Quantcast

CT Shooting & Govern by Crisis

WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB 2012/12/17 09:50:12
Related Topics: Crisis, Shooting
No comment from self. None is necessary.



Read More: http://youtu.be/fItrYmDLNEg

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • krayzrick 2012/12/17 10:19:10
    krayzrick
    +9
    "Brick by brick....."
    One day everyone is going to wake up, and America is not going to be America anymore.
    I'm glad I'm old...

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Gregaj7 2012/12/17 23:40:47
    Gregaj7
    +1
    Way too much precedent to back-up what he's saying!
  • Swampdog PWCM 2012/12/17 20:13:31
    Swampdog PWCM
    +2
    Government NEVER does anything well. Government need us, we don't need them at all. Dismantle the federal government.
  • hiram 2012/12/17 18:20:09
  • Kathy 2012/12/17 17:38:59
    Kathy
    +1
    The government always measures rights and protections by profit, that is why the
    pharmaceutical companies can drug We the People with dangerous and deadly
    drugs. Children are victims by lawmakers and drug companies, as all of society
    is at Risk!
  • S Perkins 2012/12/17 16:49:29
  • gldynmd BTO-t-BCRA-F 2012/12/17 15:40:21
    gldynmd BTO-t-BCRA-F
    +2
    What is happening to our nation turns my stomach.
  • WannaBe... gldynmd... 2012/12/17 16:05:05
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +2
    Agreed. Thank you.
  • Kathy gldynmd... 2012/12/17 17:40:34
    Kathy
    +2
    Drugs are dehumanizing our children and society, the more and more drugs the more and more sucides and murder
  • Silverlocust 2012/12/17 15:31:32
    Silverlocust
    Thanks for your thoughtful comments.
    I wonder if you could tell me your views about the following;
    * Since you probably agree that there should be at least SOME controls on the availability and use of weapons (e.g. flamethrowers and biological weapons shouldn't be freely sold to children or the mentally disturbed) - can I assume that you also agree that the 2nd amendment is open to some negotiation?
    * Would you consider the "crisis reaction" to the Three Mile Island radioactive leak (stricter requirements in the manufacturing, operating and maintenance of nuclear plants) or the Deepwater Horizon oil spill (a six-month offshore drilling moratorium pending safety checks), examples of unnecessary restrictions of liberty that over-encroached on people's freedom?
    * Do you consider ANY government intervention on people's behaviour (especially that designed to prevent serious harm or death) to be attack on their freedom and liberty and therefore worthy of preventing? I'm thinking here of seat belt laws and laws against the use of drugs.

    btw. Do you have a reliable source (not some conspiracy nut-case blog) that supports your assertion that Robert Holmes was about to testify before a Senate panel?
  • WannaBe... Silverl... 2012/12/17 17:13:46
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +2
    Never assume, "Silverlocast".
    "can I assume that you also agree that the 2nd amendment is open to some negotiation?"
    You can take to the bank that my right of self protection is not up for negotiation, nor shall it be abridged. That the premise (padding) of your argument is specious to the extreme, did not go unnoticed.
    TMI and DWH have nothing to do with my right to defend myself, my Family, my property nor my Country. In fact, if there were less controls, drilling would be done today in shallower waters and on land, and we would not have the "Energy Department" pushing nukes on us in the first place.
    My safety is not the concern of the "government", except in extremely constricted instances as enumerated in the Constitution
  • Silverl... WannaBe... 2012/12/18 07:28:20
    Silverlocust
    So, then you ARE in favour of children and mentally disturbed patients being free to but flamethrowers? To do otherwise would be to negotiate, abridge or to some degree, limit the power of the 2nd amendment.
    I understand that I'm putting forward an extreme example but then, that is what you are required to defend against if you take an extreme stance (No negotiation, no conditions, not now, not ever.)

    Look, I understand your position re personal defence, I really do and to some extent I'm sympathetic to it. It's just that I have never had explained to me why someone needs an assault rifle to defend themselves. Or why some states do not require a criminal history check, or a mental history check, or a certificate of firearms handling training, or a cooling-off period before a purchased weapon is allowed to be owned.
    All these seem like fairly sensible restrictions to me that would not impinge on a person's ability to defend themselves, or on their constitutional rights.
    I see these types of controls as being beneficial to society as a whole without restricting personal freedoms unduly. And attaining that balance is part of a government's role surely? It is done in respect of DUI laws, speeding laws, slander/libel laws and people generally accept the controls over an individual's actions in order to benefit everyone.
  • WannaBe... Silverl... 2012/12/18 09:37:11
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +1
    You've never had it explained to you why someone needs an assault rifle to defend themselves, eh?
    Never saw FLIR footage of Waco, then.

    Your "government" has proven itself incompetent to control itself, let alone manage or control my life, even benignly. Your "government" is force, nothing more, and increasingly that force is used criminally.
    It sanctions the drugs used by each and every individual who commits atrocities like the latest school slaughter we are discussing, drugs that are responsible for the very psychotic episodes they purport to "treat"... yet you are willing to take away the last line of defense for every man, woman and child, just to make you "feel" safe.
    Incredible.

    Bringing up DUI and slander to buttress your case is at best fallacious.

    I say again; There will be no compromise.
  • Silverl... WannaBe... 2012/12/18 13:30:01
    Silverlocust
    When you hold up a deluded cult leader who believed he was the "second coming" , who had taken multiple underage wives, who claimed he had fathered multiple children to girls as young as 13, as an example of brutalized innocence - that's when it's clear your argument has crumbled.
    I was actually willing to listen to your reasoning until you introduced a bunch of apocalypse-spouting child abusers to support it.
  • WannaBe... Silverl... 2012/12/18 15:16:19
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +1
    You have no proof of the false charges of "multiple underage wives", and many eye witness accounts directly opposing that false accusation, but saying that proves you approve of mass murder.
    I neither argue, nor do I attempt to reason any longer with those who will willingly give up their freedom for a false "security". I now state simple fact, and a little advice;
    Leave free men and women alone.
  • Tinka123 WannaBe... 2012/12/18 15:58:20
    Tinka123
    +1
    Amazing how he has no problem with multiple innocents being murdered to kill one so-called loon. Hmm, that seems a bit backwards...
  • WannaBe... Tinka123 2012/12/18 16:20:21
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +1
    Interesting, that. I wonder, that he can't/won't recognize cognitive dissonance.
  • Tinka123 WannaBe... 2012/12/18 22:41:04
    Tinka123
    +1
    imho - This is always what happens when people seek to rule over one another. Somehow - the 'ends' always seem to justify the means...
  • WannaBe... Tinka123 2012/12/19 08:45:52
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +1
    Ain't that the truth.
  • OPOA912 2012/12/17 15:13:35
    OPOA912
    +5
    Look a everything OZbama has done and not done and you'll see a pattern of management by crisis. No leadership, just photo op after photo op. No tough questions by the OZbama Media Group, no meetings with foreign leaders just interviews on the View. Where are the real leaders in this Country?
  • John 2012/12/17 15:02:36
    John
    +1
    I am an free thinking Democrat who agrees with everything said on the video. I am a million miles away from many Republican views but this is certainly something we can agree upon.
  • Jesse-Tired of Liberal Lunacy 2012/12/17 14:26:21
    Jesse-Tired of Liberal Lunacy
    +5
    When guns are taken away from law-abiding citizens the only ones who will have them are psychos and criminals. Does that make any sense?
  • WannaBe... Jesse-T... 2012/12/17 17:18:28
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    Order out of Chaos?
  • Unusual... Jesse-T... 2012/12/17 19:02:32
    UnusualSuspect
    Sure it does...at least we'll know who has them, and what to expect.

    Makes perfect sense!

    Then we won't have anymore senseless acts of violence like 20 kids being killed in CT, since criminals are not into mass killing sprees, but are more likely to kill over money, drugs, or get jealous over the occasional woman.

    So essentially, we'd all be safer!
  • Silverl... Jesse-T... 2012/12/18 07:30:10
    Silverlocust
    Nobody is suggesting (or WILL suggest) that all guns should be taken away from law abiding citizens.
  • Tinka123 2012/12/17 14:17:06
    Tinka123
    +1
    Govt. is force. Force and freedom are incompatible. Any solution offered by govt. must therefor restrict liberty. Such a simple concept...
  • WannaBe... Tinka123 2012/12/17 17:20:30
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +1
    Too simplistic it seems. Might Wanna jazz it up with esoteric words/terms and some PowerPoint nonsense.
  • Tinka123 WannaBe... 2012/12/17 21:33:30
    Tinka123
    +1
    Ahh yes, trigger words right? Nah - I'll pass ;)
  • WannaBe... Tinka123 2012/12/18 09:38:31
  • Rich Matarese 2012/12/17 14:04:35 (edited)
    Rich Matarese
    +5
    Never let a massacre go to waste, right?

    .

    ========
    "After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away
    from the people who didn't do it."

    -- William Burroughs
  • WannaBe... Rich Ma... 2012/12/17 17:20:56
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    Absolutely. Thanks Rich.
  • Tuna 2012/12/17 13:12:28 (edited)
    Tuna
    +4
    If we keep kicking God out of our society guess who is waiting to take control? Funny how so many Americans DIS-believe in God anymore but "know" there is a Satan. we have to stop Satan from ruling over people like this murderer.
    God bless America
  • WannaBe... Tuna 2012/12/17 13:35:11
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    +2
    Diving into the Bible as we speak, prayer warriors need to fight some battles.
  • Tuna WannaBe... 2012/12/17 13:53:48
    Tuna
    +4
    This shooter's Mom was arming herself for the last days, we seem to be rushing into. That New World Order where we don't have many rights, especially the right to defend ourselves against it. That New World Order is a Godless society, a one world government, one world economy, and one world aetheism.
  • Unusual... Tuna 2012/12/17 19:04:01
    UnusualSuspect
    No such thing as God or satan...only in your mind.
  • Tuna Unusual... 2012/12/17 19:12:26
    Tuna
    +1
    You will struggle in that New World Order; one of the sheep.
  • Unusual... Tuna 2012/12/17 19:27:47
    UnusualSuspect
    Uh huh...right...
  • WannaBe... Unusual... 2012/12/18 09:39:16
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    Only a fool says there is no God.
  • JonDeniro 2012/12/17 11:53:29
    JonDeniro
    +2
    Excellent commentary.
  • WannaBe... JonDeniro 2012/12/17 13:35:38
    WannaBeRSC the Contrarian SOB
    I thought so as well. TY.
  • Katherine 2012/12/17 11:09:00
    Katherine
    +3
    Rave. That's all I can say.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/08/22 00:06:58

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals