patrick.net

good thing he didn't make a never-seen video about mohmad, huh? Of even worse, draw a cartoon of mohmad !

Bap33 says

good thing he didn't make a never-seen video about mohmad, huh? Of even worse, draw a cartoon of mohmad !

The evils of the Middle East do not excuse the evils of the American government.

Dan8267 says

Bap33 says

good thing he didn't make a never-seen video about mohmad, huh? Of even worse, draw a cartoon of mohmad !

The evils of the Middle East do not excuse the evils of the American government.

I don't think Bap33 insinuated any such thing. His point was merely that greater evils exist in the world.

New Renter says

I don't think Bap33 insinuated any such thing. His point was merely that greater evils exist in the world.

I'd agree with that point, but would add that this particular evil is more than sufficient to cause outrage and protest. An innocent person has already lost one of the best years of his life and has suffered humiliation and pain. His entire life has been set back considerably and irrevocable altered for the worse because of state corruption and nothing more.

their knee jerk reaction is almost as bad as the big gun-grab by the progressive anti-conservative group holding America hostage right now in the WH.

obviously it is easy for some to miss reality when it is not covered by CBS .... I wish Obama would carry the fox news feed ticker on his belt so you guys could see it with your lips pressed tight to his ass.

If you MUST suggest a huge anti-gun game was not kicked into motion by the anti-conservatives, then so be it. Hows that BarryButt taste?

robertoaribas says

how many of your guns have been grabbed? I have all of mine, just like I did when Obama first took office.

Good thing your in Freedom loving Arizona. Had you been in California, you would know of the long list of new guns banned by the state.

AG Harris Bans All New Semiautomatic Handguns in California
Posted on May 18, 2013

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/05/daniel-silverman/ag-harris-effectively-bans-all-new-semiautomatic-handguns-in-california/

"There may come a time when California gun shops may have only a dozen or so new handgun models for sale. Or, perhaps, none. Think that’s an exaggeration? California still has no less than 46 civilian disarmament bills floating around in the Sacramento legislature. It’s a slave state for sure."

Wait a minute, isn't it Facebook posts that always come up after these creeps shoot up the place, that every points to? They always seem to say crap very familiar.

There's plenty of ways to be sarcastic, with out putting your self in the first person seat. Once you've done that, then you've blended into a blurry line.

He could have said, "Oh like someone is going to shoot up the school." He said he was going to.

Don't use Facebook and you wont be in any danger of having some thought police asshole interpret your intentions by your post.

that is one of my biggest problems, ... I think everyone lives where I live and that messes up alot of the discussions I enter.

Like, we went through the leftist court junk loooong before the whole National Sexual Deviant Anti-Christian Movement began. When we passed Prop 187, and our votes got blocked by a progressive/liberal/leftist court, I knew something bad was coming. That blocked Prop allowed for the invasion from mexico to be funded by the tax payers of America, and the new demographic was used by the lending industry to blow-up the housing marker. and the entire mind-set of, "it's not my fault I tried to buy someting I cant afford" was easy to foster from a group that comes from a culture of "take whatever you can". AKA, LaRaza.

As for "gun ban" ... I not only know of first hand bans on weapons, there is bans on clips, ammo, and ability to carry. The truth of the entire debate is the liberal/progressive elite POS filth are afraid of anyone that is independant and willing to defend themselves, rather than dependant and needing the help of a liberal. All of my weapons are tools, much like the other poster says. But here's something for Pelosi, Boxer, and Fienstein to run through their itty bitty deviant minds, most tools are also great weapons. For example, my ball bat beats your (anything hand held) other than a spear, really long sword, or a gun. It's the elitist freaks on the left live in a fantasy world, not conservative nutjobs like me and JSP. We were fine with full gun racks in pickups. A few bleeding heart dopesmoking nannystaters got nervous when they seen such things and wanted them to go away. I think it is because they like the idea of being able to escalte a situation and know that as long as they have the biggest bunch of goons, willing to fight for their obamaphone, then they are safe. A few armed conservatives ruins their whole intimidation technique. Look at the Occupy crap and the way they raped, mamed, harmed, and such, just trying to intimidate the TEA party into being quiet and taking the ass pounding Lord Barry has in store. Some people just aint wired like that. Some people are willing to call a spade a spade. Progressiveism/Liberalism/Communism/Socialism/Leftism ..... these are a cancer of Humanity. These things have destroyed every sect of humanity that was unable to cast them away.

The movement away from a society based on good morals, into one with a focus on making sure sexual deviants and their defective victims get public acceptance, one that plans to use women as warriors, one that is afraid of Arabs to the point that they will let Christians be murdered at will ..... dont look good folks.

Bap33 says

Progressiveism/Liberalism/Communism/Socialism/Leftism ..... these are a
cancer of Humanity. These things have destroyed every sect of humanity that was
unable to cast them away.

The movement away from a society based on good morals, into one with a focus
on making sure sexual deviants and their defective victims get public
acceptance, one that plans to use women as warriors,

Wow, we could take the above post and put it behind glass in the Smithsonian display of internet fauna. Step right up and see a paranoid xenophobe in its natural internet habitat.

you dont live in mexifornia bobby.
About that CCW, why should a free American be forced to get a "license" to exersize a God given right?

Bap33 says

live in mexifornia bobby

I'm sure Mr. Ribas feels a special connection to your mindset.

Put another way, full grokking is.

CaptainShuddup says

There's plenty of ways to be sarcastic, with out putting your self in the first person seat. Once you've done that, then you've blended into a blurry line.

In a free society people don't have to guard every word they say or write in fear of being thrown in jail for it. This prosecution is unamerican.

CaptainShuddup says

Don't use Facebook and you wont be in any danger of having some thought police asshole interpret your intentions by your post.

Unfortunately, that's not true. If you communicate in any way shape or form with another human being, the thought police may come after you. We have moved into a society where even benign political thoughts cannot be expressed openly or you get killed by a drone or arrested and taken to a secret prison.

It's a bad idea to use Facebook for anything, but not using it will not keep you safe.

Well it's one less thing to have to worry about, when buying a house, car or getting a job. Pretty soon there will be a Social Network section in your credit report. How many likes and dislikes you got and stuff like that.

Bap33 says

Like, we went through the leftist court junk loooong before the whole National Sexual Deviant Anti-Christian Movement began

Oh no, here comes the crazy...

Bap33 says

As for "gun ban" ... I not only know of first hand bans on weapons, there is bans on clips, ammo, and ability to carry. The truth of the entire debate is the liberal/progressive elite POS filth are afraid of anyone that is independant and willing to defend themselves

One, what gun ban?

Two, for the past three months I've been calling on gun nuts like you to defend America from the tyranny going on right now. Things like..
1. Rescuing the hero Bradly Manning
2. Protecting the whistle-blower Eric Snowden
3. Freeing the political captive Justin Carter, who is wrongfully being imprisoned for exercising his First Amendment write to be sarcastic.
4. Protecting the public from numerous criminal police caught murdering and sexually assaulting people.
5. Stopping the NSA from illegally spying on civilians.

You gun-nut pussies keep saying that you're guns and the right to trade them without background checks or a registry are necessary to protect America from tyranny. Well, I've been calling that bluff for three months. There is tyranny all around you, where the fuck are you and your guns?

If you want me to buy that the Second Amendment does anything to protect us and isn't an archaic piece of shit, than prove it. Exercise that Second Amendment right to stop the illegal and horrific actions that our government is doing right now. Until then, you're all hat and no cow.

Bap33 says

About that CCW, why should a free American be forced to get a "license" to exersize a God given right?

Rights are not given by your fictitious god. They are created and enforced by government. Of course, what government says is a right and what actually is are two different things. Government often lies calling something a right that it does not treat as a right.

For example, speech, religion, voting, and bearing arms are not rights in the United States. I know this may be shocking to most of you, but it is a cold, hard fact, not an opinion.

A right, by definition, cannot be taken away. A freedom that can be taken away or is conditional is, by definition, a privilege, not a right.

You do not have the right to free speech. If you call a judge a racist pig in court, you will be held in contempt. Being punished for expressing discontent at a government official is the quintessential example of not having freedom of speech.

Granted, there are some legitimate restrictions on speech, but such restrictions should be explicitly listed in the First Amendment because otherwise the state renders the First Amendment impotent and useless by assuming the state can make any arbitrary restriction on speech. The First Amendment should say "All speech is protected from any legal ramification except for:
1. Threats of violence.
2. Falsely reporting emergencies.
3. Falsely reporting crimes.
4. Perjury.
5. Extortion.
6. Slander and liable.
7. Holding an audience captive.
All other speech cannot be prosecuted in any way regardless of content or reason including, but not limited to, the content being seditious, lewd, hateful, or harmful to society."

Now maybe you want to add one or two things or remove one, but the point is the exceptions should be explicit so that all other speech is protected.

Religion is another so-called right that isn't a right in practice. Only certain popular religions are protected. Islam, for a large part, is not as evident in all the anti-Islam laws passed in the Bible Belt. Also, freedom from religion, which is an important part of religious freedom, is violated every day with blue laws. Furthermore, the state arbitrarily decides which religions are valid and which are not. Try opening a church of Wicca or Athena and get tax-exempt status.

Even voting is not a right in this country, although it should be. Convicted felons cannot vote unless the state decides to let them. This is horribly wrong especially since our government criminalizes things that shouldn't be criminal. The main reason that marijuana is illegal is to prevent blacks from voting by turning them, unjustly, into felons. Voting is not a right in the United States, and that is shameful.

And what about the Second Amendment? A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Let's ignore the whole militia issue for now. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is often quoted as the reason why there should not be a gun registry or limits on ammo clip sizes. But let's look at all the ways the government does infringe upon this right.

1. You cannot take guns in many places including prisons, court houses, libraries, schools, airports, and airplanes. If your right was not infringed, you could keep your guns in all these places.

2. Felons cannot own guns. If being convicted of a crime takes away a freedom, than that freedom is a privilege, not a right.

3. Any kind of background check would be an infringement as would any denial of a gun sale, even to someone convicted of first degree murder.

4. Having to get a permit from the state to have any type of gun or to conceal or carry it is an infringement of the people's right to bare arms, by definition. Similarly, requiring a permit to protest or peacefully assemble is a violation of the First Amendment.

5. Prohibiting the manufacturing and distribution of guns across states under the Commerce Clause is so fucking a complete violation of the Second Amendment even if you take the original intent of state-run militias protecting themselves against the federal government.

6. Banning "cop killer" bullets and other armor piercing ammo is a violation of the rights to bear arms.

7. Prohibiting the use of explosives like grenades, C4, dynamite, and IEDs is an infringement of the right to bear arms.

8. Requiring licenses for launching rockets violates the Second Amendment especially if you intend to arm those rockets with explosives and use them as weapons. In fact, the entire purpose of rocket license laws is to prevent people from bearing rocket arms.

9. Laws restricting encryption, including the exporting of encryption, violate the Second Amendment since encryption is classified as a weapon.

10. In fact, any law prohibiting the export or import of any arm would violate the Second Amendment. Yet there are a plethora of such laws.

11. The ban on civilian use of nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, biological weapons, tanks, RPGs, land mines, attack helicopters, armed remote control or autonomous drones, etc. all are clear violations of "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.".

The fact is that the Second Amendment has not been respected in any way shape or form by our government for over a hundred years. In order for the Second Amendment to be upheld, all eleven of the things I mentioned above would have to be legal. Otherwise, the Second Amendment is just a joke.

So ask yourself, would you really want the right of the people to keep and bear arms to not be infringed? Do you really think you would be safe in such a world? Do you really think it's even slightly practical?

The right to bear arms is and always will be greatly infringed. Like the First Amendment, the Second Amendment needs to be rewritten. The first step to rewriting that amendment is acknowledging that it is utterly useless for today as written and is not enforced even remotely. The second step is having an honest, adult debate not on whether or not lines should be drawn, but where they should be drawn and why.

so, by your own example, there is no gay right to marry??

p.s., your correct on calling me a pussy for not taking a stand -- yet. But, my position is one of defense, not preemptive, unless my family is harmed and me ability to reason is hampered to a point that I wish to do as BonJovi suggests, and exit in a blaze of glory.

p.s.s. I agree with most of your reasons to stop the mighty hand of Gov.

Dan8267 says

1. You cannot take guns in many places including prisons, court houses,
libraries, schools, airports, and airplanes. If your right was not infringed,
you could keep your guns in all these places.

There are guns in each of those locations. I cant carry one there ONLY because someone, somplace, took away my right to do so. And, I accepted that action, rather than force them to allow me or kill me for trying. Kinda like a slave choosing to stay and work vs getting shot for running.

wow ... bobby ..... you drunk?

Bap33 says

so, by your own example, there is no gay right to marry??

The question is whether or not same sex marriage should be a right. And the answer is a definitive yes according to both the Fourteenth Amendment and the Supreme Court case of Loving v. Virginia. The legal question has been answered.

Only bigots claim there is any legal ambiguity, and those bigots will look like fools a mere 20 years from now just like anyone claiming that interracial marriage should be illegal looks like a fool today.

an idiot is anyone that values deviant coupling as equal to needful coupling. And that value is where the Gov based the tax breaks. Right?