Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » A question for all you liberal democrats

A question for all you liberal democrats

+3
2seaoat
Sal
Hospital Bob
7 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Yesterday, I predicted Alex Jones would be calling the Orlando shooting a "false flag".

http://www.mediaite.com/online/alex-jones-already-calling-orlando-a-false-flag/

Don't worry, I'm not psychic. That was the easiest prediction I've ever made. lol

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

There is a good reply comment blog below that article. But this is my favorite reply of all of them....

A question for all you liberal democrats - Page 2 Jones10

lol

Guest


Guest

I don't necessarily oppose abortion either. I think it's a horrible moral decision... but I don't think the govt should stop the procedure. There are many people that think no more of it than flushing a toilet... and I have to respect their choice.

I would think that a woman should make that decision forthwith (60 days?)... by taking a pill or a minimal procedure.

If not... you pay for the procedure (as well as multiple events) or give the child up for adoption. Take responsibility.

Markle

Markle

Salinsky wrote:Of course, religion can compel violent lunatics into action.

But, lots of other things can too.

We can't rid our society of motivators.

But, it certainly seems possible that we could reduce the ease of access to weapons of mass destruction to violent lunatics.

He bought the guns legally, he passed a background check. He waited the three days mandated by law.

NEITHER guns were assault guns.

Specifically, without taking away the rights of law-abiding citizens, would you have prevented him from getting those two guns?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Everything You Need to Know About the AR-15 Used in Orlando


Weapon "has become the gold standard for mass murder of innocent civilians"

By Tessa Stuart June 13, 2016


"...The AR-15 "was designed for the United States military to do to enemies of war exactly what it did this morning: kill mass numbers of people with maximum efficiency and ease. That is why the AR-15 has remained the weapon of choice for the United States military for over 50 years," lawyer Josh Koskoff said in a statement. "It is the gold standard for killing the enemy in battle, just as it has become the gold standard for mass murder of innocent civilians."

Semi-automatic weapons like the AR-15 were, at one time, banned nationwide. The 1994 federal assault weapons ban prohibited most versions of the rifle from being sold in the U.S. The gun re-entered circulation after Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004. Subsequent efforts to renew the ban, or create other legislation that would limit assault weapons, have been unsuccessful..."


Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-ar15-gun-used-in-orlando-20160613#ixzz4BViHMzJn
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

Sal

Sal

Markle wrote:

He bought the guns legally, he passed a background check.  He waited the three days mandated by law.

NEITHER guns were assault guns.

Specifically, without taking away the rights of law-abiding citizens, would you have prevented him from getting those two guns?

Let me say this as succinctly and elegantly as your response deserves ...

... fuck you, you pathetic excuse for a human being.

If your position is that anyone should have access to motherfucking AR15s, high capacity magazines, and limitless ammo, you have disqualified yourself from the conversation.

You are not part of a solution, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Markle wrote:

He bought the guns legally

It depends on the era.  Not that long ago the gun he used was illegal to buy.
Now it's legal.  And now it will probably go back to being illegal again.
Legality is a fluid thing,  markle.

RealLindaL



Salinsky wrote:
Markle wrote:

He bought the guns legally, he passed a background check.  He waited the three days mandated by law.

NEITHER guns were assault guns.

Specifically, without taking away the rights of law-abiding citizens, would you have prevented him from getting those two guns?

Let me say this as succinctly and elegantly as your response deserves ...

... fuck you, you pathetic excuse for a human being.

If your position is that anyone should have access to motherfucking AR15s, high capacity magazines, and limitless ammo, you have disqualified yourself from the conversation.

You are not part of a solution, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

Geez, Sal, why don't you get a strong opinion about something once in a while??  lol

One thing I would ask Markle, were I inclined to engage him in conversation, would be what difference he thought it made to the mass murder victims and their loved ones that an AR-15 isn't what Markle calls an assault weapon.

RealLindaL



PkrBum wrote:I don't necessarily oppose abortion either. I think it's a horrible moral decision... but I don't think the govt should stop the procedure. There are many people that think no more of it than flushing a toilet... and I have to respect their choice.

I would think that a woman should make that decision forthwith (60 days?)... by taking a pill or a minimal procedure.

If not... you pay for the procedure (as well as multiple events) or give the child up for adoption. Take responsibility.

And what responsibility do you see the inseminator assuming in all this, I'm wondering?

Guest


Guest

RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I don't necessarily oppose abortion either. I think it's a horrible moral decision... but I don't think the govt should stop the procedure. There are many people that think no more of it than flushing a toilet... and I have to respect their choice.

I would think that a woman should make that decision forthwith (60 days?)... by taking a pill or a minimal procedure.

If not... you pay for the procedure (as well as multiple events) or give the child up for adoption. Take responsibility.

And what responsibility do you see the inseminator assuming in all this, I'm wondering?

Full... no matter what choice the mother makes. Too often he isn't named.

RealLindaL



PkrBum wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I don't necessarily oppose abortion either. I think it's a horrible moral decision... but I don't think the govt should stop the procedure. There are many people that think no more of it than flushing a toilet... and I have to respect their choice.

I would think that a woman should make that decision forthwith (60 days?)... by taking a pill or a minimal procedure.

If not... you pay for the procedure (as well as multiple events) or give the child up for adoption. Take responsibility.

And what responsibility do you see the inseminator assuming in all this, I'm wondering?

Full... no matter what choice the mother makes. Too often he isn't named.

Thank you.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » A question for all you liberal democrats

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum