User Profile: 2AFirearmsDealerDotCom


Member Since: July 20, 2012


  • [1] 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 (

    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.

    Simple solution.

  • 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.

  • [2] 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.

    Responses (1) +
  • 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.

    Responses (1) +
  • 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?

  • [6] 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…

  • [2] 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.

  • January 7, 2015 at 9:16am

    Fairer? Well, what could be MORE fair, is for them to use the current gas taxes imposed for the process of infrastructure instead of increasing it. The current federal taxes on fuel should be more than sufficient to keep the roads gilded in gold… That is, if they actually used that tax money to keep them up instead of squandering 40% of it like they do with every other bit of revenue.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 7, 2015 at 9:13am

    If what you are saying is true, then why the new tax at all? Why not just take the “federal income tax cut” that is proposed and turn it toward infrastructure?

    The problem isn’t with too little taxes. The problem is too much spending, especially on non-essential garbage.

  • [1] January 6, 2015 at 12:21pm

    Wanna bet you won’t find a bible in that same library???

    Responses (4) +
  • January 5, 2015 at 2:27pm

    Perhaps not, but you ARE unlawfully detained.

  • January 5, 2015 at 2:26pm

    Would you have no problem with a monthly search of your home by police, so that they can save lives by finding all the bad people hiding things in their homes?

  • January 5, 2015 at 2:24pm

    I do believe the limit was lowered to 0.08 simply as a way of obtaining more convictions, thus more money. I don’t believe there is significant documented evidence that a person is “drunk” at 1.0 vs 0.8.

  • January 5, 2015 at 2:20pm

    Until the invention of a compressed air system that will blow air for you…

    Really want to stop drunk driving? Execute those legally prosecuted.

    People will either stop driving while drunk in fear for their lives, or stop driving drunk upon losing their lives. Pretty simple.

  • [5] December 18, 2014 at 8:22am

    Wait wait wait wait WAIT…. So let me get this straight….. A person, asking another person for assistance getting something off a shelf, is now RACIST?????

    Wow. Just… Wow.

  • December 16, 2014 at 2:07pm

    While I don’t often agree with you JRook, I do agree with you on this topic, with the exception of providing subsidies to the oil companies. How about not spending taxpayer money subsidizing a multi billion dollar private industry? How about instead we simply have the government get out of the way (within reason) and let them do their job of supplying us oil/energy?

  • December 16, 2014 at 12:32pm

    You’ve lost this one.

    1) Yes, it is with the public trust. As long as the business owner does not harm the public. Refusing service is not a harm. There are many other businesses that would happily take the money, thus reducing his business revenue. That is how free market works.

    2) Refusing business is not a violation of rights. Passing laws refusing business for the entire lifestyle/religion/etc, would be a violation of rights. That business owner forcing every other business owner to refuse service would also be a violation of rights. A publicly funded print shop refusing service would also be a violation. However, a private owner/business refusing is not a violation. Hmmm, lets put it this way. Assume for the moment you are a homosexual. You want to have sex with me, and I don’t because I’m not a homosexual. Should you be allowed to sue me to force me to have sex with you?

    3) Um… huh?

    4) So by your own statement, your answer should have been yes. If a gay activist group can sue and force somebody to do something they don’t wish within that scope, then Anti-gay activists should be allowed to sue them to make them do something like print anti-gay tshits.

    For the record (and I’m sure you won’t believe me or care), I have absolutely nothing against alternative lifestyles, as long as they have nothing against me. I just believe that NOBODY should force their own values and beliefs on another individual out of “tolerance” pc crap.

Restoring Love