The Rev. Jesse Jackson connects the dots from the alleged crimes of Scott Roeder and James von Brunn to their weapons of choice, also decrying the new law allowing concealed guns in national parks and the lack of political will to plug the gun-show loophole or bring back the assault weapons ban. “Hunters do not need assault weapons to kill deer,” Jackson wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times. “Honest gun owners have a huge stake in policing the sale of guns so the nuts and haters have a hard time getting them. But instead of strengthening our laws after 9/11, we have been weakening them. The majority is getting rolled by a mobilized minority. Only leadership can turn that around.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
135 Comments
Jesse “Himey Town” Jackson who cheated on his wife, cheated corporations and generally disgraced himself has no room to speak about what’s moral in this country.
9/11? WTF do flying airplanes into buildings have to do with guns?
GITSUM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAqA2sJM-qg
Jesse who? Looks like the Reverend Jackson is feeling a little irrelevant these days. Sounds like typical crap from a once prominent National figure. When your down and out and can’t command the attention of the press anymore, just go and say something really stupid.
Whats the matter Jesse; not getting any media lately; what about personal responsibility? Nobama is starting his anti-gun ploys again only he is using another mouthpiece IMPEACH Nobama
One, there are many new sporting/hunting firearms being introduced based on semi-auto variants such as the ARs, and in calibers designed for large dangerous game. The American Rifleman tests one just this month in .338 Mag. What some are calling assault weapons are simply the natural technical progression of sporting weapons. After all the flintlock musket was the ‘assault weapon’ of it’s day.
And lets not forget, it is clear from factual data….everywhere gun restrictions have been relaxed, and 2nd. Amendment freedom expanded, crime has gone DOWN.
People have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to protect themselves and their families.
Jesse Who? Is he still relevent, is he out looking for a new corporation to blackmail for some dollahs.
“People have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to protect themselves and their families.”
Women have a constitutional right to abortion too, but you’d never know it in Wichita.
Remind me again, who would jesus kill?
Pro Life organizations threatened with violence.
http://www.kansas.com/news/featured/story/859325.html
“ksfarmgrrl” –
I think it’s –
Who Would Jesus Shoot in the Face?
Remind me again, who would jesus kill?- KFG
Who Would Jesus Shoot in the Face?- Monkeyhawk
===============================================
Must be a buy one get one free sale on idiots today.
“Women have a constitutional right to abortion too, but you’d never know it in Wichita.”
Oh no they don’t, there is nothing at all in the Constitution protecting abortion, only privacy. When is it private to kill another. The Constitution first and foremost protects the “Right To Life”.
The Supreme Court decision was a disaster and extremely poor legally.
“The Supreme Court decision was a disaster and extremely poor legally.”
Says you.
Jackson doesn’t know a damn thing about guns or hunting but he will assume the worst like most LIBs.
The same people who groan about “another Tiller thread” relish their daily gun fix.
“Boxlock20″ opines on constitutional law (which was written, he thinks, between January 20, 1777 and January 20, 1781, when Thomas Jefferson was president).
And Jesse Jackson is wrong.
It’s not about guns, it should be about gun-owners.
Regular – if you want to talk about men disgracing themselves – you better get a lot of your pencils ready to write down the number of White Republican males who have cheated on their wives, cheated their companies and/or organizations and disgraced themselves.
So let’s not try to be morally righteous, here – okay?
I happen to agree that Jesse Jackson is the last person I would listen to about anything but to think you and your side have anyone better, is pretty ridiculous. And certainly not based on the criteria of having morals.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson connects the dots from the alleged crimes of Scott Roeder and James von Brunn to their weapons of choice..
==============================================
Connects the dots?
I haven’t heard what Roeder used but it has been reported Brunn used a .22 RIFLE.
CC & Assault Rifles have nothing to do with either of these events.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted June 19, 2009 at 8:53 am | Permalink
“The Supreme Court decision was a disaster and extremely poor legally.”
Says you.
********************************************
So says (among many others)
Six justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, Byron White, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, and Sandra Day O’Connor
Harvard’s Laurence Tribe, who support Roe’s outcome on other grounds
Yale Law School professor John Hart Ely
Edward Lazarus, a former law clerk to Roe’s author, Justice Harry Blackmun,
Monkeyhawk
Posted June 19, 2009 at 9:06 am | Permalink
It’s not about guns, it should be about gun-owners.
–
Agreed 100%. Owning a gun is a right but with that right comes responsibility and accountability.
Agreed 100%. Owning a gun is a right but with that right comes responsibility and accountability.
================================================
No schitt.
I don’t think anyone would dispute that.
ANTI
Posted June 19, 2009 at 8:59 am | Permalink
Jackson doesn’t know a damn thing about guns or hunting but he will assume the worst like most LIBs
–
Unlike the CONS that believe every crackpot email they receive and any spittle that comes out of Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck, Coulter – right?
Appears that duh Libs are unable to discuss nothing but hate and other posters today.
Must be awful to be of limited mental resources.
Unlike the CONS that believe every crackpot email they receive and any spittle that comes out of Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck, Coulter – right?
=====================================
There probably are people that eat 100% of their ’spittle’.
I ain’t one of them.
Von Brunn weapon was said to so old it was not traceable, all the regulation in this country would not have discovered his ownership. Given the choice of an AK47 or weather bee 300 to be hunting a Grizzle bear I know my choice. Arguing that the typical assault rifle is a hunting weapon means that you are more into a sexual rush then actually hunting. To be clear I am NOT for the assault weapons ban on Semi-auto rifles.
Nor I am saying that there would not be a majority of legal gun owners that could be also responsible owners of a full automatic weapon. I am saying as much a rush it would be to own one, there is no reasonable reason for the ownership of a full Auto.
Gun violence would go down if only the existing laws were enforced, but a blanket law does not stop a determined criminal from getting a firearm. Nor would a “maybe they might kind of sort of” law.
A car dealership can not know whether the person they sale a car to will transport their kids to school in it or get stumbling drunk and head on a mini van carrying kids to school. The sale of a firearm also has the same chances to it.
Mr. Jackson was being myopic in his thinking and in his phrase “weapon of choice” explains the misperception. That is that it was the weapon that caused it not the person’s desire to commit the act.
Either of the killers could have just as easily walked in with a bomb vest and killed far more.
They could have went to the local department store and bought a Machete or used the tire iron from the trunk of the car. And both Dr. Tiller and Johns would have been just as dead.
Is it too easy to get a gun? Yes and no, laws mainly effect only the law-abiding following the law is a choice for the individual person. Just because it is illegal does not stop someone from violating that law.
Go post writerdog.
“The Supreme Court decision was a disaster and extremely poor legally.”
Too bad. Suck on it.
A great many of the gun enthusiast posters here make a poor argument for their cause. I can think of at least a half a dozen who I would consider an accident, or attack, waiting to happen.
BlueJay is a fan of pulling the trigger and walking away if the results are not of his liking.
Jesse “he needs his sack snipped for talking down to black people” Jackson declares:
“The majority is getting rolled by a mobilized minority. Only leadership can turn that around.””
The irony in that statement’s just a little too obvious. I guess he should stop mobilizing minorities then. Apparently mob rule is what’s needed in his opinion. Thanks for clearing that up for us “Rev”.
“Appears that duh Libs are unable to discuss nothing but hate and other posters today.
Must be awful to be of limited mental resources.”
Reg., it’s almost funny, if it weren’t so sad.
They give us brilliant crap like;
“Says you.”—kfg
“Too bad. Suck on it.”—BlowJ
And then there is the Monkey’s typical valueless crap, like attributing a statement to me that was in a copy and paste post I identified as someone elses.
But, that’s what we have come to expect I guess.
Perhaps Jackson should worry about his own community first.
You get what you give bawksy.
The best you’ve got is “I don’t like abortion! It should be illegal!” with no qualifiers, explanations or other support for answering the question “Then what?”.
So, you get back. “Too bad. Suck on it!”
Ya dish, “I need my gun at all times! Screw the national parks!”
You get back, “Fine. Let’s just go ahead and outlaw guns since gun owners are unwilling to be reasonable.
“I don’t like abortion! It should be illegal!” with no qualifiers, explanations or other support for answering the question “Then what?”.”–BlowJ
And AGAIN he make claims that are at best false and probably simply a lie.
I have never said anything like that. What I have said is this;
That developing child is a living human being.
Abortion is the DEATH of a human being, plain and simple. And other than in dire circumstances like the life of the mother or a non-viable child, as are an extremely small number in relationship to the total, it is WRONG. It is failure. It is the ending of life for the convenience of the mother.
Come on BlowJ, ‘buck-up’ and start telling the truth.
Take it to an abortion thread bawksy.
Gun enthusiasts have no one to blame but some of the less reasonable among their own for a rising mistrust among those not terribly interested in guns.
“Honest gun owners have a huge stake in policing ”
Gee, Jessie Jackson suddenly advocating personal responsibility? Every thing else is the governments responsibility – it’s the governments fault – it’s the systems fault.
When it’s convenient, people are responsible for “policing” American law?
If you are interested in guns BlowJ then don’t get one.
It is not the law abiding that are causing problems and those breaking he law and causing the problems would not pay any attention to more laws.
And your les/bian friend brought abortion to this thread, FOLLOWED BY YOU…..not me.
I simply was giving you the courtesy of responding to your post….which I admit is foolish.
“rising mistrust among those not terribly interested in guns.”
Got a link to that?
There is a coalition of representatives in the House and Senate who fully support the 2nd Amendment. There are many democrat members.
There will be no changes of significance in Congress. The president, might THINK about renewing the Clinton ban. But that’s as far as he will go.
No change here. Dim politicans got lot’s of libs hopes up again.
“If you are interested in guns BlowJ then don’t get one.”
Oh but my not getting one will not stop the carnage that is about to befall our National parks.
No I’ll need to focus my efforts on YOU not getting one or being as restricted as possible.
““rising mistrust among those not terribly interested in guns.”
Got a link to that?”
Right here. Me.
Oh but my not getting one will not stop the carnage that is about to befall our National parks.
===========================================
LMAO!
Are you really that ignorant, BlueJay?
Oh but my not getting one will not stop the carnage that is about to befall our National parks.
LMFAO. Gotta change your sheets after wetting your bed junior? How’s that carnage working out on the streets of Kansas?
Hey junior… BOO!!!!
___________________________________________
No I’ll need to focus my efforts on YOU not getting one or being as restricted as possible.
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
Huuuuuuuuuuuugh
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
Tell us all how that works out for you
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
Huuuuuuuuuuuugh
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA
Jackson Wants to Cut Obama’s Nuts Off
Jesse Jackson on Obama: ‘Wanna Cut His Nuts Off”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aLGkFpsdHo
July 9, 2008
JESSE JACKSON SAYS HE WANTS TO CUT OBAMA’S ‘NUTS OUT’
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07092008/news/nationalnews/jesse_jackson_sharply_criticizes_obama_119161.htm
WASHINGTON – In a vulgar tirade caught on tape by Fox News, the Rev. Jesse Jackson said he wanted to “cut his [Barack Obama's] nuts out” and he accused the fellow Chicagoan of “talking down to black folks” by giving moral lectures to African-Americans, source said Jackson’s shocking quotes were picked up by a hot mic before an interview on health care in Fox’s Chicago studio last Sunday
“so the nuts and haters have a hard time getting them.”
Suddenly an American civil rights activist and Baptist minister is concerned about “nuts” and “haters” having guns?
Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders. In 2005, homicide victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than the rates for whites.
In 2005, offending rates for blacks were more than 7 times higher than the rates for whites
White = W Black = B O = Other
Weapon W B O W B O
Gun homicide 47.2% 50.9% 1.9% 41.9% 56.4% 1.7%
Arson 58.9% 38.1% 2.9% 55.7% 42.0% 2.3%
Poison 80.6% 16.9% 2.5% 79.8% 18.4% 1.8%
From 1976 to 2005 –
94% of black victims were killed by blacks
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
BlowJ,
I couldn’t have said anything better myself to illustrate your foolishness and dishonesty.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted June 19, 2009 at 8:11 am | Permalink
“People have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to protect themselves and their families.”
Women have a constitutional right to abortion too, but you’d never know it in Wichita.
————————
Which Amendment is the Abortion Amendment?
Jackson sounded full of HATE when he said he wanted to cut Obama’s nuts off.
Does Jackson own any guns?
It does sound like Jackson Hates Obama:
“The election of Barack Obama may demon- strate progress toward a post-racist-society to many, but to others it’s a threat and a betrayal. The economic downturn has been particularly brutal on manufacturing workers, veterans and low-wage workers. Many of these people feel abused by their government, threatened by low-wage immi- grants and angered by civil-rights ad- vances.”
http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/1625036,CST-EDT-jesse17.article
“Jackson sounded full of HATE when he said he wanted to cut Obama’s nuts off.”
JJ that’s only news when Jackson says things about republicans. It’s part of the media contract. See ABC News publication #BR549.
Jackson thinks the 2nd Amendment is about deer hunting?
Jackson is taking one last desparate grab at the spotlight with this opinion piece of siht.
That was clean and articulate Jim Johnson.
Heard on CNBC that the spike in gun sales is creating some concern.
You just never know what those extremist will do next.
Phantom that’s your problem, you are expecting to find serious news on the CNBC. You have to be very careful what you click on the Obama channels.
Here is some interesting news from there:
Six-Pack of Beer
High Price — Fairbanks, Alaska: $11.20
Low Price — Fitchburg-Leominster, Mass.: $6.99
National Average: $8.37
Anyone that thinks restriction on purchases or ownership of firearms is the answer to gun violence is misguided at best.
American_Way
Posted June 19, 2009 at 11:12 am | Permalink
“Jackson sounded full of HATE when he said he wanted to cut Obama’s nuts off.”
JJ that’s only news when Jackson says things about republicans. It’s part of the media contract. See ABC News publication #BR549.
————–
Oh thanks for the reminder.
Now that Jackson has stopped attacking Obama, it’s time to build Jackson back up again.
Wow. Not only is it yet another anti-gun thread, but it is one authored by Jackson?
Rhonda, you definately get the award for absurdity today.
Regular
Posted June 19, 2009 at 11:16 am | Permalink
That was clean and articulate Jim Johnson.
——————–
Thanks Regular. I bathed today with Shea Butter.
BlueJay,
I see you are once again saying the same unsupported and unproven assertions about guns again.
Better hope I’m wrong about the gunfire that will destroy the national parks.
I hope I’m wrong too. But only for the sake of the parks and the wildlife.
If I am right, the backlash against gun enthusiasts could be substantial. That I couldn’t care less about. I don’t need a gun.
BlueJay,
Once again, I don’t need to hope about anything.
The law is allowing people who have already been carrying concealed to do so into National Parks.
The same people who are not causing problems and have not been doing anything you are fearful of.
I thought you owned gun BlueJay? What did you do with it?
“The law is allowing people who have already been carrying concealed to do so into National Parks.”
And down will come the signs that warn that the National parks are a no gun zone.
That in itself diminishes the parks. They’re no longer off limits to the failings of men.
All because some people go about constantly afraid for their lives. I don’t know why we must coddle the socially maladjusted.
BlueJay,
If you notice, you are the only one who is afraid in this thread.
Constantly afraid of law abiding people who already carry concealed continuing to do so into National Parks.
Once again you offer another asserton you can’t prove and have no idea what you are talking about.
There are not any signs in the National Parks prohibiting guns. Firearms may still be transported through them as long as they are stored properly.
“And down will come the signs that warn that the National parks are a no gun zone.”
Signs signs everywhere signs
blocking up the scenery blowing my mind.
Do this, don’t do that,
can’t you reeee-ad the sign!!
Interesting the people who are afraid of guns in national parks. Many are the same people worried about polar bears in the artic.
Even though these same people have never been to either place. Some people never even leave the county!
“Constantly afraid of law abiding people”
Maybe that’s because they are always bragging here about how they eagerly break the law?
BlueJay
Posted June 19, 2009 at 11:54 am | Permalink
“The law is allowing people who have already been carrying concealed to do so into National Parks.”
And down will come the signs that warn that the National parks are a no gun zone.
That in itself diminishes the parks. They’re no longer off limits to the failings of men.
All because some people go about constantly afraid for their lives. I don’t know why we must coddle the socially maladjusted.
————————————————–
You honestly think that law-abiding conceal carry holders are those you have to worry about?
BlueJay,
Nothing anyone has ever said here could logically lead you to have the fears you are consumed with about Concealed carry in National Parks.
Nathan I have met you in person several times and have exchanged posts with you for four years.
I firmly believe that you would JUMP at the chance to fire off several rounds in the National parks now just because you can. It is just who you are.
BlueJay,
And your belief is based on nothing more than your own twisted fears of me. Not facts. Not evidence. Nothing substantive.
You are just a scared little man.
I’M not the one who needs a gun at all times.
BlueJay,
But you are the one who is scared of law abiding citizens with guns at all times… scared little man.
And I don’t need a gun at all times. But I will have one when I do need it though.
I don’t need a gun at all.
Scared little man.
BlueJay,
I am not the one on here talking about how afraid I am of those who carry concealed. You are.
My having a gun for self defense doesn’t make me scared, but it makes you scared though.
LOL
I am afraid for the National parks, not myself there scared little man. It is unlikely that I find myself in the company of those who carry guns. Not my sort of folk.
Watch out for that mouse in the corner Nathaniel. He’s comin’ right for ya!
Why is a National Park your worry more than your local Quik Trip?
Mr_Kia,
1. Your question is based on several false premises.
-You assume that a National Park is more of a worry for me than a local Quick trip.
-You assume that I am worried about a National Park.
-You assume that I am worried about both a National Park and the local Quick trip.
But to answer your question:
I am not “worried” about either locations.
BlueJay,
Being afraid for the National Parks or yourself makes no difference in the fact that you are the only person here who is admittingly afraid.
Scared little man.
That was directed towards BJ Nathan.
BlueJay
Posted June 19, 2009 at 12:28 pm | Permalink
I am afraid for the National parks
Mr_Kia,
I see. Makes sense now.
heh
Nathaniel is so scared that he even jumped entertainingly at a post that was clearly meant for me.
I don’t care about Quick Trip. It is not a protected natural place.
So your concern that the National Parks are going to turn into shooting galleries is based just on the law to allow concealled carry weapons?
Or is it a sanctity of nature thing?
Nathaniel is so scared that he even jumped entertainingly at a post that was clearly meant for me.
You’re the one wetting the bed.
“Oh my!!! Guns in the National Parks! Oh my! The bloodshed! The humanity!”
What a joke.
Pete, and Repete.
See the 6/6/09 topic for more of the same. (You will see BJ is a glutton for punishment.)
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/pro-con-on-lifting-ban-on-firearms-in-national-parks/comment-page-2/
BlueJay probably cries himself to sleep at night mumbling to himself…
“The National Parks? Why? Sob…cry….sob… Why?”
“Those gun nuts have ruined the National Parks…cry…sob…cry…”
LOL, what an irrational dweeb.
Pete, and Repete.
See the 6/6/09 topic for more of the same. (You will see BJ is a glutton for punishment.)
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/pro-con-on-lifting-ban-on-firearms-in-national-parks/comment-page-2/
XXX
Posted June 6, 2009 at 7:35 am | Permalink
“But as soon as tourists start popping off rounds at bears, moose, and badgers in national parks, there should be huge sanctions against them.”
_______________________
Is that like the blood that was going to run in the streets when they passed CCW?
Like CCW, I doubt if we’re going to see any difference. Think about it. If you screw up, you’ll probably lose your license to carry. There’s the motivation NOT to go blasting the wildlife without a good reason.
BlueJay
Posted June 19, 2009 at 11:54 am | Permalink
And down will come the signs that warn that the National parks are a no gun zone.
That in itself diminishes the parks. They’re no longer off limits to the failings of men.
———————————-
For the last 200+ years the land which is now called National Parks has NOT been off limits to the failings of men.
Even before 1800, Native Americans were here and their failings were in the land we now call National Parks.
What kind of dope do you take that makes you live in a fantasyworld?
“So your concern that the National Parks are going to turn into shooting galleries is based just on the law to allow concealled carry weapons?”
More based on the post of some who carry concealed. Like this gem.
“BlueJay probably cries himself to sleep at night mumbling to himself…
“The National Parks? Why? Sob…cry….sob… Why?”
“Those gun nuts have ruined the National Parks…cry…sob…cry…”
This shows a clear lack of concern or respect for nature. And it is not surprising.
Inflicting himself on nature is written into his book.
BlueJay,
Do you have a history of mental illness in your family?
Look at the Crime in National Parks today.
The Rangers are often outgunned by drug smugglers and other criminals IN THE PARKS.
BJ, your National Park ambiance is already shot to he11, by the criminals who don’t read the “NO GUN” signs.
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=123679&page=2
Antonich isn’t alone in his assessment. An Interior Department audit from five years ago tells the whole story. It recommended a substantial increase in rangers here to fight growing crime. But since then, Lake Mead has actually lost 16 rangers, roughly a third of the ranger squad.
“You get 5 [million] to 10 million people visiting, you’re going to have problems, and if you’re a bad guy or you’re trying to hide from the law, what better place to go?” Antonich said.
Lake Mead isn’t the only major park with these kinds of policing problems, Antonich says. To varying degrees, Yosemite, the Grand Canyon, the Great Smokey Mountains, and Yellowstone are all in the same boat.
Lawlessness Along the Borders
And yet, as troubling as urban crime may be, it is nothing compared to the lawlessness we found in parks along the nation’s borders.
More than 600 miles of the United States’ northern and southern borders are covered by parks, like Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument on the border of Arizona and Mexico, where a handful of rangers are forced to patrol more than 30 miles of border.
The result is often an open door for an alarming and growing number of international drug traffickers and even potential terrorists.
Maybe they should put up ‘No Drug Traffickers’ signs.
That should solve the problem.
Vast Majority of Congress Votes for Guns in Parks:
The U.S. House on Wednesday approved Sen. Tom Coburn’s legislation to allow loaded firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges.
The so-called Coburn amendment was approved by a vote of 279 to 147.
The Senate had approved the amendment by a vote of 67-29, with the help of 27 Democrats.
AND OBAMA SIGNED IT!!!!!!!
http://newsok.com/gun-measure-draws-ok/article/3371416
Now, thanks to CONGRESS and President OBAMA, all of us will soon be able to carry loaded firearms into national parks and wildlife refuges. Even concealed weapons will be allowed, for those who have state permits.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/pro-con-on-lifting-ban-on-firearms-in-national-parks/comment-page-2/
It only passed because a Republican attached it to another bill.
Republicans are the party of ruining the environment. Honestly and otherwise.
So concealled carry holders are going to just start picking off bambi, winnie the pooh and any other wildlife that happens to cross its path (pretty darn rare by the way with the exception of squirrels) because they happen to be packing heat?
But fears about a nuclear enabled North Korea are unwarranted?
Got it.
Mr_Kia
Posted June 19, 2009 at 1:47 pm | Permalink
So concealled carry holders are going to just start picking off bambi, winnie the pooh and any other wildlife that happens to cross its path (pretty darn rare by the way with the exception of squirrels) because they happen to be packing heat?
=========================
Nah….Just Blue jays.
“It only passed because a Republican attached it to another bill.”
That one republican has power over the democrat majority in Congress? Awesome!
BlueJay
Posted June 19, 2009 at 1:42 pm | Permalink
It only passed because a Republican attached it to another bill.
===================================
Man, your party is just a bunch of pu$$ies.
Nah….Just Blue jays.
====================================================
Vile bird. Rodents of the air.
Vile bird. Rodents of the air.
==============================
During my youth, many fell to the power of my Crosman.
“But fears about a nuclear enabled North Korea are unwarranted?”
Libs are waiting for the other Dear Leader to hear
the Obama world apology speech on tape delay. Once Kim Jong-il listens to the Obama speech, it is expected Kim will order fair and honest democratic elections immediately.
The Bell Curve. It’s so steep.
When it comes to weapons, I think some people are too hung up about what it should be instead of seeing what it really is.
Whether it is a slingshot or an AK-47, the reaction is the same for the controlling types.
They do not like any challenge to their vision of a prefect world, so they impose, impose and impose.
They never consider that having a weapon is a natural instinct of all mankind’s history and if it came down to their beliefs or once again hunting and gathering days, all would welcome it as life saving.
Maybe I can turn in my old klunker pick-up, get $4,500 from Obama, and buy one of these babies:
http://www.baconstripranch.com/Suburban%20Pop-Up%20Gun%20Turret.wmv
And who the he11 does Jackson think he is? What is this “huge stake” gun owners have?
It’s not like he or his clan can do something to gun owners. It’s the Constitution and as far as I know Obama hasn’t shut it down completely.
Besides, Obama ain’t a “bro”. Jackson said Obama doesn’t meet the prerequisites because Obama acts white (not black enough).
“get $4,500 from Obama”
I thought the incentive is a reduction in taxes for a portion of the sales tax?
Oh No AmWay, there’s the Sales Tax deduction, then this week they passed the Trade In Your Junker Giveaway.
So, go buy a junk car for $100. Then trade it in and get a $4500 credit!
Great deal, huh!
CASH FOR CLUNKERS:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061804060.html
I can’t wait to see the Cash for Guns program.
Maybe I can get $1,000 for a .22 rifle ($99 at KMart) then use the $900 to buy an AR?
“Great deal, huh!”
Congress is spending money so fast I can’t keep up!
I was going to trade in my Honda Civic Hybrid for a new Toyota Prius III and hope for the sales tax credit (it’s income based).
Now, I may want to trade in my old pickemtruck and get $4,500 (because I will be trading up to 51 MPG).
I’ll need another pickup. So I guess I can find a clunker for less than my gain?
Serious questions for CCA or gun owners.
Today is National Hike N*ked Day.
Would someone hiking n*ked in a national park have to have a carry and conceal license?
Second question: What sort of holster would you recommend for hiking n*ked? Particularly if the hiker has a protruding beer belly and has problems with belts and is transitioning to suspenders for his pants?
I’m asking for a friend of a friend.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/06/open-thread-619-2/#comment-606164
Would someone hiking n*ked in a national park have to have a carry and conceal license?
=======================================
Prison style?
American_Way
Posted June 19, 2009 at 2:46 pm | Permalink
“Great deal, huh!”
Congress is spending money so fast I can’t keep up!
I was going to trade in my Honda Civic Hybrid for a new Toyota Prius III and hope for the sales tax credit (it’s income based).
Now, I may want to trade in my old pickemtruck and get $4,500 (because I will be trading up to 51 MPG).
I’ll need another pickup. So I guess I can find a clunker for less than my gain?
————————-
Yes, trade in an old klunker. If you don’t have an old klunker give BJ $50 for his POS Foreign Car and trade it in for $4500.
ANTI
Posted June 19, 2009 at 2:58 pm | Permalink
Would someone hiking n*ked in a national park have to have a carry and conceal license?
=======================================
Prison style?
——————-
Between the Cheeks, yeah, that might work.
Just don’t fart or it my go off.
“I can’t wait to see the Cash for Guns program.”—JimJ
Jim, years ago Wichita was crazy enough to do that. They were offering $50 for any gun turned in.
I turned in my Winchester Boy’s Rifle, a little short stocked single shot .22 that had a broken extractor and a loose bolt and should not even be fired anymore.
Got $50 bucks for it and put that toward another handgun. I felt a little guilty doing so as it wasn’t operable and certainly not a threat to anyone but….that was the deal and I took it.
I told the police officer who took it and he just laughed and said good trade.
“Between the Cheeks, yeah, that might work.”
I wouldn’t put a perfectly good gun in that location. Bad enough cleaning carbon off, but smega too? I’m serious! In Kansas, you can wear a gun on the outside of clothes and legally walk down the street. The gun is exposed.
So is this true in a national park? The new law Obama approved on behalf of gun owners was for “concealed” weapons?
Those GUN buy back programs take those useless POS Guns off the street.
And the Libs Cheer about how crime will go down after buying 2 or 3 hundred POS guns off the street.
Open or Concealed carry will depend on the State Law where the National Park is located.
Clothes or no clothes, I’d prefer open carry hiking up/down the moutains in bear & lion country.
“Open or Concealed carry will depend on the State Law where the National Park is located.”
Same CCW laws in the parks as out of the park in whichever state the park is located. If a park extends over a state line I wonder what problems might arise if the laws are different in the two states.
I presume that the CCW laws for the parks would mirror the reciprocity agreements between states also (?).
Boxlock20,
You would be correct.
Nathaniel,
I have always ‘carried’, or at least had a weapon available when camping in remote areas, parks or not, and will continue to do so.
I am very thankful it is legal.
Cell phones are worthless, as they are in this very city if attacked, in spite of what some dimwits contend as you well know.
I have had our camp invaded by a black bear twice, the bear being in extremely close proximity, literally feet distance from our tent, and have not felt the need ever to use a firearm but a little more confident if things went bad.
The DimLibs that condemn firearms, are I believe, cowards themselves and can not face the responsibility of defending themselves, preferring to place that responsibility on society or government as the case may be.
It is foolishness.
“The DimLibs that condemn firearms, are I believe, cowards themselves and can not face the responsibility of defending themselves, preferring to place that responsibility on society or government as the case may be.
It is foolishness”
Oh, bull pucky. This liberal owns a S & W .357 and has a CCP. I don’t carry often, but I got it (the CCP) just to prove a point. You little boys that need a gun to help you with your manhood issues are too funny. My D*CK works just fine without Republican V*agr*. I don’t need a little blue pill like Republicans need a gun.
Grow up, little boys. Carrying a gun doesn’t make you a man.
Of course, some Republicans don’t need V*agr* ‘cuz they don’t believe in having sex, so they are good to go.
“Grow up, little boys. Carrying a gun doesn’t make you a man.”–WSClark
And whatever you are doing WS hasn’t made you a man either.
And just what ‘point’ ARE you trying to prove there WS. Proving a point is not why I got one, maybe you are the one lacking something.
“I have always ‘carried’, or at least had a weapon available when camping in remote areas, parks or not,”
ANOTHER gun enthusiast proudly admits that he breaks laws that he finds inconvenient.
Well, at least my son got to see the National parks before they are ruined. He HASN’T seen a gun except on TV and in the movies. I hope someday, more kids come up that way.
“And whatever you are doing WS hasn’t made you a man either. And just what ‘point’ ARE you trying to prove there WS. Proving a point is not why I got one, maybe you are the one lacking something.”
Lacking something? Not likely. But the point I was proving was that a LIBERAL like me was willing and able to get a CCP. I am not afraid of guns, I like guns, I like shooting guns, I like the workmanship in a well-crafted gun and I like target shooting.
But I don’t need a gun to be a man, unlike some others.
I have a fully functional D*CK.
“Lacking something? Not likely. But the point I was proving was that a LIBERAL like me was willing and able to get a CCP. I am not afraid of guns, I like guns, I like shooting guns, I like the workmanship in a well-crafted gun and I like target shooting.
But I don’t need a gun to be a man, unlike some others.
I have a fully functional D*CK.”—WSClark
Well ya know WS, I don’t really give a damn about your “D*CK”, I don’t want to talk about it now or ever, I don’t want you to talk about it preferably now or ever, I don’t want to know anything about it now or ever. But I do wonder why you seem fixated on that….it’s really strange to me.
Now, if you want to talk about guns….that’s different. I appreciate your appreciation of the “workmanship of a well crafted gun”, I think many are simply master artistic pieces in steel. I used to love to hunt, and still do, but I don’t much like to kill anymore. Oh, I love upland hunting but I’m not much on hunting deer anymore. I still appreciate everything about hunting, including deer, but I don’t much care for venison and I don’t much like seeing them die anymore. I do like to shoot for sport though. And, I have come to realize that this is not as civilized a world as we all would hope simply from reading the papers. Look how many break-ins and robberies, including home invasions are occurring recently. I have a responsibility to my wife my children and my grandchildren yet, and a gun may help me fulfill those obligations protecting myself, or to directly protect them. That’s not needing a gun for phallic compensation as you so immaturely suggest, and as I said I find you somewhat suspect for bringing it up.
But then, I have found you suspect in one thing or another all along….but that’s just DimLibs I have come to suspect.
“ANOTHER gun enthusiast proudly admits that he breaks laws that he finds inconvenient.”–BlowJ
The supreme law of the land, the Constitution of the United States, makes it legal.
And as we are now seeing, the illegal laws that have been passed, mostly by liberals, are now passing out of existence.
Thank God! I actually think this ‘Savior of the DimLibs’ Obama will help that along as the country passively revolts against the DimLibs trying to make over this country.
‘The One’ may be a blessing in disguise.
“The supreme law of the land, the Constitution of the United States, makes it legal.”
The Constitution allowed for an armed militia.
What’s your unit bawksy?
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
I agree. People SHOULD be allowed to carry the arms of the time the 2nd amendment was written.
BlueJay,
And we should only be afforded the freedom of speech available at the time the Constitution was written as well?
Stupidity knows no bounds with you BJ…
WS Clark,
Funny that for being such the man as you claim to be, you have to keep telling us all about how functional your Di*k is.
A real man doesn’t have to go around trying to convince others about how functional his Di*k is.
So why do you?
WS Clark,
Where has anyone here claimed that carrying concealed makes them a man? Just another one of your strawman arguments.
I carry concealed so that I can protect myself, my loved ones, friends, and anyone else that is in danger of serious bodily harm or loss of life.
Jackson needs to try and help true Americans that try and obey laws, and not try and take away our rights to own a gun.
“The Constitution allowed for an armed militia.”—BlowJ
The Supreme Court has already canned that idea BlowJ, try and keep up.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an outright ban on home possession of an operable firearm, such as a handgun, violates the Second Amendment, and has upheld the Constitutionality of longstanding restrictions on the possession of firearms including handguns.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
“Stupidity knows no bounds with you BJ…”–Nathaniel
Oh how true and exceptionally so of late, or maybe I’m just continually surprised at his level of ignorance.
“People SHOULD be allowed to carry the arms of the time the 2nd amendment was written.”
Yes and we shouldn’t have electricity, the automobile, and should still be using outhouses.
Afterall, everything should stay the way it was the day the Constitution was adopted.
“A real man doesn’t have to go around trying to convince others about how functional his Di*k is.
So why do you?”
“ouch!