User Profile: PeepsRepublikofKalifornia

PeepsRepublikofKalifornia

Member Since: December 31, 2011

CommentsDisplaying PeepsRepublikofKalifornia's 10 most recent comments.

  • To:Neelp, who Posted on May 5, 2013 at 3:29pm

    So because some peoples reaction time is too slow, law abiding citizens should not have access to a firearm because YOU think self defense is so infrequent that gun possession is pointless? As a firearms instructor I can confidently say to you that that is the purpose of training. . .to evolve that situational awareness so it is LESS likely that the bad guys get the drop. But, even those without such training come out ahead time after time , sometimes because the criminal is caught off guard. Sometimes because after the criminal thinks he has the advantage, the victim is then able to get hold of his gun to fight back.

    As for the background checks. Yep, looked and sounded like a good idea until we began to see how it was being proposed to acquire records and intelligence and retaining such on law abiding citizens, that we began to see the strategy of such a process and the manipulation of that information above and beyond reasonable restriction on ineligible persons.

    The facts are that the Federal government is NOT enforcing the current laws which is directly related to unqualified persons acquiring firearms, thus leading to this call for information gathering well beyond what is necessary to disqualify. Tens of thousands, who are unqualified, attempted to buy guns under this administration. The CURRENT law requires prosecution. Justice Department statistics, out of more than 76,000 denials in 2010, only 62 were prose

  • Reply to Egoist, who said, “Please don’t make the NRA = God; that’s not what I signed up for (literally) when I joined. ”

    Please do not stay in an organization in which you are so uncomfortable.

  • I put this on our wide screen for my 90 year old mother in-law to watch. She is a retired school teacher with 55 years of primary school teaching to her credit. Resisted going into administration and refused to join the union as she thought it detrimental to her students. After watching this video she spontaneously said, “This should be shown in every school in this country!”

    Bruce A. Frank
    San Jose, People’s Republik Of Kalifirnia

  • Yeah, Bill is all that, but he is top rated on cable!

  • Megan is a lawyer and therefore has difficulty with absolutes, particularly the relativistic terms
    “right” and “wrong.”

  • ..derstood!

  • Is nobody paying attention? Even when Reagan granted amnesty, he DO NOT garner a significant number of Hispanic votes! Republicans ARE NOT LOSING BECAUSE HISPANICS AREN’T VOTING FOR THEM. Republicans ARE LOSING BECAUSE CONSERVATIVES ARE NOT VOTING FOR THEM!

    Consider that it is the LIBERAL side that is claiming that Republicans are losing because of the Hispanic vote. Should we REALLY be taking advise from the enemy? Should we really be putting so much effort into making ourselves into the Santa Clause Party for Hispanics? If Reagan’s granting amnesty didn’t gain anything, what does ANYONE think the Right can do that will gain the Hispanic vote?

    Look at the numbers people! The Republican party lost the last election because the candidate was too middle-left to pull the Republican conservative vote. Research also shows that when Republicans run a conservative, the “undecided” also vote Republican in higher numbers.

    Rubio will not garner a significant number of Hispanics. A staunchly qualified CONSERVATIVE, someone whom the TEA Party finds acceptable, will be the winner.

    Look at it this way, we have tried all the rest. How about pushing a Conservative who is not pandering to minorities an any way. Present the facts of a growth economy and how a growing economy pulls more minorities into the middle class than ANY promises of free cell phones or more food stamps. The facts bear this out. Ronald Reagan’s flannel board got snickers from the Left, but the people UN

  • SendTheMeteors–Earth is only 6000 year old! May well be true, but what gives you the authority to limit God’s year to the length of time he has given us?

  • Matthews reminds my of a cartoon on an enraged Donald Duck, except Matthews impersonation is excessively over the top.

  • I have always been under the impression that in court witnesses are commonly asked to identify the defendant as the one who committed the crime of which he is charged? I was also under the impression that that because of the need for such recognition, the defendant was not allowed to significantly change his looks, such as intentionally trying to look like someone else in the vicinity of the commission of the crime or looking like someone else in the courtroom?

    He should be presented to the court and the jury as he looked at the time of the commission of the crime.