AnonymousUser

Debunker

Comment history

  • Debunker 

    Gakja,

    Your response proved you are NOT smarter than me.
    You made false assumptions of me. You Falsely accused me of false assumptions as well.

    I did not think you were a retarded Libertarian. I thought you were a Liberal. ("Retarded Liberal" being redundant)

    Secondly. Any criminal using deadly force against others, is fully entitled under law to receive deadly force to prevent his actions.

    That's not to say that if he is caught, he should be taken out back and killed. NO. But while he is in the act of discharging a firearm in the direction of innocents and others.... Deadly force IS authorized to stop his actions.. Not a single Cop, Prosecutor, or Judge is going to argue otherwise.

    I am NOT ashamed at being willing to lay my life on the line to aid others. Norman is 180 degrees Opposite of what I am. And deep inside you know it. Your arguments are just nothing more than vile vitriol being spewed back from your Liberal bias. If Obama does do the (wrong) thing and bans all weapons. It is those of us who are responsible Gun owners who will be disarmed. People like Norman (Criminals) will still have their guns and THEN what will You do?
    That proves you to be a person without reason or intelligence.

    Another example of your unintelligence.... Just what firearms DON'T conform to the Constitution (Not constitution)?
    Since the Constitution States "...Keep and bear ARMS..." And does not lay any claim as to only some are allowed and others are not.

    Nor is the intent of the Second Amendment to allow only firearms to be used for hunting only and all other "people killer" weapons to be banned.
    The Purpose of the Second Amendment was so that the people could defend themselves and their freedom even from their own Government (i.e. Military grade weapons)

    That you don't know this again proves you to be less intelligent.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    Norman is rather, one of the wolves that the Well Regulated Militia Sheepdogs would have put down and out for the safety of others.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    Gakja,

    Absolutely NOT.
    But...Your response is typical crap spewing from Libtards.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    "China faces its own threats from terrorism, and has previously pledged to be a responsible partner in the global war against terrorism."

    Since when has China been "responsible" for anything. Putting poisons in our Pet food. Poisons in our children's toys, and when complained about the toys, they just switched to a different poison. (Cadmium for Lead)

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    This comment was removed by the user.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    mamaj,

    I'd give them a break if it truly was just "every once in a while".
    It isn't just this story. It's a LOT of stories.

    It's endemic to the paper as a whole.

    But VicAd's *bleep* don't stink and they can do no wrong.. So I won't be holding my breath for them to get better any time soon.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    Concerning John's comment on Civilian armed rebellion.

    I agree that this is an unlikely occurrence. But I also agree that nothing substantial will ever change in Washington until and unless it does. Does not matter if Democrats or Republicans are in charge. Both sides are "captured by the system" of corruption that is bread and butter in DC.

    It is not likely to happen because it would have to start everywhere at once, and no one is wanting to "go first" and whoever does go first... will likely to either really be an idiot like McVey, or will be falsely made out to be a McVey by the government and their media. And no one else will want to follow that.

    Speaking of which. I find yours and Vets comments insinuating John as another McVey for talking about armed rebellion to be in serious bad taste and a prime example of nastiness typical of Liberals.

    As the the Military not hesitating to put such a thing down. Best think again on that one.
    A Disorganized (or even organized) group of extremists yahoos, yes... they would put them down quick.
    Regular citizens rising up in rebellion over the government no longer serving them? Not so much.
    the problem with liberals is that they do not distinguish between the two. They love to name-call. Divide and Conquer. Look at how the TEA Party has been treated by the liberal media.
    Military members Swore an oath not to the president, but to the Constitution and though it... the people of the United States. And that oath was to protect the constitution from ALL Enemies, both foreign AND DOMESTIC. There is a large (and growing larger by the day) movement within the Military, both Active duty and former military as well as Law Enforcement. They will NOT turn on the American people if ordered to do so by a corrupt government. They will NOT blindly follow orders.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    "Eric Holder serves at the pleasure of the president but the justice dept. operates as a different entity...Unless you have proof contrary to that then your assumptions are nothing more than a partisan shot."

    The Justice department and it's head... the Attorney General, is a Part of the President's Cabinet and reports DIRECTLY to the President.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    Caught in the act?

    Justice would be served if NO charges filed on the father. Should be nominated Father of the year.

    A molester caught through investigation and already in the hands of police... that's another matter best left for the courts.
    But catching this perverted monster in the act... Any judge who would convict should be removed from the bench and any prosecutor who would pursue charges should be disbarred. Justice served and let the family heal.

    Flag this comment

  • Debunker 

    This comment was removed by the user.

    Flag this comment

Previous