Guess this hero didn't need a gun

Um, those folks ain't us citizens and their system aint our system. Keep 'em out them illegals period.

Although I am all for armed citizen protecting the borders and personal property.

Side arms for the win!
 
clipboard01bigorsmall.png
 
So...no problems with people crossing over your borders into the USA, despite criminal records? Kewl...so much for the 'no fly' list, or being stopped at the borders for a 10yr old DWI... wait till the world hears of this. :D
Hey Bishy, don't you have some indigenous Indian lands you should be taking to show the world how cool you folks are?
 
Um, those folks ain't us citizens and their system aint our system. Keep 'em out them illegals period.

Although I am all for armed citizen protecting the borders and personal property.

Side arms for the win!

but...it's your system keeping them out. It's also your system putting your citizens on your no-fly list. Why shouldn't Scott Roeder have access to firearms once he gets out? Hell, license drug dealers comin' out of stir... it's aaaaaallll good.

Armed citizens patrolling borders? Why not fire all the cops while you're at it? I'm sure that Joe on the street is more than able to investigate and stop crime. Turf the courts too...don't need them. Baby with the bathwater... what baby?
 
but...it's your system keeping them out. It's also your system putting your citizens on your no-fly list. Why shouldn't Scott Roeder have access to firearms once he gets out? Hell, license drug dealers comin' out of stir... it's aaaaaallll good.

Armed citizens patrolling borders? Why not fire all the cops while you're at it? I'm sure that Joe on the street is more than able to investigate and stop crime. Turf the courts too...don't need them. Baby with the bathwater... what baby?
I'm surprised, your making sense.

Yeah.... IF they get out of jail, finish parole and have a clean slate..... sure.

When seconds counts, the cops are only minutes away. Cops have role but they cannot guarantee my safety.

IF you allow freedom to reign, you can expect an increase of death and violence. That will subside and the crime rate will drop much lower as bad people die and other learn -- "my victim might be armed and so might the people around them."

Stay safe, stay in Canada.
 
I guess you have never read Clayton Cramer's "The Racist Roots of Gun Control". I thought you were better informed on the firearms front.

i think you need to reread my post. i'm fully aware of what went on. what i'm disputing - not that it needs to be disputed anywhere but dense as a neutron star TRW - is that the folks that pulled that shit are historically contiguous with today's "gun grabbing liberals." rather they have far more in common with those we now identify with an extreme conservatism. do YOU think of southern democrats in the 50s as liberal? how about their predecessors in the 30s?

you know the easy-as-pie concealed carry permits we can get here is WA state came about because of fear of black panthers, right?

at one level one could readily argue this is more about who has access to power rather than "rights" as such.
 
Yes they were. Left all the way.

ORLY? how so? you are aware that fascism is definitionally at the extreme right, right? sorta the extreme embodiment of the kind of flag waving identity politics we see around here all the time...?

oh, right i forgot, all the bad guys are on the left. it's a comic book world!
 
..so, if Bundy got released tomorrow, he'd be able to walk into a gun store Sunday and legally buy a gun...and you'd have no issue with this? How about Berkowitz? How about the local drug-pusher? Local child molester? The paranoid schizophrenic off his meds?

Anyone, anytime for any reason? :swing:

Criminals lose certain rights. They may petition for their return. Just like always.
 
Here's a question...what exactly is the point of owning and arming so many guns? The photo above isn't that of a 'collection' by someone who collects firearms like people collect stamps..it isn't even about someone who wants a gun in their home/car/person for self-defense. That is a collection of someone with some serious issues with paranoia.
I once knew someone who collected teddy bears of all kinds. She had her husband build shelves all over the house, wall to wall, so she could display all of these teddy bears (small, large, stuffed, or whatever). I think she and this guy share the same kind of mental illness.
 
ORLY? how so? you are aware that fascism is
definitionally at the extreme right, right? sorta the extreme embodiment of the kind of flag waving identity politics we see around here all the time...?

oh, right i forgot, all the bad guys are on the left. it's a comic book world!
Benito Mussolini's Doctrine of Fascism
;) ... good one.
Git 'em, Minks!
 
wrongo once again Leftie but you are used to that
your ability to delude yourself is admirable
I am rather envious, do you need drugs and alcohol
to keep that level of self delusion going?
 
wrongo once again Leftie but you are used to that
your ability to delude yourself is admirable
I am rather envious, do you need drugs and alcohol
to keep that level of self delusion going?

wrong about what? you gonna make some sort of point or just dangle yer weenie in the breeze?
 
Criminals lose certain rights. They may petition for their return. Just like always.

Not actually. The anti-firearms groups lobbied for the defunding of the Restoration of Rights program at Treasury. In the recent case of UNITED STATES et al. v. BEAN the court ruled that Bean had no right to go to the district court to have his rights restored. The law states that upon denial of application of restoration of rights a person may then apply to the district court. The SCotUS thew this wrench into the mix"

The absence of an actual denial by ATF of a felon's petition precludes judicial review under [section]925(c). The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to grant relief from a firearms disability if certain preconditions are met, and an applicant may seek federal-court review if the Secretary denies his application. Ibid. Since 1992, however, the appropriations bar has prevented ATF, to which the Secretary has delegated this authority, from using appropriated funds to investigate or act upon the applications. Section 925(c)'s text and the procedure it lays out for seeking relief make clear that an actual decision by ATF on an application is a prerequisite for judicial review, and that mere inaction by ATF does not invest a district court with independent jurisdiction. Grammatically, the phrase "denied by the Secretary" references the Secretary's decision on whether an applicant "will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety," and whether "the granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest." Such determination can hardly be construed as anything but a decision actually denying the application.
 
IF you allow freedom to reign, you can expect an increase of death and violence. That will subside and the crime rate will drop much lower as bad people die and other learn -- "my victim might be armed and so might the people around them."

Stay safe, stay in Canada.
...which would give your bad guys the 'shoot first before you get shot at' ideal. If the victim in question has a good chance of being armed..kill him/her without delay. It's self-defense, after all.

You sure you're not an anarchist?
 
Freedom has inherent dangers, that owuld include the freedom to kill someone at risk of being killed.

It would take time to thin the herd of the liberal damage we have lived under for too long.
 
Freedom has inherent dangers, that owuld include the freedom to kill someone at risk of being killed.

It would take time to thin the herd of the liberal damage we have lived under for too long.
GW Bush wasn't considered liberal... but thanks for playing.

Next contestant, please!
 
Back
Top