So Liberals...

[Alaska Darin]

I'm watching a documentary on "The Aryan Brotherhood" - a very well organized prison gang that is known for their violence and drug dealing WITHIN PRISON WALLS. That's right, these people are in maximum security facilities yet are able to deal drugs, murder at will, etc.

 

Somehow people who are in complete government control (a liberal utopia) are able to still commit heinous acts of violence, control an amazing amount of money, and get their hands on illicit substances. If you can't control criminals within the walls of these multi-million dollar taxpayer facilities, how in the world will you ever keep guns away from them in the real world?

[cromagnum]

I'm watching a documentary on "The Aryan Brotherhood" - a very well organized prison gang that is known for their violence and drug dealing WITHIN PRISON WALLS.  That's right, these people are in maximum security facilities yet are able to deal drugs, murder at will, etc. 

 

Somehow people who are in complete government control (a liberal utopia) are able to still commit heinous acts of violence, control an amazing amount of money, and get their hands on illicit substances.  If you can't control criminals within the walls of these multi-million dollar taxpayer facilities, how in the world will you ever keep guns away from them in the real world?

733258[/snapback]

I own guns and I'm a liberal, somewhat....I don't believe in gun control for law abiding citizens....Criminals attain access to whatever they want, almost wherever they want....As I said, I prefer to vote dem, instead of repub, but the dems suck right now, more than before... Gun controll is a misquided idea, and only strengthens the criminals intent without the fear of being shot.

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm watching a documentary on "The Aryan Brotherhood" - a very well organized prison gang that is known for their violence and drug dealing WITHIN PRISON WALLS.  That's right, these people are in maximum security facilities yet are able to deal drugs, murder at will, etc. 

 

Somehow people who are in complete government control (a liberal utopia) are able to still commit heinous acts of violence, control an amazing amount of money, and get their hands on illicit substances.  If you can't control criminals within the walls of these multi-million dollar taxpayer facilities, how in the world will you ever keep guns away from them in the real world?

733258[/snapback]

No liberal I ever met or read believes in complete government control. You're still hanging on to 30 year-old stereotypes that weren't true to start with. Actually, you are the lone person I have ever read that does believe in a utopian society. No government at all. Carry on.

[Alaska Darin]

No liberal I ever met or read believes in complete government control.

733264[/snapback]

BS. Anyone who is for completely disarming the populous (and there are many in your party of choice) is absolutely for complete government control. I know it's a hard thing to understand, being a liberal, but try and wrap the noodle around it.

 

Your last statement is ridiculous. I've never advocated no government whatsoever, or anything even remotely close to it. More liberal fear mongering. Can't deal with the message, attempt to discredit the messenger by any means necessary.

[Chilly]

BS.  Anyone who is for completely disarming the populous (and there are many in your party of choice) is absolutely for complete government control.  I know it's a hard thing to understand, being a liberal, but try and wrap the noodle around it.

 

Your last statement is ridiculous.  I've never advocated no government whatsoever, or anything even remotely close to it.  More liberal fear mongering.  Can't deal with the message, attempt to discredit the messenger by any means necessary.

733272[/snapback]

 

AD, thats not liberal fear mongering, thats politics, both sides do it bud.

[erynthered]

I own guns and I'm a liberal, somewhat....I don't believe in gun control for law abiding citizens....Criminals attain access to whatever they want, almost wherever they want....As I said, I prefer to vote dem, instead of repub, but the dems suck right now, more than before... Gun controll is a misquided idea, and only strengthens the criminals intent without the fear of being shot.

733261[/snapback]

 

 

You, owning a gun, scares me.

[cromagnum]

You, owning a gun, scares me.

733302[/snapback]

I took thesafety course 2 times, and have shot firearms for 30 years..Never shot no one in the face Never lost a gun from a robbery, due to a great gun cabinet, and home security..Was a subscriber to NRA and a local fish and game club....Have taught 12 year olds toshoot with safety in mind first....And if they hunt, how to plce the kill shot and track a wounded animal, that does happen..

You shouldn't be scared, I thought gop people had balls of steel

You sound like a northeast RINO or A LIBERAL

 

___ ----- -------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

I lived near the glades for 6 years and worked in miami,lauderdale,delray,pompano,naples,fort myers ,sanibel,sarasota,st. pete tampa, n.fla....Spent my time in the gulf living on a boat in goodland and a house off a 951 past immokalee near the seminole? indian res..I love it there,swamp buggy's and good ole southern living...In this video is where we practiced shootin and drinkin and fishin..You might like this tune and it has relevance to the political board, where the glades are controlled by the gov't ,for$$interest...I talked to my fla swamp buddy yesterday, he asked me when I'm coming down,I said this winter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac3gXoVOrZM...ch=musicvideos#

[TPS]

BS.  Anyone who is for completely disarming the populous (and there are many in your party of choice) is absolutely for complete government control.  I know it's a hard thing to understand, being a liberal, but try and wrap the noodle around it.

 

Your last statement is ridiculous.  I've never advocated no government whatsoever, or anything even remotely close to it.  More liberal fear mongering.  Can't deal with the message, attempt to discredit the messenger by any means necessary.

733272[/snapback]

 

 

I say arm the populace! Especially those guys in prison. We're going to need them when Cheney and company declare martial law....

 

Tinfoil cap to dunce cap, over...?

[Kelly the Dog]

BS.  Anyone who is for completely disarming the populous (and there are many in your party of choice) is absolutely for complete government control.  I know it's a hard thing to understand, being a liberal, but try and wrap the noodle around it.

 

Your last statement is ridiculous.  I've never advocated no government whatsoever, or anything even remotely close to it.  More liberal fear mongering.  Can't deal with the message, attempt to discredit the messenger by any means necessary.

733272[/snapback]

No one. No serious person is for completely disarming the populous. I dont know of any politician, anyone with any weight, any serious American anywhere that is against all guns. There are probably crackpots somewhere sure. I don't know of one.

 

On the last statement, virtually everything you say is the government should stay out of everything. I am sure there are some thing you think the government should do, like pick up the garbage on tuesdays, but you rarely if ever agree with anything the government intervenes in, which IMO is just as lunatic fringe as any left winger or right winger.

[Alaska Darin]

No one. No serious person is for completely disarming the populous. I dont know of any politician, anyone with any weight, any serious American anywhere that is against all guns. There are probably crackpots somewhere sure. I don't know of one.

Don't worry, when I have the time I'll post the litany of quotes I have from Democratic lawmakers who've advocated disarming the public (I'll refrain from posting all about liberal bastian San Francisco completely banning all gun possession, because apparently to you that wouldn't count). I'm sure government smokers never thought when you freedom loving libs stopped allowing them to smoke at their desks it'd never get to the point they'd take it out of public places like bars, either. Call me in 20 years and tell me how that slippery slope went.

 

On the last statement, virtually everything you say is the government should stay out of everything. I am sure there are some thing you think the government should do, like pick up the garbage on tuesdays, but you rarely if ever agree with anything the government intervenes in, which IMO is just as lunatic fringe as any left winger or right winger.

733402[/snapback]

A private company picks up my trash and always has. Of course, the government has given them a monopoly (probably for some payola). I'm for the Constitution, a strict interpretation of it. It's pretty simple really. Charitable organizations can handle the social programs, allowing you socialists to pour all your hard earned money into saving the downtrodden and still feel superior.

[X. Benedict]

I'm watching a documentary on "The Aryan Brotherhood" - a very well organized prison gang that is known for their violence and drug dealing WITHIN PRISON WALLS.  That's right, these people are in maximum security facilities yet are able to deal drugs, murder at will, etc. 

 

Somehow people who are in complete government control (a liberal utopia) are able to still commit heinous acts of violence, control an amazing amount of money, and get their hands on illicit substances.  If you can't control criminals within the walls of these multi-million dollar taxpayer facilities, how in the world will you ever keep guns away from them in the real world?

733258[/snapback]

 

But aren't half of those guys in jail to begin with from the Conservative War on Drugs?

 

Hello Brothers, welcome to crime school.

[HereComesTheReignAgain]

I own guns and I'm a liberal, somewhat....I don't believe in gun control for law abiding citizens....Criminals attain access to whatever they want, almost wherever they want....As I said, I prefer to vote dem, instead of repub, but the dems suck right now, more than before... Gun controll is a misquided idea, and only strengthens the criminals intent without the fear of being shot.

733261[/snapback]

 

 

The fact that I actually agree with one of your posts has me a little frightened! Crime rates almost always rise when strict gun restrictions are put in place. Look at DC, and Chicago for example. What many people don't realize is that the unarmed population benefits from the fact that some of us are willing to defend ourselves with deadly force. The criminals do not know who is carrying a gun in most cases and alter their behavior accordingly. If nobody is allowed to carry concealed, the criminals just have to avoid robbing or raping other criminals to avoid being shot.

[cromagnum]

The fact that I actually agree with one of your posts has me a little frightened!  Crime rates almost always rise when strict gun restrictions are put in place.  Look at DC, and Chicago for example.  What many people don't realize is that the unarmed population benefits from the fact that some of us are willing to defend ourselves with deadly force.  The criminals do not know who is carrying a gun in most cases and alter their behavior accordingly.  If nobody is allowed to carry concealed, the criminals just have to avoid robbing or raping other criminals to avoid being shot.

733562[/snapback]

I being a commie pinko socialist liberal terrorist sympathizer, also am for welfare, with a Big But, that but being, The system was overhauled in the 90's and needs to be overhauled again, to reduce fraud and waste...There are still to many people collecting,that could work and choose not too, instead they keep the gov'tsfree bottle of nourishment fastened to their ----sucker....Out of the 200 plus people in my family line, 1 is on gov't assistance with welfare, section 8, and ssdi, due to lupus...She is able to work, she chooses to be lazy instead, and because of that she is shunned from the family...Yes we all,use to give her a fair shake. not no more, she's a loser and a user and she don't care..

 

Quick note on our discussion on the homeless..

I believe that food program was a charitable donation, without gov't assistance..

I'm not positive, I'll check and post my discoveries here with an edit feature...

That is why I was vocal on that issue, I'm all for charity..

 

(Edit) Yes the mobile food program feeding the homeless was A charitable organization, far as I can tell, your taxes didn't feed the homeless and hungry..

No worries there

 

Now me being an evil liberal, I need to consume some baby's blood to keep the dark force powerful

[Orton's Arm]

I'm sure government smokers never thought when you freedom loving libs stopped allowing them to smoke at their desks it'd never get to the point they'd take it out of public places like bars, either.  Call me in 20 years and tell me how that slippery slope went.

I welcome the ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. If that ban became even more comprehensive in the future, fine with me. I couldn't care less about some smoker's "right" to subject me to secondhand smoke.

 

According to the Declaration of Independence, the purpose of government is to protect people's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Being constantly subjected to secondhand smoke shortens one's expected lifespan, and is therefore an infringement on one's right to life. It's the duty of government to protect people from things like this.

 

Well, you say, if you don't like secondhand smoke, eat in some other restaurant. Fine--assuming I can find a close restaurant that differentiate itself by having clean air. (Yeah, right!) But what about the salesman who's taking his smoker client out to eat? Or what about a junior employee who's being taken out to eat by a smoker who's higher up in the company? There are many social situations where the participants have unequal power. This lack of power shouldn't have to result in involuntary exposure to toxic substances.

 

In addition, you have to think about the people who work in restaurants. In general, people should be able to work in conditions that are as healthy as possible. Circumstances permitting, the government has the right and the duty to legislate reasonable workplace conditions. Being involuntarily subjected to secondhand smoke every day you come to work is not reasonable. Nobody is forced to receive an injection of heroin each time he comes to work, or to snort cocaine, or to eat a marijuana brownie. Why should people be forced to internalize nicotine into their systems?

[KRC]

In addition, you have to think about the people who work in restaurants.  In general, people should be able to work in conditions that are as healthy as possible.  Circumstances permitting, the government has the right and the duty to legislate reasonable workplace conditions.  Being involuntarily subjected to secondhand smoke every day you come to work is not reasonable.  Nobody is forced to receive an injection of heroin each time he comes to work, or to snort cocaine, or to eat a marijuana brownie.  Why should people be forced to internalize nicotine into their systems?

733764[/snapback]

 

 

Just playing Devil's Advocate...Who is forcing you to work in an unsafe environment? Don't you have the option to NOT work there? If I was unhappy with my job (for whatever reason), I would leave. Everyone else has the same option. Why should the workplaces be forced to abide by what you want?

[Chilly]

I welcome the ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.  If that ban became even more comprehensive in the future, fine with me.  I couldn't care less about some smoker's "right" to subject me to secondhand smoke. 

 

According to the Declaration of Independence, the purpose of government is to protect people's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Being constantly subjected to secondhand smoke shortens one's expected lifespan, and is therefore an infringement on one's right to life.  It's the duty of government to protect people from things like this. 

 

Well, you say, if you don't like secondhand smoke, eat in some other restaurant.  Fine--assuming I can find a close restaurant that differentiate itself by having clean air.  (Yeah, right!)  But what about the salesman who's taking his smoker client out to eat?  Or what about a junior employee who's being taken out to eat by a smoker who's higher up in the company?  There are many social situations where the participants have unequal power.  This lack of power shouldn't have to result in involuntary exposure to toxic substances.

 

In addition, you have to think about the people who work in restaurants.  In general, people should be able to work in conditions that are as healthy as possible.  Circumstances permitting, the government has the right and the duty to legislate reasonable workplace conditions.  Being involuntarily subjected to secondhand smoke every day you come to work is not reasonable.  Nobody is forced to receive an injection of heroin each time he comes to work, or to snort cocaine, or to eat a marijuana brownie.  Why should people be forced to internalize nicotine into their systems?

733764[/snapback]

 

It goes both ways.

 

What about a smoker's right to life, libery, and the pursuit of happyness?

 

Each property owner should decide for themselves what policies that they have in place. If *everyone* had smoking, and it was a big demand, then a place would open up that banned it. Economics 101.

 

The workers? They can ask to work in non-smoking only if they are that concerned, or work somewhere else. No one is forced to work in that environment, they choose to.

 

I don't smoke, I don't like 2nd hand smoke, but !@#$ if I'm going to try to prevent you from doing something you like.

[Hollywood Donahoe]

I welcome the ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.  If that ban became even more comprehensive in the future, fine with me.  I couldn't care less about some smoker's "right" to subject me to secondhand smoke. 

 

According to the Declaration of Independence, the purpose of government is to protect people's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Being constantly subjected to secondhand smoke shortens one's expected lifespan, and is therefore an infringement on one's right to life.

You have the right to not enter/work in private bars or restaurants that allow smoking.

[Orton's Arm]

Just playing Devil's Advocate...Who is forcing you to work in an unsafe environment? Don't you have the option to NOT work there? If I was unhappy with my job (for whatever reason), I would leave. Everyone else has the same option. Why should the workplaces be forced to abide by what you want?

733779[/snapback]

Are you opposed on principle to the government mandating workplace health and safety measures? Do you think employers should be the ones to choose how much exposure employees have to mercury, lead, and other toxins, and that any employee who doesn't like the policy should just quit?

[Alaska Darin]

I welcome the ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.  If that ban became even more comprehensive in the future, fine with me.  I couldn't care less about some smoker's "right" to subject me to secondhand smoke. 

It has nothing to do with smoker's rights. Though I'm not surprised you'd parrot that little tidbit. Try looking at the big picture - I know it's hard.

 

According to the Declaration of Independence, the purpose of government is to protect people's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Being constantly subjected to secondhand smoke shortens one's expected lifespan, and is therefore an infringement on one's right to life.  It's the duty of government to protect people from things like this. 

OMFG. You should be walking around wrapped in a giant maxi pad. Please protect me from everything, Mother Government. It says so in the Declaration of Independence, which is somehow now incorporated into the law of the land. Feel free to find your history teacher and ask him or her to B word slap you.

 

Well, you say, if you don't like secondhand smoke, eat in some other restaurant.  Fine--assuming I can find a close restaurant that differentiate itself by having clean air.  (Yeah, right!)  But what about the salesman who's taking his smoker client out to eat?  Or what about a junior employee who's being taken out to eat by a smoker who's higher up in the company?  There are many social situations where the participants have unequal power.  This lack of power shouldn't have to result in involuntary exposure to toxic substances.

Where the hell do you live? There are virtually no markets in America today where eating establishments that allow smoking outnumber those that don't. Anchorage is one of the last bastians and non-smoking restaurants outnumber smoking nearly 3-to-1. That's market forces at work, more than anything.

 

In addition, you have to think about the people who work in restaurants.  In general, people should be able to work in conditions that are as healthy as possible.  Circumstances permitting, the government has the right and the duty to legislate reasonable workplace conditions.  Being involuntarily subjected to secondhand smoke every day you come to work is not reasonable.  Nobody is forced to receive an injection of heroin each time he comes to work, or to snort cocaine, or to eat a marijuana brownie.  Why should people be forced to internalize nicotine into their systems?

733764[/snapback]

No one is involuntarily subjected to smokers, that paragraph is nothing more than typical fear mongering coupled with ignorance. If you were an informed hippy, you'd be alot more concerned about the poison coming out of your tap at home than a privately owned establishment that allows smoking. One you can avoid all together, with relative ease.

 

Those who would choose freedom over security deserve neither. The next time you wonder why the police aren't able to keep violent criminals off the street, remember you and the rest of the hippies decided it was more important for them to be out on ashtray patrol than catching criminals. That's right, your inability to walk through a different door, into a market capitalizing business that caters to your particular whininess is one reason violent crimes continue. How's that for fear mongering?

[chicot]

I being a commie pinko socialist liberal terrorist sympathizer

 

Hey, that's my line