of you refuse to perceive that you might be wrong and maybe your views and politicians are really hurting people. It's also kinda funny that none of you are from the US, and I'm wondering if you've ever even seen any branch of the government in action (excluding president and congress, stuff on TV) I'm saying none of you have probably been on US government insurance, went to a US DMV or, probably even a US school.

But yet, you think it is best for America, if we pump more money into it, and give them more power than our citizens. American cops can abuse their power, and I think citizens should always be able to protect themselves from government.

 

Next up:

Al Gore and his evil global-warming-hysteria-related plot to change the constitution so he can kill all the good babies before they're born and leave us with only evil babies who buy illegal guns to shoot unarmed citizens in the ruins of post-Obama America, and then all of the victims are denied health care unless they agree to having tracking devices installed in their brains.

 

Can you at least provide us with a hypothetical scenario where this could ever happen? I mean look at what happened to David Koresh and his group at Waco, and the incident at Ruby ridge... not that I support either of those, but guns certainly didn't help them a bit.

My opinion is the only way you can protect yourself from government is to change it from within. That means voting for the right guys.

Or maybe you should try to get into grass roots politics yourself if you feel so strongly about things. Work your way up, build a constituency. Thats the only way you can effect real change.

 

I didn't read the rest because I assume it's a lot of blah blah Obama liberals american guns blah blah ron paul.

You've said many times on here that you're bi-polar. You've actually used it to defend your irrational and angry behaviour on more than one occasion.

For the last time, I am not liberal. If anything, I could probably be described as a social democrat.

 

I was misdiagnosed, like a majority of people diagnosed with manic depression.

And you not reading my post proved everything I said, so thank you.

Leftist, (including Liberal AND democrats) are ignorant, they wont even listen to any opposing views, they just want to FORCE their will unto everyone.

There was 2 paragraphs in that response, you could've read it. But, no! Just like the rest of you Liberals you just insult me, and ignore the truth. Oh yes! You're all soo mature and intelligent, that you can't even listen to any views that contrast your own . You know everything, and having a government to force your will onto everyone isn't morally flawed in the least *sarcasm*

The reason why you Liberals jump in here and attack me is cause I'm making you question your beliefs, but you're all too hardheaded and ignorant to even question them a little. You think just because you're on the "other side," or the two party system you're soo different.


And btw- make up your mind, cause last time I talked to you, you didn't like Obama. I have every Right in the world to "bash" on Obama- I, and most of you Liberals did it to Bush, too! So Im tired of the double-standard.

Obama is a treasonous disgrace, that is giving dictatorial powers to himself and any future president, and you Liberals, Democrats and, Leftists idolize him, every time he lies to you. Even though he has done nothing to legalize marijauana or gay marriage- he SAYS he supports it, and that's good enough for Liberals/Democrats, never mind he: kills citizens, spies on us, is abolishing the constitution or, a war monger; At least he SAYS he cares about taxing the rich, and all the other jargon that Liberals think make them the only viable solution.


Meanwhile, it's a big scam, and it's obvious to anyone that does a little research. The government is reliant on us being ignorant, apathetic, dependent on government and, trusting of government. But, when they commit all this crime and terror in plain site, only real morons would still support them!

 

How can we force you if we don't have any guns?

 

Me not reading your post didn't prove anything. I didn't read it because I don't want to educate myself on opposing views, I didn't read it because you say the same thing over, and over, and over, so why bother?

Also, I'll admit that it is fun to see how many times I can get you to write a dozen paragraphs of gibberish that nobody will actually read.

 

Please show me where I said that I support Obama.

For the record, saying I would identify as a social democrat is not the same as being a supporter of the American Democratic Party.

 

They do try to do everything by forcing blunt and ignorant will on everyone because that's all they got. They use false argument tactics. They won't let you speak, they overtalk you. They are running scared, getting desperate. Feckless is the term that they have been tricked into, but not for any good or humanitarian reason. It's a part of the human condition that has been exploited and we are seeing/will see the results. There is the schlameel and the schlamozzle. One goes through life spilling soup, the other is the one he spills it on. Both are considered a kind of loser.

 

thanks for the inadvertent honesty.

 

Clearly I meant it to read "I didn't not read it," but sure, take that as a win. You need one.

 

I'm pretty sure that ad hominem is a false argument.

 

You said you didn't read it cause you figured I was bashin Obama. I have the Right to do so, and most of you bashed on Bush. Yes, he is a puppet-but, that's no excuse and he's no better than push.


And social Democrat? That is essentially communism, isn't it? People think that is the "fairest" system, but it's going to disallow anyone to become wealthy, unless they're government. The other thing it's going to do, is lower demand to become things like doctors, lawyers and, businessmen- because it makes no sense to go to school for something, when you can work at the desk and make the same amount.

On top of that, it allows those in the government that redistribute the funds to embezzle large quantities of money, while the average joe is struggling to survive. That's always how communism turns out, in nearly every case of history.

I believe people should live with less government regulations, and if they want to go join a local commune that shares everything, they should be able to do that. But they shouldn't force that on 313 million allegedly "free" people.

 

No, it is not basically communism. Socialism and communism are not the same thing.

 

@STP,

Because quoting the last 10 posts of yours, would be too long, I have to nutshell this.



1. You have a LOT of facts about how the Sandy Hook tragedy went down, I can tell because your post indicate your mixing up how he got into the building, what weapon was used, among other things.

To be specific, nobody buzzed him in, he shot through tempered glass windows, to gain entry into the building.

(As far as I know knives can't do that) Which means the kill count Adam Lanza reached could not have been done with another type of weapon.

----

Also to make another point about you comparing the notion that the tool used as a lethal weapon, doesn't matter ( aka: gun = knife = rock = pencil = all are deadly and all should be legal on that logic alone)

Let's do a bit more comparing:

Sandy Hook

1. 1 Assailant

Kill count: 26

Weapon: Bushmaster w/ surplus ammo, and a handgun. (I think a 7mm?)



China's more recent stabbing terrorist attack

1. Multiple Assailants

Kill count: 20 + some odd injuries

Weapon: Knives


---

Conclusion: Both guns and knives are deadly, but to reach the same kill count, guns and ammo, seem to be MORE EFFECTIVE than knives AND can be used in more tactical ways to gain entry into the same building security Sandy Hook elementary school had. (Sidenote: We know this because we had one survivor in the front office of the school who told us what happened, and one little girl survivor who lost all of her friends and classmates, who saw the guns used).



Therefore legislation on back round checks for gun purchases, limits on magazine size or certain gun features which should be amended as the gun industry plays a cat an mouse game with what regulations they can get by with tweaks to gun design or manufacturing, should be done.

Also in regards to police corruption i believe the courts ruled NY's frisky policy to be halted on unconstitutional grounds, and so that to me indicates a check and balance system is still working, and isn't as bad as you say.

You'd also have to show me that statistically, corrupt cops, represent a systemic poisoning of an entire police department or if that was just a sick individual who happened to be a cop. (I only know of 3 cases were a cop raped woman in recent history spanning a lot of years.)

For the most part the cops I've meet are pretty upstanding people. I get the feeling your demonizing the majority for a minority.


----


We agree on the drug war in some respects but disagree on others.


For instance I do think government and law play a role in NOT legalizing PCP, because I know what PCP can do to someone.


People on a trip from PCP, have done very violent crimes, which include homicide, rape, the inability to feel pain (so getting shot doesn't phase them and won't work well in self defense until you outright kill them).


The premise of drugs being illegal is that because a drug is an influencing someone's behavior and brain chemistry, while in the midst of a crime that does fall under the juristication of law enforcement, that the drug's correlation makes it a matter of law enforcement.

But you're certainly correct that in some cases, case by case (like marijuana), the drug war should be significantly scaled back, and state and federal budgets should save those $ and reinvest domestically and/or pay down some debts.


Also Obama has cut a lot on military spending as well, but you seem to be glossing over that.

 

Now on to the other issues briefly mentioned:

1. I agree there is too much corporate money influencing elections at every level of government, and I think the 1 cause all of us should rally behind is a constitutional amendment to how campaigns are funded to weed out this special interests, so the focus can be put on good governing of the USA.

2. I actually believe in the creation and popularity of more than 2 main political parties, which could allow both main parties now to shrink their party platform ideals, and not have to cater to such a wide range of views, so as to be hypocritical in party stance and behavior/actions.

(This is where the image of hypocrisy comes for both parties because they're trying to appeal to a spectrum of views for each election cycle)

 

Ad hominem refers to an individual, not groups organized or nor utilizing the only propaganda and social techniques they're capable of. Sheesh

 

That is why I said "inadvertent" honesty. Looks like your subconscious mind got the better of you..

Ha! Yeah right! You Leftists can gang up on people, call names and insult people, but you can't defend your views when they're exposed as being part of the problems that I'm against.

Pawns only move in square in the game, buddy.

It is freedom that will give us a safe and happy life- not government. They haven't so far, they only hold us down and create more problems and war.


So, keep insulting me- because in the end the biggest difference between you and I, is that I have more moral fabric than to sit back and justify murders for my own personal gain.

 

I was under the impression that you were an individual.