Magox Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 cuz 60 inch tv's and priuses have been so often used in multiple murders... what about smoking? or cholesterol? sugar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 what about smoking? or cholesterol? sugar? for the most part that self inflicted harm. if your asking if i support fda regulation of tobacco, then, yes i do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 (edited) cuz 60 inch tv's and priuses have been so often used in multiple murders... So you are going to stand there and say automobiles are not REGULARLY misued, resulting in death and often, multiple deaths. Really? Edited December 26, 2012 by RkFast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 (edited) for the most part that self inflicted harm. if your asking if i support fda regulation of tobacco, then, yes i do. I don't see much of a difference. One is self-inflicted and the other is tool that can be used for malicious intent. Death is death, and if you are going to restrict any tool that causes death or a means to it, than for the sake of consistency you would have to include, cholesterol, sugar, smoking, drinking, etc. etc. Edited December 26, 2012 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 the ability to see gradation and relativity is important in my opinion. i think important in public opinion as well. im confident that public opinion is more in agreement with me than you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 the ability to see gradation and relativity is important in my opinion. i think important in public opinion as well. im confident that public opinion is more in agreement with me than you. With what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 There was a very good reason that gun control was not an issue in the election. The vast majority of the population of the U.S. is solidly behind the 2nd amendment and if Obama made an issue of it he was going to anger those people or his base. Since the election is now over he doesn't need to vote "present" on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 yup, pols felt that it was untouchable politically. things have changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 yup, pols felt that it was untouchable politically. things have changed. The only thing that has changed is that the media is making a stink out of it and making those that agree with the media think that there is some great groundswell of public opinion against the 2nd amendment. The media can't even differentiate between automatic, semi-automatic and assault weapons. The AR-15 is no more deadly than a hunting rifle with a clip, but because it looks like an M-16 the media is coming out against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Liberals Panic As They Lose The Gun Narrative. When you argue for a living, you can tell how an argument is going for you. The evidence and my gut both tell me that the liberals have lost control of the gun control narrative. Not for lack of trying – it was almost as if they were poised to leap into action across the political, media and cultural spectrum the second the next semi-human creep shot up another “gun free zone.” This was their big opening to shift the debate and now it’s closing. They’ve lost, and they are going nuts. The evidence is all around that this is not going to be the moment where America begins a slide into disarmed submission through an endless series of ever-harsher “reasonable restrictions” on our fundamental rights. You just have to look past the shrieking media harpies to see what’s really happening. Let’s start with the most obvious omen that this tsunami has peaked. President Obama thrilled his base by grandstanding at the memorial, and then promptly washed his hands of it by handing it over to a “blue ribbon commission.” Making Joe Biden its chairman was like staking a vampire through the heart, then hosing him down with holy water before burying his body beneath the Gilroy Garlic Festival. {snip} Sure, Senator Feinstein will submit her gun ban wish list to Harry Reid, who will look at it sagely, nod politely, and let it die. He’s more Tom Hagen than Fredo. He is going to retain the NRA “A” rating his website proudly showcases regardless of what Chuck Schumer thinks. What gets you hosannas in Manhattan gets you unemployed in Searchlight. So, the politicians’ actions have spoken louder than their words, but what of the media? We lawyers always say that when your case is strong, pound on the law and the evidence, and when your case is weak, pound on the table. The furniture is splintering in Liberalland. Their post-Newtown strategy was always to prevent an effective response from the pro-gun freedom side by both rapid action and by demonization. But the holidays and the kabuki theater that is the fiscal cliff drama meant that legislative action, their Holy Grail, would have to wait. That gave people time to think and the gun freedom side the time to react. Demonizing those who support gun freedom was always intended as a weapon to silence them. It was also critical that we, law-abiding gun owners, become the Other. By dehumanizing us and painting us as evil, it is that much easier to strip us of our rights. But gun freedom advocates fought back. Using the mainstream media, conservative media and especially social media – we need to understand its huge significance here – gun freedom advocates countered liberals’ bogus “facts.” Media reports about “automatic” weapons were corrected, clownish statements about “high caliber magazines” and “large capacity round” were mocked. The struggle raged over millions of Facebook posts. The average citizen saw gun banners ask “When will America control access to weapons?” and then saw several experts among his or her friends post about the significant hurdles one needs to get over to get a gun. Truth bypassed the mainstream media and became a weapon for the side of fundamental rights. The banners overplayed their hand, losing credibility with every distortion, evasion and smear. The cries of “Blood is on your hands!” failed to resonate – reasonable Americans just did not blame the actions of a single sociopath on millions of their fellow neighbors. And it did not help when third-string celebrities and wizened literary has-beens took to hoping gun rights advocates would be shot for daring to oppose disarmament. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Liberals Panic As They Lose The Gun Narrative. When you argue for a living, you can tell how an argument is going for you. The evidence and my gut both tell me that the liberals have lost control of the gun control narrative. Not for lack of trying – it was almost as if they were poised to leap into action across the political, media and cultural spectrum the second the next semi-human creep shot up another “gun free zone.” This was their big opening to shift the debate and now it’s closing. They’ve lost, and they are going nuts. The evidence is all around that this is not going to be the moment where America begins a slide into disarmed submission through an endless series of ever-harsher “reasonable restrictions” on our fundamental rights. You just have to look past the shrieking media harpies to see what’s really happening. Let’s start with the most obvious omen that this tsunami has peaked. President Obama thrilled his base by grandstanding at the memorial, and then promptly washed his hands of it by handing it over to a “blue ribbon commission.” Making Joe Biden its chairman was like staking a vampire through the heart, then hosing him down with holy water before burying his body beneath the Gilroy Garlic Festival. {snip} Sure, Senator Feinstein will submit her gun ban wish list to Harry Reid, who will look at it sagely, nod politely, and let it die. He’s more Tom Hagen than Fredo. He is going to retain the NRA “A” rating his website proudly showcases regardless of what Chuck Schumer thinks. What gets you hosannas in Manhattan gets you unemployed in Searchlight. So, the politicians’ actions have spoken louder than their words, but what of the media? We lawyers always say that when your case is strong, pound on the law and the evidence, and when your case is weak, pound on the table. The furniture is splintering in Liberalland. Their post-Newtown strategy was always to prevent an effective response from the pro-gun freedom side by both rapid action and by demonization. But the holidays and the kabuki theater that is the fiscal cliff drama meant that legislative action, their Holy Grail, would have to wait. That gave people time to think and the gun freedom side the time to react. Demonizing those who support gun freedom was always intended as a weapon to silence them. It was also critical that we, law-abiding gun owners, become the Other. By dehumanizing us and painting us as evil, it is that much easier to strip us of our rights. But gun freedom advocates fought back. Using the mainstream media, conservative media and especially social media – we need to understand its huge significance here – gun freedom advocates countered liberals’ bogus “facts.” Media reports about “automatic” weapons were corrected, clownish statements about “high caliber magazines” and “large capacity round” were mocked. The struggle raged over millions of Facebook posts. The average citizen saw gun banners ask “When will America control access to weapons?” and then saw several experts among his or her friends post about the significant hurdles one needs to get over to get a gun. Truth bypassed the mainstream media and became a weapon for the side of fundamental rights. The banners overplayed their hand, losing credibility with every distortion, evasion and smear. The cries of “Blood is on your hands!” failed to resonate – reasonable Americans just did not blame the actions of a single sociopath on millions of their fellow neighbors. And it did not help when third-string celebrities and wizened literary has-beens took to hoping gun rights advocates would be shot for daring to oppose disarmament. It's always nice to hear what townhall.com has to say about any issue... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 It's always nice to hear what townhall.com has to say about any issue... This response is a perfect example of why G.F. is one of the board's weakest posters. The author of the piece is a well respected commentator across the country, and whether or not you agree with his opinion piece, they are always well-stated and cogent Kurt Schlichter's freelance work has been published in nationally recognized publications like the New York Post, Washington Examiner, Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, the Washington Times, the Army Times, and the San Francisco Examiner. Kurt is also a successful trial lawyer based in the Los Angeles area representing companies and individuals in matters ranging from routine business cases to confidential Hollywood disputes. A member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, which recognizes attorneys who have won verdicts in excess of $1 million, his litigation strategy and legal analysis articles are regularly published in legal publications such as the Los Angeles Daily Journal and California Lawyer. Kurt is a 1994 graduate of Loyola Law School, where he was a law review editor. He majored in Communications and Political Science as an undergraduate at the University of California, San Diego, where he edited the conservative student paper California Review while also writing a regular column in the student humor paper. Kurt is also an Army infantry colonel serving in the California Army National Guard. He wears the silver “jump wings” of a qualified paratrooper and commanded the elite 1st Squadron, 18th Cavalry Regiment. A veteran of both the Persian Gulf War and Operation Enduring Freedom (Kosovo), he is a graduate of the Army's Combined Arms Staff Service School, the Command and General Staff College, and the United States Army War College, where he received a master of Strategic Studies degree. But what do we get from a liberal when his "narrative is challenged? a weak-ass comment about the site that the article is from..............................thats what passes for commentary.................sad . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 This response is a perfect example of why G.F. is one of the board's weakest posters. The author of the piece is a well respected commentator across the country, and whether or not you agree with his opinion piece, they are always well-stated and cogent But what do we get from a liberal when his "narrative is challenged? a weak-ass comment about the site that the article is from..............................thats what passes for commentary.................sad More a commentary on you and from where you have your opinions fed to you. Save your insults for somebody who actually gives a **** what you think. Or don't. Doesn't matter much to me. Kurt Schlichter: Conservative, ex-military, gun proponent writes an op-ed piece on how the Libs f-ed up the gun narrative. B-Man: See! PROOF that Libs are stupid and bad! Wait, you didn't actually say that, or anything else for that matter. All you did was cut and paste from the article. You did bold some of the text, so bonus points there. Bravo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 More a commentary on you and from where you have your opinions fed to you. Save your insults for somebody who actually gives a **** what you think. Or don't. Doesn't matter much to me. Kurt Schlichter: Conservative, ex-military, gun proponent writes an op-ed piece on how the Libs f-ed up the gun narrative. B-Man: See! PROOF that Libs are stupid and bad! Wait, you didn't actually say that, or anything else for that matter. All you did was cut and paste from the article. You did bold some of the text, so bonus points there. Bravo! Nice to see you're still both pathetic and predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 Nice to see you're still both pathetic and predictable. Hi Darin! Why U Mad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 Finkle, I happen to go to Drudge to get some of my news. Drudge gets his articles from a variety of publications, so I get my info from everything from InfoWars to The Huffington Post. I usually try to verify things by Googling the subject. Your argument is specious and child-like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 Finkle, I happen to go to Drudge to get some of my news. Drudge gets his articles from a variety of publications, so I get my info from everything from InfoWars to The Huffington Post. I usually try to verify things by Googling the subject. Your argument is specious and child-like. I don't know if I believe you... Drudge is ok, but only if you live in a red state. Are you B-man? Full disclosure: I've been drinking and am just entertaining myself at this point. P.S. If I were ever to change my screen name (again, Darin), it would be to Gene Finkle, but only to throw the mouth-breathers off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 Drudge is ok, but only if you live in a red state. So you just admitted you prefer your news from sources biased in your favor. But when someone else posted from a source biased the other way, you said that was "bad." Weeeeeeaaaaaakkkkk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 So you just admitted you prefer your news from sources biased in your favor. But when someone else posted from a source biased the other way, you said that was "bad." Weeeeeeaaaaaakkkkk Well, calling Drudge "news" is interesting in the same kind of way. You betcha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 Well, calling Drudge "news" is interesting in the same kind of way. You betcha! Finkle, you're impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts