Goran_K's comments

« First    « Previous     Comments 4209 - 4248 of 4,248     Last »

  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 15, 8:28am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Patrick says
@Goran_K you are right. Anons no longer have the ability to like/dislike threads or comments. The like/dislike links will just send anon users to the registration page.

I notice immediately the difference in thread/post likes.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 15, 11:13am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

It's ALMOST as if playing identity politics on hyper racist lines doesn't create an equal and opposing force.

Just like Jordan Peterson had predicted.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 17, 10:12am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Lebron = crybaby
Kevin durant = snake
Wade = should retire
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 10:52am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

I’m waiting for Marvels inclusiveness movie “White Wizard” featuring a white hooded hero that saves the day from his home base in Hicksville, Alabama.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 10:53am   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

RC2006 says
Quigley says
Ahahahahahahahah! This film is a sneak attack on Leftist values and communist ideas! It’s the anti-BLM movie of all time!

Is that how you think blacks will interpret it?

Blacks still think Black Panther is a “black created hero”. Someone should tell them the whole character and universe was invented inside the head of a white Jewish guy.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 5:54pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

Leftist: “The gun debate would change if you saw the effects of a gun shot on human tissue.”

Also Leftist: “Welcome to Planned Parenthood, please sit as we provide you with pregnancy education and care!” slyly kicks box of pictures and videos showing real abortions under the couch
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 5:59pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

I honestly can’t wait to see leftists get what they want, a civil war with everyone else they want to impose their statism on.

Shortest civil war ever.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 6:03pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

If being ranked #1 means the women, culture and national identity in your country have to get raped constantly by hairy, smelly Muslims then they can keep that trophy.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 8:14pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

The 2nd amendment is NOT about hunting.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 8:17pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Fact, 3 times more people die to knives in the U.S than to rifles.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 8:55pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

anon_7f4bc says
It is, however, about a well regulated militia. Seems obvious that you shouldn't be able to own a gun if you are not part of a militia.

The "militia" is the people as intended and described in the Federalist papers by the founders and clarified and decided in DC vs Heller (2008).

The lefty/democrat distortion that the "organized" militia is somehow separate from the people is just a distraction and total misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment. Seriously, just think about the circumstances under which the 2nd amendment was created, and it becomes obvious the lefty/democrat interpretation of the 2nd amendment makes ZERO sense.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 18, 8:59pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Jimmy Kimmel is a well paid mouth piece for the DNC and Globalist. Nothing more.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 20, 11:51am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
Amen. If only Democracy could overcome the $50MM+ in campaign donations from the NRA.

The NRA is a private advocacy group of over 5 million citizens that gets $0 in Federal or State funding.

Seems like it's Democracy in action, not being overcome.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 20, 1:48pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

bob2356 says
No there aren't. The percentage of households with guns is down 40%. The guns per household has doubled. Less of the population owns guns but the ones that do own a lot more of them. Numbers matter.

Nice try sniper.

Uh how would anyone even know this or get accurate information about this?

As a matter of fact and culture, gun owners aren't very open about what they have inside their home. Gun owners aren't going to be like, "Yeah I have guns inside my house. 17 exactly."

That sounds ridiculous.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 20, 1:55pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
By this logic, we should get rid of all laws. Criminals don't follow them, after all.

Uh no. That's not what people are saying.

You need to have laws that are calibrated to stop the problem WHILE also working to not deny people, who have done nothing wrong, their rights.

Hyperbole on either side is not useful or productive.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 21, 8:37am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Patrick says
Absolutely. The theme of his presidency is helping the working poor of all races, especially poor whites who are reviled by the SJW racists. And he really seems to mean it.

Trump is the best Democratic president we've had in decades.

I've been saying this since Trump was on the campaign. He's NOT a Republican. He's not even all that conservative, he donated to Kamala Harris's campaign for fucks sake. Just look at his daughter Ivanka, read what she writes or says. Does she seem right leaning?

People watch too much CNN/MSNBC, and believe the BS. They don't care for facts, they just want to be force fed their narrative.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 21, 8:39am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_61c8a says
At the very least, people should need to buy insurance to own guns. Every time one of these shootings happens, the victim should be able to sue the insurance agency, and the true costs of ownership should be put on the users. The insurance agencies could come up with algorithms to figure out what to charge the wannabe John Wayne types.

What about knives? Far more people die to knives than to rifles. Should they get insurance to own a knife?

What about fried chicken? Should there be "extra" insurance to eat fried chicken? Heart disease is the number one preventable cause of death in the country.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 21, 8:55am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Patrick says

SJW: They are going to figure out that we are the ones killing them with our globalist policies. We have to disarm them all, now!
Working class: Ain't gonna happen.

This can't end well. I really hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime (or my kids lifetimes), but there will be a backlash, and bodies are going to drop.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 21, 9:47am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Why would child refugees eat people? This can't be right.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 21, 9:48am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsPlissken says
"Guns are only for the Militia"

Also Liberals:
"So let's have our Modern Militia be armed with Blackpowder Muskets!"

I love it.

Liberals: "Trump is literally Hitler!"

Also Liberals: "Trump needs to take away all of our guns!"
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:07am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Obviously a Nazi.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:10am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_cf6c6 says
So, what exactly is the definition of "arms"?

Dude, this was already decided at the Supreme Court over 10 years ago, and the SCOTUS rarely sees 2A cases. This "may" change in your lifetime, but it's unlikely. The SCOTUS decided that AR15's were arms and that's why gun ban happy states have not been able to outright ban AR15's, only "feature bans" like pistol grips, mag releases, etc.

Anytime some Psycho kills, the same "arm chair" lawyers try to relive Heller vs DC, and the same guys reach the opposite decision of the court, every time. Probably because they aren't thinking about the constitution but are thinking with their emotions.

Do some reading, research Heller vs DC and read the courts findings. You'll find your answer. It's also a good read.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 7:59am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CajunSteve says
I've read quite a bit actually, and posted a good history of Supreme Court decisions earlier in the thread.

Then you should read some more. Scalia and Thomas both answered the question you're asking quite clearly in Heller vs DC:

CajunSteve says
Weapons of offence would seem to include pretty much anything and everything, from knives to nuclear weapons.

So like I said, do some reading and you'll find the answers to your question.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 8:17am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_8ca4d says
It's extremely inaccurate to say that Heller (a case about trigger locks in DC) made any finding as to AR15s whatsoever. A maxim of the court is that they only answer the question asked and nowhere in the facts or opinion is a reference to a AR15.

In fact, if you read the Scalia concurrence you will see he (a textualist) likely would come down against things other then ordinary "handguns & long guns of the time". Alas, he is dead now and his findings are only dicta and not the holding.

It's inaccurate because you don't understand the actual courts opinion or the case itself? It was NOT just about "trigger locks". You simply need to read more.

I didn't say it made any findings to AR15s, it made an opinion on commonly used arms. The AR15 is the MOST popular long gun in the United States. So yes, his opinion and the judgement in Heller vs DC has been used to rebuff any attempts to ban the AR15. That's why California gun grabbers are only attempting feature bans, a direct "AR15" ban would never stand constitutional scrutiny. Seriously, you don't think gun grabbers have been trying to find ways to ban the AR15 over the past DECADE? This is one of the biggest reasons the 2016 election was so important, the SCOTUS was up for grabs and the integrity of 2A. Once Ginsberg dies (and she will die before 2024), and Kennedy retires, Trump is going to stack the court even more heavily in favor of constitutionalist and reduce the power of leftist/socialist.

I didn't even care about Trump winning, I did care very much that Gorsuch got into the SCOTUS because of people who start threads like this.

As for Scalia being dead, and his findings "not holding", that's ridiculous and not worth the response I just typed to reference it.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 8:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_24e57 says
Its entirely insufficient. When one registers under the National Firearms Act, they are fingerprinted, and subjected to a legitimate background check where usually someone comes to your town to verify what you said. Most importantly, a county sheriff or someone equivalent must personally sign off on your application, and if they take their job seriously, they likely are going to call you in for a sit down interview which is usually pretty good at excluding psychotic individuals like most of the guys in question.

So again, if the objective is to stop the mass killings while keeping arms legal under the second amendment, how about we add these weapons to those that must be registered under the National Firearms Act?

Because registration has been used by dictatorial regimes before as a means of confiscation (see Germany 1937, Philippines 1973, etc).

Also, you can engage in better background checks (which I agree with), but in the case of Cruz, there were clear signs and warnings that the FBI missed or didn't act upon. We should fix those breakdowns in process since it's a lot easier than rewriting the entire background check process.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 11:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

HappyGilmore says

Yep, I agree. Unfortunately the NRA won't allow ANY laws to be passed that might affect the ability of someone to get a assault rifle--no matter if they are mentally ill, teenaged, whatever. I'm all for a rational discussion of facts, but that's very hard to find because one side desperately wants to avoid it.

The NRA is a private advocacy group that takes zero state or federal dollars and has over 5 million citizens as members. They do not allow or disallow law, they vote with their dollars and at the booth.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 11:33am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Here's the thing, the reason why the AR15 is not banned is because people do not want to ban it. Plain and simple. It's the most popular rifle in the country and 99.9% of people who own them do not commit murders.

More people die to knife attacks than to ANY long gun attacks. CNN/MSNBC/Pelosi/Schumer/Soros are using this tragic event to push a politically agenda most people do not want.

I would be more afraid of why people like Soros, leftist billionaire who worked with the Nazis (for survival according to him), and have pushed strong statist policies throughout his life. IMO, the guy is dangerous and should be investigated.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 11:40am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Man, I'm ashamed at how much laughter this got out of me.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 11:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_24e57 says
We don't have to rewrite the background check process. We have an enhanced standard since 1934 under the NFA, and we have the "normal" standard which you and I go through when we pick up a new 22 at our local cabelas. I argue that under the enhanced standard (most particularly your in person interview with the sheriff) guys like Cruz which for years went undetected will then be detected and their permits denied.

I've actually gone through the tax stamp process (I'm guessing you have too?). I'm waiting here on 9 months for my stamp so I can put a can on my rifle. I'm also thinking of buying a Class III NFA item, that will probably take another 12-14 months. When someone needs self protection, they can't afford to wait 9-14 months. I think that's an unreasonable burden.

anon_24e57 says
Fair enough, but we have been under this regime right here in the united states since 1934.

It also hasn't significantly reduced gun crime by any statistical study, and the NRA has tried to repeal parts of it (including removing items like suppressors from the list).
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:02pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsPlissken says
Didn't we already have an Assault Weapons ban, and Columbine happened?

Soros is a complete nasty piece of work. He gave a speech, contents unknown, about his collaboration with Nazis at a Jewish Thing and Elie Weisel was shocked. He's never shown the least remorse about his role as a murderous Turncoat.

The Netanyahu Government agrees with Orban about Soros being a threat:

Soros has stockholm syndrome bad. I have no doubt he has nazi-like policy and law changes in mind for America. The sooner he dies the better.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:04pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
That's correct. And their dollars have bought them a good chunk of the Congressmen and women. That's not how democracy should work.

Um, that's exactly how Democracy works. Private citizens pooling their money and resources fighting for their rights against coastal leftist billionaires pushing an agenda? Thats the epitome of Democracy.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
Pretty sure that poll is not representative of the general public's feelings on the matter.

Why are you pretty sure? The poll has over 300,000 respondents, and was placed on a leftist leaning website where you would expect the opposite result.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:11pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsPlissken says
By the way, has Soros being a Nazi collaborator as false, even though he was the assistant of the guy who was inventorying Estates of Fled or Captured Jews during WW2.

Snopes is almost as much of a joke as Polifact.

Well Snopes is completely unreliable, the owners, David and Barbara Mikkelson , are rabid leftist who have publically endorsed CNN/MSNBC as "good sources of information" for their fact checking, and Snopes itself belongs to the New York Times now (very left leaning company).

Here's his comments on how to fact check stories.

DAVID MIKKELSON: Well, other than checking out our site, a lot of different things. One is, of course, if a story is real, you're generally going to see it in more than one place. If you're finding something that seems rather sensational and it's only on one Web site and it's not something major like CNN or ABC, that's a pretty good tip that perhaps the story is just a rumor or something that someone made up.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:14pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsPlissken says
A handful of DC based anti-gun groups, staffed by professional lobbyists and activists, underwritten largely by a literal tiny handful of wealthy individuals or foundations, is attempting to smear a multi-million person Membership Organization, the NRA, as undemocratic.

You have to stand in awe.


I wasn't even an NRA member until a couple of years ago. They are a citizen driven advocacy group in protection of a key civil right. They have been villainized by leftist media but that's no excuse for people who actively viillanize them based off of that smear campaign. People have their own brains, they should use them to think and form their own opinions.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:32pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
Every real poll says otherwise.

67% support a ban on assault weapons.

64% favor tougher gun control laws vs 30% oppose.

66% favor stricter gun control laws vs. 31% oppose.

Dude seriously?

From your MSN poll.

"The poll was conducted on Feb. 20 among 1,992 registered voters." I'm sure very tilted towards DNC registered voters.

The TYT poll has 330,000 respondents.

Guess which one is statistically more trustworthy?
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 12:34pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
I disagree. Democracy is 1 person, 1 vote.

Not 1 person with $300MM = 2000 votes. 1 person with no money = 1 vote.

5 million people beating 2-3 coastal leftist billionaires from stripping them of their rights. Sounds very Democratic even using your own definition.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 2:45pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
Don't be ridiculous. The polling I posted above shows conclusively that the vast majority of the population is for tighter gun control. It's only the gun manufacturer $$ and their lobby that is stopping the will of the people.

You're not talking facts. Here are the top lobbyist orgs in the country by dollar amount.

Do you see the NRA? They aren't even in the Top 50. This imaginary "gun manfacturer money and NRA money" that is supposedly getting all these senators into office is nonsense (just like the Russia meddled narrative). The reason why pro-2A people get voted into office is because the majority of Americans still believe in gun ownership. Only lefty coastal enclaves hate gun ownership and enact strict gun controls, and ironically, they are also the source of most gun crime per the FBI homicide report.

I'm afraid for people who believe these made up stories about "NRA money", because it shows me they are willing to ignore reality and accept biased fantasy narrative.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 3:37pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Feux Follets says
In the 2016 election, the NRA spent $11,438,118 to support Donald Trump’s campaign and donated $19,756,346 to groups opposing Hillary Clinton’s. However, the bulk of the contributions have gone to House and Senate members. Here is a look at the top 10 recipients of NRA contributions.

OF Course they would donate to oppose Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton would have severely weakened the 2A movement. Trump ran on a pro 2A platform. I spent money to oppose Hillary Clinton (over $10,000+).

Why is this a big deal?

Hillary Clinton got $1.2 billion dollars in donations from Hollywood, Silicon Valley and other groups, the most money ever gathered by a single presidential candidate, and she still lost.

I laugh about that until this day. Don't see you accusing Hollywood and Silicon Valley of "meddling in law making".
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 3:45pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

There's not one anti-gun citizen run advocacy group with a 5 million person PAID MEMBERSHIP. Not even 100,000.
  Goran_K   ignore (0)   2018 Feb 22, 4:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CBOEtrader says

Try being a doctor, and extend a 250 lb ghetto queen' s life as she eats her Cheetos and little Debbie donuts. Life expectancy is far more about life choices than health coverage.

Obama care was a huge step backwards, but we do still have the best doctors and most accessible healthcare in the world.


Now socialize the cost of keeping that fat ghetto welfare queen latifa alive for the next 30 years.