LGBT - Terror

[Frederick Foresight]

Since you stick up for the homosexuals, I wonder who owns your mind.

There you go again. I "stick up" for innocent people. But that's not how you evidently see the victims, is it? Thanks for the insight. It supports my earlier conclusion about you being something of a sympathizer. And it continues:

..just like they assured everyone that all they wanted for homos was to get married, and nothing more!
But as soon as the deviant marriages began, the law suits started to force normal people to participate in them.

You're quivering with hate, aren't you? Just for the record, how many guns do you own?

 

[fhl]

There you go again. I "stick up" for innocent people. But that not how you evidently see the victims, is it? Thanks for the insight. It supports my earlier conclusion about you being something of a sympathizer.

You mean as opposed the the NRA being guilty of....exactly what?

You are an articulate fool.

 

[fhl]

Just for the record, how many guns do you own?

Just for the record, how many times have you taken it up the rear?

 

[fhl]

There you go again. I "stick up" for innocent people. But that's not how you evidently see the victims, is it? Thanks for the insight. It supports my earlier conclusion about you being something of a sympathizer. And it continues:



You're quivering with hate, aren't you? Just for the record, how many guns do you own?

You're a joke. You write post and then you spend the next thirty minutes seeing how many times you can edit.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Just for the record, how many times have you taken it up the rear?

Such preoccupation. Next, you'll be asking what I'm wearing. Is your hate possibly fueled by self-loathing? You might want to think about that one.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

The killer was US-born. Are you paying attention?

His parents were afghan immigrants. His father is some sort of radical extremist, etc. You let them in, they have kids, raise them to be jihadis, etc and then of course they get to bring in their entire extended families through the madness of chain migration.

We have had three recent terrorist attacks, Boston marathon bombing, San Bernadino shooting and this. All by muslims, all either immigrants or first generation offspring.

When that Root kid shot up a black church, the left immediately amped up its cultural cleansing campaign against any and all artifacts of Southern heritage. Not just Confederate flags, but even schools and streets named for Confederate heroes, monuments to the dead etc.

When it's murderous muslim terrorists however, they walk on eggshells. The Washington Post opined this morning that this was the result of intolerance towards gays, ie blame family values groups, lax gun laws, of course, and our failure to make muslims feel sufficiently accepted.

Their recommendation is to let's be more accepting of muslims and restrict gun rights for law-abiding Americans whose families came over on the Mayflower. Oh yeah, I'm sure they will want to have more and bigger government agencies monitoring us. Just no profiling please.

 

[piezoe]

Even Heller, in which the right to bear arms was deemed by Justice Scalia as 'inalienable' on the basis of English law, from which our own law descends, does not preclude the banning of certain types of firearms, nor would such banning be a violation of the Second Amendment, according to current law.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

You're a joke. You write post and then you spend the next thirty minutes seeing how many times you can edit.

And if you ever wish to edit your posts for content and clarity, may I recommend the Delete button?

 

[CaptainObvious]

So you lefties are saying it's not possible for our glorious government to stop a suspected terrorist from purchasing a weapon because we can't/won't create a list that would pop up during a routine background check? How is this such a stretch to do? This is going to cost millions upon millions of dollars to do? Why? OH YEAH, we're talking about the government. Admit it, law enforcement was hamstrung by the PC police on this one. Can't profile a suspected terrorist. Might offend someone.

 

[wjk]

...(b) the right to not be harmed by others' expression of their interpreted freedom...

I don't disagree with that in any way. Don't we have laws to prevent such harm? I don't believe the intent of the fathers was to take freedoms from some based on the actions of others, which in my opinion, falls under the same exact statement above.

Let me give you a different type of example, but there are fundamental similarities. Should I have my car taken away or be forced to drive a vehicle that may not meet my personal wishes or needs because other people are too stupid to put their texting device down while driving, and are killing more people than drunk drivers (you can include drunk drivers, too)?

(a) definition and purpose of assault vs hunting and defense.

I can think of multiple situations where certain weapons would be better than others in self defense, even if you don't agree. Who gets to make that decision...what is adequate self defense for an individual?

I lived in Japan for a year and a half. No one had guns (including myself). I'll admit, it was actually kind of nice. I never really felt the lack of guns was why there was so little violence, though certainly a factor. To me, it seemed like people over there actually had respect for each other. Don't see much of that in this country anymore.

We have serious societal issues in this country, and if the gov can figure out how to cure those, I'm completely open to greater and reasonable controls. But first, we need to reach a point where politicians and celebrities no longer need body guards. That would be a pretty good indicator that things have improved. Then, I'll be ready to surrender the few guns I own(if any of them fall under a ban), but only for a fair price. Seriously.