Ann Coulter~ NEGROES WITH GUNS

[Glock 27]

I guess it has something to do with education maybe.  It's like the Jewish community that votes democrate all the time despite those
whom went through the holocost.  Jews for the Protection of Firearms.com is an interesting web site.  Some Jews are all out for being armed and even use scripture to substantiate their belief in being armed.  My opinion is "we are just a bunch of lazy cows grazing away
while everything is being removed from us by legislatures with the intelligence of a piss ant.

[tombogan03884]

I guess it has something to do with education maybe.  It's like the Jewish community that votes democrate all the time despite those
whom went through the holocost.  Jews for the Protection of Firearms.com is an interesting web site.  Some Jews are all out for being armed and even use scripture to substantiate their belief in being armed.  My opinion is "we are just a bunch of lazy cows grazing away
while everything is being removed from us by legislatures with the intelligence of a piss ant.

Then again, maybe they just like the idea of not having to think for themselves or take any responsibility for their actions.

[Solus]

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership at    http://jpfo.org/

They also have a video on this topic

[tombogan03884]

Disarming the populace has NEVER in world history been an act of keeping the peace, or safety.
It has ALWAYS been a method of exerting control .
And it usually is followed by massacres of one group by the group in power.

[santahog]

The Republican Party draws much of it's base from the more wealthy and it is in their interest to keep them wealthy.  They might not do anything to help someone become wealthy, but they sure won't discourage it.

I have never "had in abundance", but I've been pretty thin at times.. My association with the GOP was never motivated my the money end of it. It was always the religious/moral affiliation that was present from its founding..
I know I'm wierd, (and Tom thinks I'm an idiot, screw you Tom..) but I don't think of the historic GOP/political right from the point of view of "advocating for the wealthy", but freedom/opportunity.. The Democrat Party, to me is the party of the godless/envy/demonic..

[Sponsor]

[twyacht]

Disarming the populace has NEVER in world history been an act of keeping the peace, or safety.
It has ALWAYS been a method of exerting control .
And it usually is followed by massacres of one group by the group in power.

Caught this on the BBC site.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-18288430

Venezuela bans private gun ownership
A worker destroys a weapon confiscated by the police during a news conference in Caracas May 18 2012. The government implemented a gun amnesty ahead of the introduction of the new law


Venezuela has brought a new gun law into effect which bans the commercial sale of firearms and ammunition.

Until now, anyone with a gun permit could buy arms from a private company.

Under the new law, only the army, police and certain groups like security companies will be able to buy arms from the state-owned weapons manufacturer and importer.

The ban is the latest attempt by the government to improve security and cut crime ahead of elections in October

Venezuela saw more than 18,000 murders last year and the capital, Caracas, is thought to be one of the most dangerous cities in Latin America.
'Must do more'

The government has been running a gun amnesty in the run-up to the introduction of the new law to try to encourage people to give up their illegal arms without fear of consequences.

[tombogan03884]

I have never "had in abundance", but I've been pretty thin at times.. My association with the GOP was never motivated my the money end of it. It was always the religious/moral affiliation that was present from its founding..
I know I'm wierd, (and Tom thinks I'm an idiot, screw you Tom..) but I don't think of the historic GOP/political right from the point of view of "advocating for the wealthy", but freedom/opportunity.. The Democrat Party, to me is the party of the godless/envy/demonic..

It isn't a matter of being for the rich, or the poor.
It's a matter of being smart enough to know that if you spend more than you earn you will have trouble.
Any one who can balance a checkbook should be able to figure that out.
The rest vote Dem.
Running the country is not that much different than running your personal life.
If you spend more 60% than you earn, you are going to run up a debt you can never repay.
If your kid steals from you or kills the cat they have to be punished,and if some one breaks in and starts living in your house you throw them out, you don't get them a cable hook up.
It isn't exactly rocket science.
As for Santahogs personal attack, yes, I do mostly, especially if you think religious organizations have any place, in secular politics.
Religious organizations do not even have a legitimate right to comment on secular affairs.
Note that I specify "religious organizations".
It is the reverse side of the 1st A.
If Congress can have no say religion, then religions  have no say in the conduct of Congress.
That being said, a persons opinions will be formed in accordance with their personal beliefs in right and wrong, and there is no way to separate an individual's religious beliefs from the decision making process.

As an example, no matter what laws are passed they  can never remove sincere prayer from school as long as grades matter.
They can get rid of the "Pledge of allegiance" and everything else, but they will never get rid of "Oh God PLEASE let me pass this test".

[santahog]

...
As for Santahogs personal attack, yes, I do mostly, especially if you think religious organizations have any place, in secular politics.
Religious organizations do not even have a legitimate right to comment on secular affairs.
Note that I specify "religious organizations".
It is the reverse side of the 1st A.

Tom, waaah.. I'm sure somebody will wipe a tear for you.. You've done alot of dishing to recoil at something as ordinary as that..
As for the "Reverse side ot the 1A", I didn't know that those things were written to work like a dirty sock or underwear that you can just turn inside out to get a little more mileage out of it.. Guess that was in one of those undiscovered letters between Hamilton and Jefferson.. 
Seriously though.. At the end of your post you got it right.. You can't protect government from the religious without turning the whole structure on it's head, (which won't work.. It'll break it).. It was only meant to protect the religious from the government, not the other way around..

[tombogan03884]

Tom, waaah.. I'm sure somebody will wipe a tear for you.. You've done alot of dishing to recoil at something as ordinary as that..
As for the "Reverse side ot the 1A", I didn't know that those things were written to work like a dirty sock or underwear that you can just turn inside out to get a little more mileage out of it.. Guess that was in one of those undiscovered letters between Hamilton and Jefferson.. 
Seriously though.. At the end of your post you got it right.. You can't protect government from the religious without turning the whole structure on it's head, (which won't work.. It'll break it).. It was only meant to protect the religious from the government, not the other way around..

You have fallen into the Liberal trap on this.
Every one is supposed to have "Rights" with no mention of equal and opposite RESPONSIBILITY.
Apply common sense.
You have freedom of speech, but you also have the unstated responsibility not to yell fire in a theater.
You have the Right to arms, but the responsibility to use them safely.
Opposite sides of the same coin.
If the founders never specified it they probably never conceived of a population dumb enough to need it pointed out to them.
But then, they also never would have believed in a population to gutless to defend their right to a 20 Oz. Coke either.

[santahog]

In (a small) Coke we trust..
Have a curse for the day.. My gift to you.. NO charge..