I really disagree with her policies, and she has no experience, and like its been pointed out before, abuses her power for personal reasons.
But hey, she's kinda cute!
Printable View
I really disagree with her policies, and she has no experience, and like its been pointed out before, abuses her power for personal reasons.
But hey, she's kinda cute!
Obama doesn't idealize Socialism. He just wants to give the middle-class and lower a break.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchoftheBlackLions
Hahahahahahahahahaha.
"I believe in rights over most things.".
So, of course, McCain/Palin is the vote for you. The party that believe women do not have a right to abortion based on a belief in God that is entirely subjective.
Yeah...rights are top priority for them.
Gay marriage bans were supported by Palin and McCain, that's a support of rights isn't it?
But of course, if all else fails, they love the right to hold guns...to protect yourselves against the threat you've probably never encountered in your life.
If Palin's ass was in charge, at least we'd have something nice to look at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cereal&Milk
He has voted with the Republican party about more or less (about 88%) of the time, he has and does vote against his party (why he isn't that strong with the conservative base). Obama has voted with the Democratic party almost 100% of the time, he is one of the most liberal members of congress (he is not most liberal, even though some will accuse him of it)Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
So why suggest we shouldn't think he's just another Bush?
Any closer and it'd be incest.
I value my right to bear arms over my right to marry another man (I support gay rights). That's what's more important to me. It's ****ed up I know, but with the way the parties are at the moment you can't have your cake and eat it too, sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
I didn't feel so strongly about the 2nd Amendment until I was robbed at gunpoint in my own home and a couple of years after a friend was gunned down. A seat belt is pointless too, until you are involved in an accident. But it's cool, I don't rag on people who choose not the wear them.
What would he do exactly that would make him a third coming of Bush? What has Obama done that would suggest he'd be better than McCain, not just different. I'd be more inclined to believe that Obama would be another Jimmy Carter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
I've said it once and I'll say it again, McCain wasn't my first choice by far...but now he's my only choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aEURwsrUSQ
this is the problem with bush
no matter what dmg happens i voting mccain becuase i rather look at palin
OH EXPLOITABLE
http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/output...tor7908977.jpg
Made it just now
Are you really serious lol!? It hasn't worked at all, in fact it has worsened the problem! Gun crime has actually gotten worse since the stricter gun control laws! Hand gun crime rose 40%! two years after they were banned in 1997. It is still rising! It's a ****ing joke.Quote:
Originally Posted by lothia
Have you even been to the U.K.? It is radically easy to get a firearm even though they are "banned." That legislation only does one thing; allows only criminals to be armed.
It's really not hard to understand if you will put realism ahead of idealism.
The school shooting incident was propelled by the scared to get ******ed legislation passed.
In 1982, Kennesaw, GA passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate dropped 89% the following year. Lawful gun ownership for protection and otherwise works.
To say firearms are no longer need is wildly ignorant.
Your statement also indicates that you are ill informed. Citizens carrying firearms DETERS crime. Only those who are easily scared are readily against concealed carry.Quote:
He isn't against you having a gun at home, he's against people being allowed to walk around with them. If this bothers you, then obviously you do not care about safety. You cite your friend being held up in the street, that'd be happening a lot more if personally concealed weaponry was allowed. It's won't be under Obama, and it shouldn't be.
After passing their concealed carry law, Florida's homicide rate fell from 36% above the national average to 4% below, and remains below the national average (as of the last reporting period, 2005).
In Texas, murder rates fell 50% faster than the national average in the year after their concealed carry law passed. **** rates fell 93% faster in the first year after enactment, and 500% faster in the second. Assaults fell 250% faster in the second year.
States that disallow concealed carry have violent crime rates 11% higher than national averages.
The general public is 5.7 times more likely to be arrested for violent offenses than CCW permit holders and 13.5 times more likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than the than CCW permit holders.
Of 14,000 CCW licensees in Oregon, only 4 (0.03%) were convicted of the criminal (not necessarily violent) use or possession of a firearm.
A different study concludes that the four year violent crime arrest rate for CCW holders is 128 per 100,000. For the general population, it is 710 per 100,000. In other words, the general public is 5.5 times more likely to commit a violent crime than a CCW licensee.
Multiple victim public shootings drop in states that pass shall-issue CCW legislation.
In 80% of gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occurred in places away from the defender's home.
66% of police chiefs believe that citizens carrying concealed firearms reduce rates of violent crime.
Armed citizens deter an average of 2.5 million crimes a year.
You can live in your "The world is a wonderful place where we all hold hands and sing-a-long!" fantasy land if you want to, but I choose not to let my idealism impede my realism.
well...she can suck mah bawls.
Are you serious? You're letting your irrational fear guide you. The fact is, the U.K.'s gun laws do not work.
Why are you ignoring the facts? That's just being stubborn.
It is not "common sense" as you put it.
It's not about overthrowing the government, it's about having one of the most basic human rights. The right to defend yourself.
If all the guns in the world disappeared I would not shed a tear. But they won't.
The point of the police is to maintain law and order. It can not and will not protect every single citizen from harm.
It's pretty funny, because a good bit of CCW holders actually have more training with their weapons than the average police officer.
Your suggesting "If someone wants to **** or kill you, just let them. It's not your job to protect yourself."
I have family that live in Essex and Norfolk (no incest jokes please, lol). The very first week of my stay in Essex I walked with a friend to a local grocery store and on my way in I noticed a few guys (16-20 years old maybe) around the corner near the alley. The older fellow that was at the counter could tell that I was just visiting and told me to "be mindful of the chavs outside". He was right, as we were leaving the store I noticed the revolver protruding from his hoodie. How is that possible? Law forbids him from having it! OH SHI-
Also check this out:
http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/17341
I agree Norrin. But the fact is that people are allowed to carry and conceal guns. What do you want to be done? Prohibition? That failed the last time. It's not a question of what's morally or legitimately adequate good reasoning for having a gun, but what can be done be sure that guns are only used in a legitimately and moral fashion. If you cannot supply the answer to that, then there's no point in having beliefs in having handguns. I, however, suggest communism, and it doesn't look like we'll be moving to that kind of regime anytime soon.
First off, that event was in Essex, not Norfolk ( Norfolk is a bit too rural to visit for my tastes). You are correct, I am not from England, my mother is. You can believe said event or not. I don't see why this is so hard considering you apparently believe that which you have posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
That event just proved that the U.K.'s gun laws don't keep firearms out of the hands of who are intent to have them, not that I needed one.
I have no idea where you get the idea that I am for so called "western quickdraws."
I have common sense and facts to back it up.
Congrats, you just made no ****ing sense. If all the guns in the world disappeared then I wouldn't have one either. I would be okay with that, but we are living in the real world.Quote:
Nice Freudian slip, by the way. If ALL the guns in the world disappeared, you'd shed a tear? Why? Then there'd be no guns for criminals to use either. So clearly you just get a stiffy off the idea of shootin' some robbers or acting hard with a gun. If the whole premise is "I want to defend myself against guns.", then nobody having guns would put you on equal playing field, so you wouldn't have an issue. You do, though, so there's clearly more to your psyche than you're letting on, here.
I enjoy posting back and forth with you...but this is getting really ******ed now. I have no idea where you are getting this shit from. Why would even suggest that I'd get a "stiffy" out of shooting someone?
The police are more likely to accidentally shoot you than a CCW.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiore
The point is that gun laws will only leave those who break the law armed. If you can not see the common sense in the right to defend your own ****ing life then I'm sorry.
I'm not advocating gun slinging here.
What happens when someone has a gun and the only weapon a cop has is a baton? Does he throw it at the criminals head?Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
I'm not trying to start an argument nor am I trying to be a smart ass. I just want to know what you think.
They don't, here anyway.
Which brings us back to my last point that we should get over the fact that we have guns as there doesn't seem to be any realistic plan to remove them from the US society and do something to prevent unlawful use of them, which reforms are being done on a daily basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norrin Radd
I agree with the 2nd Amendment, but why would I vote for the party that would end up putting me in a situation that I'd use it?
I'm not a violent person at all, but it's the "republican party" that I am protecting myself from.
It's people like Palin that I fear, because it's that kind of mentality that brings our genocides.
You are all far too young to have lived through Hitler's regime. None of us know how he came to power.
My Grandmother, on the otherhand, did.
She knows, first hand, how the politics were manipulated, how the people were brain-washed, etc.
This is the same god damn thing.
Not saying that it's to wipe out the Jews. But it's the same god damn process that the Nazi's used to take full control.
And it's happening again. It started with Bush. Open up loop-holes, give more and more power to one branch, manipulate the media to give the coverage that you want. And all the while keep the people just bearly placid enough that they don't start a full-out riot, but are angry.
Then, through media manipulation, simply manipulate that anger and get the people to do what you want.
But lets bring this back on topic.
Palin.
Not McCain, not Obama, but Palin.
Now that the dust has settled, your thoughts on her?
---------------- Now playing on Winamp: The Red Hot Chili Peppers - Nevermind via FoxyTunes
She's a shit.
WHAT??!?!?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Manic
WHAT?!?!
Ever since 9/11 has happened, the republicans have used it AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN in their political campaigns.
And after over six years of them doing this, THIS IS YOUR RESPONSE?!?!?!
BULLSHIT
Find a better excuse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FabianN
Holy ****ing A, Fabiann went off. XD
To quote Biden:
"The reason they're talking about us is because...well...what do you talk about? What do you talk about when you can't explain the last eight years of failure? You talk about the other guy.".