User Profile: TerminalLance


Member Since: October 13, 2010


  • May 14, 2013 at 10:57pm

    Everyone on here is super mad about this removal. But imagine how enraged all the overzealous religious people on here would be if something to do with Islam was up on the wall at the school. You’d all lose your minds. Quit with the double standards;

  • March 21, 2013 at 5:06pm

    Grenade launchers are Class 3 weapons listed as “destructive devices”. They are not hard to get your hands on at all, they require only a tax stamp. The ammo is a little harder to find and very expensive, but not illegal. They are legal in almost every state. I couldn’t find a good map for it, but this NFA lawyer’s blog has a list of what you can and can’t have in every state.

  • March 21, 2013 at 4:58pm

    Don’t forget that “assault weapons” are only a fraction of the total rifle count. Plenty of people die from bolt action and smaller rimfire caliber guns, as well as semi-automatics that don’t fit the visual description of assault weapons.

  • March 19, 2013 at 2:15am


    Actual wages don’t rise, the price of goods deflates and the value of the money that people make has greater purchasing power. Since we are constantly inflating the currency, the natural deflation resulting from better and more efficient supply methods is null.

    For example, look at what our wages used to be: in 1962, it was 75 cents/hour. That’s 3 silver quarters. In today’s (03/18/2013) melt value of the metal, it’s about $5.22 per quarter including the 10% copper price. That means minimum wage under a sound money policy, ceteris parabis, would be $15.66.

    What do we inflate the currency for? (Hint: to pay for wars and entitlement spending, mostly social security, medicare, and medicaid.) So why isn’t the minimum wage $9/hour? Because idiot democrats and idiot republicans wrecked the monetary system.

  • March 5, 2013 at 12:17am

    This has been a regular practice for decades. If you’re learning of this now, you’ve never served in the military. This is in no way limited to the Marine Corps. It is extremely common to get paper marriages before deployments. The paychecks are bigger, you offer your partner benefits and a few hundred dollars a month, and that’s the deal. There’s no way to vet marriages for legitimacy of any kind, and who’s to say the arrangement isn’t ok or legal? None of your damn business.

    Maybe, JUST MAYBE, we could cut down on these extra taxpayer expenses if we weren’t constantly sending troops overseas to build the empire. Aduh. Better economy, lower taxes, and less incentive to join the military for financial reasons. People stop dying, we pay less in taxes, everybody wins.

  • February 27, 2013 at 7:25am

    *25% reduction in global whining.

  • February 27, 2013 at 7:25am

    ^Proud libertarian.

  • February 27, 2013 at 7:24am

    I do want to throw it out there as well that I’m sure we’re all sick of hearing the gay marriage debate. So here’s a solution I think we can all agree with some part of:

    1. Stop outrageous federal spending. I know most of you don’t want to stop medicare, social security, or medicaid, but you’ll call out welfare recipients as if your sacred cow is holier than thou. (It’s not.) Grow up.

    2. Since we have now limited the government’s spending, its revenues can nearly cease to Constitutional levels (minimal taxes on imported items).

    3. Abolish the income tax. See what’s happening here is that by doing this, you can shut up all those gay marriage supporters since they won’t be able to make the tax benefit argument anymore. Win right?

    4. Get the government out of our bedrooms. I know I don’t want a bunch of gay people forcing me to choose uncommitted single promiscuity or gay marriage, so why would you give them the legal precedence to do so by trying to pass a national mandate against gay marriage? See that’s how common law works. If you have the power to hurt your neighbor, they have the power to hurt you. They call it, ‘precedence’.

    5. Profit. Just like that, we’ve shut everyone up about gay marriage. Amazing. And we’ve killed several birds with one stone. We’ve massively reduced federal spending and taxes, thereby boosting economic production. We’ve restored civil liberties, and the best part about all of this is that we will have at least 25% red

    Responses (1) +
  • February 27, 2013 at 6:52am

    I have to say, I didn’t expect the outpouring of rage and hatred that’s been displayed here. She’s doing what the rest of the neoconservative crowd SHOULD be doing, which is embracing niche groups in the ‘conservative’ tree of American politics. That includes libertarians, anarchists, gay conservatives, and just about anyone else that we can find ground with on real issues. I’m not sure how you all expect to disenfranchise certain groups of people and then cry at every election when you’re continually marginalized. You’re doing it to yourselves.

    I don’t comment often, but you all really need to get your minds straight. You will continue to lose elections and party members the more you irrationally hate people for personal traits, rather than their character and actions. That, and let’s discuss collectivist mentality here for a minute. You are all seething at one individual for her beliefs and essentially demanding a Christian group (Republicans) that you hope will legislate the nation into morality. You’re going to claim someone ELSE is a communist/collectivist? You clearly have no education in actual ideological theory.

    That said, I’ll finish up with why I decided to post this. I joined the Marine Corps as a neocon back in 2007. Having finished my service last month as well as three bachelor’s degrees, I have been ashamed of how civilians have been acting in this country. I can now understand the importance of real freedom and individualism, and I’m a pro

    Responses (1) +
  • July 17, 2012 at 5:35pm

    How can you possibly be interested in politics and think the Fed is boring? The Fed is the root of all evil in the American economy. If you don’t understand how significant it is, take some time to read up on it because it will blow your mind. The line about the federal reserve being a boring subject literally made my skull implode from hard I facepalmed.

  • March 14, 2012 at 6:32am

    You all hate Obama so much, you’re willing to put another big government ideologue in office. Seriously? Have you even considered the impact of inflation, being that oil is measured in dollars? How about the Keynesians up at the federal reserve, printing trillions of dollars in order to increase credit liquidity, the same reason they keep interest rates artificially low. Keep buying, consumerists, keep buying. Don’t save your money, because what’s the point when your savings account pays .01% in 3-4% inflation when you include the collapse of the housing market?

    You can put all the oil you want into the market, but it will never be enough to overcome the insane destruction of our currency that Romney, Santorum, Obama, and Gingrich love so much. (Maybe not Gingrich, he seems to be heading in the right direction . . . strangely enough.) It’s artificially cheap money flowing through the economy that inflates the dollar and makes it worthless to buy anything with. Most of the people here really believe the Ponzi scheme that is Social Security can be saved too, I’m sure. I guess you can take Keynes’s hypothesis on the failure of centralized economic planning and just say, “Everyone eventually dies,” and that it’s not really your problem.

    I promise you this: until the federal reserve is audited and ended, oil will stay expensive, no matter how much you drill.

  • March 12, 2012 at 10:27pm

    And nobody wonders what happened during the cuts in the video. Not surprised.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 20, 2012 at 12:37am

    Dr. Paul did not say Santorum was over sensitive on the issue, he was replying to Santorum believing Paul’s reply was directed at him, when it wasn’t. Having a “50% rating” on the ‘pro-life’ issue is complete crap. He has a different view on how it should be handled, which is not at the federal level. Just because he doesn’t want to use the federal government to control everyone’s lives, doesn’t mean he wants to kill babies.

    Responses (1) +
  • December 7, 2011 at 8:35pm

    Did anybody notice the hilarious amount of American-made parts on that gun? Magpul, Eotech, Surefire, etc.

  • June 29, 2011 at 1:45pm

    Can we just put out there that Adam is wrong? You can’t buy fully automatic weapons at gun shows without backgroun checks. Impossible. In order to even possess autos, you have to have a valid class 3 fffl. That requires the federal government to issue you a license. That means, you have to abide by ffl rules whether you’re at a gun show or not, not to mention the feds bg check you instead of the state,. So he’s completely wrong anyway. I feel like I need to explain existing law to this gvroup.

  • June 12, 2011 at 10:40am

    WOW you people are quick to hate anybody that criticizes your great leader. He’s not criticizing him, he’s discussing a perception of deviation from the status quo. Sure is Neo-Con in here, and I thought this was supposed to be a more libertarian-leaning crowd. You guys are just like Obama’s fans.

  • June 10, 2011 at 7:42pm

    Nobody uses the HK 416 anymore. The piston isn’t even shielded, it’s old technology that fails after about 5,000 rounds.

  • May 28, 2011 at 2:21pm

    did anybody stop to think that walking into a marine’s house and NOT getting shot is deliberate action by him to NOT shoot them? if this guy wanted to kill them, there’d be at least 2 or 3 officers dead.

  • April 15, 2011 at 3:29pm

    Are they thinking that we actually care about them not eating? Go ahead and starve yourself, you’ll break eventually if you’re not cheating, or you’ll die, and you will have died looking like an idiot.

  • April 15, 2011 at 3:19pm

    Is anyone curious as to why Ron Paul voted against this? I thought this was good, but him voting against it has me taking a second look and wondering what there is in this bill we don’t want.

    Responses (1) +