Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Bedtime Prayer For Democrats

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 139 Times in 114 Posts
    Groans
    28
    Groaned 46 Times in 38 Posts

    Default Bedtime Prayer For Democrats

    Now I lay me down to sleep
    I pray there is another mass shooting before I wake
    If I should die after my prayer is answered
    I pray the Devil my soul to take

    In the aftermath of the two shootings last weekend Democrats jumped on the opportunity to go full bore for registering every gun.


    As I said many times, the government fears the location of the guns they do not know about. Confiscating guns is a little difficult when the government does not know where the guns live. In truth, media mouths have just as much to fear from law-abiding unknown gun-owners than does the government. Government stooges in the media must know that if Democrat gun-grabbers bring this country to violent revolution media mouths will be the first ones to get shot.

    https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...77#post2887277

    In Short: Registration is the final step before confiscation.

    Only a fool would believe that Democrats are not conspiring to promote mass shootings. Every Democrat mouthing the same words: “Racism causes mass shootings” is proof of a conspiracy.

    If truth be told, a mass shooting every day is every Democrat’s fondest hope. Democrats know that pushing for gun control legislation without racism is the biggest loser of all. They also know they are stuck with it.

    Assume mass shootings stop permanently. Now ask yourself “What will Democrats campaign on in every future election?” Democrats cannot run on previous mass shootings because shootings are like insulin to type 1 diabetics. Democrats require daily injections of killing in order to function properly.

    Obviously, Democrats cannot campaign on Socialism, they dare not campaign on no borders, nor can they campaign on free stuff for everyone. Campaigning on global warming garbage is so ridiculous it has Democrats running for the tall grass. On the other hand, gun control racism is the unlimited supply of free insulin Democrats need as much as they need media coverage and campaign donations.

    Finally, Andrew Napolitano beats the gun-grabbers to a pulp:

    VIDEO

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-andrew-napolitano-a-few-words-about-guns-and-personal-liberty


    Last weekend's mass murders in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, have produced a flood of words about everything from gun control to mental illness to white nationalism. Most of those words have addressed the right to keep and bear arms as if it were a gift from the government. It isn't.

    The Supreme Court has twice ruled in the past 11 years that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual pre-political liberty. That is the highest category of liberty recognized in the law. It is akin to the freedoms of thought, speech and personality.

    That means that the court has recognized that the framers of the Constitution did not bestow this right upon us. Rather, they recognized its preexistence as an extension of our natural human right to self-defense and they forbade government – state and federal – from infringing upon it.

    It would be exquisitely unfair, profoundly unconstitutional and historically un-American for the rights of law-abiding folks – "surrender that rifle you own legally and use safely because some other folks have used that same type of weapon criminally" – to be impaired in the name of public safety.

    It would also be irrational. A person willing to kill innocents and be killed by the police while doing so surely would have no qualms about violating a state or federal law that prohibited the general ownership of the weapon he was about to use.

    With all of this as background, and the country anguishing over the mass deaths of innocents, the feds and the states face a choice between a knee-jerk but popular restriction of some form of gun ownership and the rational and sound realization that more guns in the hands of those properly trained means less crime and more safety.

    Can the government constitutionally outlaw the types of rifles used by the El Paso and Dayton killers? In a word: No.

    Can the government constitutionally outlaw the types of rifles used by the El Paso and Dayton killers? In a word: No.

    We know this because in the first Supreme Court opinion upholding the individual right to keep and bear arms, the court addressed what kind of arms the Second Amendment protects. The court ruled that the Second Amendment protects individual ownership of weapons one can carry that are of the same degree of sophistication as the bad guys have – or the government has.

    Thankfully, Napolitano included the one fact that Democrats despise more than anything else. So much so that Democrats and their television mouthpieces spent decades convincing the public that the Right to bear arms is about criminals.

    The government? Yes, the government. That's so because the Second Amendment was not written to protect the right to shoot deer. It was written to protect the right to shoot at tyrants and their agents when they have stolen liberty or property from the people.

    If you don't believe me on this, then read the Declaration of Independence. It justifies violence against the British government because of such thefts.

    Governments are the greatest mass killers on the planet. Who can take without alarm any of their threats to emasculate our right to defend our personal liberties?

    The criminal argument was wearing thin; so Democrats (AND TRUMP) added mentally ill to the attack on the Second Amendment as the best way to get the gun controls they could not get with criminals alone:


    In theory, all of this was known by President Trump when he addressed the nation and attributed the weekend slaughters to mental illness, the freedom to express hateful ideas on the Internet and violent video games. He should have consulted his lawyers before he spoke.

    Federal law prohibits records of mental health problems, unless they result in involuntary institutionalization, from entering the government's databases that are consulted in background checks. And the Supreme Court has already ruled that the government cannot censor, ban or punish opinions expressed on the Internet or games played there.

    Then the president condemned hate. Do you believe his condemnations? He has, after all, praised the white supremacists at Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 as "good people," even though one of them pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder of a young woman, and even though, as a candidate and later as president, he argued that the southwest United States was being "invaded" and "infested" by Hispanics.

    That white supremacy ideology – "let's repel the Hispanic invaders because the feds won't do so" – resonates in the manifesto of the man accused of being the El Paso killer, which he published about 20 minutes before the shootings. That ideology is far more widespread than most Americans realize. The FBI recently demonstrated as much. This form of hatred of people because of their immutable characteristics breeds violence.

    We know that some among us love to hate. That is their right, but they have no right to act violently beyond their perverse thoughts. And all people have the right to defend against such violence by using guns to do so.

    The president also offered his support for "red flag" laws. These horrific statutes permit police or courts to seize guns from those deemed dangerous.

    Red flag laws are unconstitutional. The presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of demonstrable fault as a precondition to any punishment or sanction together prohibit the loss of liberty on the basis of what might happen in the future.

    In America, we do not punish a person or deprive anyone of liberty on the basis of a fear of what the person might do. When the Soviets used psychiatric testimony to predict criminal behavior, President Ronald Reagan condemned it. Now, the president wants it here.

    The United States is not New Zealand, where a national legislature, animated by fear and provoked by tragedy, can impair fundamental liberties by majority vote. In America, neither Congress nor the states can outlaw whatever handguns or rifles they want to outlaw or infringe upon the right to own them.

    The government can no more interfere with Second Amendment rights than it can infringe upon any other rights. If this were not so, then no liberty – speech, press, religion, association, self-defense, privacy, travel, property ownership – would be safe from the reach of a fearful majority.

    That's why we have a Constitution.
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    9,324
    Thanks
    2,894
    Thanked 6,197 Times in 4,127 Posts
    Groans
    422
    Groaned 710 Times in 658 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    So you belittle God and prayer to swipe at liberals. You're obviously not a Christian, are you?

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Living in rural America "clinging to my God and Guns"
    Posts
    10,579
    Thanks
    1,160
    Thanked 6,521 Times in 4,815 Posts
    Groans
    24
    Groaned 171 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jade Dragon View Post
    So you belittle God and prayer to swipe at liberals. You're obviously not a Christian, are you?
    It's understandable you could only comprehend the first 4 sentences, the rest obviously went way too far over your abilities.
    Common sense is not a gift, it's a punishment because you have to deal with everyone who doesn't have it.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to RB 60 For This Post:

    Flanders (08-09-2019)

  5. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    9,324
    Thanks
    2,894
    Thanked 6,197 Times in 4,127 Posts
    Groans
    422
    Groaned 710 Times in 658 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    What the heck do you want this time, RB?

  6. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 139 Times in 114 Posts
    Groans
    28
    Groaned 46 Times in 38 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jade Dragon View Post
    So you belittle God and prayer to swipe at liberals. You're obviously not a Christian, are you?
    To Jade Dragon: Asshole. Reread my responses to you in this thread:


    #25 Permalink
    Incidentally, people like me who believe in God, but not religion, do not care what others believe. Did you ever hear of an individual who believed in God beating up someone because they practiced a religion? How many times has the world seen fanatical believers in one religion trying to wipe out, or convert by force, true believers in another religion?

    #36 Permalink
    God has not a damn thing to do with organized religion:

    https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...79#post2831979
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  7. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 139 Times in 114 Posts
    Groans
    28
    Groaned 46 Times in 38 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post
    The criminal argument was wearing thin; so Democrats (AND TRUMP) added mentally ill to the attack on the Second Amendment as the best way to get the gun controls they could not get with criminals alone:
    Only a halfwit running scared would pull something like this:

    Trump calls for 'intelligent background checks' in response to mass shootings
    By Brett Samuels
    08/09/19 10:08 AM EDT

    https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...sponse-to-mass

    QUESTION: Exactly what is an intelligent background check? ANSWER: Ask Joe Biden who has never been been right about anything in his entire political life.

    Trump is gambling that Democrats will give him enough votes to get a second term. They better, because law-abiding gun owners are not voting for background checks for any reason.

    Nor will a whole lot of Americans vote for Trump’s “Great Economy Bullshit.” So far, Wall Street’s absentee owner’s are the only people getting any lasting benefits from the sales pitch Trump spouts every day.

    Bottom line: Economies can be corrected, while once a constitutional Right is gone it is gone forever.
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  8. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 139 Times in 114 Posts
    Groans
    28
    Groaned 46 Times in 38 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flanders View Post
    Trump is gambling that Democrats will give him enough votes to get a second term. They better, because law-abiding gun owners are not voting for background checks for any reason.

    Nor will a whole lot of Americans vote for Trump’s “Great Economy Bullshit.” So far, Wall Street’s absentee owner’s are the only people getting any lasting benefits from the sales pitch Trump spouts every day.

    Bottom line: Economies can be corrected, while once a constitutional Right is gone it is gone forever.

    Trump does not know I exist, but he might listen to El Rushbo:

    RUSH: Donald Trump, another walk by-the-media impromptu presser today. He was on the way to the helicopter to catch the big jet on the way to the Hamptons for the two big fundraisers totaling $11 million that the Drive-By Media and the Democrats are trying to shame him not to attend. He said, screw you, I’m going.

    The people hosting the fundraisers the Democrats tried to shame into canceling them. They said, screw you, we’re holding them. It’s also the beginning of a vacation period for Trump as much as he ever is actually on vacation. And the left-wing hate and the left-wing insanity — folks, you know, now you got people dressing up as military people armed to the teeth walking into a Walmart not intending to shoot anything up, just to get noticed now.

    And you’ve got Democrats showing up at Republican town halls acting like Republican voters, Trump voters, threatening the Republican member of Congress to disband the NRA, to disavow the NRA and so forth. And, you know, I don’t know if it’s become apparent to everybody yet, but they’re not going away. And you cannot satisfy them. You cannot make them happy. You cannot compromise with them.

    Like they’re talking about gun control. Don’t give them a thing! It’s not gonna buy us anything! You know, Trump risks something here. We got sound bites of his little presser today, and we’ve learned to ignore what Trump says to the media and instead wait for the action that follows or yet another statement. But Trump is making it appear that he’s got some negotiating room with the left on gun control things.

    I know this. I know that there are people in the West Wing, in the Trump administration, urging him to do it, swamp-dwelling Republicans. Just like there were people in the George H. W. Bush West Wing, “You’ve gotta compromise on that tax cut promise you made. You gotta do it! You gotta raise taxes, you gotta give the left something.” George H. W. Bush who had said “Read my lips: No new taxes” raised taxes. And any kind of a deal with the Democrats on guns is going to risk the same fate happening to Trump.

    Now, don’t get alarmed. I’m not suggesting that Trump’s moving in this direction. I’m telling you that there are people around him pushing him into it. Trump has not cleaned everybody out of there. And even if he has, I guarantee you that if you live in Washington, D.C., you live and die by the fear of the Democrats and the media and trying to do anything about it.

    And people make the ongoing mistake — I’ve been watching this mistake made for 30 years — thinking that you can calm them down, make them go away, make them like you, make them drop the issue, even, if you just compromise with ’em. It never works because they’re never happy because their objective, as is now plain as day, is wiping us out. Plain as day. There is no desire for peaceful coexistence or compromise. Their objective is to wear you out and to wipe us out. No two ways about it.

    Now, up next were some comments on the NRA. Now, Trump loves the NRA, and the NRA loves him. But there is a potential pitfall lurking ahead as the left continues to ramp up its pressure in the aftermath of these shootings. There isn’t a person in the world who thinks that new laws are gonna change or end the shootings, including the people who want to take your guns away. Nobody thinks that. That’s just what they want you to believe they think. Everybody knows we have enough laws on the books.

    Every one of these shooters already violated some law — including murder! You don’t need any more laws. There’s not a single new law that would change anything. The only thing a new law would do is it would drive a wedge between Trump and his voters and the NRA. ‘Cause make no mistake, they want your guns. They want every gun you’ve got as quickly as they can get it. They want guns out of your hands. When the movie The Hunt becomes real, they don’t want you to have a way of firing back.

    They don’t want you to have the freedoms that are codified in the Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution. This is not an exaggeration. This is who they are. And the pressure that is always on Republican politicians to bend and flex and to compromise and to somehow show that we’re not racists, that we’re not nationalists, that we’re not uncaring about people getting shot? This is this kind of thing that leads and has led in the past to Republicans making stupid deals.

    Talk about stupid! These stupid compromise deals with the left, with the Democrat Party on things they claim are of great importance to them. And it’s always done never so solve the issue. There isn’t a person in the world who believes that any gun control compromise is gonna fix this. What they’re trying to do on our side is (sobbing), “Limit the criticism! Stop saying these things about us. We want to show the American people we’re not what you say.” That’s been going on my whole life too.

    Republicans feeling compelled to do things and say things so that the people of America will see the media and the Democrats are wrong. How has that worked out for anybody? The Democrats are still saying it no matter how much they’ve been given. They will continue to say it no matter how much they give them. Folks, if they succeed… Just to give you an analogy, an example, if they ever succeeded in eliminating the Second Amendment, do you think they would go away?

    Nope. Then they’d go for the First Amendment, if it still was in place. And then after those, they would go for every other codification of freedom until there isn’t any more. That’s what they’re truly opposed to is freedom and all the manifestations of it. Here’s Trump on the NRA, and you’ll hear him say he spoke to Mitch, he spoke to senators, and they’re gonna take a hard line on the Second Amendment.

    THE PRESIDENT: I have a great relationship with the NRA. I have a lot of respect for the people at the NRA. And I have already spoken to them on numerous occasions. And, frankly, we need intelligent background checks, okay? This isn’t a question of NRA, Republican, or Democrat. I spoke to Mitch McConnell yesterday. He’s totally on board. We don’t want insane people, mentally ill people, bad people, dangerous people…

    We don’t want guns in the hands of the wrong people. I spoke yesterday to Nancy Pelosi. We had a great talk. I spoke to Chuck Schumer. We had a great talk. We have tremendous support for really common-sense, sensible, important background checks. Look, the NRA has over the years taken a very, very tough stance on everything — and I understand it. You know, it’s a slippery slope. They think you approve one thing and that leads to a lot of bad things. I don’t agree with that.

    Now, I’m just gonna tell you that your basic Trump voter doesn’t want Trump talking to Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer about this. They are not the people to talk to about guns, background checks, intelligent background checks. We don’t want insane people, mentally ill people, bad people, dangerous people having guns in their hands. Well, who gets to sit there and determine who’s insane and who isn’t?

    So I’m gonna tell you, this is a potential red flag, and I just want to remind everybody, “Read my lips: No new taxes.” George H. W. Bush thought that he was demonstrating to Americans that he had compassion. The media was out there, Democrats were talking about what a cold-hearted guy he was, people were going hungry because of these tax cuts, Bush needed to raise taxes, blah, blah.

    And finally, because he thought he could work with Tom Foley, because he thought he could make a deal with Tom Foley. He didn’t trust George Mitchell in the Senate, but he loved Foley. He thought they could make a deal. And he never recovered from it. Never recovered from it and it’s probably one of the key reasons he did not get reelected in 1992. Same kind of potential pitiful is out there again awaiting Trump.

    And again, not to be redundant, but I think his instincts are fine, but I’m telling you there have got to be, because of the law of averages, there are people in the White House who are career Washington people who live and think as swamp dwellers do who believe that they can sue the Democrats for peace or they need to do something to show the American people that they’re not gun crazy racists or what have you.

    And so they’ll want Trump to make some kind of deal. I guarantee you he’s being pushed. I don’t know who these people are. Don’t misunderstand. I just know that they’re there. I mean, there are people in the Trump White House who are trying to sabotage his policies in a lot of different places.

    Now, I probably don’t have to do this, but I’m gonna explain to you why I think this Amendment II, gun control thing is so crucial. It’s an issue the Democrats have lost totally. Remember us marveling in 2008, 2012, 2016, the Democrats laying off of gun control. Remember John Kerry going (imitating Kerry), “Is this where I get me a huntin’ license?”

    And Hillary Clinton putting on the fatigues like she’s gonna go out there and hunt sharks in Iowa, whatever she thought she was gonna do. They have totally lost the issue of gun control. It is polling way, way against them. Then these shootings happen and guess what happens? The left gets reenergized about it.

    Now, I had some people email me, “Rush, what do you mean people don’t want to see Trump talking to Pelosi and Schumer? That’s exactly how Washington ought to work. Real people want to see Trump talking with ’em.” Wait just a minute. We got an election coming up in 2020. If Donald Trump loses his base, all the rest of this is academic.

    And Donald Trump’s base — correct me if I’m wrong — we’ll find out here, I guess, in a minute — Donald Trump’s base is not cool with Pelosi and Schumer having a say-so about the Second Amendment, when they did not win the election.

    Now, we say this with caveats because Trump does this a lot. Appears to bring ’em in — he’s done this with Dianne Feinstein on a number of things, and then the next meeting or a week later, he drops the hammer on ’em. So I’m not raising the panic flag here yet, folks. I’m just telling you, it’s a pitfall out there, potential.

    https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2...s-never-works/
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

  9. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    58,488
    Thanks
    15,986
    Thanked 15,123 Times in 11,349 Posts
    Groans
    622
    Groaned 1,029 Times in 976 Posts

    Default

    Democrats pray?
    DRINK MOR KOFFEE


  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Howard the Duck For This Post:

    Steven VanderMolen (08-10-2019)

  11. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 139 Times in 114 Posts
    Groans
    28
    Groaned 46 Times in 38 Posts

    Default

    BACKGROUND CHECKS IS DOUBLESPEAK FOR REGISTRATION. REGISTRATION IS THE FINAL STEP BEFORE CONFISCATION.


    XXXXX


    A substantial number of Americans see no harm in background checks or a national registry. The problem is in convincing EVERY private sector American that they will lose a constitutional Right along with gun owners. Bottom line: Americans who are being conned by Democrats are begging to die victims right alongside those gun-owners the federal government will disarm.

    The sole purpose of background checks is to set up a data bank so the federal government knows the location of every gun. So how come not one media mouth ever suggested that the government must delete all records of every person after they clear a background check? (I am probably being naive. There is no way in hell the government will delete an essential component of confiscation.)

    When you get right down to it, why should Americans believe anything government officials say about background checks when they lie all of the time?

    You can believe the one thing government liars say. The police and the military will obey when they are ordered to confiscate all of the guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans?

    Finally, federal control of the military, and local law enforcement, combined with confiscating millions of “background check” guns has long been a major objective for Democrats.

    https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...77#post2887277

    If background checks was a coffin you would need a nail gun to seal it airtight. Call this article a nail gun:


    Mitch McConnell has confirmed that when the Senate reconvenes in September to discuss new federal gun-control measures, “universal background checks” will “lead the discussion.” If that is the case, the Senate should listen carefully to the proposals on offer, and then politely decline to assent.

    Absent further examination, “universal background checks” appear to represent the inoffensive extension of an already existing principle. At present, the federal government mandates that an instant background check be run prior to the completion of all commercial and interstate firearms transactions. This being so, the argument runs, there can be nothing wrong with Washington extending that rule to private transfers, to non-commercial transfers, and to purely intrastate transfers.

    But there can, and there is. The idea is unconstitutional. It requires the establishment of a de facto federal gun registry — long a no-no in American politics. It would considerably inconvenience law-abiding gun owners while doing nothing to prevent the problem, mass shootings, to which it is being touted as a response. And, as even friendly studies from Washington and Colorado have shown, it doesn’t work.

    Upholding the Constitution is a task that falls to all of government’s branches, not solely to the Supreme Court. One cannot uphold the Constitution and pass “universal background checks.” By explicit design, the federal government is prohibited from acting outside of the limited set of powers that the Constitution has granted to it. None of those powers permit it to superintend private firearms transactions that take place between two residents of a single state. Because it limits its remit to the regulation of federally licensed businesses and of commerce between the states, the existing background-check system does not fall afoul of the limits that have been placed on Washington. Because they explode that remit, universal background checks absolutely do. If the federal government is able to control what two citizens of a state do with their already-manufactured and already-purchased property, the federal government’s power has no boundaries. Every election season, Republicans tell us that if they are awarded a majority they will keep the Leviathan at bay. This is a chance for them to prove it.

    Equally problematic is that universal background checks require the creation of a national gun registry that can be used to check compliance. Indeed, without such a registry, the system is rendered useless because there is no way for the government to prove whether a transaction has been made in compliance with the law or outside of it. Apologists for the idea like to dissemble on this question by insisting that the records would be kept by third parties or that they would be decentralized. But this, of course, is to miss the point. If the government has access to information about who owns which guns, and where, then it has access to a registry. As they have in the past, Americans should resist this development robustly, for the history of gun registries in America is the history of private citizens handing over great gobs of information to the government for no discernible reward. A government that knows where all the guns are is a government that can stage a confiscation drive — or, in the Orwellian parlance of modern gun-controllers, a “mandatory buyback” drive. Those who doubt this need look no further than to Venezuela.

    And then there is the rather inconvenient fact that universal background checks do not actually work. After Washington, Colorado, and Delaware passed laws mandating that all intrastate transfers involve a background check, boosters of the idea hoped to see results that they could pitch nationally. But they got no such thing. Per research conducted by self-professed gun-control advocate Garen Wintemute (and others), the imposition of laws requiring more background checks be conducted resulted in no more background checks being conducted in two of the three states (Washington and Colorado), and in a small rise in Delaware. “These aren’t the results I hoped to see,” Wintemute conceded. “I hoped to see an effect. But it’s much more important to see what’s actually happened.” Indeed it is. Which, in turn, raises a question: Why would we extend the federal government beyond its established legal role, institute an invasive national gun registry, make it more difficult for peaceful Americans to remain in compliance with the law, and increase the number of people in prison for arcane malum prohibitum infractions in pursuit of a policy that doesn’t help?

    Against Universal Background Checks
    By The Editors
    August 9, 2019 3:34 PM

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...ground-checks/
    Last edited by Flanders; 08-10-2019 at 07:29 AM.
    The basic test of freedom is perhaps less in what we are free to do than in what we are free not to do. It is the freedom to refrain, withdraw and abstain which makes a totalitarian regime impossible. Eric Hoffer

Similar Threads

  1. Bedtime Bible Stories
    By Timshel in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-08-2014, 07:38 AM
  2. The Dos and Don'ts of Prayer
    By Timshel in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-09-2014, 07:49 AM
  3. A bedtime story
    By I'm Watermark in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-23-2013, 06:05 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •