Notice: All Boston.com forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at Boston.com.

NRA=GOP

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    AlleyCat=despicable moron

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from GreginMeffa. Show GreginMeffa's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

    What is it about gun nuts and the republican party? They seem to go hand in hand.




    what a dick

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from msobstinate99. Show msobstinate99's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    Like I said last night before my comment was removed.

    You can have all the strict gun laws you want but would a female kindergarten teacher be on the radar and rejected?  

    Automatically the King LWNJ took this tragedy as a way to turn it political. Sad, that you couldn't wait one day and let the world grieve,  instead you used it as a way to stir the anger. Hope you are proud of yourself.  

    By the way, has it been established that the deceased teacher was a republican gun nut?

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    Not Now Folks !

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    There are plenty of politicians from both party's who court the NRA for their endorsement.

    The NRA is the NRA and they will fight tooth and nail any restrictions on guns.

    In their fvckedup minds their right to own dozens of military-grade weapons trumps a child's right to a safe environment in which to just plain be a kid. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    The NRA's role here may be about to be reduced to kibitzing, at least for a time, eclipsed as the spotlight shifts to the scenario at the very broken Lanza home.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    If you need a license to get married, drive a car or catch a fish...

    ...then you should need a license to own or carry a gun.

    "Gun control" is a misnomer.  The goal should be "gun identification".

    The 'right' to own guns should not trump the interests of public safety.  It's not the NRA's fault that they are more effective at framing the debate on their terms. 

    The rest of us are to blame for not challenging them more forthrightly on their arguments in public.

    Disclosure: I own guns, but I refuse to join the NRA.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    Disclosure: I own guns, but I refuse to join the NRA.

     

    Of course you do. The left always thinks that everyone else needs to be controlled and that they're the only ones qualified to do the controlling.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    Serious question for conservatives - how would you feel about addressing this issue through ammunition restrictions?  Maybe make rubber bullets and shock rounds readily available, but lethal ammo very difficult or expensive?  Maybe make an exception for hunting rifles?

    Guns would still be effective for hunting, sport & self-defense, but you minimize the risk of accidental fatalities.  

    Thoughts?

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to slomag's comment:

    Serious question for conservatives - how would you feel about addressing this issue through ammunition restrictions?  Maybe make rubber bullets and shock rounds readily available, but lethal ammo very difficult or expensive?  Maybe make an exception for hunting rifles? Guns would still be effective for hunting, sport & self-defense, but you minimize the risk of accidental fatalities. Thoughts? 



    Interesting approach.

    The problem would be writing legislation without gaping loopholes in it. A lot of ammunition is not weapon-specific so someone could say they are buying it for hunting but using it for other purposes.

    Of course, if you would have to have both a hunting license and a federal permit to purchase lethal ammo. Could work....

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    Disclosure: I own guns, but I refuse to join the NRA.

     

     

    Of course you do. The left always thinks that everyone else needs to be controlled and that they're the only ones qualified to do the controlling.

     



    Like on abortion rights... oops. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    Like on abortion rights... oops.

    Bad analogy Reubin. As far as I know the strong anti-abortion people would never consider abortion as an option for themselves. Also, I know it's liberal dogma that the anti-abortion crowd wants to "control womens bodies" but I know for a fact they most of them could care less about that, they just want to prevent killing babies. No matter how you want to spin it that's how they look at it. That's a long way from the usual liberal attitide of "we know what's best for you."

     

     

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 12-Angry-Men. Show 12-Angry-Men's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    Bad analogy Reubin. As far as I know the strong anti-abortion people would never consider abortion as an option for themselves. Also, I know it's liberal dogma that the anti-abortion crowd wants to "control womens bodies" but I know for a fact they most of them could care less about that, they just want to prevent killing babies. No matter how you want to spin it that's how they look at it. That's a long way from the usual liberal attitide of "we know what's best for you." 



    Are you freakin serious?

    So that pro-life whacko wingnut doctor who ran for a US representative position from Tennesee (?) who pushed his mistress to have an abortion in Georgia because the laws were less restrictive- the same laws, mind you, that this fvcking piece of shiite helped pass in his own state as a state rep....That was excusable to you freakin idiots.

     

    My gawd, how much of a sanctimonious pieceofshit does someone have to be, in the wingnut party, to be callled out on it?

     

    Just like your bullshiite "Sunday links"; you're a fvcking ignorant ideaologue who spouts the latest echo chamber baloney. And you do it with 'chocolate' on your nose-to-rectum face.

     

    Just shut the freak up already.

    The only thing you do is, every Sunday you regurgitate that wingnut diarhea and when confronted with the obvious bullshiite factor you run like a fvcking coward!!!!

     

    Shut up!!!!

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

    Bad analogy Reubin. As far as I know the strong anti-abortion people would never consider abortion as an option for themselves. Also, I know it's liberal dogma that the anti-abortion crowd wants to "control womens bodies" but I know for a fact they most of them could care less about that, they just want to prevent killing babies. No matter how you want to spin it that's how they look at it. That's a long way from the usual liberal attitide of "we know what's best for you." 




    Are you freakin serious?

     

    So that pro-life whacko wingnut doctor who ran for a US representative position from Tennesee (?) who pushed his mistress to have an abortion in Georgia because the laws were less restrictive- the same laws, mind you, that this fvcking piece of shiite helped pass in his own state as a state rep....That was excusable to you freakin idiots.

     

    My gawd, how much of a sanctimonious pieceofshit does someone have to be, in the wingnut party, to be callled out on it?

     

    Just like your bullshiite "Sunday links"; you're a fvcking ignorant ideaologue who spouts the latest echo chamber baloney. And you do it with 'chocolate' on your nose-to-rectum face.

     

    Just shut the freak up already.

    The only thing you do is, every Sunday you regurgitate that wingnut diarhea and when confronted with the obvious bullshiite factor you run like a fvcking coward!!!!

     

    Shut up!!!!




    Angry:  I've noticed a significant uptick in your anger as expressed through the written word through all posts . It is not healthy for you, nor conducive to discussion/debate.  Why don't you take a time out?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink2. Show WhichOnesPink2's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    There are plenty of politicians from both party's who court the NRA for their endorsement.

    The NRA is the NRA and they will fight tooth and nail any restrictions on guns.

    In their fvckedup minds their right to own dozens of military-grade weapons trumps a child's right to a safe environment in which to just plain be a kid. 



    Hell, someone who practices enough could have inflicted the same damage with two revolvers. Takes no more that 10 seconds to empty cylinder and re-load with speeloaders. 

    That being said, I do believe automatic weapons, military-grade gear and magazines carrying more than 10 rounds should be banned. The average citizens just doesn't need that kind of capacity. 

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink2. Show WhichOnesPink2's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to slomag's comment:

    Serious question for conservatives - how would you feel about addressing this issue through ammunition restrictions?  Maybe make rubber bullets and shock rounds readily available, but lethal ammo very difficult or expensive?  Maybe make an exception for hunting rifles?

    Guns would still be effective for hunting, sport & self-defense, but you minimize the risk of accidental fatalities.  

    Thoughts?

     



    Psst....conservatives aren't the only people who own guns.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    Angry:  I've noticed a significant uptick in your anger as expressed through the written word through all posts . It is not healthy for you, nor conducive to discussion/debate.  Why don't you take a time out?

     

    It's funny that you should mention that. Anecdotally, I've noticed an sharp uptick in the anger level amongst liberals in general on my twitter feed. Assuming it's true, I wonder if it's in reaction to the events at Sandy Hook or if there's something else going on. Curious.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink2. Show WhichOnesPink2's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    If you need a license to get married, drive a car or catch a fish...

    ...then you should need a license to own or carry a gun.

    "Gun control" is a misnomer.  The goal should be "gun identification".

    The 'right' to own guns should not trump the interests of public safety.  It's not the NRA's fault that they are more effective at framing the debate on their terms. 

    The rest of us are to blame for not challenging them more forthrightly on their arguments in public.

    Disclosure: I own guns, but I refuse to join the NRA.

     



    I believe all states require a license/permit in order to carry a handgun

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

    Angry:  I've noticed a significant uptick in your anger as expressed through the written word through all posts . It is not healthy for you, nor conducive to discussion/debate.  Why don't you take a time out?

     

     

    It's funny that you should mention that. Anecdotally, I've noticed an sharp uptick in the anger level amongst liberals in general on my twitter feed. Assuming it's true, I wonder if it's in reaction to the events at Sandy Hook or if there's something else going on. Curious.

     



    People should be angry. They should be very angry. Angry and disgusted. If your not angry then your not clued in.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

    Angry:  I've noticed a significant uptick in your anger as expressed through the written word through all posts . It is not healthy for you, nor conducive to discussion/debate.  Why don't you take a time out?

     

     

    It's funny that you should mention that. Anecdotally, I've noticed an sharp uptick in the anger level amongst liberals in general on my twitter feed. Assuming it's true, I wonder if it's in reaction to the events at Sandy Hook or if there's something else going on. Curious.

     



    People should be angry. They should be very angry. Angry and disgusted. If your not angry then your not clued in.



    Angry's anger is not a righteous anger.  It is a sick anger.  He needs a time out.

    Liberals in general are angry and violent, particularly when confronted with the failures of their policies and thought process.  Sorry, but that it the truth.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: NRA=GOP

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

    Disclosure: I own guns, but I refuse to join the NRA.

     

     

    Of course you do. The left always thinks that everyone else needs to be controlled and that they're the only ones qualified to do the controlling.

     




    I didn't say that.  You did.

    But if we can't control the guns due to our 2nd Amt., then we must control the circumstances which may allow something like this to occur.

    As for myself, I have no criminal record or history of mental illness (though some on the right would point to my perceived liberalism as such).  My guns are licensed and registered with my local police dept.

    So, what's your point?

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts