Sudden Outbreaks of Common Sense
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Sudden Outbreaks of Common Sense

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993

    Sudden Outbreaks of Common Sense

    Can Gun Control Work?(ABC News.com VIDEO)

    I couldn't get an embeddable version.

  2.   
  3. #2
    It was great watching O'Reilly eat ABCs lunch in one of the other videos too. Can't help but point out too how quickly ABC was ready to use the Brady bunch as their source for information.

    What kills me is if the Brady bunch, Clintonistas and libs in general would take a more measured, thoughtful and carefully sculpted campaign towards restricting the sale of firearms they'd probably be surprised, to our dismay at how effective they would be. Trying to turn something like an AWB juxtaposed against the Mexican drug war or Va Tech or Binghamton as a need for radical gun control is a real loser, it's one crisis they lack the sense to make hay out of.

  4. #3
    I saw that on ABC his morning. It was a surprise to see a little common sense.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  5. #4
    Very Good, Thank you Ma'am. That's not the answer that the Brady Bunch likes to hear...
    Semper Fi

  6. Id like to see a suit filed against the statistics of the Brady Bunch and make them stand behind the stats and watch them squirm,

    I just dont know if that kind of suit could even be brought?

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993
    A lawsuit must be predicated upon some violation of law. Most usually, the law used is contract law. That's how you get some smarmy git of a judge suing for a million dollars because the dry cleaner lost his pants, some implicit contract between merchant and customer not to lose customer's property.

    There is no contract that I know of which binds the Brady Bunch to tell the truth about inanimate objects, or government statistics. Now, if they start telling lies about a specific individual or company, then that individual or company could bring the full weight and force of libel and.or slander law down on their heads, which is prolly why they don't generally like to talk in specifics.

    But a generic lawsuit to force them not to lie? Nope. Might as well sue the moon because your blue cheese dressing wasn't creamy enough.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by rockwerks View Post
    Id like to see a suit filed against the statistics of the Brady Bunch and make them stand behind the stats and watch them squirm,

    I just dont know if that kind of suit could even be brought?
    that would be great if there was some way to get it to happen.
    You can have my freedom as soon as I'm done with it!!!

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kempner, Tx
    Posts
    124
    The first in what I hope to be a long string of public truths on a MSM network, but I won't hold my breath. Here is what needs to be made public: 1. the number of legal adult residents in this country who have never committed a crime. 2. the number of residents (adult or minor) in this country (legal or illegal, because they both can obtain illegal weapons) who have committed a crime. 3. the odds of a law that "saves one life" vs. a God given right that defends how many lives annually? The good guys outnumber the bad, period. To paraphrase "arm them all and let God sort them out"

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by rockwerks View Post
    Id like to see a suit filed against the statistics of the Brady Bunch and make them stand behind the stats and watch them squirm,

    I just dont know if that kind of suit could even be brought?
    Me too but a better and more likely scenario is to discredit them in a very public way, they have to lose credibility in some way shape or form in a public manner.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993
    They always go on about "If it saves one life..." Do what this guy did. Take them to task on it. "Well, if your parole boards would stop paroling these violent, recidivist felons who commit all the crime with guns, that would save a lot of lives and not cost any more money for government computer clearing houses of faulty information that don't work and wouldn't encumber law abiding Americans exercising a Constitutionally protected right."

    They also still love to trot out the old saw of comparing gun ownership to car ownership, "We require people to register their cars. Why don't we require people to register their guns?"

    "Well, driving a car isn't mentioned in the Constitution like gun ownership is. Gun ownership is a right. Automobile driving is a privilege, that's why you CAN register cars. As for the 'if it just saves one life" mantra, that would mean before it was proper to start registering guns for safety purposes, we would first have to be registering all bodies of open water, since people drown more often than they are shot; all flammable materials, since more people are injured by fire than are injured by firearms; and all carcinogens, since more people are taken by cancer than are taken by murder with a gun. By all means, once you've achieved those ends, you come back and we can see about registering firearms."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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