Nationwide dog and pony **** show.

[Ron Burgundy]

Because they're getting into the hands of the wrong people and kids are getting mowed down by the hundreds sitting in their classrooms.

Like the guns Obama and Holder sent to Mexico?

 

[warriors42]

https://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cause-of-accident/cell-phone/cell-phone-statistics.html

Teen Driver Cell Phone Statistics

11 teens die every day as a result of texting while driving.
According to a AAA poll, 94% of teen drivers acknowledge the dangers of texting and driving, but 35% admitted to doing it anyway.
21% of teen drivers involved in fatal accidents were distracted by their cell phones.
Teen drivers are 4x more likely than adults to get into car crashes or near-crashes when talking or texting on a cell phone.
A teen driver with only one additional passenger doubles the risk of getting into a fatal car accident. With two or more passengers, they are 5x as likely.

How many of you that want to take the rights of law abiding Americans away are willing to give up your cell phones. I say we go back to only corded house phones, and lets not forget drinking and driving deaths.

When the left decides that murdering unborn children to sell off their body parts is wrong I will start to listen to your bullshit about giving up any of my guns. The snow flakes want to scream that losing one child to gun violence is to many, but its ok to murder 1200 babys a day???????

 

[Ironcitysteelers]

 

[CharlesDavenport]

May I recommend the movie, Churchill.

The movie I was thinking about was Darkest Hour. Didn’t see Churchill.

 

[Steeltime]

Bad people have been around longer than guns and weapons.

Abel would still be alive if only we had common-sense rock control. But nooooooo, the NRA (Nascent Rock Association) bought all the politicians and prevented simple, common-sense rock control.

 

[Sarge]

While the point of the military not turning on people maybe valid that would be the case no matter what weapons citizens had. If citizens gained access to better weaponry who is going to fly the planes? Don't think many people are going to hop in a fighter jet and become magically combat competent. Even if the military did not want to attack if their lives were threatened the plane would be shot down.

Look, I try hard not to insult fellow posters. But I have to ask......are you retarded? Do you honestly think there isn’t a citizen alive that served in the military that used this equipment, flew the planes, flew the helicopters, drove the tanks, shot the weapons? Good lord, I still work with the military after serving 24 years. I am up to date on this **** as are many, many others. You may wanna lay down and give up, but don’t assume the rest of us will.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

The second amendment is way outdated and times are different. I think it is a delusional fairy tale that we need weapons to protect ourselves against the govt. I have no problem with the right to bear arms, but the reasoning is BS. People just want to play with their toys

We will agree to disagree. FOUR states in the union - their hunters - represent the largest army in the world.

170Million people have been killed by governments in the past 100 years. That's no fairy tale.

 

[Steeler]

[/url][/IMG]

 

[Steeltime]

The second amendment is way outdated and times are different. I think it is a delusional fairy tale that we need weapons to protect ourselves against the govt. I have no problem with the right to bear arms, but the reasoning is BS. People just want to play with their toys

I know, right? The clowns who wrote the Constitution - and more importantly the first 10 amendments - could not see changes in technology. Therefore, the 4th amendment right to have our affairs private without a warrant issued upon a showing of just cause? That should apply only to papers, and not to electronic communications. There were no electronic communications back in 1787 so the government should be free to listen in on telephone calls, cell phones, computers, etc. If not, please explain the difference.

And how about the 8th amendment and cruel and unusual punishment. In 1787, electricity did not exist so the government should be free to torture prisoners with electricity. Seriously, the 8th amendment could not possibly apply to technology which did not even exist at the time. Right??

Yes, and that 6th amendment jury trial thing? At the time, only property owners could sit on a jury, and certainly not women. So the right to a jury trial should remain a jury of your peers, so long as they are property owners and do not include women. Right? AMIRITE?!? That was the law back in 1787. ("the word jury has been long established to mean twelve men, appointed in a particular mode, and holding a certain quantity of property, which gives them the right of voting for legislators." http://www.readtheconstitutionstupi...f-the-trial-by-jury-theophrastus-october-1787)

Yes, and how about that 1st amendment? Right to peaceably assemble the government to address grievances? Fine, but anybody who intends on attending such assembly must travel by foot, horse, carriage or 18th century naval craft. NO CARS OR AIRPLANES. since those did not exist in 1787. Right again. And Freedom of the Press? That has to refer only to paper print, since the internet and blogs and e-mail of course did not exist as of 1787. The government must thereby by given every right to restrict - indeed, prevent - any political speech broadcast by the internet, blogs, e-mail, etc. That only makes sense.

Or perhaps I don't trust you to interpret the Constitution the way YOU think it should read, and demand my rights remain unabridged by you or any other person, judiciary, or government. How about that view? A lot easier to justify than your "oh, this-and-that didn't exist in 1787" argument.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I know, right? The clowns who wrote the Constitution - and more importantly the first 10 amendments - could not see changes in technology. Therefore, the 4th amendment right to have our affairs private without a warrant issued upon a showing of just cause? That should apply only to papers, and not to electronic communications. There were no electronic communications back in 1787 so the government should be free to listen in on telephone calls, cell phones, computers, etc. If not, please explain the difference.

And how about the 8th amendment and cruel and unusual punishment. In 1787, electricity did not exist so the government should be free to torture prisoners with electricity. Seriously, the 8th amendment could not possibly apply to technology which did not even exist at the time. Right??

Yes, and that 6th amendment jury trial thing? At the time, only property owners could sit on a jury, and certainly not women. So the right to a jury trial should remain a jury of your peers, so long as they are property owners and do not include women. Right? AMIRITE?!? That was the law back in 1787. ("the word jury has been long established to mean twelve men, appointed in a particular mode, and holding a certain quantity of property, which gives them the right of voting for legislators." http://www.readtheconstitutionstupi...f-the-trial-by-jury-theophrastus-october-1787)

Yes, and how about that 1st amendment? Right to peaceably assemble the government to address grievances? Fine, but anybody who intends on attending such assembly must travel by foot, horse, carriage or 18th century naval craft. NO CARS OR AIRPLANES. since those did not exist in 1787. Right again. And Freedom of the Press? That has to refer only to paper print, since the internet and blogs and e-mail of course did not exist as of 1787. The government must thereby by given every right to restrict - indeed, prevent - any political speech broadcast by the internet, blogs, e-mail, etc. That only makes sense.

Or perhaps I don't trust you to interpret the Constitution the way YOU think it should read, and demand my rights remain unabridged by you or any other person, judiciary, or government. How about that view? A lot easier to justify than your "oh, this-and-that didn't exist in 1787" argument.

https://img.memecdn.com/*****-slap_o_732430.gif

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

Rapper Killer Mike goes on NRA-TV to call out the anti gun crowd by pointing out how important guns have been to the personal safety of black people

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2018/03/25/rapper-mike-gun-control-promises-return-slavery/

In the lead-up to the March 14 school walk out for gun control, Killer Mike said he told his kids, “I love you, but if you walk out that school walk out my house.”

“You can’t continue to be the lackey,” the Atlanta-based rapper and business owner said. “You’re a lackey of the progressive movement because you have never disagreed with the people who tell you what to do.”

Noir pointed out how celebrities like George Clooney and Steven Spielberg pledged $500,000 to Saturday’s gun control march.

“Celebrities often don’t know what to do. They’re told what to do,” Killer Mike said, explaining how a famous rapper, who’s a friend of his, felt pressured into doing an anti-gun promo. Killer Mike told his friend that he’s very pro-Second Amendment” and that it is about the children for him — after a shooting on his daughter’s college campus (Savannah State University); “I talked to my wife and daughter after that, the decision was we’re going to go to Savannah, she’s going to get a gun and train more.”

“We’re raising a generation of kids where everyone gets’ a trophy. But in real life, everyone doesn’t get a trophy,” Killer Mike said. “In real life, the cops don’t come on time.

 

[DBS1970]

Sorry but every citizen could have an assault rifle and the govt could demolish any rebellion if it wanted to. Vietnam was a terrible strategy and things would be way different now a days. Our troops wouldn't be blindly running around in the jungles. Also Russia could blow up Afghanistan if it choose to put full military force against it.

Who will provide fuel, food and ammunition to the military that is making war on its own people?

 

[SteelChip]

Like the guns Obama and Holder sent to Mexico?

The arguments against what the loony libs want to impose on the rest of us are many.

But like Tibsy...Uncle George whistles....they dance

 

[Yinzerlyn]

Ben is ******* amazing.

 

[Hypocycloids]

Sorry but every citizen could have an assault rifle and the govt could demolish any rebellion if it wanted to. Vietnam was a terrible strategy and things would be way different now a days. Our troops wouldn't be blindly running around in the jungles. Also Russia could blow up Afghanistan if it choose to put full military force against it.

That is a very common kneejerk argument.
I used to think that, but not so much anymore. You cant demolish something you cant see, or we would have demolished terrorists a long time ago. Terrorists wear no uniform. American citizens will be wearing no uniform. America would turn into a giant jungle where the military would be "blindly running around" as you so eloquently put it..

Plus there are others besides white males that can shoot.

 

[deljzc]

That first rifle she used in that video was fully automatic, wasn't it?

Isn't that a no-no to own?

 

[Hypocycloids]

Ben is ******* amazing.

Let's not go there ...LOL

Kidding aside, yes, Shapiro is a libtard killer.

 

[Superman]

That first rifle she used in that video was fully automatic, wasn't it?

Isn't that a no-no to own?

no. you CAN own a fully automatic rifle, but they're cost prohibitive for the vast majority of the country, and the background checks and waiting time are also considerable.

https://rocketffl.com/who-can-own-a-full-auto-machine-gun/

For example, a private citizen can lawfully own a machine gun only if:

• the possessor isn’t a “prohibited person,”
• the full-auto machine gun was made before 1986, and
• their relevant state law does not ban that the firearm (whether banning machine guns outright or any firearm with certain features).
  
  As with everything, there are a some exceptions…
  
  For example, someone can lawfully possess a machine gun made this morning if it is in connection with their duties as a government or law enforcement official, or if they have their Federal Firearms License (FFL) and have either made or possess the machine gun for possible sale to government/law enforcement personnel.
  
  Full-auto machine guns fit into a certain class of firearms called National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) firearms. These NFA firearms have extra regulations and controls. For example, unlike with “standard” firearms, NFA firearms (such as machine guns, silencers, etc.) are registered with the federal government and tracked from lawful owner to lawful owner – permission must be obtained prior to the transfer of these types of firearms and the ATF keeps a log of all currently registered NFA firearms.
  
  Machine Gun Owners
  
  Machine gun owners can’t be “prohibited persons.”
  
  Well, to be more accurate, a “prohibit person” can’t lawfully possess a machine gun – ownership is irrelevant.
  
  A “prohibit person” is a class of person defined under federal law who is not allowed to posses firearms nor ammunition (not just full-autop machine guns).
  
  The category “prohibited person” includes anyone who:
  
  • is a felon
  • has been convicted of any crime punishable by more than a year in prison (whether or not they were ever sentenced to or served a day in prison)
  • is under indictment for any crime punishable by more than a year in prison
  • is a fugitive
  • is an unlawful user of any controlled substance
  • has been adjudicated as a mental defective
  • has been committed to a mental institution
  • is an illegal alien
  • has a dishonorable discharge from the military
  • has renounced their U.S. citizenship
  • is the subject of a restraining order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner, or
  • who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
  
  

 

[DBS1970]

Anybody here think that Tibs, Trog, 21, and Elfie aren't secretly hoping for a total ban on private firearms ownership and fantasizing about swat teams shooting up people that refuse to turn over their weapons?

 

[Steelr4evr]

tibs it was a dereliction of duty by everyone who was warned about this kid and did nothing...From the Coward County Sheriff department to the FBI....they all failed these kids....but why isn't that the talking point?

and of course you like Popvich's viewpoints...he pretty far left.....

And that is the true absolute fact of this matter. When time is of the essence in a hostile or emergency situation you're best line of defense is yourself. The police show up to draw a line around your corpse.

The FBI and local police department failed miserably to prevent a situation that was in FLASHING lights....DANGER!

I've handled many a firearm from 9 years old on up to adulthood . None ever escaped and committed atrocities. It's how you're raised when it comes to the value of human life and the respect given to it.

Today's society is so far out in la la land with it's values. That is the problem,but don't come take away the ability to defend my keep because of it. Turn out the lights or add in any catastrophic event and you will see just how quick things can get really nasty. That's reality. The other reality is the heavy influence of socialism,marxism and this progressive garbage that's really just communism with a cute name.

Just mind your own and I'll mind mine. If you want have no self preservation tools that's your choice. Good luck begging for mercy should evil come knocking on your door or gather in large groups hell bent on destruction.

Just watch what happens in this next presidential election cycle when rallies will be attacked by these little control freak leftist loons. That's coming all of that nasty has been brewing even before Trump was sworn in. It's going to be pretty damn sad to see

 

[ark steel]

And that is the true absolute fact of this matter. When time is of the essence in a hostile or emergency situation you're best line of defense is yourself. The police show up to draw a line around your corpse.

The FBI and local police department failed miserably to prevent a situation that was in FLASHING lights....DANGER!

I've handled many a firearm from 9 years old on up to adulthood . None ever escaped and committed atrocities. It's how you're raised when it comes to the value of human life and the respect given to it.

Today's society is so far out in la la land with it's values. That is the problem,but don't come take away the ability to defend my keep because of it. Turn out the lights or add in any catastrophic event and you will see just how quick things can get really nasty. That's reality. The other reality is the heavy influence of socialism,marxism and this progressive garbage that's really just communism with a cute name.

Just mind your own and I'll mind mine. If you want have no self preservation tools that's your choice. Good luck begging for mercy should evil come knocking on your door or gather in large groups hell bent on destruction.

Just watch what happens in this next presidential election cycle when rallies will be attacked by these little control freak leftist loons. That's coming all of that nasty has been brewing even before Trump was sworn in. It's going to be pretty damn sad to see

This is the not so funny part of the whole situation. The government, at all levels, failed this school and those children. Yet, the "solution" is MORE GOVERNMENT!!

 

[DBS1970]

As I keep saying Leftists hate the 2nd Amendment because an armed population wil not willingly get on the train cars to the reeducation centers. If you don't think it can happen in a civilized country think again. They are arresting people in European countries for comments on social media complaining about Muslim Rape gangs and migrant crime. Don't think for a moment the tolerant left doesn't want you dead if they can't control you completely.

 

[blitzburghv5]

I see lots a folks afraid of change that's on the horizon.

We got folks wishing deadly harm on marchers. We got folks suggesting keynote speakers and youthful front personalities don't know what they are talking about. This screams of desperation and fear of change and its all propaganda driven.

Again---NO ONE WANTS TO BAN YOUR ****** GUNS !!! Stricter gun legislation doesn't equate to repealment of the 2nd Amendment.

Anyway...back to your panic-ladened vitriolic replies to this movement. And buying more guns so the problem magically goes away.

 

[ark steel]

NO ONE WANTS TO BAN YOUR ****** GUNS !!!.

Well, that is completely untrue. there are a great many people who want to ban guns. A Sheriff has been quoted as willing to pry the guns from your cold dead hands...

 

[DBS1970]

I see lots a folks afraid of change that's on the horizon.

We got folks wishing deadly harm on marchers. We got folks suggesting keynote speakers and youthful front personalities don't know what they are talking about. This screams of desperation and fear of change and its all propaganda driven.

Again---NO ONE WANTS TO BAN YOUR ****** GUNS !!! Stricter gun legislation doesn't equate to repealment of the 2nd Amendment.

Anyway...back to your panic-ladened vitriolic replies to this movement. And buying more guns so the problem magically goes away.

It's incrementalism guy. This week it's "assault weapons" next week its Pistols. A week later its hunting rifles with a scope. A week after that it's pump action shotguns. The eventual goal is total civilian disarmament. Every gun control organization has stated this all you have to do is look for it.