That is because it only goes to 2016. I already posted links showing right wing violence going up significantly in 2017 relative to 2016. But suit yourself. Ignorance is a choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Printable View
That is because it only goes to 2016. I already posted links showing right wing violence going up significantly in 2017 relative to 2016. But suit yourself. Ignorance is a choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
So in addition to the three high profile cases of white supremaxisf Right-Wing violence, 4 white supremacists were just arrested for participating in violence against counterprotesters and journalists in rallies across California, including a MAGA rally.
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/25/66040...fornia-attacks
No thanks as the left started this crap of theirs after Trump was elected and I sure won't believe a northeast liberal University of Maryland stats on this issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
And I sure will never believe liberal and socialist/Democrap loving NPR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Ok. Here you go:Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...ornia-58722757
And??? White supremacist rioting should be arrested just like racist blacks rioting should. Duh!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
But just because a California news source, ABC and a prosecutor labels them as such doesn't convince me.
As long as it’s anyone in the media other than FOX News that says or prints it, it’s gospel to Guiss. ABC is as fake and biased as a network can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
You two are certifiably paranoid.
I wish more military personnel would come forward and shut down the talking heads and misguided law enforcement superiors who continue to call an AR platform rifle and assault weapon. Ask anyone in the military if they would carry an AR into battle. They will tell you they would if the other option was their 2 hands and nothing else.
What is the definition of an assault weapon? I know what an assault rifle is.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
No you don't! what a moron!Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
AR-15. AR stands for “Armalite Rifle”, named after the company that developed this firearm. Contrary to popular beliefs it is not “assault rifle” or even “automatic rifle”.
Lol. I know what the AR in AR-15 stands for. I would bet I know more about this platform than you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
And I know the AR-15 is not an assault rifle. Assault rifles are selective-fire, and the M16 and M4 carbine are examples.
What I asked was “what is the definition of an assault WEAPON?” Emphasis added for morons. Techman05 was objecting to its use, saying it was improper, and that someone that is not misguided should come tell the talking heads what it is. Well, what is it?
My fault. Forgot I was going to be asked a question by our resident legal authority. I misspoke. Not going to argue with anyone on the board this week. I’m in a good mood.
The AR-15 platform, if equipped with sufficient number of “military features”, is defined as an “assault weapon” under the previous “Assault Weapon Ban” of 1994 (expired in 2004).Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
The vast majority of AR-15s that people enjoy today would be defined as “assault weappons” under that law. The government created that class, which is distinct from the selective-fire cousin “assault rifles”.
Of course the name was created by mostly liberals to make the weapons sound more dangerous. But let’s be real. The AR-15 platform is far more lethal in MOST circumstances for the average civilian wanting to inflict mas casualty than your semi-auto hunting rifle with longer barrel and no pistol grip. Sure, there are scenarios (like UT tower shooting) where that isn’t the case, but there is a reason the AR-15 is the most popular choice, by far, for these latest run-in-and-shoot-the-place-up events. Its effectiveness in these situations is also why police departments like these rifles.
By the way, they just found a 3rd package bomb that was sent to CNN.
This is poppycock. Anti-semitism, as it has been practiced by Nazis and White Supremacists, is directed more against the ethnicity than the religion. In fact these crimes are often committed under the cloak of religion. For example, this Bowers guy in his bio section, Bowers wrote, “jews are the children of satan. (john 8:44) — —- the lord jesus christ is come in the flesh.”Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
And here is the story about the evolution of the conspiracy theory that Jews were behind the migrant caravan that ultimately set Bowers off on his mission that day. Notice FoxNews’s (inadvertent) role in the Jewish connection - though deliberate role in promoting Trump’s message that the caravan is an existential threat to the country:Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
https://www.vox.com/2018/10/29/18037...jewish-caravan
Bullshit! Double BULLSHIT!!
I have watched EVERY Trump rally, read most of his Tweets, and also belong to two Blogs, one very pro-Trump, and another kind of middle of the road, but leans a little anti-Trump, they do a good job of reposting his Tweets. Anyway, not once has Trump said, "this caravan, this invasion, is the fault of the Jews." Not once.
Yeah, George Soros claims to be a Jew, when it suits him to. But he doesn't even like Jews. His family, in Hungary, disavowed their Jewish heritage, changed their names from Schwarz, George's real family name, to Soros and severed ties with their Jewish relatives and friends. If anyone is anti-Semitic it's George Soros and that ilk.
Just more ridiculous, bullshit propaganda and lies by the left.
None of that rebuts what I just said. 2 ships passing in the night. Reread my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
And the fact that you have watched every Trump rally explains ALOT.
Not only that, but I record them, and then watch 'em again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I does kind of help to actually hear what he says don't you think? I don't watch them but I certainly don't rely on what the "media" tells me about them and that includes FOX.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I have seen enough of them to understand how they work and what his themes are. If you watch all of them, though, you would be quite paranoid and a hateful person.Quote:
Originally Posted by GonzoDawg
Kansas militia men that plotted to kill Somali migrants are blaming Trump’s heated rhetoric.
https://fox4kc.com/2018/10/30/kansas...lanned-attack/
And “Stein’s knowledge of the Quran, the Muslim holy book, came from the internet and conservative talk-show hosts such as Sean Hannity and Michael Savage, Stein’s attorneys wrote.” That would describe a lot of folks around here too.
Blaming others for your actions is a cop out used by both sides. Can I blame McDonalds for making me fat even though it is my choice to go there and order a Big Mac, large fries, and a coke? Just because someone says something doesn’t mean I have to believe them or agree with them. Now, we can argue whether these folks on both sides are deranged and can’t reason on their own that their actions may be unreasonable and they are just acting on the impressions they get from leaders they trust.
Trump and FoxNews are doing their best to mainstream paranoia. Some people aren’t as well equipped to handle that.
Dude, it is historically (decade after decade) the leftist media and politicians that bring "mainstream paranoia" to the masses. How old are you to not know this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Oprah was carried live on TV today making a campaign stop in Florida, she said the Repubs: want to take away your healthcare, deny women their rights, and other BS! Last night on Tucker/Hannity (cuz I can't remember which show it was), a Dem strategist said they would win because Trump and the Repubs will take away women's rights. Obviously that's a DNC talking point. I will point out that Oprah was reading from a sheet she held in her hand. Clearly she was just articulating someone else's views (with which she agrees).Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
First...except for the obvious right to murder your own child, what "women's rights" will Trump and the Repubs take away? What rights are we talking about here, and how do those rights differ from "men's rights?" Secondly, if it were true Trump and the Repubs are gonna take away these undefined rights, then, why haven't they already? For the past TWO YEARS, Trump and the Repubs have held Congress and the WH. So...…?????
This is typical of the left. Just throw out ridiculous claims, like:
"will take away your rights"
"they want dirty air and water" Oh! Oprah said TODAY, if the Dems don't take back Congress in 2018, then "your children will be wearing oxygen masks just to go outside." She got applause for that one. Guess Dems want their kids needing such masks, why else would they cheer for it?
"push your grandma over a cliff"
"take away school lunches so they can starve your kids" On that one, even if it were true Repubs defunded all school lunch programs, are you telling me libs would allow their kids to starve to death, or would they take steps....ya know, pack a P&J sandwich in the backpack? Libs would allow their kids to die, chalk it up as a retroactive abortion, and be thankful for the political issue.
and so on.
This has been going on for decades. Their willing accomplices in the lamestream media never calls 'em on it....of course not.
They are talking about the right to terminate pregnancy and the right not to face discrimination or harassment.
Then why don't they say that? Sounds too strong? Women's health is such a BS line. So is the pre-ex lie your people are using.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Why don’t Republicans call there tax cuts “deficit increasing tax cuts” or “fiscal stimulus for an economy that is already growing”?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
You don’t think pregnancy and services a physician/clinician provides to a woman is about “women’s health”? If they can’t get legal abortions, getting a black market abortion definitely puts a woman’s health in jeopardy.
It's not a threat to women. It's an agenda only a few run on and we both know that it won't be going away. Using "women's health" is one of the scare tactic lies your people are using. Fortunately most women are too smart to be taken in by the lies of the left and socialists. Same with the "health care" lies y'all are spewing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Didn’t Trump promise to appoint judges that will overturn Roe? Are you saying that was a lie?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Like I said, you know it won't happen, but round up those slow blinking democrats who might vote our of fear or for a new smart phone. Too bad you won't have the invaders from Mexico here in time to vote.
You calling Trump a liar? Just want to make sure I understand. Did he or did he not appoint judges that would overturn Roe?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
If the Party of Trump is going to actively campaign on the idea of making abortion illegal, it seems perfectly fine for Democrats to campaign on keeping women’s rights intact. It seems like an issue of obvious contrast for Republicans and Democrats. Am I wrong?
No, he has not. Did he say he would appoint judges to overturn it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
"Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Lots of conservatives take up the anti-abortion speech. Strange that y'all use "women's health" instead of the right to "terminate pregnancies in a safe environment". We both know it's about shock value. Many of the women you are trying to scare would NEVER have an abortion.
No one apart from white supremacists are actually pro-abortion. People that want abortion to be legal don’t like abortion, but we think women’s health is more important than making it illegal.
https://youtu.be/oq6Taf5fIysQuote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Are you sure you actually know anything about Trump?
The thing that confuses me is why would it be ok for my parents to kill me in the womb for whatever reason, maybe because they can’t afford to take care of me, but it’s murder if I kill them because I can’t afford to take care of them? What’s the difference other than the child can’t speak up for themselves?
“Ok” or “legal”? Tons of things that aren’t “ok” that are “legal.”Quote:
Originally Posted by SicemDawgz
Extend this same concept to the severe physically or mentally disabled. If they have deteriorated to the point they can’t care for themselves, can we off them if we can’t afford or have the ability to care for them?Quote:
Originally Posted by SicemDawgz
They are still “persons” under the law, therefore they have constitutional rights. We have been through this many times.
We have also stated many times that abortion is a heartless, and unnecessary procedure, but you still don’t agree. That’s your right. It’s our right to contend that not all legal things are good things and that some legal things shouldn’t be so.
I hope he did! that's one reason I voted for him. Now, whether or not it actually happens, we'll see. Kavanaugh said many times what his position is on Roe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Exactly, fetuses are not a legally cognizable “person” so the referenced federal law creates a special class of victim in certain crimes (that doesn’t apply to abortion). In this case, the fetus doesn’t have a constitutional right but a statory right not to be killed in the commission of a federal crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
There are other crimes that can be committed against victims that are not “persons” under the constitution/law, as well.
There is not a decent human being on here that could sit through a gynecologist's detailed description of an abortion, and walk away thinking..."well, it's her right to do this..."
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c45545...inos-testimony
Since you qualified it as a "decent human being," goosey could watch the murdering of babies and ask for more popcorn.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckK3
"We stand for women's health and the children." - Democratic Socialist Party of Irony
https://www.vox.com/first-person/201...n-obstetricianQuote:
Originally Posted by ChuckK3
And this seems logical to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And for every diagnosis like this, another baby supposedly has the same thing, but is born healthy. Miracle of science, or just a miracle? Or the doctor was wrong. It happens. Lady has multiple tests run showing she has a mass in her breasts, then when the doctor goes to biopsy the mass, it’s gone. How many times have we read or heard similar? Doctors aren’t omniscient and test results give false positives and negatives all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Logical that fetuses don’t have constitutional rights? Yes-ish. That is the beauty of Roe.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
It also makes sense that you can give them statutory rights. If you can give statutory rights to animals (Animal Welfare Act and state cruelty laws) then it would be strange that you wouldn’t be able to give statutory rights to fetuses.
Which is why you have to let the woman decide, with whatever open advice she can get from her health care provider, because she has to live (or die) with the consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
But if you want to reduce these later second term abortions, one of the best ways is to make first term abortions easier to get and to invest heavily into education. But Republicans, in general, aren’t fans of these options.
An interesting thread was started about this on another website. Currently it is totally up to the woman if she chooses an abortion or not. The guy involved in the situation has absolutely no say what so ever, even though he is party to the "event". If the "dad" wants to have the baby, tough, not his decision. So why then does the "dad" have to financially support the baby if the girl decides to go through with it? Should he be able to waive his rights and responsibilities?
For the record, I am totally against abortion, but this was an interesting perspective.
Very interesting thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Because we don’t believe someone else, such as “the guy”, should have any say with what a woman does with her body. Somewhere starting around the 1920s and the 19th Amendment we started that women are their own people and not the chattel of “the guy.”Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Then don't hold "the guy" responsible financially for what she does with her body.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
We aren’t. We are holding him responsible for what he did.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
So women can sleep around and have an abortion, or they can sleep around and saddle the man with the bill. However, the man has no rights. So now, the argument that women are being denied rights is absolutely demolished.
A man doesn’t get rights over a woman’s body just because he slept with her. Both bear the consequences of their decisions - it is just that the woman bears an even greater burden of carrying the fetus and taking the “wear and tear” on her body. She also gets to decide what happens to her body going forward. That is the nature of the deal - and it is the game you choose to play when you decide to stick it in. If you don’t want a woman to abort your jointly conceived fetus, maybe you should get to know her a little better before sticking it in.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
And since when has the gripe “life is not fair” ever “absolutely demolished” an argument? LolQuote:
Originally Posted by techman05
It's not about the man nor the woman, it's about the third person in the equation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
It’s like riding a merry-go-round. Hey, we’ve been here before, and we’re not getting anywhere.
The Violent Left...
Alec Baldwin arrested for assault on some poor fellow. Typical...
Yeah but God is taking notes...and names.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
Another conservative sexual assaulter shoots up a yoga studio in Tallahassee, Florida and kills 2 women.
https://heavy.com/news/2018/11/scott-beierle/
You are so full of crappola! Even that liberal blog didn’t say that.
That isn’t a liberal blog. But if you read it, it says:Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
“Beierle was a member of two groups on his Facebook page, FSU College Republicans and We Are Conservatives.“. Maybe you also saw him cheesing with the cardboard cutout of Reagan.
Commie at Georgia State University arrested and charged with assault. It attacked some GSU College Republicans exercising their 1st Amendment rights.
Here is another thing the violent left and socialism just caused. Irresponsible wack jobs.
Venezuela Leaking Oil Everywhere and Making Dangerous Mess...
Well, here we go again! :furious3:
Antifa member charged with violent attack on Marines tied to key Democrats
- DC 'antifa leader' is third charged in Marine attack in Philadelphia: report
- FLASHBACK: Marines testify about Antifa mob attack in Philadelphia
Antifa activist facing assault charges was tied to Democratic policymakers
What a difference a year made for Joseph Alcoff.
On Monday, the 37-year-old has a court date in connection with charges he’s facing in Philadelphia that include aggravated assault and ethnic intimidation for allegedly being part of an Antifa mob in November that attacked two Marines, Alejandro Godinez and Luis Torres, both Hispanic. Alcoff and two others charged in the attack have pleaded not guilty.
ANTIFA FIGURE CHARGED IN MARINE ATTACK
But while Democratic officials are distancing themselves from Alcoff now, until recently he was a well-connected, aspiring political player in Washington who may have even had a hand in key policy proposals.
His endorsement apparently mattered when several congressional Democrats in February 2018 issued press releases with his quote backing their bill on regulating payday lenders.
As the payday campaign manager for the liberal group Americans for Financial Reform, Alcoff participated in congressional Democratic press conferences, was a guest on a House Democratic podcast and met with senior officials at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from 2016 through 2018.
He was also pictured with now-House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and ranking Democrat on the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio. Both committees oversee financial regulatory policies Alcoff was advocating.
Alcoff met with then CFPB Director Richard Cordray and other senior CFPB officials on April 2016, again in March 2017 and a third time in May 2017, as first reported by the Washington Free Beacon.
During this time, he reportedly was an Antifa leader in Washington.
https://a57.foxnews.com/hp.foxnews.c....jpg?tl=1&ve=1
:angry: Maxine Watters, the hater racist socialist, knows this won't go well.
MAXINE: TAKE TO THE STREETS!
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...X_KPoLUtbWYiMs
MAXINE: TAKE TO THE STREETS!
The liberal left just loves the thought of violence and death (just like post-birth abortions now). More potential violence for Maxine's street protests I guess.
Democrats reject push to alert ICE when illegal immigrants fail firearm background checks
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
The liberal left just loves the thought of violence and death (just like post-birth abortions now).
Democrats reject push to alert ICE when illegal immigrants fail firearm background checks
I put this article here because why not? It could go under the "end times" thread actually.
What happens when you stop believing in God?
Exclusive: Joseph Farah thanks progressive politicians for showing us their black hearts
Read more at https://www.wnd.com/#l0xjawBVBu5urd5P.99
More right wing violence.
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/20/pol...t%3D9999999999
A mass shooting in Norway? I thought all those European countries banned guns? Hate that about the serviceman. What about that right wing violence against that Smollett guy? Or the right wing violence on UCB campus? Oh, that’s right.
Facetious?Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
No, I thought the European countries were setting the standard for gun control so that doesn’t happen there. Not making light of the fact that it happened and is a tragedy, but their laws should have stopped it, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by JuBru
Hate crime on the Berkeley campus. This guy needs to spend some time in prison. http://www.louderwithcrowder.com/hat...student-media/
I take it back. Norway has pretty reasonable regulations. I mistakenly lumped them in with others in Europe.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuBru
And then there are the spooled up Trumphards.Quote:
Originally Posted by DONW
https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...lly-in-el-paso
Trump makes political currency off of bringing the worst out of Americans. He needs to go.
I assumed that you were talking about the 2011 attacks by the right wing extremist on the socialist camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by techman05
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks
You never called for Obama to go. He is much more of a racist and thrives on stirring crap to incite blacks and stupid whites.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
ROFLMAO!Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
He’s not nearly as good at it as your heroes on the left.
That is because, while he played the race card for his political advantage occasionally, he didn’t stoke division nearly as much as Trump does. Trump lives on division politics and it is bad for the country, much worse than Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Right. Furguson and Baltimore was very peaceful. Do you need more pics? You give Obama, Holder, and others a pass why? Because they are black? It doesn't get any worse than that, unless you just hate to be hating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Those didn’t happen because of Obama. He has nothing to do with the violence in Ferguson and Baltimore.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
you are either naive, stupid, or a liarQuote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Well, explain it then. Were those Obama rallies?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
I didn't see the guy do anything to the cameraman like the guy was attacked by the thug on the Berkeley campus. Trump even asked the cameraman if he was okay and he said he was. They immediately threw his ass out. That thug visciously attacked the conservative on the Berkeley campus and cowardly punched him in the face while he wasn't expecting it. Watch the video.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
It's all three.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
How about this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by DONW
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljE0ZjSYvCY
Or this one:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iLufi33mnsE
And then what happens to the guy that got punched:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ojdZu5_DtPU
What the Trumphard had to say for himself:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DzU3FLZgIhc
Y'all notice how Goosey defends all leftist violence, excuses it, in fact, blames Trump for it. Trump has mind control. Some thug 3,000 miles away is minding his own business, heading toward a Humane Shelter to volunteer his time...and suddenly bam! MIND CONTROL...dude attacks a good American. Wasn't his fault! It's Trump's fault.
Then when some idiot, like that moron in Virginia, does something stupid...well, that is also Trump's fault. EVERYTHING is Trump's fault!
Ignore Goosey, he has ZERO credibility.
The guy that was assaulted on the Berkley campus should have been better prepared to defend himself before he attempted to exercise his right to free speech on such a communist campus as Berkley. I've watched video of the attack and, had the guy being assaulted been properly trained, he could have easily inflicted severe injury on his assailant. I personally know several people that would have put that thug in the hospital (or worse) in about three seconds. Idiots like him will rue the day they meet up with someone properly trained in self defense.