Vote for Vengeance in 2018

[Bill Peckham]

I have a slogan for 2018 and 2020: Vengeance. Vengeance for Charlestown. Vengeance for Puerto Rico. Vengeance for allowing the Republican Presidential nominee to be unvetted. Vote Vengeance. By 2020 the Republican Party should cease to exist. Change the letter next to your name or be voted out of office. Vote Vengeance 2018 ^tm

[Michael Murphy]

Nice slogan.  It is time to vote out the NRA flunkiesand vote in people who care about people rather than a gun lobby which has lead to our schools running with innocent blood.  This gun first attitude has lead to a place where any public gathering can be turned into a slaughter house.

[kickingandscreaming]

I'll vote for vengeance but I'll also vote to support the great kids from Parkland FL.  Their voices are clear and raw and full of truth.  They are the only hope I have for the future of this once great country.  They are shaming our weak, NRA-owned politicians.

[willowtreewren]

Count me in!
 

[MooseMom]

While I understand the sentiment, I don't think voting for vengeance is the answer.  There is a certain portion of the population that voted for vengeance because we had a black president, and look where that got us.

[Cupcake]

I'm calling my IRA and 401K administrators to be sure none of my investments have anything to do with gun manufacturers or distributors/sellers. And if there are any rallies or pickets going on locally, I'll March for a ban on semi-automatics, assault rifles, bump stocks, or anything any sick mind can dream up to mow down innocent people. Teachers with guns? That's a really bad idea.

[Simon Dog]

I'm calling my IRA and 401K administrators to be sure none of my investments have anything to do with gun manufacturers or distributors/sellers.

The problem is that most IRA and 401K investment selections are mutual funds with a broad selection of investment vehicles, selected for best possible return rather than political agenda.

There are "socially resonsible" mutual funds that avoid a wide list of politically incorrect investments.    If you can't find one of those with your current custodian, you may have to transfer to another company.

Just be careful that you don't veer from your investment strategy (sector selection/diversification; beta selection; etc.) in the effort to be politically correct.

Oh, and you may want to rent cars form Hertz - they just cancelled the NRA member discount.

[Cupcake]

Yay hertz!

[Michael Murphy]

I think it would better to cancel the second admendment, of all the constitutional rights it’s the only one it’s proponents want to be unlimited.  Every other right las limits and exclusions,  if the NRA and it’s minions want to exercise the 2 admendment without any resonable bounds then all that’s left is to admendment the constitution and cancel the second admendment.

[Charlie B53]

I refuse to Re-Elect anyone, regardless of their political party.

Keeping these professional politicians in office is what has created this whole mess.

Get rid of the politicians.

It was intended for the Farmer, Rancher, shopkeeper to be elected for a term, go spend those few months in Congress and Senate, then get back home to the Farm, Ranch, or Store and get back to his regular job.

Ever since they started giving themselves salaries they have been voting themselves raises, granting more benefits, perks, paid travel, housing, everything under the sun.  And WE THE PEOPLE pay for it all.

Create a worthwhile bill then tag on multiple riders, spending billions of 'pork' dollars to line the pockets of contributors to their reelection campaigns.

It is up to us, WE THE PEOPLE, to put an end to all of this political madness.

The Congress and Senate voted to limit the president to no more than two terms.  Why will they not do the same for Congress and Senate?  Because they do not want to give up raking in all those tax dollars they are milking from WE THE PEOPLE.

[Simon Dog]

I refuse to Re-Elect anyone, regardless of their political party.

We had a Democratic candidate for the House of Reps (federal) who believed in and campaigned on term limits.

Once in, he changed his mind, and handily won reelection until he retired to take a lucrative job attached to the state nipple while collecting his congressional retirement pay.

Ever since they started giving themselves salaries they have been voting themselves raises

The MA state legislature just gave themselves 40% and included the judiciary to trigger a technicality that would prevent rollback of the increase by a citizen's initiative petition.   Every Democrat who voted that can be certain of re-election solely because of party affiliation.

[Rerun]

I voted with vengeance last time and I will again.  Good advice ! 

MAGA!!!       Let's get rid of the guns.  Let's see how that works out. 

[MooseMom]

  Let's get rid of the guns.  Let's see how that works out.

Let's start with banning civilian ownership of the AR-15, the most favored weapon, AKA "Barbie for Men", of white male murderers of school children and concertgoers.  Don't let anyone tell you that this would go against the Second Amendment.

http://www.businessinsider.com/scalias-2008-second-amendment-opinion-2012-12

https://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/justice-scalias-gun-control-argument/

You get the idea.

Do you really want to drain the swamp?  Really really really?  Do you really want to see Trump keep his promise to drain the swamp?  Then have him get rid of the NRA.  Make it illegal for candidates/elected officials to accept campaign money from the NRA.  Let's see the President go after "L'il Wayne" LaPierre.  There.  I've already given Trump a nickname he can use in his tweets.  Never say I'm not a patriot! 

[Charlie B53]

Sorry Folks, but.... as a Veteran I am all for RESPONSIBLE gun ownership.

The trick is going to be how do you sort out the Responsible from those that may be less than responsible?

Training, training, training.  Education from an early age, experience in less than ideal situations, a level head.

Gun laws do not apply to criminals.  Period.  They simply make it more difficult for responsible people to legally purchase a weapon.


Parenting has a whole lot to do with it.  That old adage, ""It takes a Village." But in this day most people hardly even know their neighbors.  Living as close as we are we still refuse to socialize with even our neighbors.  Instead the kids occupy their time with these damn phones, videos of violence, and play violent games and laugh at the death and destruction pictured.  This cannot develop a well balanced individual.

Until we get tough with the kids and start banning all the violence presented to them things are not going to improve anytime soon.

Hollywood needs to stop glorifying violence.

[Paul]

Sorry Folks, but.... as a Veteran I am all for RESPONSIBLE gun ownership.

Yeah but a responsible gun owner can be described as someone who has taken the responsible decision not to own a gun!

[MooseMom]

Sorry Folks, but.... as a Veteran I am all for RESPONSIBLE gun ownership.

As a citizen of the United States of America, I am all for banning weapons like the ones used in Las Vegas and Parkland.

As a Veteran, you must surely be appalled that the NRA has taken away our freedom to live in safety because men have to have their Barbies.

I still want to know why we should allow the ownership of this particular weapon.

Stop blaming this on kids who watch violent movies or have bad mommies and daddies.  There have been too many mass murders that were perpetrated by other types of men, not kids.

Any responsible gun owner would be very clear with the idea that the second amendment does not mean that these kinds of weapons should be available at all.  If they are not used for self defense, and if they are not used for hunting animals, then the only other reason they are used is to hunt down people.  That a veteran, whose mission was to protect the United States and its citzens, would believe that these weapons should be allowed in civilian hands is a startling proposition.

There is NOTHING in the Constitution that bans the banning of this class of weaponry. 

Again,  https://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/justice-scalias-gun-control-argument/

[Simon Dog]

I still want to know why we should allow the ownership of this particular weapon.

Private swimming pools cause more child deaths per year than school shootings.

Can you please explain why such pools should be permitted?

[Paul]

I still want to know why we should allow the ownership of this particular weapon.

Private swimming pools cause more child deaths per year than school shootings.

Can you please explain why such pools should be permitted?

Sorry Simon you loose this argument. It is a very old Internet rule that when someone brings up a stupid comparison like that the debate is over, and the person who brought up the comparison has lost the debate.

[Simon Dog]

Sorry Simon you loose this argument. It is a very old Internet rule that when someone brings up a stupid comparison like that the debate is over, and the person who brought up the comparison has lost the debate.

No, it is you who have lost the argument by not responding with a rational answer*.

The comparison is not stupid, as it discusses the balance between allowing an item which is enjoyed by many, but kills a few and banning that item for the common good.   The difference is that the idea of guns offends some people but pools do not.

Banning private pools would save children's lives.   Why do we permit many people to enjoy such items when filling them in would save lives?   Is the recreational value people get from pools really worth telling dozens of parents a year "Sorry, your kid died so people could enjoy private swimming pools"?  What are your answers to these two questions?

* - It useless and irrelevant for either party in a debate to declare the other side the loser.   The marketplace of ideas and thought does not work that way, and asserting it does is arrogant. 

[Paul]

Accidentally deleted - see next post.

[Simon Dog]

I apologize to Paul.  I thought I was quoting his post, and unintentionally deleted it.  This happened because I have admin privs for the purpose of installing forum upgrades.

I am going to remove admin privs from SimonDog and create a SimonAdmin account for the upgrades so this will not happen again.

Paul - Please repost your commentary.   It was in no way my intent to remove or delete it.   I have no right to do so, and apologize again.

[willowtreewren]

Once again, the primary purpose of swimming pools is for recreation.

The primary purpose of AR-15s and similar weapons is for killing. https://www.bustle.com/articles/167365-the-creator-of-the-ar-15-rifle-only-invented-the-gun-for-one-purpose

Simon Dog, you are falling for NRA propaganda by trying to compare the two.

[Simon Dog]

Primary purpose aside, they both result in innocent deaths.   Please explain why pools should be allowed.

Curiously, the ARs I get are marketed for only two purposes - recreation and law enforcement.  Nothing else.

[MooseMom]

Simon Dog, please supply data that shows that more people are killed each year in private swimming pools than are killed by guns.  A logical question, just as a logical answer, needs to be based on factual evidence.

I am sure that many people own both guns and swimming pools.  If they have children, I would assume they ensure their children understand the risk of using each.  I also assume the parents reduce the risk of accidental death using all sorts of methods, i.e., locking away guns and putting fencing around pools.

The problems is that guns are transportable and can be even stolen and used in nefarious ways.  It would be easier to murder someone with a gun than with a swimming pool.  You can't transport pools across state lines.  There is a reason you need a background check to have a purchase a gun.  I am not aware of any background check a man needs to put a pool in his back yard.

No one is calling for "pool control".  This is not a national issue.  There are not planned marches against pool violence.

It is intellectually lazy to assume that all people who are concerned about the KIND of guns used in these mass shootings "don't like the idea of guns".  It would be more honest to say that "most people do not like the idea of AR-15 style weapons being so widespread and so easily available".

And yes, the recreational value that people get from their private swimming pools is worth having to tell some parents that their child died in a private pool, and here's why.  Parents and their children can decide if they want to take that risk.  They can discuss the pros and cons and are free to choose a local park district pool with lifeguards.  Parents can sign their kids up for swimming lessons to lessen any risk.  There are many ways to mitigate the risk of drowning in a private pool.  When children (and adults) are murdered by a man using an AR-15 type weapon, those victims have not been given a choice.  They have had no opportunity to escape.

What we are now left with is a possible scenario where people will no longer go to concerts or allow their children go to school or dare to do anything because you never know when some white dude is going to whip out his gun and start murdering people.  You are shifting the burden of risk assessment onto people who have no interest in Barbies for Men.  That's not freedom.  That's tyranny.  I shouldn't have to worry about being shot any time I go into a movie.  I don't know what the risk may be.  I don't know where the danger may lurk.  But if I go into a private swimming pool, I don't have those concerns.

That should answer your queries.  If not, then it shows an inability to see nuance and a determination to view this issue in only black and white.

[Charlie B53]

Barbies for men?  I don't know who coined this phrase but maybe they need to have a couple of wires connected to their head and plugged into the ignition of my truck for a little 'shock' therapy.

Doesn't a lot of men want to marry a 'Barbie'?

What about the 'Barbie' I have on my front porch?  I have two.  One gas and one charcoal.

Using such a word is asinine and needs a bit of correction.

Now, as for  'Black' guns, most EVERY pistol is 'Black'.   Since I was a teen hunting in the forests of the NorthWest we have been refinishing many of our rifles 'Black' non-reflective as the highly reflective lacquered wood finish was too easily seen by the animals long before the hunter saw the animal.

So to answer the simple question "Would I purchase and own a BLACK weapon?"  Is actually a very stupid question.

Would I purchase an AR?    I seriously doubt it.   While I do enjoy a bit of range-time, it is to maintain my proficiency with my selected hunting and self-defense weapons.   I've never been one of the spray and pray types.  You WILL run out of ammo and then you're toast!   Learn to make each round count.

Many yet claim the 223 to be a defensive weapon.  I much rather have a 12 gauge, that packs far more 'punch' and will take an intruder off his feet and into the wall behind him.  And he ain't gonna get back up.


But if you want to argue about something that kills far more people, DAILY, just look outside on any street in America.

Cars.   Why haven't we developed mass transit?   No, we are too hooked on this 'Freedom' thing.  Crashing and killing far more people daily.  And that's before we even add alcohol to the drivers.  Yet NO ONE is doing anything to limit the number of vehicles on the roads.   Google the number of kids killed in auto accidents annually.  Go ahead, I dare you!