HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » this week, the reasons th...

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:35 PM

 

this week, the reasons the pro-NRA, pro-guns side have for their guns have changed to one

We are winning, the NRA has lost.
The gun people used to say

they need their guns for hunting
they need their guns for sport
they need their guns to collect

and this week, it now is evident that the real reason they never spoke of, but now are saying aloud is- they need their gun to overthrow a governement, they paranoid like think is tyranny.

They are now out in the open about their gun

And they are now showing themselves for being treasonous and wanting to have a violent coup'd'etat.
They are no longer silent

Because they know that their old excuses have been debunked.
no one was taking their private weapon out of their home

just the street

they could have still collected,(no need for bullets) used for sport(without lethal bullets)or going to the range and like mini-golf getting a gun to shoot for an hour or two.

they could hunt with a bow and arrow

they could protect their home, and like alarms, put a big neon sign on the windows saying
warning you will be shot if you trespass or something like that
but they never wanted it for that

they wanted it to overthrow the governement because they are delusional conspiracy theorists

they should all be tried for treason with the appropriate, (MANDATED in the original founding fathers days) punishment.

I always knew that the ones who spewed the constitution in the media and otherwise,
never actually cared for it, nor read it.

18 replies, 1463 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply this week, the reasons the pro-NRA, pro-guns side have for their guns have changed to one (Original post)
graham4anything Jan 2013 OP
leftyohiolib Jan 2013 #1
Bay Boy Jan 2013 #2
graham4anything Jan 2013 #3
patrice Jan 2013 #4
malaise Jan 2013 #5
graham4anything Jan 2013 #6
patrice Jan 2013 #8
malaise Jan 2013 #16
Robb Jan 2013 #7
patrice Jan 2013 #9
patrice Jan 2013 #10
samsingh Jan 2013 #11
samsingh Jan 2013 #12
Turborama Jan 2013 #13
graham4anything Jan 2013 #17
apocalypsehow Jan 2013 #14
backwoodsbob Jan 2013 #15
Demo_Chris Jan 2013 #18

Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:39 PM

1. maybe it's why there's never a time for discussing it b/c this is what it comes down to

 

they're scared without it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:41 PM

2. No doubt there are delusional right wingers

who fantasize about overthrowing the government, but I bet if you searched the old DU board
you would find some of us who were discussing the same thing in the Bush years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bay Boy (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:51 PM

3. Bush on inauguration day, got into the helicopter,taken to airport, flew home. Like always

 

He did not stay, did not stop an election, did not chain himself to the oval office

did not do anything the conspiracy theorists in those days thought he/they would do

His terms ended, he went home and retired. Where he has stayed, mostly out of the news now for 4 years.

The way to ensure his way doesn't ever continue, is never to vote his brother or other Bushies back in.

the paranoia funnelled by the same sources then and now with the conspiracy theories
(the Alex Jones, the CTers, the leaders of the CT were NEVER democratic party wanters.
They were either anarchists or 3rd party ites or doing a double mole type thing, Bush people to start off with.

The helicopter and Bush waving and leaving voluntarily on inauguration day Jan. 2009, showed it all.

No overthrow of government.

And the old Bush/Obama bullspit is still bullspit.

Because the helicopter cleared any cloud away. And was seen by all on all sides.

(BTW, if there ever was another civil war- same side would win again. Brains over guns any day wins.

the gun people want it to overthrow, and now the curtain was opened and revealed
so we never again even need to do anything but call it for what it is -treason.
(not hunting, not sport, not collecting, but 100% treason).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:53 PM

4. There's a very interesting blog post over at Huffington Post that goes into this:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #4)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:59 PM

5. That Larry Ward lunatic was on Al Sharpton earlier

He said the government does not have a right to have any weapons not available to citizens

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:04 PM

6. Nutjob must think everyone should own a shoulder missle or have a Zimmerman at their call.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:11 PM

8. It's HARD to understand how people who say they prioritize freedom above all else don't see how

fascist and oppressive, not only to others, but also ultimately to themselves, such an attitude about what weapons should be available to citizens is.

It's all so incredibly, amazingly, stupendously, unbelievably, incredibly, surprisingly, shockingly childish and immature and stupid and mentally limited that I just really am disoriented by how dumb all of this is. We have TRULY entered the Twilight Zone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #8)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 04:04 AM

16. The irony of course is that the government's Constitutional role is laid out in the

Articles of the Constitution before the amendments were added.

They are also beyond ignorant. I'm betting Larry Ward would not show up on Lawrence O'Donnell's show. Sharpton was excellent re MLK and slavery but not that sharp on the Constitution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:08 PM

7. It's a First Amendment remedy, really.

The more they are allowed to speak, the better. They do more harm to their "cause" via the Pogo Principle than we could ever hope to do attempting to reason with them.

I am confident.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:16 PM

9. One of my biggest concerns is how this is NOT just a domestic issue. The people behind the NRA are

making it an international issue that could ultimately lead to the commitment of American troops in situations that they do NOT need to be in. They are doing this with the help of Senator Jerry Moran, from my state of Kansas, whom I believe inherited this particular legislative effort from Rand Paul. It concerns me highly for the way in which Secretary Clinton's work is used as one of the whereas -es for this bill in the Foreign Relations committee in the Senate right now:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022186767

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:35 PM

10. I see that THOMAS timed that search out, so here's the text of the bills heading:

S.2205 -- Second Amendment Sovereignty Act of 2012 (Introduced in Senate - IS)

S 2205 IS

112th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 2205

To prohibit funding to negotiate a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty that restricts the Second Amendment rights of United States citizens.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 19, 2012

Mr. MORAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations


And another link which will time-out again in a bit: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c112:2:./temp/~c112ccsciq::

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 11:34 PM

11. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 11:51 PM

12. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 12:11 AM

13. Hey, g4a. I think you'll be interested in this ---

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turborama (Reply #13)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 05:07 AM

17. That is a great idea. (plus other thoughts).

 

I wish there was some way to have seen transparent when one posts there, which are
anti-NRA, anti-Gun posts, as when I posted on their turf, it just says I posted there, and without reading there, no one knows all my posts are anti-guns.

BTW, I think I pretty much blew their arguments away a few months ago when I asked in their area,
what if Zimmerman had (was packing) a bowling ball instead of a gun.
The parallel being that bowling is a sport, people go to a place specific for bowling, like gun people go to shooting ranges, and alot of bowlers leave their ball in a locker there,
and bowlers do not carry their bowling ball (either openly or concealed) in a bar, movie theatre, restaurant and in general on the street at all.

Any way you look at it, Mr. Martin still would have been alive and zimmy would have been bogged down with a bowling ball that to inflict something would have required distance to lift, and where Mr. Martin might have had a fighting chance (as opposed to being shot in cold blood by Zimmy, just to have Zimmy watch him die for having skittles.

I think between Zimmerman, between CT, and also because of the one election in California, where Bloomberg financed heavily(and used it as a test) the anti-gun candidate in the democratic primary against the heavily favored incumbent pro-gun candidate (believe it was Joe Baca who was tossed from office).
That was a test for 2014. That primary challenges for those pro-NRA will be heavily financed with a challenger to run against them, and if there are no challengers in a red state, the Dem candidate will run in the general who is anti-gun.

Within 6 years, all senators will have to run and 3 cycles of house will.

Bill Clinton said something interesting in an old Charlie Rose clip I watched after the 2004 election, talking about 2000 election,and 1994, and how bill did not know the power of the NRA back in 1994, and if he had been allowed to help Gore in 2000, Bill thought he could have made a resounding anti-NRA case and convinced enough voters one on one to have turned KT and TN and ARK around in 2000, making both Nader and Florida obsolete that year.
(but his help was shunned by Gore and in 1994, Clinton did not see the NRA as powerful like he did later.

In reality, the NRA is indeed part of that vast rightwing conspiracy Hillary talked about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:09 AM

14. Had one in Meta asking "Will you fight?" in this very context - against his OWN COUNTRY:

Start with my reply to his hidden post, and scroll down.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=205076

That mask is slipping, and the ugly NRA agenda is being exposed. Kick, Rec.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:16 AM

15. actually I'm pro gun I guess

and mine are for hunting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 06:01 AM

18. It's ALWAYS been this.

 

ALWAYS.

Second amendment advocates often get annoyed at all the hunting and sports talk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread