Every time a fuckball lefty says something stupid today, I'm going to experience a tumescent attraction to this web page.

Years on, this day will known in politico/media circles as Boner Monday.

Please... Idiot lefties... Don't make me do this.

You're not that decent. You're not that courageous. You're not that bright.

Agreed, Crid, but I prefer jpfo.org even though I'm a life member of the site you linked to.

I hope your idiot’s dream of a constant boner comes true today. As for me I’m sick to death of the slaughter that repeatedly goes on in this country because of so-called “patriotic Americans” mewling about their Second Amendment rights. We are not the country of colonial muskets the Founders lived in nor the wild frontier anymore. Instead we have hordes of people too dumb, too careless, too volatile, too mentally unbalanced, owning or having access to weapons of mass destruction (yes, that’s what assault weapons are.) Regulation has failed dismally. When we care enough about our children, our lives, our neighborhoods, we will disarm. I’m not holding my breath.

Don't hold your breath, Katherine. Because, news flash - ANY object can be an "assault weapon". Knives, chains, bottles, bats, CARS, rocks, bricks, hammers, brooms, etc. If someone wants to kill badly enough, it doesn't matter WHAT they choose as a weapon. Knee jerk reactions to "assault weapons" should also include the above items. It's the person wielding the weapon, not the weapon itself. Do some weapons have the potential to cause more damage than others? Yes, of course. But banning ALL weapons such that only the police and military have them? Oh HELLS no. Instead of removing the Second Amendment, how about more timely determination of, treatment and care for the mentally ill? More guns laws won't help because, you know, the mentally unbalanced and the criminal element DON'T pay any attention to laws. Me? I'd rather have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it. And I've said it before, but it bears repeating: if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. I want a level playing field, thank you.

If the teachers or principal had been armed with guns and trained in their use, the body count would have been much, much lower. Disarming the public just creates more potential victims, not more safety.

So, Flynne, your solution to rampant gun violence is more guns???

No, Katherine, it's timely and effective determination of those who are mentally ill who would carry out acts of "rampant gun violence". War is "rampant gun violence" yet war is waged all the time, all over the world. I'd love to see an end to it, but as long as the human race if full of egos that need assuaging (for whatever reasons); religions that "need" defending; and perceived or mis-perceived injustices that people feel a need to avenge, there will be wars. Not fair, not right, but it's a fact. And still the fact remains that less people are killed by guns than are killed by drunk drivers. Let's ban alcohol, then. Will that stop people from drinking it? I don't think so.

Disarming the public just creates more potential victims, not more safety.

Also, what Assholio said. This time I happen to agree.

Ever seen what happens to a country where only the governemnt gets guns Kathrine? They ususally kill far, far more people than the odd mad man.

The odd mad man that I'm sure someone like you would protest being locked away without trial before they commited such a crime

. We are not the country of colonial muskets the Founders lived in

1) Are you sure?
2) So?
3) You are aware that people died of *splinters* back then, much less gunshots, right? Guns were seriously bad news - get shot, you were probably going to die, very painfully, if you didn't die quickly.

So the concept that the Founders (who personally owned friggen CANNON used to mow down tens or hundreds), and their own armed ships, were somehow "less aware" of danger then than now, when 80% of all gunshot victims survive, is rather antiquated.

If that's what you mean, but it usually is when people talk about muskets.

nor the wild frontier anymore.

Speak for yourself. I've got a 10 foot gator in the backyard right now, and coyotes prowling the driveway, trying to catch the bobcat kits.

we have hordes of people too dumb, too careless, too volatile, too mentally unbalanced, owning or having access to weapons of mass destruction

Well, yes, but whatcha gonna do without any police?

Regulation has failed dismally. When we care enough about our children, our lives, our neighborhoods, we will disarm. I’m not holding my breath.

Ah, yes, well, funny thing... Chicago was disarmed, as was Detroit. New York's pretty much there. DC for sure.

Obviously, this is where you want to raise your kids.

For safety.

Katherine- Come back for a response about 8pm pst.

If you just can't wait, review those three items on the bottom of the first comment.

Well, been thinkin' all day about what to say to this woman, but can't come up with anything special. The usual constraints apply:

She's ungrateful.

I'm guessing she's a happy little white woman in an idiot suburb with friendly, responsive police officers paid from a high tax base. She's never been in fear for her own safety... And certainly never for as long as, say, a summer. The lifetime of tingling dread that many Americans feel from their neighborhoods after dark is unknown to her. She can't imagine that she is in fact surrounded by a swirling constellation of grim humanity that would take, by force, whatever comfort she could offer... Financially, sexually, etc... If only she could be caught without her entourage of loving family and associates.

Rather than recognizing the improbability of her luck, she thinks others are just confused about who their friends are... She can't imagine a context where loving support isn't just a phone call away.

She's cowardly.

She can't even form the words... She mumbles something about all the different kinds of people in the world, but the only ones she wants to hold accountable are those who obey the law. In other words, Katherine thinks the problem is things, not people.

Well, people are hard for her to deal with... As we see from this effort... But that doesn't mean they aren't the problem. She wants OTHER people to make things illegal, and then she wants OTHER people to enforce the law, and the she wants OTHER people to pay for that enforcement, and then she wants OTHER people to deal with the consequences.

(For example, imagine an armed, Paul Blart-style cop in every school in the nation. Do you suppose having guns hidden under bellies like that, but within grabbing distance of a generation of 9-year-olds, will make school safer?)

Katherine's not done any social work herself, or law enforcement, or even political persuasion. Too intimidating! Real people smell bad, and they involve you in their emotional lives in ways that aren't comfortable! She just wants to bleed on her tampon and demand that other people make problems go away.

Well, getting all pissy like that would be a good morning in my house, too.

But it would be no less despicable than it was in your house (not workplace, I trust) on Monday morning, 'Katherine.'

I find that on this first day, I am ready for a fight.

I miss Breitbart like you wouldn't fucking believe.

As for me I’m sick to death of the slaughter that repeatedly goes on in this country because of so-called “patriotic Americans” mewling about their Second Amendment rights. -- Katherine at December 17, 2012 8:38 AM

Katherine,

I'm going to try and be rational and reasonable about this discussion. You want to blame the availability of guns for this animal's attack. The animal shot his mother in the face four times.

In Bath, MI -- in 1927 the perpetrator first killed his wife and then killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, and four other adults; at least 58 people were injured. It was carried out with car bombs.

In the Oklahoma City bombing, a gun was not used. The madman used a fertilizer bomb outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.

You are blaming the weapon -- not the possessor of the weapon.

I know how to make several different explosives, lethal and irritating chemicals, and other detrimental substance, from common household items. Not to mention the firearms, knives, swords and other lethal apparatus I have such as axes, picks, shovels, chainsaws, etc, I have around the house and property.

Does that mean I need to be locked up?

If you actually read the Constitution, with the thought that the Founding Fathers have a stream through it of resisting tyranny, it comes out very differently. The reason the Founding Fathers put the Second Amendment in was because they wanted the citizens of the United States to resist the tyranny of a federal government that grew too large and took away the individual rights.

I also want to ask where you truly feel safer:
A. If you are at an NRA (or associated) event?
B. If you are at a gun show?
C. At a ren fest where a good 25% of the population are carrying swords or other items of mayhem?
D. In a school, mall, or other facility that bans firearms.

Picking "D" means that you haven't rationally thought about it.

Anyone wanna go after her for the "assault weapons" thing? Worth the time?

Via Reynolds: The Metaphor of the Year.

Anyone notice reoccuring catch phrases or choice words that seem to come out of no where with Lefties? For example, "Muskets". Just today, I've seen this word used now at least twenty times to support the current anti gun narrative.

Basically, it goes something like:

"since the Founding Fathers wrote the second amendment during the time where only muskets were available (insert substantial reloading time as a variation "here"), we really shouldn't need it anymore now that we have "assault weapons" (or something)..."

And like most lefty propaganda - it actually says NOTHING - like, ever.

"Muskets!".

Anyone else notice this pattern in comments left by the anti gun primmadonnas?

Yes. And imagine how they'd respond if you said "Women's suffrage!" in that same tone of voice.

Anyone wanna go after her for the "assault weapons" thing? Worth the time?

Already did that, Cridmo. See my first response to her.

Love you two. Like, a lot. :-)

> Already did that, Cridmo. See my first
> response to her

Kewl. Just want to be sure we're tidy.

See what I mean?

http://m.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/adam_lanza_weapons_NU2tb0tIf9hNsOCZkPJ1XP

"Obsolete!!!"

My, how you boys do go on. First of all this isn't a question of right or left. It's a question of right and wrong. I've been a card holding Republican for decades. Secondly, yes, lots of things can be weapons, but none are as coldly efficient as guns. Thirdly, I don't live in a lily-white suburb, but was born, bred and still live in one of the most dangerous cities in the country where someone dies every day from gun violence. Fourth, yes, I'm a white woman ( a minority in my city). I notice that your wives, sisters,daughters, mothers haven't commented. My how you boys cling to your phallic symbols.

I'm a white woman, Katherine, I live near Bridgeport, CT, one of THE most deadly cities in the state, and I am a card carrying member of the NRA, so don't call me "boy", please. ANY weapon can be "coldly efficient". How about the knife that kook in China used to cut all those kids last Friday? And how about the bombs used in the Bath School disaster, or did you not click on the link and read about it because it would have shown your argument to be disingenuous, at best?

I think bombs are much more "coldly efficient" that guns. But more than that, I think mentally unstable people and sociopaths are more "coldly efficient" than ANY inanimate object. But that's just me.

Right or left, right or wrong, the bottom line, once again, is, any THING can be used as a "coldly efficient" weapon. No THING, however, is more "coldly efficient", than the first thought of a person to use a weapon to carry out an atrocity. ANY atrocity.

(By the way, I think that Feebie, who is also female, might take objection to your calling her "boy" as well.)

I am a white, pregnant woman! I live in a rural area, miles away form any sort of PO-leece protection. If someone comes on my property to do me or my family harm I want to be sure the job gets done (I live in a castle doctrine state).

I don't care if that is a glock, a pump action shotgun, or a
Fucking howitzer. I want to be able to eliminate the threat, immediately. anybody who would take away my right to defend myself or my family has another thing coming if they demand my silence in exchange for insults and sexist put downs ("oh you boys!" WTF has that got to do with anything!)

Lady, if you don't want a gun, no one is forcing you to carry one. We all have choices in life. But I'll be damned if you are gonna broadbrush the rest of us because you think you are some sort of moral authority of a "civilized" society.

"When only the cops have guns, it's called a 'police state'". Robert Heinlein

She's offering only insults: She doesn't want to persuade, finance, investigate, defend or deal with anyone. She just wants to snark.

As far as I can tell the only person with penile projection is you Kathrine.

Would a photo of a real cock help quiet your obsession? I'm twice the national average if you want pics

How weird does this get? MONDO weird.

Regarding Feebie's link about "Obsolete!":

Imagine if the government decided, for some reason, that we'd all be safer if we went back to Gordon Gecko-era cell-phone technology.

How many people would be willing to go back?




I've been thinking about Michael Douglas, an unremarkable white-man actor, all day... Because of this.

I watched the press kit for the movie (not the movie itself) mentioned in the news story, the one the son was in. I've never seen a film with a person who was so obviously baked by weed. Just in the press kit video, you could tell. Not baked at the moment it was filmed, just baked over a (young) lifetime.

Kids, fatherhood is important.