Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
25 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Mitch's account restored -- after being silenced for... wait for it... showing a video of protesters outside his own house. 

 

Literally, his campaign account was suspended for being a threat to him for showing a video of other people threatening him.  :wacko:

 

Twitter is insane.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Literally, his campaign account was suspended for being a threat to him for showing a video of other people threatening him.  :wacko:

 

Twitter is insane.

 

This summed it up best for me from what I've seen this morning: 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

...unconscionable how are once ability to rightfully and civilly disagree has degraded to violence, blatant hatred and vitriol.......our once proud tolerant society has sadly lost its way.......

Posted
1 minute ago, ALF said:

Trying to keep guns out of the wrong hands is just common sense.

 

I would imagine that's one reason that we have gun laws.

<_<

Posted
1 minute ago, ALF said:

Trying to keep guns out of the wrong hands is just common sense.

 

I agree

You shouldn't have any guns.  If you have any, I"ll take them off your hands

Posted
1 minute ago, ALF said:

Trying to keep guns out of the wrong hands is just common sense.

Define wrong hands. Using common sense. Be very specific. Be very legal.

Posted

...pretty effin' sad how the fickle nature of the general electorate is easily swayed by the loquacious nature of those in power.....no ability or wherewithal to think on one's own two feet?...good Lord, we're in trouble.... 

Posted
59 minutes ago, Azalin said:

 

I would imagine that's one reason that we have gun laws.

<_<

 

Do you think they are working good enough ?

Posted
On 8/9/2019 at 5:39 AM, B-Man said:

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Media ‘unhinged’ over shootings, ‘unprecedented levels of left-wing bias.’

 

 

 

 

BYRON YORK: Has anyone actually read the El Paso manifesto?

 

Much discussion was spurred by an article in the New York Times with the headline, “El Paso Shooting Suspect’s Manifesto Echoes Trump’s Language.” The story quoted just 28 words of the nearly 2,400-word manifesto. It noted that Crusius specifically wrote that his views “predate Trump.” And it warned that “linking political speech, however heated, to the specific acts of ruthless mass killers is a fraught exercise.” Nevertheless, the Times declared that even “if Mr. Trump did not originally inspire the gunman, he has brought into the mainstream polarizing ideas and people once consigned to the fringes of American society.”

 

So what did Crusius actually write? The Times story did not link to the manifesto, nor did many other media accounts. Most news organizations decided that even though the manifesto is clearly part of the El Paso story, they should not give Crusius the exposure he sought by linking to its full text. So many stories have included just a few snippets from the document. (The Washington Examiner has also decided not to link to the manifesto, but it can be easily found on the internet.)

 

But since the manifesto has become such an important part of the moment’s political debate, it is worth looking at the whole thing. And the impression one gets after reading the manifesto is quite different than some press accounts.

 

 

 

Shocking, that. I think that it’s unprofessional to simultaneously not link to the manifesto to deny it attention — and then talk about the manifesto a lot, especially in a misleading way. But then, “unprofessional” is what journalism is all about these days.

 
.
 

 

TLDR

 

If it's longer than 140 characters i can't be  bothered.

Posted
12 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Do you think they are working good enough ?

The problem with mass shootings and violence in our inner cities has nothing to do with our gun laws. Changing gun laws won't change the amount of shootings. Our problems are the disintegration of the family and moral fiber of our populace. This is exacerbated by the Left and MSM pushing to bring about change in our time tested standards. We can now identify as a woman if we choose, just ignore that dicky thing. We can go take a dump in your daughters bathroom. I can insist that you call me anything I want. We even have a Democrat presidential candidate that checks off a box because he is gay. It's a slippery slope we're on and I personally don't see an easy way off of it.

Posted
39 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Do you think they are working good enough ?

 

Yes, I do. Laws only work when people obey them. People who do not obey the law will ignore them regardless of how strict they become. Do you actually think that someone who is unhinged enough to commit mass murder will have second thoughts because the gun laws have been made more severe? Do you think that making gun ownership illegal in certain urban areas has done anything to curtail gun violence in those communities?

 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
15 hours ago, ALF said:

 

Do you think they are working good enough ?

What are your views on our motor vehicle and traffic laws, our laws on domestic violence, robbery, embezzlement, fraud, and rape? Are THEY working “good enough?”

 

I’ll hang up and listen to your answer on the air. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, ALF said:

I think  a big problem is the poor follow up for see something , say something. If it is true the mother of the El Paso  shooter spoke to police about concern for the weapon her son had. 

Close. What you’re seeing almost every time is a complete breakdown of the government agencies charged with  doing something about red flags when they’re reported. It’s happened time and time again. So the Dems play whack a mole! Write another law. Create another agency. Fund another program. All of which target the symptom not the disease. Then...toss in political correctness and you have a mess.

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...