The only way to stop a . . .

[ebacon]

Originally Posted by icenine

I see how we are ending up fighting over every last buck...however whether she is as influential as people might suspect is the question. Which if true would be downright scary.
I can go to the Mall right now and ask everyone who Ayn Rand is; I bet I may find one or two people out of 500.

We could be destroyed by enemy we don't even know is what I am trying to say.

I have to rethink some details of my theory. Ayn Rand might not have been a Soviet agent. Note that Jewish means two things -- an ethnicity and a religion. This distinction is important.

According to wiki the Bolsheviks included a number of Jewish citizens that were opposed to religion. If Ayn Rand was one of them then she could have pushed her agenda on her own with support from the neocons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisem...e_Soviet_Union

[merrylander]

Ayn Rand was simply a gabby slut of a snake oil saleswoman, but some segments of our society seem to love snake oil. While married in her 40s she took an also married 20 year old lover named Nathaniel someting or other.

[BlueStreak]

"Lying in wait right now is a terrorist, a deranged school shooter, a kidnapper, a rapist, a murderer, waiting and planning and plotting in every community across our country, lying in wait right now," LaPierre said.

"No amount of political schemes, congressional legislation, presidential commissions or media round tables will ever change that inevitable reality."


Nor will having every wannabe redneck Rambo in the country armed to the teeth. The notion is a ridiculous Hollywood fantasy. We already have an assload of CCW carriers strutting around everywhere....How many "terrorist" attacks have they stopped? One, maybe two, if any?

LaPierre is a delusional ass.

Dave

[MikeG22]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

"Lying in wait right now is a terrorist, a deranged school shooter, a kidnapper, a rapist, a murderer, waiting and planning and plotting in every community across our country, lying in wait right now," LaPierre said.

"No amount of political schemes, congressional legislation, presidential commissions or media round tables will ever change that inevitable reality."

As much as I'm not a fan of ol'wayne or his organization I can't argue with his point. There are lots of nut jobs out there. I'm not saying walk around paranoid but besides carry how do you defend yourself?

[BlueStreak]

I've gone through the last 49 years unarmed. Just got back from a one of my nightime urban hikes and I live in a somewhat crappy low budget neighborhood complete with Section 8 housing and all.............

It's really no big deal. If I get killed; Oh well.

Dave

[bobabode]

By David Horsey May 3, 2013, 5:00 a.m. LATimes
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,3037339.story


"This week, a 5-year-old Kentucky boy was playing with the mini-rifle he had gotten as a gift and ended up shooting and killing his 2-year-old sister. Apparently, even kindergartners have a right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.
For many people, it was a revelation that there are companies that manufacture guns specifically for children. The boy in question had a Crickett rifle, a smaller version of an adult weapon designed specifically for little trigger fingers. The guns come in a variety of happy colors, including pink and even swirls.
Some people think giving guns that shoot real bullets to kids is a rather insane idea, but not folks in the gun culture, where it is perfectly normal. A state legislator in Kentucky, Rep. Robert R. Damron, insisted that the kiddie rifle was not the problem.
“Why single out firearms?” Damron asked, according to the Associated Press. “Why not talk about all the other things that endanger children too?”
Well, perhaps because, in this case, a child died -- not because she swallowed a toy or fell off a playground swing, but because her brother, who probably cannot yet even tie his shoes, had been entrusted with a lethal weapon.
I suppose someone will suggest that giving guns to children under 3 feet tall should be outlawed, but such a law would certainly be opposed by the National Rifle Assn. as the first step down a slippery slope toward confiscating all guns and enslaving America. Maybe a better idea would be to fine anyone idiotic enough to put a gun in the hands of a tiny child. Possible? Naw, the NRA would kill that idea too. The gun lobby depends on a legion of idiots.
But, hey, here’s an idea the NRA could support: Arm 2-year-olds so they can defend themselves. A toddler militia -- what could be more American?"

[BlueStreak]

LMAO!!!!!!!

That about captures the essence of it, Bob!

Dave

[BlueStreak]

“Why single out firearms?” Damron asked, according to the Associated Press. “Why not talk about all the other things that endanger children too?”

Here we go again with that absurd logic;

"Why do anything about gun violence when some people die from choking on a pickle?"

Why drive your car to work when tricycles have wheels too?

I swear to God, the logic is so colossally twisted it defies description.

Dave

[merrylander]

I don't know why anyone is surprised, these NRA honchos are about as deranged as they come and still talk. Push LaPierre up another notch and all you will get from him is a incoherent babbling.

[JBS...]

Originally Posted by bobabode

http://www.saf.org/lawreviews/kleckandgertz1.htm

Here's the Kleck and Gertz study if anyone wants to read it. Published in 1995.

http://www.nsc.org/pages/home.aspx

I couldn't find that exact phrase on the National Safety Council website. Could be a limitation of their search function.

It does get repeated extensively by lobbyists like this one https://www.gunowners.org/sk0802htm.htm

Thanks Bob.

Did you happen to research Barbara's link as well? or do you just research the links teabaggers post. Kellermann is a hack

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9715182/