Comments on: Defenseless in National Parks — Again

By: Barry Soetoro

Barry Soetoro — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:43:46 +0000

The judge overturned it because the Bush Administration didn’t do an assessment? These are the same anti-gun people that want to pass rediculous gun control laws without doing assessments. But now since it is pro-gun now they want an assessment? These liberals don’t assess their useless anti-gun laws because they know that if they did that America would see that they are counter-productive to making Americans more safe. Oh and NAN and COPYLEFT and the rest of that ilk, to help you out with your argument: only paranoid people need to own guns. The muggers, robbers, rapists and murderers don’t own guns and don’t carry guns because they are not allowed to by law, and we all know how well criminals obey the law. Guns pull their own triggers, cars cause accidents and kill people, pencils are the cause of spelling errors not the people using them. So as long as we throw logic and common sense out the window we can understand people like NAN, COPYLEFT, and the rest of the anti-gun crowd. There is a difference between somebody who is armed that is a criminal, and someone who is armed legally, i.e. LAW ABIDING citizens. You anti-gunners need to stop confusing us LAW ABIDING citizens with the criminals.

By: Barry Soetoro

Barry Soetoro — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:33:41 +0000

The judge overturned it because the Bush Administration didn’t do an assessment? These are the same anti-gun people that want to pass rediculous gun control laws without doing assessments. But now since it is pro-gun now they want an assessment? These liberals don’t assess their useless anti-gun laws because they know that if they did that America would see that they are counter-productive to making Americans more safe. Oh and NAN and COPYLEFT and the rest of that ilk, to help you out with your argument: only paranoid people need to own guns. The muggers, robbers, rapists and murderers don’t own guns and don’t carry guns because they are not allowed to by law, and we all know how well criminals obey the law. Guns pull their own triggers, cars cause accidents and kill people, pencils are the cause of spelling errors not the people using them. So as long as we throw logic and common sense out the window we can understand people like NAN, COPYLEFT, and the rest of the anti-gun crowd. There is a difference between somebody who is armed that is a criminal, and someone who is armed legally, i.e. LAW ABIDING citizens. You anti-gun ilk need to stop confusing us LAW ABIDING citizens with the criminals.

By: Dave R

Dave R — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:10:48 +0000

Yes, copylefty, and that can change with a single ruling. When, and if, that happens, there will be a new precedent set.

The problem, as I have articulated for you loser lefty’s over on Bookman’s blog, is that you and your Socialist buddies have corrupted the Constitution over the years with liberal loopholes and torturous interpretations to where the ORIGINAL INTENT has been DEFILED by the law.

We talk raw, plain-spoken Constitution here, son, not your ba$tardized version of the Constitution through the eyes of liberal judges. Take your lack of law degree elsewhere.

By: Copyleft

Copyleft — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:56:20 +0000

Dave R: Sorry, you still flunk Constitutional law. You see, they don’t need to take “a liberal’s word” for what the Constitution means.

What they have to take is what the Supreme Court says it means.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:15:43 +0000

Sam S. Sense you can’t refute my argument you resort to name calling? I have no idea what ‘Badies blog’ is and I assure I am NOT an Aryan! My point was that everyone who is against this rule seems to think it would allow just ANYONE to carry a concealed weapon; it applies ONLY to those who have passed the requirements to be granted a carry permit. As a subset of ‘gun owners,’ concealed carry licsencees are WAY more law abiding than just about any other group of people, including law enforcement officers! Look up any States’ statistics on revocations and you’ll see something on the order of 0.05 to 0.08% of CHLs granted are revolked for any sort of criminal misbehavior. For your information, the process to receive a permit includes an FBI level background check, training by a certified instructor, authorized examination of your medical history for any mental health, alcohol or drug addiction issues, and any other various state requirements.
Road Scholar, you said “Well, you could dial 911 or the number posted at the entrance to the park or your entrance pass to the park!” Excuse me, but there are LARGE sections of National Parks with absolutely NO cell phone coverage. Also, if it took you several hours to get from the park entrance to where you are, then it will take a Park Ranger about that same ammount of time to find you!

By: Dave R

Dave R — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:54:32 +0000

The LAST thing you need to believe is a liberal telling you what the Framers of the Constitution meant.

By: Copyleft

Copyleft — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:40:20 +0000

Hmmm… forgot to close the bracket. Oh well.

By: Copyleft

Copyleft — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:39:55 +0000

Let’s get everything into perspective.

First of all: Regulation of gun ownership IS constitutional

Second: Facts include things like ALL the Supreme Court cases I’ve cited on this very point, as well as hundreds more that address this same issue. Regulation of gun ownership was, is, and always will be Constitutional barring a new amendment.

You really can’t do anything about it, gun nuts. Your rights DO have limits, and those limits DO stand up in court. Quit acting like spoiled babies and start looking for ways to make your case a bit better.

Our society is doing just fine, thank you, and getting better the more often we can put liberal officials in office to move us forward, rather than back to the jungle (or bunker, in your case).

Have a great day! I know I will (grin).

By: Secondamender

Secondamender — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:00:02 +0000

It is so easy to tell Anti rights people, They all state lies and mistruths instead of facts because they can not do research on their own. They follow like sheep when they are themselves elitists and hypocrytes who think they are better than the rest of society.
Copyleft & Nan for example have no facts just insinuations. When the briliant men who founded the Constitution and this great country had more brains in their small toe than Copyleft or Nan have combined.
At the time the Bill Of Rights was written the meaning of (Regulated) meant supplied or stocked. Theirfore (A well supplied militia)was the intent of the time. Our society is going to hell because of the likes of Copyleft and Nan for they are so dependant on government they would love Chavez or Hitler.

By: Second Amendment

Second Amendment — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:05:11 +0000

First lets put everything into perspective. Liberalism is a mental disorder. Okay, can’t hunt in national parks because of that bad old lead ammo. Well, the only people I heard of that ate lead paint were usually low IQ inner city YUFFs. In my neighborhood we typically don’t eat lead paint atleat not without barbecue sauce. Okay, lead is to be made illegal just as CO2 is to be. Okay, lets take lead out of the nuclear reactors that are located near these urban welfare centers. CO2 is used by plants to convert to oxygen. Last time I looked Oxygen is a good thing. Obvious not enough oxygen got to the brains of Hillary and Kerry. Okay Hillary and Kerry let’s look at their life experience. Hillary dodge sniper fire in Bosnia, she also avidly hunted ducks with her grandfather. Kerry came to OHIO and baited geese and supposedly shot one. Kerry also went up the Makong delta into cambodia. Okay, to much lead in their food atleast based on their thought. Guns should be allowed in parks because people hunt and their are bears, and actually there are brazen homosexuals who try to assault innocent park dwellers. Well liberalism is a mental disease right Hillary and Kerry.