house republicans demonstrate why there is a republican war on women minorities

SmarterthanYou said:
Looks like I might have been too quick. It appears you have a problem with equal gun rights for people.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-on-the-firearm-front&highlight=guns+firearms
Click to expand...

what did i say that was not true?

perhaps everyone that is qualified should have a ccw, but i want them to be qualified first, training, screening for felonious conduct, mental illness, etc and awareness of the law

an armed society is a polite society, ROBERT A HEINLEIN
 
Don Quixote said:
house passes a watered down version of the violence against women act

now house/senate must reconcile differences

obama promises to veto house version

http://news.yahoo.com/house-passes-violence-against-women-act-grudgingly-005401751.html
Click to expand...
I like this part of the article.

"The Senate adds language that explicitly mentions gay and transgender Americans for protection, while the House version is gender neutral. Republicans contend that their measure allows all Americans to receive protection because it does not specify who qualifies for various programs. Democrats, however, say that local law enforcement could use the lack of specificity to discriminate against gay or transgender people."

Leave it to Democrats to infuse segregation into a bill. Will you bigots ever just shut the fuck up and live your lives?
 
Granule said:
I like this part of the article.

"The Senate adds language that explicitly mentions gay and transgender Americans for protection, while the House version is gender neutral. Republicans contend that their measure allows all Americans to receive protection because it does not specify who qualifies for various programs. Democrats, however, say that local law enforcement could use the lack of specificity to discriminate against gay or transgender people."

Leave it to Democrats to infuse segregation into a bill. Will you bigots ever just shut the fuck up and live your lives?
Click to expand...

granny, i have kept you off of ignore because you had stayed polite, but you have violated one of my rules so it is ignore for you

specifically defining rights ensures that no lawyer or law enforcement person will try to weasel around a law these days
 
Don Quixote said:
what did i say that was not true?

perhaps everyone that is qualified should have a ccw, but i want them to be qualified first, training, screening for felonious conduct, mental illness, etc and awareness of the law

an armed society is a polite society, ROBERT A HEINLEIN
Click to expand...
what other fundamental rights should people ask for permission from the government to exercise?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
what other fundamental rights should people ask for permission from the government to exercise?
Click to expand...

do you have a problem with the restrictions that i listed?

do you want mentally unstable people walking around with guns

or felons

or people that do not know how and when to use a firearm
 
Don Quixote said:
what did i say that was not true? perhaps everyone that is qualified should have a ccw, but i want them to be qualified first, training, screening for felonious conduct, mental illness, etc and awareness of the law an armed society is a polite society, ROBERT A HEINLEIN
Click to expand...

Perhaps SmarterThanFew fears he would not pass such an examination?
 
Don Quixote said:
do you have a problem with the restrictions that i listed?
Click to expand...
yes, for the simple fact that this seems to be the ONLY right some people actually want restrictions on, or requirements to be met before being granted.

Don Quixote said:
do you want mentally unstable people walking around with guns

or felons

or people that do not know how and when to use a firearm
Click to expand...
if you can't be trusted with a weapon, then you shouldn't be trusted out in public. If you have a right, you should learn how to use it, however, I don't believe that the government has any power or authority to require some certification to exercise a right.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
yes, for the simple fact that this seems to be the ONLY right some people actually want restrictions on, or requirements to be met before being granted.

if you can't be trusted with a weapon, then you shouldn't be trusted out in public. If you have a right, you should learn how to use it, however, I don't believe that the government has any power or authority to require some certification to exercise a right.
Click to expand...

scotus and i disagree with you
 
Don Quixote said:
granny, i have kept you off of ignore because you had stayed polite, but you have violated one of my rules so it is ignore for you

specifically defining rights ensures that no lawyer or law enforcement person will try to weasel around a law these days
Click to expand...
I would love to take a peak at your ignore list.

Sorry, Dairy Queen. A person is a person. There is no need for further clarification. Again, leave it to the Liberals to muddy an issue with bigoted language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top