Heh

[olevetonahill]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/1002421_321113978021787_1335318359_n.jpg

[XingTheRubicon]

One good thing, for the next 3 years he's not taking **** 'cause nobody believes a f*cking word he says.

[olevetonahill]

One good thing, for the next 3 years he's not taking **** 'cause nobody believes a f*cking word he says.

From the Look on her face Neither does His Kid

http://l3.yimg.com/nn/fp/rsz/061813/images/smush/malia-obama-funny-faces_635x250_1371579402.jpg

[diverdog]

One good thing, for the next 3 years he's not taking **** 'cause nobody believes a f*cking word he says.

He is pretty much a lame duck. However he may gain political advantage because the economy is slowly getting better (at least according to my companies economist).

[Midtowner]

He hasn't taken a gun from anyone.

And because of Republicans, not even from crazy people who shouldn't have 'em.

[olevetonahill]

He hasn't taken a gun from anyone.

And because of Republicans, not even from crazy people who shouldn't have 'em.

Were you born stupid, Or did yer Momma drop you on yer head?

[OU68]

Were you born stupid, Or did yer Momma drop you on yer head?

Ima guessin both! :biggrin:

[olevetonahill]

Ima guessin both! :biggrin:

Heh,
Did ya lose yer way to the Hideout?

[OU68]

Heh,
Did ya lose yer way to the Hideout?

Got busy on a project, so on a work computer most of the time - gets a little to colorful over there, if you know what I mean :wink:

[olevetonahill]

Got busy on a project, so on a work computer most of the time - gets a little to colorful over there, if you know what I mean :wink:

:biggrin:

[IGotNoTiming]

And now we are arming cannibals in Syria!

[Midtowner]

Were you born stupid, Or did yer Momma drop you on yer head?

Well rube, if you can show me where the administration has passed any bills to take guns away from citizens, you might have something.

[olevetonahill]

Well rube, if you can show me where the administration has passed any bills to take guns away from citizens, you might have something.

Well ya Ignernt azz, IF you can show me WHERE I said he HAS then YOU might have something .

God I feel sorry for anyone that has to be around you very much.

[Midtowner]

Has he tried to take guns away from citizens? Yup. And it's all been perfectly reasonable stuff supported by huge majorities. Not wanting crazies to get guns is not a bad thing.

The whole Syria and Mexican situations though aren't good.

You're one stupid SOB, aintcha?

[olevetonahill]

Has he tried to take guns away from citizens? Yup. And it's all been perfectly reasonable stuff supported by huge majorities. Not wanting crazies to get guns is not a bad thing.

The whole Syria and Mexican situations though aren't good.

You're one stupid SOB, aintcha?

Which is all that deal I posted said. Come back when you grow up some more and we will let you play with the Bigger kids.

[C&CDean]

Has he tried to take guns away from citizens? Yup. And it's all been perfectly reasonable stuff supported by huge majorities. Not wanting crazies to get guns is not a bad thing.

The whole Syria and Mexican situations though aren't good.

You're one stupid SOB, aintcha?

Dude. C'mon. "reasonable stuff supported by huge majorities?" Really? That's why it didn't pass, right?

You seriously aren't very smart. "not wanting crazies to get guns is not a bad thing" No ****, huh? The only problem with idiots like you; with your whacked out line of thinking, is that you actually are stupid enough to believe that somebody not being able to buy a 30-round magazine somehow keeps guns out of the hands of crazies. You're a dumbass of the highest order, and you know it. Dontcha?

[olevetonahill]

Dude. C'mon. "reasonable stuff supported by huge majorities?" Really? That's why it didn't pass, right?

You seriously aren't very smart. "not wanting crazies to get guns is not a bad thing" No ****, huh? The only problem with idiots like you; with your whacked out line of thinking, is that you actually are stupid enough to believe that somebody not being able to buy a 30-round magazine somehow keeps guns out of the hands of crazies. You're a dumbass of the highest order, and you know it. Dontcha?

Heh, The Boys stupid is eclipsed only by his immaturity

[Midtowner]

Dude. C'mon. "reasonable stuff supported by huge majorities?" Really? That's why it didn't pass, right?

You seriously aren't very smart. "not wanting crazies to get guns is not a bad thing" No ****, huh? The only problem with idiots like you; with your whacked out line of thinking, is that you actually are stupid enough to believe that somebody not being able to buy a 30-round magazine somehow keeps guns out of the hands of crazies. You're a dumbass of the highest order, and you know it. Dontcha?

I didn't say anything about any 30 round magazines.

Keeping crazies from getting guns through background checks is a totally reasonable idea supported by huge majorities, except in the Republican House where the 'pubs are terrified of the NRA.

Hadn't seen you for awhile... you never miss a chance to act like a crass 'ol SOB though... too tough to pass it up, huh?

[olevetonahill]

I didn't say anything about any 30 round magazines.

Keeping crazies from getting guns through background checks is a totally reasonable idea supported by huge majorities, except in the Republican House where the 'pubs are terrified of the NRA.

Hadn't seen you for awhile...
you never miss a chance to act like a crass 'ol SOB though... too tough to pass it up, huh?

And you never miss a chance to act like a Titty baby.
Where is the Proof of these "HUGE MJORITIES"?

[C&CDean]

I didn't say anything about any 30 round magazines.

Keeping crazies from getting guns through background checks is a totally reasonable idea supported by huge majorities, except in the Republican House where the 'pubs are terrified of the NRA.

Hadn't seen you for awhile... you never miss a chance to act like a crass 'ol SOB though... too tough to pass it up, huh?

Yes, I'm a magnet to stupid. Can't just stand by and watch someone be so excruciatingly ignorant without at least saying something.

Anyone with even an ounce of sense understands that background checks (which are already done except on personal gun sales) don't have a single thing to do with crazies getting guns. This is where people like you just go full-bore dumb. Why? Why do educated, supposedly intelligent people go there? It's incomprehensible to me. Here's your sign...

[Midtowner]

Yes, I'm a magnet to stupid. Can't just stand by and watch someone be so excruciatingly ignorant without at least saying something.

Anyone with even an ounce of sense understands that background checks (which are already done except on personal gun sales) don't have a single thing to do with crazies getting guns. This is where people like you just go full-bore dumb. Why? Why do educated, supposedly intelligent people go there? It's incomprehensible to me. Here's your sign...

Background checks would work if we'd require them on everything, including secondary sales. Not everyone has access to a black market gun. A mental health database would literally save lives.

[Midtowner]

And you never miss a chance to act like a Titty baby.
Where is the Proof of these "HUGE MJORITIES"?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=polling+background+checks+guns

[sappstuf]

Background checks would work if we'd require them on everything, including secondary sales. Not everyone has access to a black market gun.[/B] A mental health database would literally save lives.

Those people just kill their mothers and steal her guns...

[olevetonahill]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=polling+background+checks+guns

Har ****in Har, aint you so clever. Its NOT up to ME to substantiate YOUR claim. Its up to YOU to back it up. Go **** yerself.

[diverdog]

Not to change the thread but I just paid $75 for 550 rounds of .22 long rifle ammo. Seventy Five f**king dollars! My kid so much as misses the target I am going to stomp him. $75! That is highway robbery.

[olevetonahill]

Not to change the thread but I just paid $75 for 550 rounds of .22 long rifle ammo. Seventy Five f**king dollars! My kid so much as misses the target I am going to stomp him. $75! That is highway robbery.

Yup, Dont seem that long ago ya could buy a box of 50 fer 50 cents.

[diverdog]

Yup, Dont seem that long ago ya could buy a box of 50 fer 50 cents.

I am worried the price will never come down. The gun shop owner said that all his suppliers are out of pistol ammo. He did tell me that the people who were hoarding ammo have slowed down. Same with gun buyers. I am waiting to see what happens because I want to buy a Walther PPQ M2

[olevetonahill]

Yea I have only bot 1 box of 357 since this crap began. Between the Govt. Buying it up and the skeerdy cats trying to buy every round they can Its making it hard to purchase any at any price

[diverdog]

Yea I have only bot 1 box of 357 since this crap began. Between the Govt. Buying it up and the skeerdy cats trying to buy every round they can Its making it hard to purchase any at any price

I am embarrassed to say in the same purchase I bought 25 9 milli hollow points for $30! The guy asked if they were for home defense and I said yes. I am not sure how he would have reacted if I told him they were to shoot a few cats. Lol. Use to zip em with my .243 but now I like to get up close and personal.

[Midtowner]

Har ****in Har, aint you so clever. Its NOT up to ME to substantiate YOUR claim. Its up to YOU to back it up. Go **** yerself.

You asked a stupid question.

**** is common knowledge.

[olevetonahill]

You asked a stupid question.

**** is common knowledge.

You said HUGE MAJORITY ya dim wit
I said PROVE IT. Where is a question in that?

[IGotNoTiming]

I love the gun debate.....

****ing love it.....

We are so obsessed with this and the gov loves it.....

just keeping the sheeples minds off of the important issues....

[OU68]

I love the gun debate.....

****ing love it.....

We are so obsessed with this and the gov loves it.....

just keeping the sheeples minds off of the important issues....

The 2nd Amendment isn't an important issue?

[Midtowner]

If you're a member of a well regulated militia, it's probably an important issue.

[olevetonahill]

If you're a member of a well regulated militia, it's probably an important issue.

How about if Ive been a member of a WELL regulated Militia and am now simply a Member of the PEOPLE?
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/1/4/0/4/3/0/Einstein-Retarded-57345424811.jpeg

[Spray]

You said HUGE MAJORITY ya dim wit
I said PROVE IT. Where is a question in that?


I really hate to even get in the middle of this lovers quarrel, but it is pretty well established through a myriad of polls that a large majority of Americans are in favor of a long hard look at background checks- whether stiffer regulations or at the very least real enforcement of current regulations. Folks do, by and large, think this is a key component of the issue that needs attention by our elected idiots.

[Midtowner]

How about if Ive been a member of a WELL regulated Militia and am now simply a Member of the PEOPLE?

You were a member of a regular military unit, not anything remotely resembling an 18th century militia. The 2nd Amendment has been twisted by the right into something it was never intended to be and its purpose is perhaps one of the most antiquated. We don't need a militia to protect us from British invaders anymore.

[olevetonahill]

You were a member of a regular military unit, not anything remotely resembling an 18th century militia. The 2nd Amendment has been twisted by the right into something it was never intended to be and its purpose is perhaps one of the most antiquated. We don't need a militia to protect us from British invaders anymore.

Yer right retard, we need OUR weapons to protect us from idiots like YOU.

[OU68]

^^^^ heh

[olevetonahill]

I really hate to even get in the middle of this lovers quarrel, but it is pretty well established through a myriad of polls that a large majority of Americans are in favor of a long hard look at background checks- whether stiffer regulations or at the
very least real enforcement of current regulations. Folks do, by and large, think this is a key component of the issue that needs attention by our elected idiots.

This, just about any of us can and will agree with
matlock is saying that a VAST majority wants MORE. I simply told him to prove his assertion.

[IGotNoTiming]

The 2nd Amendment isn't an important issue?

Sigh........ no one is taking the peoples' guns..... the amendment is not being threatened.



I just believe there are more important issues that are being ignored..... (at this point in time) meaning today.

Overturning Citizens United is first and foremost on my list. I will support anyone running for gov who puts that high on their
list. Be they republican, democrat, Gay nazi, I don't care.

I just believe that is is a bigger threat at this time, that will open the door to worrying about the 2nd amendment.

[olevetonahill]

Sigh........
no one is taking the peoples' guns..... the amendment is not being threatened.



I just believe there are more important issues that are being ignored..... (at this point in time) meaning today.


Overturning Citizens United is first and foremost on my list. I will support anyone running for gov who puts that high on their
list. Be they republican, democrat, Gay nazi, I don't care.

I just believe that is is a bigger threat at this time, that will open the door to worrying about the 2nd amendment.

Dude dont know what you been smoking but the 2nd has been under attack by the Left for well over 40 years.

Plus tell me how any politician can"OVERTURN" a non profit organization?

Citizens United describes its mission as being dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security."

[rock on sooner]

Dude dont know what you been smoking but the 2nd has been under attack by the Left for well over 40 years.

Plus tell me how any politician can"OVERTURN" a non profit organization?

Citizens United describes its mission as being dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security."

Citizens United's mission is a noble one. My issue is that the
SCOTUS says that corporations (on both sides) can spend
unlimited funds to promote that mission, whereas the "little
guy", the real people are restricted to much smaller amounts.
It is a given that money talks, and always will. Overturning
that decision won't be done by a politician. If it is overturned,
it will be by grass roots movements that gets the issue back in
the courts and a long drawn out process of appeals to the high
court. Personally, Citizens United decision, along with Bush v
Gore are the two most egregious SCOTUS actions in my lifetime.

[IGotNoTiming]

Dude dont know what you been smoking but the 2nd has been under attack by the Left for well over 40 years.

Plus tell me how any politician can"OVERTURN" a non profit organization?

Citizens United describes its mission as being dedicated to restoring the United States government to "citizens' control" and to "assert American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty and security."

Vet.... please tell me your are not serious. Citizens United is being used by those in power to pump as much money as they can into political agendas... ANONYMOUSLY. Do you not see the danger in this? It doesn't matter whether you are a dem or rep or an independent. This IS being abused to essential erode any power that YOU have in voting for your candidates. Once that right is gone
it wont matter how many guns you got.....

[IGotNoTiming]

Personally, Citizens United decision, along with Bush v
Gore are the two most egregious SCOTUS actions in my lifetime.



Could not agree more

[olevetonahill]

Vet.... please tell me your are not serious. Citizens United is being used by those in power to pump as much money as they can into political agendas... ANONYMOUSLY. Do you not see the danger in this? It doesn't matter whether you are a dem or rep or an independent. This IS being abused to essential erode any power that YOU have in voting for your candidates. Once that right is gone
it wont matter how many guns you got.....


Dint ask what it was . I asked HOW can any politician "OVERTURN" ( your words) it?

[IGotNoTiming]

Dint ask what it was . I asked HOW can any politician "OVERTURN" ( your words) it?

You are right- no politician, by themselves can overturn it.

Congress can amend the law in such a way that the problem is solved. Technically, this is not "overriding" the decision, but it is one way Congress can make a law do its intended purpose without being unconstitutionally vague about the subject and purpose.

Other than that, only the Supreme Court can overturn its own precedent.

As far as the gun control debate- it is really the same.... from what I have read and watched the appearance nationwide in my opinion
is that the people appear in favor of tighter restrictions. I am not sure that means taking anyones' guns away.... I havent found anything that is pointing to that at all.

[diverdog]

The notion that corporations are people and money is speech is a dangerous one.

[rock on sooner]

The notion that corporations are people and money is speech is a dangerous one.

Sure didn't seem to bother the SCOTUS....

[KantoSooner]

You have to treat them as something. Norwegian law treats them as ships, essentially, and achieves some of the same benefits (protection of investors from limitless liability, providing a framework for accounting of expenses, etc.)
I despise the role PACs, 501's etc play in our electoral politics, but believe that it's more a question of tweaking than of fundamentally rethinking. Let's shorten the time frame of elections and limit total money to be spent. That would go a long way to resolving the issues we see today.

[OU68]

Sigh........ no one is taking the peoples' guns..... the amendment is not being threatened.



I just believe there are more important issues that are being ignored..... (at this point in time) meaning today.

Overturning Citizens United is first and foremost on my list. I will support anyone running for gov who puts that high on their
list. Be they republican, democrat, Gay nazi, I don't care.

I just believe that is is a bigger threat at this time, that will open the door to worrying about the 2nd amendment.

On April 1st, a legal gun owner in upstate New York reportedly received an official notice from the state ordering him to surrender any and all weapons to his local police department. The note said that the person’s permit to own a gun in New York was being suspended as well. The gun owner contacted attorney Jim Tresmond (a specialist in gun laws in New York) and the two visited the local police precinct.

Mr. Tresmond reportedly went into the precinct and informed the officers that his client, waiting in the parking lot, was coming in to voluntarily surrender his weapons as requested. The local police were aware of the letter because they had already been contacted by the State Police. Apparently, if people do not respond to the initial mailing, local law enforcement is authorized to visit the gun owner at their home and demand the surrender of the firearms. In this case, the gun owner followed the request as written. The guns and permits were handed over and a receipt given to the client.

After the guns were turned over, a request for a local hearing was filed and the gun owner is expecting to have his Second Amendment rights restored. But there is more to this story.

In our conversation with lawyer Jim Tresmond, we learned that this client, who has never had a problem with the law — no criminal record and or violent incidents on record — did have a temporary, short term health issue that required medication. But how were his client’s private medical information accessed by the government? This appears to be a violation of HIPAA and Health Information Privacy policies at HHS.gov. If it is declared a violation, this becomes a civil rights issue.

Some claim that a broad interpretation of this statement from HIPAA might allow the government to have instant access to the medical records and gun ownership records of anyone who is prescribed psychotropic drugs.

A major goal of the Privacy Rule is to assure that individuals’ health information is properly protected while allowing the flow of health information needed to provide and promote high quality health care and to protect the public’s health and well being.



Read more: http://www.wbzt.com/articles/nationa...#ixzz2Q5lzKDVV

[rock on sooner]

You have to treat them as something. Norwegian law treats them as ships, essentially, and achieves some of the same benefits (protection of investors from limitless liability, providing a framework for accounting of expenses, etc.)
I despise the role PACs, 501's etc play in our electoral politics, but believe that it's more a question of tweaking than of fundamentally rethinking. Let's shorten the time frame of elections and limit total money to be spent. That would go a long way to resolving the issues we see today.

Kanto, use your imagination and see if you can guess the amount of
money that would be spent in opposition to shortening the time frame
and limiting how much could be spent.

[IGotNoTiming]

"Some claim that a broad interpretation of this statement from HIPAA might allow the government to have instant access to the medical records and gun ownership records of anyone who is prescribed psychotropic drugs."

Slippery slope indeed but I am not sure I would be comfortable with a schizophrenic living next door to me armed to the teeth.....
or someone who is bipolar and not following their doctor's prescriptions. At that point, does that persons right to own guns trump
everything else?

People who have seizures are prevented from driving because of the POTENTIAL danger for the public who share the road with them.

Isn't this the same thing?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

The notion that corporations are people and money is speech is a dangerous one.

The more dangerous notion is that Congress can restrict the right of private entities to advocate for their positions. Money is not speech but it buys air time. I'm no corporatist and not a fan of all the money in politics these days but you either believe in the first amendment or you don't. You can't save democracy by restricting speech. If the Koch Brothers or George Soros or Katy Perry want to buy air time to promote their own bullsh!t, it's protected under the first amendment.

I agree with Kanto that a better option is to shorten the campaign season.

[OU68]

"Some claim that a broad interpretation of this statement from HIPAA might allow the government to have instant access to the medical records and gun ownership records of anyone who is prescribed psychotropic drugs."

Slippery slope indeed but I am not sure I would be comfortable with a schizophrenic living next door to me armed to the teeth.....
or someone who is bipolar and not following their doctor's prescriptions. At that point, does that persons right to own guns trump
everything else?

People who have seizures are prevented from driving because of the POTENTIAL danger for the public who share the road with them.

Isn't this the same thing?


did have a temporary, short term health issue that required medication --- Not even close.

[IGotNoTiming]

did have a temporary, short term health issue that required medication --- Not even close.


I am not sure I am following you.... The conditions I listed aren't "short term" and in some cases seizures aren't a short term condition but an ongoing one that requires medication.

Could you elaborate? Not sure what you mean.....

[OU68]

OK, we're talking about two different issues. My response was about the govt. not taking anyone's guns. To your point, I am in total agreement with expanding/strengthening the mental health side of the process for buying a weapon.

[Midtowner]

The more dangerous notion is that Congress can restrict the right of private entities to advocate for their positions. Money is not speech but it buys air time. I'm no corporatist and not a fan of all the money in politics these days but you either believe in the first amendment or you don't. You can't save democracy by restricting speech. If the Koch Brothers or George Soros or Katy Perry want to buy air time to promote their own bullsh!t, it's protected under the first amendment.

I agree with Kanto that a better option is to shorten the campaign season.

A more dangerous notion is that entities, rather than people have constitutional rights at all.