or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by jazzguru

  And it started when the British government attempted to seize stockpiles of weapons from the colonists. The aggressor was the government, not the people.
  You didn't answer my question.   Why do you believe arms are dangerous in the hands of "ordinary" people, but not people who work for the government?
More hyperbole:   Biden: Gabby Giffords 'Was Shot and Mortally Wounded'
I'm still trying to understand how those who believe guns are so dangerous and people cannot be trusted with them can possibly think it's a good idea to limit their ownership and use ONLY to people who happen to work for the government.   What is it about working for the government that suddenly makes guns not dangerous and people trustworthy and competent with them?
  So the guns took control of these partners through some form of mind control and forced them to shoot the women?     Are guns sprouting legs, roaming the streets, and seeking out women to shoot?     The fact is these are inanimate objects and they, in and of themselves, do not kill or harm anyone.
The hyperbole starts at the top:   Democrat Charlie Rangel claims "millions" of kids being "shot down by assault weapons"
  Does the car control you? Does the gun control you?   They are inanimate objects.
  "The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society." -- Thomas Jefferson     Interesting theory.
Guns are inanimate objects.
I actually think there is a slight possibility Obama could be reelected - or will be in office more than 4 years.   All the government has to do is declare some kind of emergency that "necessitates" the postponement of the election or allows Obama to run for a third term, and the majority of the people would roll over and let it happen.
New Posts  All Forums: