Terrorists have the right to defend themselves from the Red Coats too.Especially if they're an MP.
ABC reporting that the Dems have put forward that any suspected terrorists be banned from buying a gun .... Republifux have said no, that is too much, & proposed that they should be made to wait 72 hours before getting the WMD.FMD, you couldn’t make this shitt up.
I think the argument is, the moment you start banning people from doing things simply because you suspect them of something, is the moment you take away the western concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Are people “proven guilty” of having a mental illness?
How to derail a vigil:
Time and a place- NOT
ABC reporting that the Dems have put forward that any suspected terrorists be banned from buying a gun .... Republifux have said no, that is too much, & proposed that they should be made to wait 72 hours before getting the WMD.FMD, you couldn’t make this shitt up.
I think the argument is, the moment you start banning people from doing things simply because you suspect them of something, is the moment you take away the western concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Like kicking brown people out of your country and building a wall to stop another kind getting in and making them pay for it?
lol Trump really is a moron
ABC reporting that the Dems have put forward that any suspected terrorists be banned from buying a gun .... Republifux have said no, that is too much, & proposed that they should be made to wait 72 hours before getting the WMD.FMD, you couldn’t make this shitt up.
I think the argument is, the moment you start banning people from doing things simply because you suspect them of something, is the moment you take away the western concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Are people “proven guilty” of having a mental illness?
Often they can be proven to have a mental illness, so yes.
As for the argument, I wasn’t saying it was right or wrong, I was saying I think that is what the Repubs are arguing.
ABC reporting that the Dems have put forward that any suspected terrorists be banned from buying a gun .... Republifux have said no, that is too much, & proposed that they should be made to wait 72 hours before getting the WMD.FMD, you couldn’t make this shitt up.
I think the argument is, the moment you start banning people from doing things simply because you suspect them of something, is the moment you take away the western concept of innocent until proven guilty.
You really mean:
Suspected of taking performance enhancing drugs on flimsy evidence, rolled into fabricated strands that lead nowhere and then persecuted despite their innocence and the unconstitutional requirement to prove that innocence.
lel. Some hacked the NRA twitter account.That’s ■■■■■■■ brilliant
Not if the gun misfires !!
Ahm…no.
Then it’s more brilliant.
Position 3 takes a fair bit of commitment.
Now that’s what you call “loading” a gun … Oh baby.
lel. Some hacked the NRA twitter account.That’s ■■■■■■■ brilliant
Not if the gun misfires !!
Also known as “premature discharge”.
Do they use the bayonet attachment for extra pleasure?
Now you’re just being weird …
How to derail a vigil:Time and a place- NOT
I thought there wasn’t really a time & place for blatant hate speech like that.
How to derail a vigil:Time and a place- NOT
I thought there wasn’t really a time & place for blatant hate speech like that.
You’re confusing self-involved put-uponism with hate speech.
Do me a favour and put up a youtube of right wing hate speech so we can contrast and compare.
How to derail a vigil:Time and a place- NOT
I thought there wasn’t really a time & place for blatant hate speech like that.
You’re confusing self-involved put-uponism with hate speech.
Do me a favour and put up a youtube of right wing hate speech so we can contrast and compare.
Can’t say I’m familiar with “put-uponism” . Self-involved is fair enough but its hardly an excuse for her words & the hijacking of a public vigil to promote radical views not associated with the reason people were there. Racism & hatred has many faces no matter how some may choose to justify it. Had a different person taken that stage & said “I’m afraid because there’s so many blacks here” & “you don’t know because you’re black” then I would equally see it as condemnable.
That video doesn’t cover half of what she said (accidentally posted the wrong link when I searched YouTube). I think it comfortably fits under the “hate speech” umbrella.
Fair enough, just going on what was there.
Typical condescending liberal Uni student. If you want to call ‘you don’t get us cos you’re white’ hate speech then let me get you some aloe vera toilet paper.
lel. Some hacked the NRA twitter account.That’s ■■■■■■■ brilliant
Not if the gun misfires !!
Also known as “premature discharge”.
Permanent discharge.
What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do. How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea? I don't understand that at all.Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues
The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issuesSo how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
Apparently, if they are on a “No Fly” list, they can’t buy a gun.
I don’t think that’s correct.
I understand that you can be on a NFL and still be able to buy firearms legally - even without the loophole of 'no background checks if purchased from a fair/trade show or used.Correct. Obama said exactly this in a talk at some point. Their congress doesn’t even allow the study of gun violence. That’s how ridiculous it is.
This is the video. Boggles the mind.