Stop. Don’t spread the 97% thing anymore. Debunk it.
The “97 percent” figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey, out of over 10,000 surveys sent out—does not a consensus make.
Basically, they only got back around 31% of the surveys they sent out, and threw out all but about 80 of them in order to get the 97% result they were looking for.
Its like saying 97% of the people that own Ford cars, drive ford cars, with the surveys only sent to ford owners, and throwing out any that don’t say Ford.
Here is my statistic:
In a recent study, 97% of people believe anything you say if prefaced with “in a recent study”.
 March 20, 2015 at 12:10pm
When I was in the military, we were given the option of saying “so help me God” or “I so affirm”. I don’t see any problem with leaving it as a choice with the people being sworn in.
Wrong. You could swear or affirm but those came at the start of the oath and So help me God at the end.
firearmsdealer: you are correct. the commissioning oath for all services still has the words "So help me God," but it is optional in all services. The subject of the article here is a change to the USAF Academy Honor Oath, which is a different oath than the commissioning/enlistment oath.
 March 16, 2015 at 12:12pm
One BIG flaw in their logic (besides the obvious of… criminals will always get illegal stuff, and nobody has anything to fear from law abiding citizens even if they own a rocket launcher)…. however…
According to several studies…
” Velocity drops rapidly as the barrel length decreases, especially below 10 inches where the velocity drops below 2,500 fps. M855 bullets traveling below 2,500 fps when impacting a target will not produce a lethal wound channel.”
Basically, pistol length barrels may not have the capability of throwing a M855 round (or any round for that matter) fast enough to actually penetrate body armor. Therefore, if true, their “excuse” that pistol AR’s with “armor piercing” rounds is a big fat lie. Go figure.
I’d like to see actual proof that a 223/556 round fired from a pistol could actually penetrate body armor.
 March 16, 2015 at 12:05pm
At the very least, it makes a nice “bong” sound when hitting steel targets… :)
But obviously the first and foremost reason is, well, the 2nd amendment. Period.
Haha, that could be the issue. Like I said, I see no justification in limiting access to the ammunition. I also don't see the appeal, but that's a separate issue.
March 10, 2015 at 12:05pm
You are either being sarcastic, or extremely misinformed.
Stop and search for any reason somebody feels like is a violation of the 4th amendment. Would you like to be stopped and searched every 15 feet when you’re trying to walk somewhere? Maybe searching for drugs? Or pink underwear?
So what if somebody is carrying a weapon? As long as they are law abiding citizens? Now, somebody running around screaming, waving a gun in the air, shooting randomly, sure, stop them.
Sandy Hook…. The weapon used there was a HANDGUN, obtained ILLEGALLY. Outlawing “assault” Rifles (no such thing, by the way), would have done nothing. In addition, if the Sandy Hook creep(s) didn’t have firearms, they would have used something else, like knives and baseball bats like a guy in China used the same day that Sandy Hook happened.
The problem isn’t inanimate objects. The problem is bad people. How about we outlaw bad people and bad actions instead? Oh, right, murder is already against the law. Look how many murders happen every year, and surprise, less than half the murders committed used guns for those murders. And Rifles? They are used in less than 4% of all gun related crimes. Source? FBI stats. Look them up. Educate yourself.
 March 10, 2015 at 11:57am
I’m neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the actions of this individual, but, to clarify, in Michigan:
Schools are “gun free” zones, protected by law so you are not allowed to carry a firearm within 1000 feet of a school, with a few exceptions.
So, the first question is, how “near” is “near”? If he was more than 1000 feet from the school, he was not violating any laws.
If he was within 1000 feet, then we must ask, does he have a concealed pistol license? If not, he was in violation of the law and subject to action.
If he has a CPL, then by law, he is not allowed to conceal carry within the school gun free zone unless he is in a car and picking up or dropping off a student, but, he IS allowed to open carry within the school gun free zone.
Finally, unless the police suspect a crime in progress, they have no right to even stop and question the man, unless he chooses to stop and speak with them. If they force the issue and stop him without his consent, they are guilty of unlawful detainment and false imprisonment.
As for being insolent, if he was outside of that 1000 foot range, the police had no authority to stop him. However, it is our duty as responsible gun owners and 2nd amendment rights defenders to be polite and forward our cause, not act like a progressive dirtbag.
can you quote gun-free zone law from the constitution for me? any law that does not agree 100% with the constitution IS NOT A LAW. There fore a non law cannot be broken.
 March 6, 2015 at 12:09pm
I know this has been said over and over and over again, but…
How about cutting all the garbage spending and working within a viable budget like all Americans must do?
 March 4, 2015 at 12:01pm
Another half billion dollars for the “affordable” care act… lmao.
 March 2, 2015 at 12:22pm
Hang on… so we Americans were NOT safe up until 14 years ago when DHS was created out of panic?
I’m sorry, but DHS should be disbanded and their duties taken over again by FBI and CIA, both of which can and do the exact same job as DHS does. Just because we have another 3 letter acronym department taking hundreds of billions of dollars of our tax money makes us no more safe than we were before DHS was created.
Ultimately, how about complaining at the people that are refusing to pass the DHS funding that will fund everything EXCEPT the illegal immigrant amnesty program?
 February 25, 2015 at 11:53am
I am as conservative as they come. That is not what I want. Here is what I want, as well as most conservatives I personally know:
We want government out of marriage. Period. Specifically the federal government, but state governments too.
Remove all tax benefits/penalties that have anything to do with marriage (actually, change the tax base to fairtax (http://fairtax.org).
For legal issues, people are allowed to get power of attorney so, for example, they can visit loved ones and make decisions for people in hospitals, or whatever.
February 25, 2015 at 11:49am
Check your state laws. Right or wrong, most states still have laws against Homosexuality.
February 23, 2015 at 1:54pm
To quote Nancy Pelosi… “What does it matter now?”
February 20, 2015 at 1:59pm
You are making an unjustified venomous bigoted comment by assuming that Colonialgirl is a racist bigot.
Unless you know that person, personally, (s)he could just have easily said slimeball white trash thief, if the suspect had been white instead of black. It may not have had anything to do with race but simply an adjective for description.
Have care for your own words when you don’t definitively know anything about another’s words.
For example, I actually believe in the use of the “N” word, where it applies to a person’s behavior, regardless of race. It has unfortunately been appropriated and utilized by the black community to be racist by anybody using it other than another black person. If it is racist for a white to use it, why isn’t it racist for a black to use it?
Anyway, the point is, don’t judge somebody when you have no knowledge of their intent.
 February 11, 2015 at 12:00pm
“It’s one thing when you’ve got a mom-and-pop store who can’t afford to provide paid sick leave or health insurance or minimum wage to workers …”
Okay, BHO, so you’re saying mom and pop stores should be treated differently than the big corporations. Got news for you. 94.7% of the businesses affected by this ACA are the smaller businesses that cannot afford it. As for the large corporations making billions of dollars, did you ever stop to consider that they won’t be making those profits BECAUSE of the ACA?
Oh, thats right, you and your marxist, socialist and communist cronies know exactly what you are doing.
My wife and I own one of those mom & pop stores and our health insurance premiums have increased by over $4,000 since the day he said they would decrease by $2,500. We have compensated by not replacing two part timers who left for college and by cutting back on our seasonal hiring. What Bozo doesn't understand is that when small business owners are forced into a situation of diminishing returns they will trim the fat and payroll is usually the first place they look.
February 4, 2015 at 12:12pm
I think this could be fought in a different way…
I would say they should put forward the notion that the couple was not refused service because of sexual orientation, but the design of what they wanted was against their business guidelines. For example, should they not be able to refuse to bake a cake that portrays a child being molested?
If they simply changed the content of the service to something that fell in line with the business’ guidelines / rules, the lesbian couple would gladly have been serviced.
Yes they would have been within their right to refuse to bake a cake depicting any illegal activity.
is that what happened though?
do you know something we dont?
January 13, 2015 at 12:10pm
How about we just force everybody to be gay, that way there is no discrimination against gay people at all?
 January 8, 2015 at 1:51pm
Wait, black had nothing to do with the chokehold, but had EVERYTHING to do with the divisive cop hating mentality and racial garbage the protestors and media and government leaders are all pushing…
 January 8, 2015 at 1:42pm
Exactly the same arguments they used against Hitler becoming a dictator…
I’ll give just one potential possibility for you to contemplate:
While polls show only 15% of the military supports obama (as you say), I can guarantee you that at least 90%, if not more, of the military supports this country and most importantly their families.
I agree it is unlikely that O will become a dictator in the next two years. However, I do agree it is possible, and here is why…
Make an assumption that like Hitler, O starts off shoveling the whole “its for the good of the country and the protection and well being of its citizens” manure. (They have already passed many laws, like ACA, using that mentality to sell it to the masses). Now, assume that the media pushes it as well, as him being our savior from crime, starvation, whatever, etc. After all, a people is only 9 meals from anarchy, which nobody wants.
So, things go from bad to horrible (through coincidence or planned, doesn’t matter). Things deteriorate to the point where martial law must be declared to restore order and feed the people. Military members are unlikely to refuse if they are helping innocent people to be protected and fed. In addition, they want the paycheck to be able to protect and feed their own family….
Next, dictatorship, at least on some level. Please at least admit to the possibility, even if remote.
And this was just ONE possible path. Think financial collapse, Infrastructure collapse, war, et al…
January 8, 2015 at 11:47am
Wait, I’m confused. ***** wants to fund DHS to fight the 5 Billion or so in funding they passed for illegal aliens (yeah, thats right, I said it correctly) in the omnibus spending package?
Yup. Conservatism at its best. Just like when I was in the navy, they spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to re-roof a building that they spent another hundreds of thousands of dollars on a few months later to tear down.