RE: Shooting in California

RE: Shooting in California (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 8:39:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub We are not letting them fly my friend... are gun rights the only ones in this world?... If you are worried about their rights to guns then they should have the right to fly with your children. Butch So that sounds like you want to go with the list as is, who cares how badly concieved the current system is. You want to stop people from getting guns period, and you don't seem to be concered with people getting hurt as long as you get what you want. You do understand that any terror watch list is based on criteria that would never stand up in court don't you? You do understand that it is not just the 2nd rights that the current system infringes on don't you? But you have seen talking points that say we should take a fact based system and add into it data from a fact irrelevant system and pretend that it is fact based. Don't you think that a person should have the right to know why they are on said list? Do you realize that everything that currently disqualifies people from firearms is not only is fact based but that everyone who is disqualified is informed of what FACTS disqualified them. Don't you think that this should be the case regardless of what right they are being deprived of? Why is it that you are outraged that it isn't used to stop people from getting firearms rather than being outraged that an arbitrary system that does not require any FACTS is being used to deprive people of other rights?

ifmaz -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 8:48:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub We are not letting them fly my friend... are gun rights the only ones in this world?... If you are worried about their rights to guns then they should have the right to fly with your children. Butch You mean the 8 year old "terrorists"? I'm OK with that. Assuming he doesn't kick my seat during the flight, of course. You may want to review this post and this post before continuing to (naively) believe only terrorists are on the no-fly list.

kdsub -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 8:54:08 PM)
quote: So that sounds like you want to go with the list as is, How can you say that after what I have posted... don't you read. I Said........ quote: Then should not the focus be on making sure the people we have on the list are indeed a risk I Said....... quote: Why not do both Bama When you said..... quote: How about fixing the list before demanding that it is used against more people Bama stop...just stop and think...its ok to argue but pay attention and keep up. Butch

kdsub -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 9:01:12 PM)
Then lets correct the mistakes on the list or NOT HAVE ONE AT ALL...simple...Then those who are a risk to our lives can be rightly denied guns. Which is more important to you... your children and mine or your damn guns? You can't have it both ways... if rights are that important to you then if they cannot be denied rights to guns then they should not be denied rights to fly. Butch

BamaD -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 9:14:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Then lets correct the mistakes on the list or NOT HAVE ONE AT ALL...simple...Then those who are a risk to our lives can be rightly denied guns. Which is more important to you... your children and mine or your damn guns? You can't have it both ways... if rights are that important to you then if they cannot be denied rights to guns then they should not be denied rights to fly. Butch Duh yes you can protect both your rights and your children. As I have said before but you ignored, St Louis is the only place I know of where people routinly leave firearms sitting on the front seat of unlocked cars, since it doesn't happen in other places I have to suspect your sources, particularlly since your sources always seem suspect. When I say you should be outraged about a list which requires no more than hearsay to get you on it being used to curtail any rights. If it isn't fact based you can't use it to curtail rights.

ifmaz -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 9:26:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Then lets correct the mistakes on the list or NOT HAVE ONE AT ALL...simple...Then those who are a risk to our lives can be rightly denied guns. Which is more important to you... your children and mine or your damn guns? You can't have it both ways... if rights are that important to you then if they cannot be denied rights to guns then they should not be denied rights to fly. Butch Kindly point out where I said random people whose names appear on a secret government list should be denied any rights. You'll have a hard time doing so because I said no such thing. I have pointed out the absurdity of this "no-fly list" repeatedly and attempted to stress the magnitude of removing one's rights (any rights) simply because their name appears on a government list. The ACLU agrees and has filed suit: quote: ORIGINAL: https://www.aclu.org/cases/latif-et-al-v-holder-et-al-aclu-challenge-government-no-fly-list Until the government fixes its unconstitutional new process, people on the No Fly List are barred from commercial air travel with no meaningful chance to clear their names, resulting in a vast and growing group of individuals whom the government deems too dangerous to fly but too harmless to arrest. (emphasis added) You then accuse BamaD of not reading. The irony is strong with you, kdsub.

kdsub -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 9:38:48 PM)
So you think there should not be a no fly list... if you believe this i understand you... I just will not agree with you. You at least make sense in your stance. Butch

JVoV -> RE: Shooting in California (12/4/2015 9:50:04 PM)
I rarely believe in a violent reaction to a basic property crime. Carjacking? Sure, shoot em. Home invasion? They have it comin. Snatching your iPad when you're too lazy to click the damn button to lock your shit up? Nope.

bounty44 -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 5:01:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was just responding back to yet another FOX News bashing post. Fair enough. But Fox News really is crap, lovmuffin. The entire world knows this. You'll only ever be laughed at if you cite it. It's embarrassing, frankly. The entire liberal world believes this. No, the entire world knows it. Even non-liberals - outside of the USA, that is - start laughing when Fox News is mentioned. It's possibly the most laughed-at news organisation in the world. peon, im sorry, but as you have absolutely no way of knowing this, its absurd on its face.

bounty44 -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 5:03:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was just responding back to yet another FOX News bashing post. Fair enough. But Fox News really is crap, lovmuffin. The entire world knows this. You'll only ever be laughed at if you cite it. It's embarrassing, frankly. The entire liberal world believes this. no...just the sane parts of the world believe this righttttttt, so in your view the millions of conservatives, libertarians, moderates and even liberals who watch fox, are not sane. good one, I trust even a 12 yr old can figure out what you just said as being a stupid statement.

Lucylastic -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 5:32:12 AM)
not to be a pain, but yanno, paris was gonna threaten fox and the PM of the UK called the fox guy (who claimed that parts of the UK were no go zones because of muslims) a complete idiot. Jindal's claim was particularly brazen because it came just a day after Fox News apologized for a comment an alleged expert made on air. Steve Emerson, who analyzes terrorism for the network, said on Fox News Sunday, "There are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim, where non-Muslims just simply don’t go in." British Prime Minister David Cameron ripped Emerson as only an old Etonian can: "When I heard this, frankly, I choked on my porridge and I thought it must be April Fools' Day. This guy’s clearly a complete idiot." Emerson apologized, but other Fox personalities repeated variations on the theme, and eventually Fox issued on-air corrections on both Fox & Friends and Justice With Judge Jeanne. Fox isn't known for shying away from controversial claims, so the decision to move so aggressively to reverse is an indicator of how wrong the claim is. Of course, that came after several days of Fox personalities repeating the claim casually on air. (The retraction didn't come in time for one group, apparently: Paris' mayor said Tuesday that Paris would sue Fox News for sullying its image.) http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/paris-mayor-to-sue-fox-over-no-go-zone-comments/384656/ a single simple (Bolded) but eloquent statement from a man who apparently stuck his willy in a dead pigs mouth.

tweakabelle -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 7:00:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was just responding back to yet another FOX News bashing post. Fair enough. But Fox News really is crap, lovmuffin. The entire world knows this. You'll only ever be laughed at if you cite it. It's embarrassing, frankly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mRPj8jEo5A go fox! That video was a hoot! Thanks. [:D]

Hillwilliam -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 7:39:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 righttttttt, so in your view the millions of conservatives, libertarians, moderates and even liberals who watch fox, are not sane. good one, I trust even a 12 yr old can figure out what you just said as being a stupid statement. I, for one, enjoy laughing my ass off at the stupid crap they spew and expect people to believe. They have great ratings. Know why? They realized some time ago that basically half of the US population is of below average intelligence. Cater to them and you'll get ratings and ratings = money.

Lucylastic -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 8:19:32 AM)
I watch it, purely for their faux outrage at the crap they focus on. Its really a shame that their brand of stupid isnt damn painful like shingles is..

Lucylastic -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 8:27:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was just responding back to yet another FOX News bashing post. Fair enough. But Fox News really is crap, lovmuffin. The entire world knows this. You'll only ever be laughed at if you cite it. It's embarrassing, frankly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mRPj8jEo5A go fox! That video was a hoot! Thanks. [:D] ok Im sorry, I didnt watch the video, I was looking for news stories. NICEEEEE link

Lucylastic -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 8:41:47 AM)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF-mhgGWIgk Fox actually "apologizes" for making the "mistake"

tj444 -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 12:56:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I watch it, purely for their faux outrage at the crap they focus on. Its really a shame that their brand of stupid isnt damn painful like shingles is.. They can spew this stuff, especially the ridiculous stuff, with a straight face, that's what gets me...

ifmaz -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 1:08:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I watch it, purely for their faux outrage at the crap they focus on. Its really a shame that their brand of stupid isnt damn painful like shingles is.. They can spew this stuff, especially the ridiculous stuff, with a straight face, that's what gets me... I'd imagine they feel the same as left-leaning newscasters feel when they push their own agendas. Interestingly, Business Insider has an article on the most and least trusted news organizations according to a Pew survey, and it appears only the WSJ is universally trusted.

thompsonx -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 3:43:35 PM)
ORIGINAL: ifmaz I'd imagine they feel the same as left-leaning newscasters feel when they push their own agendas. Interestingly, Business Insider has an article on the most and least trusted news organizations according to a Pew survey, and it appears only the WSJ is universally trusted. I am sure it will surprise you that rupert murdoch owns fox and wsj and a piece of business insider. Business insider edited by henry blodget, the fellow who was permantly barred from wall street for his criminal activity. That these punkassmotherfuckers pimp each other is hardly surprising.[8\|]

ifmaz -> RE: Shooting in California (12/5/2015 6:05:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: ifmaz I'd imagine they feel the same as left-leaning newscasters feel when they push their own agendas. Interestingly, Business Insider has an article on the most and least trusted news organizations according to a Pew survey, and it appears only the WSJ is universally trusted. I am sure it will surprise you that rupert murdoch owns fox and wsj and a piece of business insider. Business insider edited by henry blodget, the fellow who was permantly barred from wall street for his criminal activity. That these punkassmotherfuckers pimp each other is hardly surprising.[8\|] I think the entirety of news organizations ultimately belong to a mere 6 corporations. Here's a different article citing what appears to be the same data set from Pew.

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.296875E-02