Check out some similar questions!

smoothy · Apr 24, 2013, 09:32 AM

We have more of a legal right to know about Obamas still secret college transcripts than ANY doctor or the government has to know if we have a gun or not...

speechlesstx · Apr 24, 2013, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by talaniman

Take TWO aspirin, call me in the morning. If paranoia persist seek an emergency free clinic.

I took some aspirin but you're still there.

NeedKarma · Apr 24, 2013, 10:08 AM

I took some aspirin but you're still there.

You want him to leave this site?

speechlesstx · Apr 24, 2013, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

You want him to leave this site?

SMH... will you ever grow up? Ask Tal if that's what I meant, k?

NeedKarma · Apr 24, 2013, 11:02 AM

So what did you mean? It's a public forum.

speechlesstx · Apr 24, 2013, 11:18 AM

It's an old, old joke, dude. As I said before, Tal can answer for himself, we don't need your help.

speechlesstx · May 1, 2013, 06:47 AM

Gun control is apparently not dead, yet, and Bill Clinton is giving us advice on self-defense a la Joe Biden.

If you live in a city and you think you need protection of your home, you’re way better off with a shotgun than an assault weapon,” Clinton added. “Trust me. It’s not even close.

Something like this baby? The SRM 1216 semi-automatic tactical shotgun, holds 16 rounds.

excon · May 1, 2013, 06:54 AM

Hello again, Steve:

No, it's NOT dead. That's because you wingers don't know how to read polls. Ok, that's not true. You don't BELIEVE the polls you read.

Of course, this blowback is going to DESTROY the Republican majority in the House, and RUIN your hopes of taking over the Senate.

How could you guys miscalculate so badly?

excon

speechlesstx · May 1, 2013, 07:49 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

No, it's NOT dead. That's because you wingers don't know how to read polls. Ok, that's not true. You don't BELIEVE the polls you read.

Of course, this blowback is going to DESTROY the Republican majority in the House, and RUIN your hopes of taking over the Senate.

How could you guys miscalculate so badly?

excon

I haven't miscalculated, you guys are miscalculating on these polls. It just isn't that important to Americans, they're worried about the ECONOMY and jobs, but you guys cannot get your priorities straight.

tomder55 · May 1, 2013, 08:08 AM

The best defense against Clintoon is a chastity belt

smoothy · May 1, 2013, 11:10 AM

talaniman · May 1, 2013, 11:12 AM

Nice add for 1776, but kind of stupid for 2013.

smoothy · May 1, 2013, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by talaniman

Nice add for 1776, but kind of stupid for 2013.

Kind of stupid for lefties to have freedom of speech... what the heck do they need that for anyway... your handlers tell you what to think anyway.

excon · May 2, 2013, 06:30 PM

Hello smoothy/traitor:

See you on the battlefield. I'll be the one carrying the American Flag.

excon

excon · May 3, 2013, 05:33 AM

Hello again,

Right wingers argue that background checks would NOT have stopped Sandy Hook.. That's the answer to a question that NOBODY is asking.. They give that answer, because they don't want to answer the CORRECT question...

The CORRECT question, is what can be done to prevent the NEXT one. I'm SURE Frank Luntz has something to do with the right wing lockstep response.. They think they're FOOLING us...

From MY vantage point, I don't care that the proposed law wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook.. I care if it'll stop the NEXT one... And, if the next one is perpetrated by a person who WOULD have been stopped by a background check, what will right wingers say? What COULD they say? Would they embarrassed? Would they be ashamed? Would they come out and ADMIT they were answering the wrong question? Will they RESIGN? Will they fall on their swords?

Nahhh... They'll just LIE again..

excon

tomder55 · May 3, 2013, 05:39 AM

The FBI conducted 14,409,616 background checks in 2010, 16,454,951 in 2011, and 19,592,303 in 2012.

Add to that the first four months of 2013 (2,495,440, 2,309,393, 2,209,407 and 1,714,433 respectively) and the total number of background checks under President Obama comes to 72,005,482.

Obama has been President for 1,550 days. That works out to 46,455 background checks for gun purchases each day.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nic...als-033113.pdf

excon · May 3, 2013, 05:42 AM

Hello again,

Yes, I have more to say... One of the reasons right wingers don't want background checks is because they say the EXISTING background check law ISN'T being enforced... That's a pretty BIZARRE way to look at it... In fact, it's SOOO bizarre, that it's not credible... I'm STILL scratching my head over it...

From MY perspective, the purpose of the current background check law is to PREVENT felons from buying guns. And, it's WORKING. It's DOING that. It REALLY is. However, right wingers, say it's not being enforced because the cops DON'T arrest the felons who were DENIED... Makes NO sense to me..

Now, let me see... They CAN'T buy a gun.. They were REFUSED. They didn't WALK out of the gun shop WITH a gun. But, the law doesn't work because the cops don't chase them down?? Really.. They want cops to arrest the guy who COULDN'T buy a gun. And, if they don't, they're not going to let OTHER felons be denied.?

Am I the only one who thinks that's STUPID, STUPID, and even more STUPID than that??

Over to you, wingers...

excon

excon · May 3, 2013, 05:51 AM

Hello again, tom:

That works out to 46,455 background checks for gun purchases each day.

Cool. What's your point?

Excon

tomder55 · May 3, 2013, 05:59 AM

The only gun recovered so far from the Tsarnaev brothers' shootout was a semiautomatic handgun with its serial number scratched off... which means it was probably purchased /obtained illegally (as ,most guns used in crimes are ).That means that the brothers somehow neglected to register for gun permits as required in Massachusetts. Would expanded backround checks have made a difference in this case ? Nope . For that matter ;all the other lists the government maintains made no difference either .

speechlesstx · May 3, 2013, 06:14 AM

Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney said background checks would have stopped the Boston bomber.

As it stands right now, Tamerlan, as we know now, was on the terrorist watch list, so we know a gun check would stop him. If there was a background check, as it stands now, Tamerlan… or the next terrorist, can go to any gun show, and buy a hundred-round magazine. They can buy all the assault weapons they want, no questions asked. The gun lobby has the upper hand now, even though 90 percent of Americans want gun safety. This in no way infringes on the right of law-abiding Americans… but for the terrorist, for the bad guys, let’s pass sensible gun-safety legislation.

Personally I didn't know pressure cookers were that hard to come by.

As long as you lefties keep making dubious, make that moronic links you can't be taken seriously.