HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Meet George Zimmerman: He...

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:22 PM

Meet George Zimmerman: He Is the NRA

Daniel Gross
03/22/2012 3:10 pm

<...>

The shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman is a heartbreaking tragedy. But make no mistake, it is not a surprise that it happened in Florida, the NRA's closest thing to an armed utopia. In fact, much more so than any of the shills they had promoting their agenda in their big budget propaganda campaign, George Zimmerman is the embodiment of the gun lobby and its vision for America.

George Zimmerman is the NRA.


And now the NRA has made it abundantly clear that their vision is of an America that looks just like Florida, a nation where it's easy for criminals and dangerous people to get, carry and use guns -- a nation without any gun laws, where just about anybody can get a gun and use it anywhere. Their spokespeople use fear, bordering on paranoia to justify flooding our streets with armed and violent people, and the result is more tragedies like Trayvon Martin's.

The NRA is literally working to promote "George Zimmermans" to carry and use their guns in virtually every state across our nation.


Just days after the Trayvon Martin tragedy, the NRA was working on Capitol Hill to nationalize Florida's vigilante mentality. The gun lobby has gotten U.S. senators to introduce a bill that will force states like New York with strong gun laws to follow Florida's model of arming criminals and killers. Led by Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), they call S.B. 2188, the National Reciprocity Act.

We call it the George Zimmerman Armed Vigilante Act.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-gross/george-zimmerman-nra_b_1372873.html

113 replies, 15895 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 113 replies Author Time Post
Reply Meet George Zimmerman: He Is the NRA (Original post)
Cali_Democrat Mar 2012 OP
onehandle Mar 2012 #1
RZM Mar 2012 #3
Hoyt Mar 2012 #4
RZM Mar 2012 #5
caseymoz Mar 2012 #11
Pacafishmate Mar 2012 #17
Hoyt Mar 2012 #19
baldguy Mar 2012 #20
hack89 Mar 2012 #21
baldguy Mar 2012 #22
hack89 Mar 2012 #23
DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2012 #42
hack89 Mar 2012 #51
DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2012 #52
hack89 Mar 2012 #60
DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2012 #112
hack89 Mar 2012 #113
Nevernose Mar 2012 #58
hack89 Mar 2012 #59
Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #62
fascisthunter Mar 2012 #27
shraby Mar 2012 #32
DonP Mar 2012 #6
onehandle Mar 2012 #7
RZM Mar 2012 #8
onehandle Mar 2012 #13
RZM Mar 2012 #39
PavePusher Mar 2012 #98
safeinOhio Mar 2012 #9
RZM Mar 2012 #10
Pacafishmate Mar 2012 #16
Hell Hath No Fury Mar 2012 #2
K Gardner Mar 2012 #12
belcffub Mar 2012 #14
DisgustipatedinCA Mar 2012 #45
belcffub Mar 2012 #57
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #15
hack89 Mar 2012 #24
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #25
hack89 Mar 2012 #26
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #28
hack89 Mar 2012 #31
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #33
hack89 Mar 2012 #34
X_Digger Mar 2012 #36
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #38
hack89 Mar 2012 #44
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #54
hack89 Mar 2012 #56
Warren Stupidity Mar 2012 #63
hack89 Mar 2012 #64
BiggJawn Mar 2012 #100
Logical Mar 2012 #40
X_Digger Mar 2012 #41
Logical Mar 2012 #43
hack89 Mar 2012 #46
Logical Mar 2012 #48
hack89 Mar 2012 #50
hack89 Mar 2012 #18
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #29
hack89 Mar 2012 #30
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #35
hack89 Mar 2012 #47
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #53
hack89 Mar 2012 #61
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #65
hack89 Mar 2012 #66
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #67
hack89 Mar 2012 #68
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #70
hack89 Mar 2012 #72
hack89 Mar 2012 #69
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #71
hack89 Mar 2012 #73
Cali_Democrat Mar 2012 #74
hack89 Mar 2012 #75
Cali_Democrat Mar 2012 #76
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #77
hack89 Mar 2012 #78
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #79
hack89 Mar 2012 #80
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #81
hack89 Mar 2012 #82
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #83
hack89 Mar 2012 #84
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #85
hack89 Mar 2012 #86
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #87
hack89 Mar 2012 #88
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #89
hack89 Mar 2012 #90
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #91
hack89 Mar 2012 #92
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #97
PavePusher Mar 2012 #103
hack89 Mar 2012 #104
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #107
hack89 Mar 2012 #108
PavePusher Mar 2012 #102
PavePusher Mar 2012 #101
PavePusher Mar 2012 #99
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #96
hack89 Mar 2012 #105
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #106
hack89 Mar 2012 #109
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #110
hack89 Mar 2012 #111
apocalypsehow Mar 2012 #93
Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2012 #95
X_Digger Mar 2012 #49
LynneSin Mar 2012 #37
Initech Mar 2012 #55
ellisonz Mar 2012 #94

Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:27 PM

1. Zimmerman, Loughner, McVeigh... All NRA Poster Boys. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:34 PM

3. Depends on what you mean by 'poster boy'

 

I don't think a nut who shot a congresswoman and a terrorist who blew up a federal building are the kinds of people the NRA would put on their posters.

I think what you're arguing is that their behavior is typical of that of NRA members. I think very few members of the NRA shoot congresspeople or blow up buildings.

Or, you might be arguing that the NRA encouraged these people. I'm no expert on the NRA, but I don't think they encourage shooting politicians or committing acts of terrorism.

I'm not a member of the NRA and I don't own a gun. But I do believe that they don't encourage these kinds of crimes.

As for Zimmerman, I don't know, but he doesn't seem to me to be a 'responsible gun owner.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:39 PM

4. Basically agree, but the NRA's actions have made it much easier for the Loughners and Zimmermans.


McVeigh was a true anti-government, gun and explosives nut.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #4)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:48 PM

5. Maybe so

 

But it's also a bit like saying that Obama made it easier for the recent massacre in Afghanistan because he called Afghanistan 'the good war' and has continued to keep combat troops there.

I mean, I guess you could make the case, but I don't blame him for the massacre because I know he doesn't support that kind of thing and doesn't encourage the troops to behave that way.

Same thing with the NRA. By promoting gun ownership and pro-gun legislation they are keeping guns out there. But they don't support or condone any of the actions of these three (or at least two of them, though I doubt they would issue a statement in support of Zimmerman either).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #5)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 06:27 PM

11. I would put it like this:

They're so certain of their ideology about guns, that they can't tell when it undercuts their intentions. That is to say, the better ones of them are like that. They are absolutely certain that guns are such a good thing to have, and that the Second Amendment is such an unassailable idea, that they can't examine how it might actually play out badly in the real world.

Fact: nobody has really tried what they're doing. Historically, America was not really a gun-saturated society before liberals came around and ruined it. That's a myth. Old Western towns had people check their guns when they entered. The Second Amendment has never been legally interpreted the way they're insisting it be now. The guns today are technologically superior to anything in previous generations.

They can't honestly say they know what kind of society, what kind of conditions, they will create. The indications aren't good, but they're not interested in knowing that. They impugn and attack people who question it in any way, meaning that they're not willing to be found wrong; they'll only accept being proven correct.

I'll also add: gun marketing is definitely a huge part of the drive toward more guns and more legality, and less application of common sense regarding guns.

Those are the better ones. The worst ones are paranoid, Timothy-McVeigh, David Koresh nuts, who want to own guns because they have all kinds of unfounded fears and filled with rage looking for an excuse to create tragedy. As incidents like the Martin case begin to pile up, all of a sudden, the better ones are going to wake up and notice they're in bed with crazy rats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #4)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:59 PM

17. Yes, society becomes a bit more interesting when the people are given a bit of freedom.

 

That's just one of the costs that comes with civilization. There are nuts out there. There are better ways to deal with them than a blanket solution that restricts everyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #17)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:44 AM

19. Freedom to carry a gun anywhere? That's not freedom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #19)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:49 AM

20. Anyone who is fearful enough to believe they always need to carry a gun is not free.

By definition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #20)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:58 AM

21. So people that live in high crime areas can never be free?

Because they certainly live in constant fear.

Is fearful and unarmed any freer than fearful and armed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #21)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 09:02 AM

22. Twin Lakes is a high crime area?

The most dangerous person there was the guy with the gun. The ignorant, racist, fearful guy with the gun.

The thing is, in high crime areas, the RW would rather write the people off and let them be afraid than actually help them. A major component extremist RW dogma is "the govt can't help you or protect you". High-crimes areas validate that view, even though they're generally created by RW economic policies. The only options the RW offers to those people is A) get a gun, or B) be killed. And if you don't get a gun, then it's your own damn fault if you get killed. It never occurs to them. as it does to rational people, that guns are a big part of what makes these people's homes "high crime areas".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #22)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 10:47 AM

23. So you were not talking about all CCW carriers, only one?

ok - sorry for the confusion.

What makes an area a high crime area is criminals. So why not solve the real problem? In the mean time, since criminals will always get guns let law abiding citizens obtain the means to protect themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #21)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:05 PM

42. Yes. Fearful and unarmed gets a lot fewer people slaughtered

So...yep, big difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #42)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:18 PM

51. Because criminals will never be able to get guns?

drug cartels ship illegal drugs across the border by the truck load but that would be impossible with guns and ammo. Yup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #51)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:48 PM

52. I don't play games with gun worshipers. I respect gun owners

But the fetishists who want to argue pro-gun stuff after the slaughter of an innocent get no seat at my table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #52)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:36 AM

60. What do you think about gun grabbers that use the death of an innocent

to push their political agenda? Are they OK?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #60)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 04:58 PM

112. I don't like your choice of words, but I'll use them.

Of course it's ok for "gun grabbers" to use the death of an innocent to push their political agenda, an agenda that would result in fewer people killed senselessly. Did you want them to use no examples, to be strictly hypothetical? That doesn't make sense on its face. It's stories like this that highlight the need for gun control. You can't just talk about gun control in a vacuum. So it surprises me to see that you appear to be so far gone that you can't allow for gun control advocates to use actual examples when advocating for gun control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #112)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 05:13 PM

113. Here is the issue I have with gun control

the present laws are working just fine. Every year there are fewer gun deaths - even as there are more guns and laxer laws.

So I question the mind set that more guns are automatically bad. The facts show that in reality American's can be trusted with guns. The facts show that a tiny minority of gun owners ever use their weapons to hurt others.

I would like to see gun control advocates to be honest. To admit that perhaps the real issue is criminals carrying out criminal acts. To not smear as right wing fanatics the 99.999..% of gun owners that will never harm anyone. To understand that disarming the law abiding is simply political theater aimed at a politically correct demographic.


In my 50 years of life, the odds of me being shot have never been lower. Gun violence is at historic lows and still declining. So I question the "need" for more gun control. This incident is classic gun control politics - sensationalize a single tragedy while ignoring the big picture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #51)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:09 PM

58. FWIW

I'm really not trying to jump in the whole debate, but the drug cartels get their guns primarily from the United States.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nevernose (Reply #58)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:34 AM

59. They like automatic weapons - can't buy those in an American gun shop. nt



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #59)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:43 AM

62. Well...there are a few gun shops where you can buy fully automatic weapons.

 

But there's a lot of paperwork, and costs have skyrocketed since the absurd '86 ban on new manufacture of machine guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #20)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 05:36 PM

27. exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #17)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:49 PM

32. You call that "civilization"? Your definition of civilization is certainly a lot different than mine

It begins with the word "civil". The carrying and usage of guns and the mayhem that erupts too many times is the antitheses of "civil" behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:55 PM

6. Well, you're no fun here

>sarcasm on>

What's wrong with you? This is no time for logic and reasoned discussion. There's a chance to score cheap, ignorant points preferably before all the facts become available. All you need to form an opinion are a few poorly written and even more poorly sourced news reports. Everybody know they must be right.

Quick, jump on the bandwagon while it's rolling downhill and you can blame the whole state of Florida as well as people that have nothing to do with the crime and smear a few others along the way.

Then a week or two later move on to the next big thing.

<sarcasm off>

Good post, well made points. Thanks for injecting reason into the discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:58 PM

7. The NRA Loves these money making icons.

The checks come in just that much faster from their paranoid sheep when acts of violence occur.

McVeigh is applicable. He lived at gun shows and was crazy about the 2nd amendment.

To quote a poster in freeperville, 'That poor railroaded boy.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #7)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 04:09 PM

8. I don't base my opinions of the NRA

 

One the quote of one anonymous Freeper.

If you want to argue that their fundraising spikes when gun nuts kill a bunch of people in cold blood, then provide a link that shows that.

I'll bet that their funding does spike after cases like the 'Wichita Horror' and other famous home invasion scenarios. But that's a reaction against the murderers, not a favorable response to their actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 07:18 PM

13. Sorry, I'm not privy to the NRA's inside numbers.

But when there is violence, the calls for gun controls come out, and so do the NRA's fundraising letters.

Simple math.

They love their freaks.

McVeigh was a member.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #13)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:02 PM

39. I agree with the first part

 

When calls for gun control spike, NRA funding probably spikes too. That makes sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #13)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:23 PM

98. You have just insinuated that all NRA members are like McVeigh.

 

Please cite your evidence or retract your false stereotype.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 06:16 PM

9. Has Wayne given any speeches about this endorsement

warning website for the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan


http://www.knightriderskkkk.com/http://www.knightriderskkkk.com/

3/4 down the page

Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
Officially Endorses The NRA and Supports all
Their efforts to Protect Our Second Amendment
Rights.
God Bless Us All in our time of need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #9)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 06:20 PM

10. I don't know

 

Nor do I care. The KKK is a tiny fringe presence at this point. The only time they make news is when 5 of them march down the street and they are outnumbered 10-1 by counter-protesters. They are a stupid joke. Maybe he doesn't think they even warrant a comment.

I don't know though, you'd have ask him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #9)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:50 PM

16. What does that have to do with anything?

 

Osama bin Laden once said that something should be done about climate change. Does that somehow mar the reputation of groups working to stop it? Please think before you post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 03:29 PM

2. Wow, I was unaware of the National Reciprocity Act.

So much for the sanctity of "States Rights". Will keep an eye on how this is progressing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 06:31 PM

12. Good lord. No words. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 08:30 PM

14. the world needs a villain and for the left many have choosen the NRA...

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do to prevent it, but each horrible act can’t become an axe for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us. America must stop this predictable pattern of reaction. When an isolated terrible event occurs, our phones ring demanding that the NRA explain the inexplicable. Why us? Because their story needs a villain. … That is not our role in American society and we will not be forced to play it. … Now, if you disagree that’s your right, I respect that, but we will not relinquish it, or be silenced about it, or be told ‘do not come here, you are unwelcome in your own land.’

Extremist Makeover Homeland edition

I love this clip... but to get to the meat go to 7:00

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to belcffub (Reply #14)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:07 PM

45. The NRA is a right-wing thug organization, and support of them will be challenged here

Why are you shilling for this rightwing merchant of death organization?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #45)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 10:57 PM

57. I disagree

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Mar 22, 2012, 11:41 PM

15. The article says it correctly - it's no surprise it happened in Florida - a gun nut's paradise

People here are armed and itching to get a chance to shoot somebody. It's almost a sickness - classes to learn to shoot people, licensing of guns out the wazoo, gun permits for this, gun permits for that, the psychotic Stand Your Ground Law, which should be called, Shoot Whoever the F You Want law. It's a psychotic state, based on sick right wing ideology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #15)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 10:55 AM

24. Yet their violent crime rates have fallen every year but two in the last 20 years

Violent Crime Rate per 100,000 in 1990 was 1,220.9. In 2010 the rate was 542.9

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/FSAC/Menu/Crime-Trends/Violent-Crime.aspx

Looks like Florida has been getting safer and safer for the average citizen.

Can you show an increase in the number of gun deaths in Florida due to this law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 05:18 PM

25. You're incorrect. There was a crime drop in the entire U.S. in 2011. Florida has nothing to do

with that crime drop in 2011 throughout the U.S., nor does the Florida law allowing murder have anything to do with the drop of crime in the entire U.S. in 2011, nor does gun ownership have anything to do with the crime drop in the U.S. in 2011.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/us/24crime.html

The number of violent crimes in the United States dropped significantly last year, to what appeared to be the lowest rate in nearly 40 years, a development that was considered puzzling partly because it ran counter to the prevailing expectation that crime would increase during a recession.

In all regions, the country appears to be safer. The odds of being murdered or robbed are now less than half of what they were in the early 1990s, when violent crime peaked in the United States. Small towns, especially, are seeing far fewer murders: In cities with populations under 10,000, the number plunged by more than 25 percent last year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #25)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 05:32 PM

26. You missed my point

You said that Florida is a dangerous place because of the proliferation of guns and their lax gun laws. I pointed out that during the past 20 years of increased gun ownership and laxer gun laws Florida has become safer.

In other words your perception does not match reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #26)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:40 PM

28. Again, the entire nation has become safer, but you're equating that to gun ownership and pro-murder

laws.

What you're stating makes no sense, is illogical, and is intended only and exclusively to support your beloved gun ownership stance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #28)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:47 PM

31. No I am not.

I am saying that more gun ownership and "pro-murder laws" has not increased gun violence.

Can you show me where our present gun laws have increased gun deaths?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #31)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:49 PM

33. You're now changing your argument again. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #33)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:53 PM

34. No - you simply failed to understand it. No suprise there. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #34)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:57 PM

36. Like talking to a brick wall. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #34)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:00 PM

38. Questions.


What's your political affiliation?

Whom did you vote for in the past 4 presidential elections?

What liberal causes do you support?

As is clear, I'm having serious doubts about which side of the fence you're on, so pony up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #38)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:06 PM

44. Democrat

Clinton x2, Gore and Obama

Abortion, marriage equality, all civil liberties (including 2A)

I could give a shit what you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #44)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 09:38 PM

54. Ok. But you're all pro-gun. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #54)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 10:03 PM

56. Nothing wrong with that - it is a enumerated Constitutional right after all. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #56)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:51 AM

63. There is no 2nd amendment issue with respect to SYG murder laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #63)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 10:10 AM

64. I agree there are no 2A issues with SYG.

but the conversation always seems to veer off into 2A issues.

There have to be laws defining self defense - SYG is certainly appropriate in many instances. If there is ambiguity in the laws that can be removed then it should be done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:28 PM

100. Oh, here it comes, the famous "DU Tru Blu Litmus Paper"...

Rub it in your face, Nope, not BLUE enough, off to Freeperville with you!

Fuck dat.

Oh- before you accuse me of being a stealth freeper,

Socialist Democrat

Carter X2
Mondale
Dukakis
Clinton X2
Gore
Kerry
Obama X2 (Forgot that I'm going again for him this year)
Marriage equality, Right to Chose, The environment, No-Kill shelters, and Veterans (oh, sorry, those guys are murderers, right?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:03 PM

40. No proof guns had anything to do with it. Even cities without guns went down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #40)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:04 PM

41. So the law did not lead to an increase?

(paraphrasing what I believe his point is..)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #41)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:05 PM

43. I agree with that. Sorry, I did not read close enough! Thanks Digger!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #40)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:07 PM

46. So you agree that more guns did not create more gun violence?

Then we see eye to eye on the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #46)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:10 PM

48. Yes I do. But no proof more guns reduce crime either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #48)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:16 PM

50. Never said it did - the causes of crime are complex. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 12:13 AM

18. The OP is wrong about the National Reciprocity Act.

it will not force NY to change their gun law for their residents. The law says that if a visitor to NY has a valid CCW from another state then it is valid in NY. That person still has to follow NY law as it pertains to concealed carry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #18)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:41 PM

29. LOL! Amazing what gun-lovers will say to support their gun love. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #29)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:45 PM

30. So show me where I am wrong. Show me how every state must follow Florida gun laws.

can you show me that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:56 PM

35. Wrong about what? Wrong that Zimmerman shot this kid with a gun? Wrong that this

Florida law allows murderers to run free?

Wrong about what exactly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #35)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:10 PM

47. Did you even read the damn OP? Did you read what it said about the National Reciprocity Act?

that's what I am talking about.

Zimmerman should be in jail. The law is a bad law. But it has nothing to do with the National Reciprocity Act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #47)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 09:37 PM

53. I view lack of gun control the same way I do this law. What's the difference?

Both promote the murder of humans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #53)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:40 AM

61. Yet every year fewer and fewer are murdered. Are the laws defective? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #61)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 06:32 PM

65. INCORRECT. Your absence of logic is too much.

It's like people in the U.S. losing weight, and you attributing it to tomatoes being more expensive in Delaware.

The entire nation has had a decrease in crime recently. That has nothing to do with the sale of guns. Guns have never ceased selling rampantly in this country thanks to the NRA and gun-lovers like you.

The entire nation has had a decrease in crime recently. That has nothing to do with Florida having a law allowing murderers like Zimmerman to go free.

I keep having to repeat the same thing over and over. Cease with the lack of logic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #65)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:06 PM

66. But more guns and these laws have not led to more murders - right?

so what exactly is the issue?

I agree that the law needs to be changed. But apart from that, Florida gun laws have not led to any harm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #66)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:10 PM

67. The U.S. decrease in crime during 2011 (if you bothered to read the article)

has no explanation as of yet. This decrease took place last year.

You're so desperate to defend guns, that you'll introduce gun ownership as the reason for anything good that happens.

The way you carry on, I'm getting the feeling you think of guns as a talisman of sorts, conferring good luck on whoever carries them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #67)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:16 PM

68. Crime has steadily decreased for the past 20 years.

the lowest rates of violence in 50 years. You need to educate yourself. You have never been safer.

Here are the facts:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #68)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:36 PM

70. Gun crimes have dropped with more guns being sold?

Please stop the bs. I don't know if you believe that I'm going to believe gun-lovers' bs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #70)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:53 PM

72. Read the FBI annual crime reports. Listen to what Obama's DOJ says

I gave you the link.

Nice graph here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13799616


These are hard facts. You can't refute them. I am sure you will ignore them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #67)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:29 PM

69. I am not saying guns led to lower crime

I am merely pointing out that more guns and laxer gun laws have not led to more deaths. That's all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #69)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:36 PM

71. Oh stop it. I've lived in countries where guns are not prevalent and felt infinitely safer because

gun crimes are so low.

Stop the bs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #71)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:55 PM

73. You have never been safer in America

violent crime is at a 50 year low.

If you disagree, then show me the real numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #73)

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:59 PM

74. Still not safe enough

Ever been to Sweden? Finland? Japan?

I have and I feel MUCH safer there. I don't fear being shot in cold blood while walking down the street because some NRA nut feels like he wants to go human hunting.

If you look at the gun murder rate in those countries and compare them to 'Murka, I'm sure 'Murka has a much higher rate. Those countries actually provide access to affordable healthcare as well. 'Murka is most definitely not the greatest country on earth.

USA! USA! USA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #74)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:02 AM

75. I feel very safe.

there has been exactly one murder in my town of 17,000 in the 12 years I have lived here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #75)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:03 AM

76. Good for you.

You should ask Trayvon how safe he feels. Oh, he's dead. You can't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #73)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:04 AM

77. Really? You're talking to someone who has lived abroad. Meanwhile, you haven't.

All you know is what living in a high gun crime country is like, and to you that's your normal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #77)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:08 AM

78. I was born overseas. Lived four years in Japan as an adult.

I have seen every part of the globe both good and bad.

And I still don't feel endangered. Why should I when no one around me is getting shot. One murder in 12 years - and that was a love triangle gone bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #78)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:09 AM

79. Where were your parents born? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #79)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:11 AM

80. One in America, one in Europe. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #80)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:12 AM

81. So your father was American. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #81)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:13 AM

82. Is that significant? He was a life long Democrat by the way. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #82)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:14 AM

83. Sure. He was American, a military guy, he met someone abroad, married her

You were born while he was stationed abroad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #83)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:15 AM

84. And you would be wrong. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #84)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 12:15 AM

85. I doubt it. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #85)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:13 AM

86. Based on what? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #86)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:21 PM

87. I'm pretty good at figuring people out. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #87)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:42 PM

88. In other words you pulled it out of your butt.

what a surprise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #88)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:44 PM

89. Not at all. I have you figured out. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #89)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:48 PM

90. So then tell me

why would a military father be significant?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #90)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:50 PM

91. Because you likely were born while he was in the military.

However, the main issue in all this, is that you refuse to accept that people like you have turned this country into a high-gun-crime country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #91)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:53 PM

92. And why is that significant?

I was still exposed to different people and cultures.

Gun crime is at a 50 year low - and still declining. We are on the right path.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #92)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:18 PM

97. There's a mammoth difference between being born on a U.S. base, and living

in another country.

Such as the difference between a yellow pasteurized cheese food, and a queso manchego from Albacete.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #97)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:47 PM

104. When I was stationed in Japan for four years I never lived on base.

I lived in a Japanese house in a Japanese neighborhood with Japanese neighbors. My daughter was born in a Japanese hospital. You don't have to live on base and many don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #104)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:04 PM

107. The key word here is stationed. You did not move abroad to live there as a Japanese.

You were in the employ of the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #107)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 08:09 AM

108. So what.

I was expose to Japanese civil live. I know what daily life in Japan is like. I talked everyday to my Japanese friends.

You make yourself look foolish going to such extremes to avoid admitting there is another side to the story. You simply look close minded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #71)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:33 PM

102. Dodging. Again. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #65)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:32 PM

101. No one is claiming what you are insinuating.

 

But you are still dodging.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #35)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:28 PM

99. Dodge. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:10 PM

96. Where your fallacy is wrong? It's not even there yet. It's still in the fallacy stage. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #96)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:52 PM

105. This reply is more incomprehensible then normal

You seem to agree with the OP that the National Reciprocity Act will force New Jersey to adopt Florida gun laws. Can you show me in the actual law how that is possible?

Can you actually answer a direct question with a direct answer? No more emotional rants - I have asked a simple question. Please Google the law and answer my question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #105)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:00 PM

106. I've said all I'm going to say. You people have destroyed this country's safety

It's a gun-crime ridden country thanks to you people and the NRA. I've said this, and I will merely continue to repeat this. Everything else you bring up fails to address this. The End.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #106)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 08:14 AM

109. How do you explain a 20 year decline in gun violence?

you keep avoiding that very basic question. Don't you think your credibility is damage by your refusal to address hard facts that challenge your pronouncements? You seem so sure of yourself yet cannot offer any supporting facts just emotional rants. Why is that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #109)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 09:37 AM

110. You've spent several days on here attempting to convince me that 1) gun crime rate has dropped - bs

2) Trying to give guns credit for the 2011 drop in crime rate.

I have responded to you that guns have CREATED crime, not lessened it.

As you seem hell-bent on giving guns credit for peace, when guns have created crime, and you have nothing else to say, I will not respond to you again.

Speak to someone else.

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #110)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 09:44 AM

111. So guns have created more crime yet crime is at historic lows? Strange logic there.

I am saying that more guns did not create more crime. Do you agree? If not, can you show real status that prove a link between increased crime and increased guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sarah Ibarruri (Reply #29)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:57 PM

93. Ain't it, though? The death toll from handguns continues to pile up, and yet nothing - NOTHING -

is allowed to get in the way of the Almighty Gun and its right wing lobby. Facts don't matter much to our "pro gun Democrats."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #93)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:09 PM

95. They don't care. And by the way, I like the quotation marks there. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #18)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 07:11 PM

49. Don't bother me with facts, son, I'm on a roll here!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 06:58 PM

37. I wouldn't be surprised if he posted at the Free Republic too

or some similar site

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 09:39 PM

55. I said it before and I'll say it again: fuck the NRA.

Flame away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Reply #55)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:03 PM

94. Were you hoping for flames?

Try the Gungeon

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread