User Profile: politicianssuck

politicianssuck

Member Since: May 25, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [46] August 20, 2014 at 12:21pm

    Since I dont use credit cards I am going to start up a foundation called freedom from credit cards. That way I can sue any business that tells me only if i sign up for their company credit card can receive a 10% discount.

    Responses (1) +
  • August 20, 2014 at 10:35am

    “Meanwhile, if people would walk around with pistols securely holstered you give a person second thoughts. Hey as long as I dont see that gun leave that holster we are good. Hey he looks like he is responsible with that gun or whatever. They dont Automatically think “crazy” and therefore call the cops.”

    I never insinuated people should hide their rights. As stated above I am simply saying you need to set yourself apart from crazies. I understand they cant carry in Texas. Thats not what I am saying. I am just saying at no point did I ever insinuate you should hide your rights.

  • August 20, 2014 at 10:15am

    “Your logic is worse than you accuse me of having. You claim these people are “scared” which some certainly are. You then go on to suggest a public BBQ where people are carrying their guns. Just how many of those scared people are going to show up to an open carry BBQ and talk with these guys? (Hint: 0)”

    Walking around the streets carrying a long gun scares people because they do not know IF you are a threat. They have no way of knowing if you are about to walk into a movie theater or Wal-mart and start shooting the place up. Thus you are creating an environment of FEAR.

    Now hold something like a public BBQ where people are notified that it is a gun awareness event and people can bring their guns and learn about them. Now guess what…people wont be WONDERING if you are going to shoot up a place. My Logic is sound.

    “I clearly stated in my first reply “They’re trying to raise awareness of how backward this part of Texas law is.””

    Got it! But how is that working? They cannot carry pistols, why? There is no factual evidence that citizens carrying pistols is more dangerous. NONE. So why is it illegal? Because of FEAR. People are scared so now they lost their right. So how does instilling fear help their cause? What are they going to do when their rights to open carry long guns is taken away because people are tired of being scared?

    Its not a personal attack. I just dont understand why they want to use a tactic that got their initial rights taken away.

  • [5] August 19, 2014 at 11:45am

    Ol’ Boomer must be an explosive dog to fetch like that.

  • August 19, 2014 at 11:25am

    You have to remember. We live in a thin skinned society. Like it or not. People are easily offended. You have to adjust your tactics.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/03/nra-says-open-carry-texas-group-too-extreme/

    The last paragraph shows OCT getting on the defensive and tries to say the NRA is accusing them of not being civil. Thats not at all what the NRA is saying. The NRA is saying their IMAGE that they are portraying is not helping.

    So instead of getting offended and jumping to conclusions maybe they should rethink their tactics.

    “They do that by carrying rifles and when people ask why they’re doing it the OCT guys can say “Carrying a handgun without a permit is illegal, but this is not. We’re sorry if we scared you, but if that’s the case you should help us by advocating for open carry of pistols so we don’t have to tote around these scary long guns.”

    I still love that comment. When people are scared they are going to come up too you and ask what your doing. NOT! LOL! They will run and call the cops without asking you one single question thus not giving you the opportunity to discuss the issue. Hence the reason why the cops showed up. LOL!

  • August 19, 2014 at 11:10am

    “So failing to read my post, then asking two questions which I already answered and then discussing the “feelings” that guns should be banned is somehow adding to the discussion… and cleverly avoiding talking about feelings by talking about them?”

    Obviously, I read your post. And no, you did not answer those questions. When you parade around with long guns you make people scared. When people are scared they are NOT going to come up and talk to you and ask what are you doing. Hence the word “Scared”. Your rights are being violated everyday because people are scared. So your logic makes absolutely no sense in that scaring people is going to bring back your rights.

    “Seems to me you’re just wasting your time and everyone else’s to boot. Next time Google it. AGAIN, the point of OCT is trying to raise awareness of the fact that the gun laws on OC in TX are backwards.”

    All I am saying is that the way they are going about it seems to be scaring people more than educating. Which is the goal. So instead of getting butt hurt, how bout thinking outside the box and put yourselves in the shoes of those your trying to convince. Hand out flyers, bring doughnuts have a bbq where people are all walking around with their long guns. Create an environment that people actually feel safe and will come ask what are you doing. Walking around the streets with a long gun does not create that environment.

  • August 18, 2014 at 2:38pm

    Sasquatch, I am unaware of Texas law. But I say again, how is that helping the cause? To show how backwards the law is? I am sure most anti-gun people dont care about the laws. They dont know what they are. Heck, neither do the police anymore. So parading around with long guns is just making people feel even more like ALL guns should be banned. It’s not doing anything else. Thats my opnion. I may or may not be wrong. Just my opinion. Trying to add to the discussion rather than the feelings.

    Foobared, I never said anything about a certain class of assault weapon. If you take a .22 and paint it camo just to make it look scary then libs. consider that an assault weapon. Here is an example of what I was speaking about look more specifically at 12:45. That gun is going to scare people. How is carrying that gun going to help pro gun people in their cause? I am of the belief that it dont matter. The Constitution is the law and we should not have to justify anything. However we dont live in that world and it is up to us to show people why the constitution and ALL amendments are rational and never outdated. Very few people have read the constitution so when you act idiotic in trying to defend the constitution then they will think the constitution is also idiotic. Not all people act like idiots but its those who do that give us all bad names.
    http://youtu.be/_iOM24kPefQ

  • [-7] August 18, 2014 at 1:31pm

    Pot did not make him attack those people. Sorry but that information is irrelevant.

    Unless of course we were mistaken by him chocking the store owner. He might have been running around giving bear hugs.

    Responses (4) +
  • [-3] August 18, 2014 at 1:22pm

    I know people will disagree with me but…

    I am pro gun, pro second amendment. I have to say when people are walking around carrying shotguns or them scary assault rifles around town, I cant help but think they are idiots. Why are liberals winning? Why is socialism winning? Because they work off human emotions. They say things like, “Republicans want you to die in the street!” or “republicans hate poor people!” They never follow up with facts! Why? Because they dont have to.

    Meanwhile conservatives keep throwing out facts and they are losing. Because people dont think anymore. They “FEEL”. People live their lives based on how they feel.

    So when they see people walking around with AR’s and Shotguns they think “crazy” and “AURORA”. So they panic and are confused as to when they should and should not be scared. Meanwhile the gun carriers are thinking we got to get them used to seeing stuff like this and that we are not dangerous. But it never addresses when people should be scared. If a guy walks into a movie theater with an AR should they be scared? What signs do they need to look for to know when they are in danger?

    Meanwhile, if people would walk around with pistols securely holstered you give a person second thoughts. Hey as long as I dont see that gun leave that holster we are good. Hey he looks like he is responsible with that gun or whatever. They dont Automatically think “crazy” and therefore call the cops. Of course there are always exceptions…

    Responses (11) +
  • August 16, 2014 at 2:25pm

    Nobody, you said “Then maybe there should be amendments to give the state power to overrule a out of control federal government.”

    I say again, whats the point? No one will follow the Amendments. The Amendment you suggest already exists. That is the Tenth Amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

    You want the answer? You wont like it. John Adams said ” Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.”
    Charles Carroll said, “Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.
    James Garfield said”Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature…. If the next centennial does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.
    Thats the answer.

  • [15] August 14, 2014 at 7:31pm

    Whats the point? I keep asking people this and get no reply. WHATS THE POINT?

    We dont follow the constitution now! Yet somehow we think by adding Amendments to it that somehow we will then follow it?

    Article 1, Section 8 outlines what Congress can collect taxes and spend on. Yet we dont follow that. We instead follow a “General Welfare” clause which they feel gives them the power to do whatever they wish. James Madison would disagree.

    The Second amendment has the phrase “shall not be infringed”. Yet we dont follow that.

    The first Amendment has the phrase ” prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Yet we dont follow that.

    The fourth Amendment has the phrase “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated” Yet we dont follow that.

    The tenth Amendment says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” YET WE DONT FOLLOW THAT!

    Thats not it! So why in the world would we want to start changing the Constitution when we dont want to follow what it says now? Are we just going to start being like Obama and change laws as we go while ignoring the laws?

    This is so stupid and I could not disagree anymore!

    Responses (4) +
  • [1] August 13, 2014 at 9:19pm

    James Madison Said…”With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

    But what does he know? He did not have a degree in constitutional studies. Right?

  • August 13, 2014 at 9:15pm

    I just want someone to show me where in any of our founding documents that phrase exists.

    Also, Jrook. You said, “The phrase penned by Jefferson is exactly the one that has been used by constitutional attorneys and judges who frankly know the constitution a lot better than the folks educated by GB and Rush.” Why are you commenting on the constitution? By your own statement if you do not have a “degree” in Constitutional studies then you could not understand what the constitution means. Therefore you have no idea what you are talking about.
    Just saying…

    Lastly, You would agree that the supreme court which is operated by man, could never be wrong. So Obama care was passed because it was a tax. The supreme court Stated, with their ruling, that the Federal Government can do whatever it wishes to the American people so long as it is a “TAX”. Not driving the Federal Government brand car? “TAX” them if they dont drive one. Overweight? “TAX” them if they dont lose weight. The Federal Government now has the Authority granted to them by the Supreme Court to “TAX” the American people into submission. All under the power to tax. And the power to tax has been expanded under the false notion that the General Welfare Clause allows Congress to collect taxes and spend money on whatever it wishes.

  • [7] August 13, 2014 at 8:42pm

    Well I do believe if Glenn looks back at history he will find that people always looked at people dead or dying in America. It is nothing new. Just look at all the high profile deaths during the wild west era. They posed the bodies of notorious outlaws in coffins or on wagons with their guns in their laps. People would crowed around and stare. They posted the pics in news papers.

    I remember Stew saying that he watched the execution of Saddam Hussein. He specifically mentioned the position of Saddam neck.

    Sorry Glenn, this is nothing new.

  • [31] August 13, 2014 at 8:33am

    “A high school football team is under fire from atheists who say that prayer and Bible scriptures reportedly being shared with players and plastered on official team stationary violate the separation of church and state.”

    There is no such thing as the separation of church and state. NEXT!

    Responses (19) +
  • [1] August 10, 2014 at 3:26pm

    Moderate, I agree with you.

    Hannity has always annoyed me. He always says “let me tell you folks” or ‘I’m here to tell you”.

    Then to top that off his laugh always makes me think of a rich snob who is sitting in front of the fireplace with a tobacco pipe hanging from his mouth. Exactly like one of Glenn’s bits he used to do years ago.

    Mark Levin is another one who is annoying. The guy does not have a radio voice. He sounds like a male version of Fran Drescher or Roseanne Barr.

    So whenever I point this stuff out am I somehow laughing at a soldier being killed somewhere? Or Mexican children being killed in the desert from dehydration? Come to think of it. Sean is basically using the same tactics as Race Baiters. “I dont know what happened because I was not there, but I do know that it was a white cop and a black guy. So therefore the cambridge police acted stupidly!”

  • [2] August 10, 2014 at 3:02pm

    Free voice,

    I agree with you and so does history. My point was merely to say that you cant have it both ways.

    I can say the same thing about sex education in schools. If you believe teaching firearm safety in schools trains students to be killers. So therefore we will not allow it. Then what about those who believes teaching sex education trains students to be teen parents? Why is it okay to have it one way but not the other?

    enough said.

  • [4] August 9, 2014 at 9:58am

    This my friends is why gay marriage licences being valid in all states is a good thing. If they can say that it is unfair for a Gay couple to be married in one state and another state will not recognize that marriage. Then pass laws stating it is unconstitutional, then so be it.

    Because if one state will recognize concealed carry and another wont then I would say the very fundamental issue is exactly the same. So whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

    Responses (2) +
  • [3] August 8, 2014 at 6:37pm

    eye always try and use spell check before I pubic and everyone can sea. That wood be embrace!

  • [2] August 8, 2014 at 6:04pm

    There, Their, They’re all you grammar Nazis.

    You sound like Liberals who say, “Well I won’t listen to you because you’re not a constitutional scholar! So how can I take you seriously when you have no degree, hmmm? Tell me that Einstein!”

    Get over yourselves!

123 To page: Go