Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 I listened to and read his speech, anyone praising it is a focking nutcase. It was pathetic as usual. He was compassionate for 10 seconds and then after saying he was not going to make it about Hillary...he spent a large portion of it whining about her and patting himself on the back again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 How many Syrian refugees have been brought in? President Barack Obama said on Thursday he expected the United States would meet a goal of admitting 10,000 Syrian refugees before the end of the year despite delays and opposition from critics concerned about security implications. As Europe grappled with Syrians fleeing the country’s civil war last autumn, Obama promised to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees by the end of fiscal year 2016. But the State Department reported on March 31, halfway into the fiscal year, that only 1,285 Syrians had been admitted into the United States. "We're going to keep on pushing," Obama said when asked on Thursday whether the goal would be achieved. too many Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 Hillary has never once said she wants to take anyone's guns. She wants to have tighter restrictions to keep them out of the hands of guys like Omar Mateen. You pussies said the same thing about OBAMA. NOBODY WANTS TO TAKE YOUR GUNS! Get that through your thick empty heads. they turn everything they can into gun control, under Hillary's plans, my dad who was a Vietnam vet would be unable to own his guns, since he has seen a psychiatrist over PTSD his entire life. quite frankly, had Mateen not gotten the gun legally, he would have gotten the gun illegally, or worse, he could have become a suicide bomber. Guns actually in this situation could have saved lives Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 5,625 Posted June 14, 2016 Hillary has never once said she wants to take anyone's guns. She wants to have tighter restrictions to keep them out of the hands of guys like Omar Mateen. You pussies said the same thing about OBAMA. NOBODY WANTS TO TAKE YOUR GUNS! Get that through your thick empty heads. Do you think people should be able to sue gun manufacturers for incidents that happen with a legally obtained firearm? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 Do you think people should be able to sue gun manufacturers for incidents that happen with a legally obtained firearm? Hillary couldn't possibly think this could she? thats right, she does Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Willis McGahee's Dentist 61 Posted June 14, 2016 quite frankly, had Mateen not gotten the gun legally, he would have gotten the gun illegally, or worse, he could have become a suicide bomber. LOLOL Ok, then lets' make heroin legal too. Because they still manage to get it. Why have any laws? People just break them. This is easily the dumbest point I hear made by gun whackos. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Willis McGahee's Dentist 61 Posted June 14, 2016 Do you think people should be able to sue gun manufacturers for incidents that happen with a legally obtained firearm? No. Not under current law. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,790 Posted June 14, 2016 Hillary has never once said she wants to take anyone's guns. She wants to have tighter restrictions to keep them out of the hands of guys like Omar Mateen. You pussies said the same thing about OBAMA. NOBODY WANTS TO TAKE YOUR GUNS! Get that through your thick empty heads. I would bet that the people who started the whole Obama wants your guns rumor Where the gun and bullet manufacturers.I would bet that the people who started the whole obama want your guns rumor Were the gun and bullet manufactures. Gun and bullet sales have increased exponentially ever since obama took office. ...Which in and of itself sort of dispels the myths, no? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 LOLOL Ok, then lets' make heroin legal too. Because they still manage to get it. Why have any laws? People just break them. This is easily the dumbest point I hear made by gun whackos. completely different, heroin is illegal across the board. However if a person decides he wants to kill people in masses, whether he has a gun legally or illegally is irrelevant, hes still getting a gun. The only way to stop that is to abolish all guns and ammo. And still Muslims, love that bombing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 15,519 Posted June 14, 2016 How many Syrian refugees have been brought in? As of April, 1258, with the balance of the 10k promised to be here by November. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 5,625 Posted June 14, 2016 No. Not under current law. Well Hitlery does. That right there should be enough for anyone who believes in the 2nd amendment to not vote for her. Note: I do not own nor do I ever plan on owning a gun. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Willis McGahee's Dentist 61 Posted June 14, 2016 Well Hitlery does. That right there should be enough for anyone who believes in the 2nd amendment to not vote for her. Note: I do not own nor do I ever plan on owning a gun. Link? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,790 Posted June 14, 2016 they turn everything they can into gun control, under Hillary's plans, my dad who was a Vietnam vet would be unable to own his guns, since he has seen a psychiatrist over PTSD his entire life. quite frankly, had Mateen not gotten the gun legally, he would have gotten the gun illegally, or worse, he could have become a suicide bomber. Guns actually in this situation could have saved lives Again, living in total denial of the facts already presented in evidence. The Orlando Police Chief Has gone on camera and on record describing the trained armed police Officers who engaged the gunman before he ever got into the club. There is Independent audio Corroborating His Statement. So 3 guns wielded by trained shooters With hundreds of hours at the shooting range And still this occurred. Tell me again how if there had been a gun there it would have saved lives? Because it took atleast a dozen trained armed gunmen to take out the 1 lunatic with 1 gun this idiot purchased a week earlier to take out 50 lies and ruin 50 more. Strange math. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 5,625 Posted June 14, 2016 Link? Why, will it change your mind re: Hitlery and gun control? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crackattack 520 Posted June 14, 2016 It is most certainly a 1st amendment issue. And Trump is no longer just a private citizen and if elected his thoughts on the press also show his disdain for the 1st. Don't you have a link? Anything to show the reporter is now unable to write articles about Trump? Anything at all? Anything that shows he's been stopped by the government or Trump to continue to write for his newspaper. I'll wait for that link of proof to back your claim. And Trump is still a private citizen. He's been elected to no governmental position of power. He can't make laws. He can't submit bills to be voted on, he can't do executive orders, he has no power=private citizen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 Again, living in total denial of the facts already presented in evidence. The Orlando Police Chief Has gone on camera and on record describing the trained armed police Officers who engaged the gunman before he ever got into the club. There is Independent audio Corroborating His Statement. So 3 guns wielded by trained shooters With hundreds of hours at the shooting range And still this occurred. Tell me again how if there had been a gun there it would have saved lives? Because it took atleast a dozen trained armed gunmen to take out the 1 lunatic with 1 gun this idiot purchased a week earlier to take out 50 lies and ruin 50 more. Strange math. obviously you didn't comprehend what I wrote, so I will simplify had Mateen not had a gun, and decided he was going to do a mass killing, there would be far more dead. If he walked in there with a suicide vest, we would be talking in the hundreds. The fact that he had a gun means less people died Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Willis McGahee's Dentist 61 Posted June 14, 2016 Why, will it change your mind re: Hitlery and gun control? If true, I'd like to hear her reasoning for being able to sue a gun manufacturer. . I see none as of now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 Link? Seven in 10 American voters do not support Hillary Clinton’s position that crime victims should be allowed to sue firearm manufacturers and retailers if they made or sold the gun lawfully, according to a new poll. Seventy-two percent of those surveyed believe criminals who commit the crimes should be punished, not law-abiding manufactures and retailers who sell the product, according to a survey released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation released Monday. Only 23 percent agreed with Mrs. Clinton’s stance, with 4 percent unsure. “The concept that an entire industry should not be held liable for the criminal or negligent use of products made and sold legally clearly makes sense to the overwhelming majority of the American public, as these poll results demonstrate” Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel, said in a statement. “We commissioned this poll to help determine where Americans stand. They have told us. Now, it’s time for politicians to demonstrate that they have some respect for the good sense of the people and to stop vilifying the hard-working people of an entire industry and exploiting real tragedy that is the result of criminal conduct,” he said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Willis McGahee's Dentist 61 Posted June 14, 2016 Seven in 10 American voters do not support Hillary Clinton’s position that crime victims should be allowed to sue firearm manufacturers and retailers if they made or sold the gun lawfully, according to a new poll. Seventy-two percent of those surveyed believe criminals who commit the crimes should be punished, not law-abiding manufactures and retailers who sell the product, according to a survey released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation released Monday. Only 23 percent agreed with Mrs. Clinton’s stance, with 4 percent unsure. “The concept that an entire industry should not be held liable for the criminal or negligent use of products made and sold legally clearly makes sense to the overwhelming majority of the American public, as these poll results demonstrate” Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel, said in a statement. “We commissioned this poll to help determine where Americans stand. They have told us. Now, it’s time for politicians to demonstrate that they have some respect for the good sense of the people and to stop vilifying the hard-working people of an entire industry and exploiting real tragedy that is the result of criminal conduct,” he said. Consider me part of the 70% that doesn't think victims should be able to sue the gun manufacturer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted June 14, 2016 had Mateen not had a gun, and decided he was going to do a mass killing, there would be far more dead. If he walked in there with a suicide vest, we would be talking in the hundreds. The fact that he had a gun means less people died Right, because everyone just automatically has the knowledge and means to obtain and deploy high quality illegal explosives. That's why we've had this rash of suicide bombings in the U.S. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 Link? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 5,625 Posted June 14, 2016 Right, because everyone just automatically has the knowledge and means to obtain and deploy high quality illegal explosives. That's why we've had this rash of suicide bombings in the U.S. I'm sure his Isis handlers would have mailed him one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 Right, because everyone just automatically has the knowledge and means to obtain and deploy high quality illegal explosives. That's why we've had this rash of suicide bombings in the U.S. we dont have them cause we don't need to have them, we have guns. And yes, it is very easy to obtain and make high powered explosives. Car bombing is the easiest way about it. Fill your car with tanks of gasoline, drive into a building and detonate Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,790 Posted June 14, 2016 obviously you didn't comprehend what I wrote, so I will simplify had Mateen not had a gun, and decided he was going to do a mass killing, there would be far more dead. If he walked in there with a suicide vest, we would be talking in the hundreds. The fact that he had a gun means less people died Old jesus! You literally made me laugh out loud! Thank you! Hey man he didn't walk in with a nuclear weapon So Really guns SAVE lives! Oh gosh, I'm going to be chuckling about that all day long. Thank you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,790 Posted June 14, 2016 obviously you didn't comprehend what I wrote, so I will simplify had Mateen not had a gun, and decided he was going to do a mass killing, there would be far more dead. If he walked in there with a suicide vest, we would be talking in the hundreds. The fact that he had a gun means less people died And oh, by the way, I comprehended the last sentence in your post which clearly stated the guns in the situation would have saved lives. Then I pointed out that there were three guns operated by trained individuals And it didn't save any lives. Then you switch to the moronic well at least he didn't have dynomite! Oh God, that's brilliant. LOL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 And oh, by the way, I comprehended the last sentence in your post which clearly stated the guns in the situation would have saved lives. Then I pointed out that there were three guns operated by trained individuals And it didn't save any lives. Then you switch to the moronic well at least he didn't have dynomite! Oh God, that's brilliant. LOL no I did no switching. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
donkeyjotes 54 Posted June 14, 2016 the whole idea that something that was created for the sole purpose of killing things is somehow making everyone safer defies logic. guns do not make people safer. never have. never will. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted June 14, 2016 National Shooting Sports Foundation I'm sure their poll about guns is completely on the level Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 President Barack Obama said on Thursday he expected the United States would meet a goal of admitting 10,000 Syrian refugees before the end of the year despite delays and opposition from critics concerned about security implications. As Europe grappled with Syrians fleeing the countrys civil war last autumn, Obama promised to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees by the end of fiscal year 2016. But the State Department reported on March 31, halfway into the fiscal year, that only 1,285 Syrians had been admitted into the United States. "We're going to keep on pushing," Obama said when asked on Thursday whether the goal would be achieved. too many Less than 1300 is too many? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hardcore troubadour 15,519 Posted June 14, 2016 Less than 1300 is too many? What's a good number? That was easy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 they turn everything they can into gun control, under Hillary's plans, my dad who was a Vietnam vet would be unable to own his guns, since he has seen a psychiatrist over PTSD his entire life. quite frankly, had Mateen not gotten the gun legally, he would have gotten the gun illegally, or worse, he could have become a suicide bomber. Guns actually in this situation could have saved lives You mean like the trained law enforcement that engaged him? Like Mr skinny jeans was going to be packing to hit the club? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted June 14, 2016 And oh, by the way, I comprehended the last sentence in your post which clearly stated the guns in the situation would have saved lives. Then I pointed out that there were three guns operated by trained individuals And it didn't save any lives. Then you switch to the moronic well at least he didn't have dynomite! Oh God, that's brilliant. LOL guns are what eventually stopped him, no ? Weren't there like 300 people in there ? Seems like stopping him probably did save many lives. But that's just logic and common sense. Not easily understandable to some who are just too smart to understand it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 completely different, heroin is illegal across the board. However if a person decides he wants to kill people in masses, whether he has a gun legally or illegally is irrelevant, hes still getting a gun. The only way to stop that is to abolish all guns and ammo. And still Muslims, love that bombing ###### So, why not make it more difficult. Nobody is saying we can end all gun violence. But we can limit it...we can increase the chances this guy gets busted trying to obtain it illegally rather than going into a bass pro and buying one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
parrot 789 Posted June 14, 2016 And yes, it is very easy to obtain and make high powered explosives. Car bombing is the easiest way about it. Fill your car with tanks of gasoline, drive into a building and detonate Well if some guy on the internets said it, it must be true. Remind me how many people were killed in the Boston Marathon bombing? And how did the car bomb work out for the Times Square guy? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 obviously you didn't comprehend what I wrote, so I will simplify had Mateen not had a gun, and decided he was going to do a mass killing, there would be far more dead. If he walked in there with a suicide vest, we would be talking in the hundreds. The fact that he had a gun means less people died This is simply the most moronic thing in this topic...and probably on this bored in quite some time. Just focking idiotic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 I'm sure his Isis handlers would have mailed him one. Link to him communicating with such people? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted June 14, 2016 guns are what eventually stopped him, no ? Weren't there like 300 people in there ? Seems like stopping him probably did save many lives. But that's just logic and common sense. Not easily understandable to some who are just too smart to understand it. In the hands of law enforcement in great numbers. Not quite a logical stance you idiots are taking here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 5,625 Posted June 14, 2016 Link to him communicating with such people? Maybe it was just a sarcastic joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kutulu 1,685 Posted June 14, 2016 The war on heroin ain't really working either Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RaiderHaters Revenge 4,369 Posted June 14, 2016 the whole idea that something that was created for the sole purpose of killing things is somehow making everyone safer defies logic. guns do not make people safer. never have. never will. surely * Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. [1] This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. [2] * Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.[3] * As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.[4] * Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.[5] * Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).[6] And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."[7] * Handguns are the weapon of choice for self-defense. Citizens use handguns to protect themselves over 1.9 million times a year. [8] Many of these self-defense handguns could be labeled as "Saturday Night Specials." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites