Tails
of the Gun
The
attack on Maryland's gun laws
Our view: A federal judge finds the state's limit on handgun permits unconstitutional in a win for the NRA crowd but a potential loss for public safety (Baltimore Sun) |
|
scream-of-consciousness; "If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
Tails
of the Gun
The
attack on Maryland's gun laws
Our view: A federal judge finds the state's limit on handgun permits unconstitutional in a win for the NRA crowd but a potential loss for public safety (Baltimore Sun) |
|
"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. " |
This will be the comment box |
How do you argue with that?
I would say, finish the job you started with abortion. When Democrats shoot each other into extinction, there will be no further need for any gun laws, regulations, or concerns. We will have peace and prosperity, and a golden age will spread across the planet.
I agree with whoever wrote this editorial for The Baltimore Sun. Progressives/Liberals/Democrats/Socialists should not own firearms.
They are too irresponsible to have one in their hands.
Remove "Second Amendment" from that quote and read it again.
I've said before, if you want to make a democrap's head explode, swap their arguments for gun contol and abortion. They screem drooling into a black hole of absurdidty.
Tim
"given the death and destruction perpetrated by those possessing handguns in this state"
"those possessing" meaning "murderous criminals."
Perpetrated against those not possessing handguns meaning those certified defenseless by fantasy-poisoned politicians.
Progs refuse to discriminate between law-abiding and criminal. It's too judgmental for their fantasy world.
How do you argue the case?
Show the statistics over the past ten or twenty years of expanded concealed-carry.
got it! .... she looks like Annette Funicello
It is depressing that opposers of Second Amendment rights seldom if ever mention the frequency with which a firearm is used to prevent tragedies, such as rape, robbery and murder, that would occur if the potential victim was unarmed. Because they do not mention them, one is left to assume that it never happens, but conservative estimates and anecdotal evidence indicates it may happen tens of thousands of times per year.
Hows that?
Cheesy: Victim-disarmament supporters never use facts.
They got to their current position through psychotic fear, so facts are evil to them.