Honest citizens are terrorists

[LDB]

Honest citizens who disagree with improper government intrusion are like terrorists according to Hillary. If one were of the Wanda Sykes persuasion they'd wish she had kidney failure or another clot.

AWESOME: Hillary Clinton Compares Gun Owners To Terrorists - Bearing Arms

 

[layoutshooter]

This is no surprise, we all know how the Demoncrats view the People and our Constitution.

These jerks are the same pot smoking Hippos that ran around in the '60's screaming "Power to the People"!

 

[Ragman]

Honest citizens who disagree with improper government intrusion are like terrorists according to Hillary. If one were of the Wanda Sykes persuasion they'd wish she had kidney failure or another clot.

AWESOME: Hillary Clinton Compares Gun Owners To Terrorists - Bearing Arms

Amazing, just amazing! Expressing dissatisfaction with a political advisory is one thing, even encouraged if the situation calls for it. But to use a back door method to wish for the death of said person is just deplorable.

 

[Humble2drive]

From the article:

“I believe that we need a more thoughtful conversation, we cannot let a minority of people — and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people — hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people,” Clinton said during a CNN town hall.

Viewpoints don't terrorize people, guns don't terrorize people.

What terrorizes people is someone who creates and maintains a state of extreme fear and distress in others. That is exactly what Clinton is doing with her comments.
I seldom hear any research or scientific conclusions that gun control will actually solve the gun violence in America. Just the constant repetition of Sandy Hook, dead children, Sandy Hook, dead children. Emotional scare tactics in place of actual logic and reasoning is fear mongering and a form of terrorism in itself.

 

[layoutshooter]

The Clinton/Obama/Pelosi types have NEVER met a gun murder that they did not love and work hard to exploit.

 

[LDB]

Amazing, just amazing! Expressing dissatisfaction with a political advisory is one thing, even encouraged if the situation calls for it. But to use a back door method to wish for the death of said person is just deplorable.

You are correct and should so inform Wanda. I've pointed out the negativity of it. Now it's other's turns.

 

[Turtle]

Viewpoints don't terrorize people, guns don't terrorize people.

What terrorizes people is someone who creates and maintains a state of extreme fear and distress in others. That is exactly what Clinton is doing with her comments.

Soooo, viewpoints don't terrorize people... except Hillary's viewpoints... they terrorize people.

I'm just sayin'

 

[cheri1122]

You are correct and should so inform Wanda. I've pointed out the negativity of it. Now it's other's turns.

Since you asked for it: Ragman is right to call you on the passive-aggressive tactic of pretending to attribute to someone else what you don't have the guts to say outright.
You're not fooling anyone, except [maybe] yourself.
"Honest citizens" and "improper intrusion" are debatable, BTW, not necessarily factual. I don't much like Mrs Clinton, and don't know if universal background checks would really make any difference [they won't stop those who steal weapons], but I agree that some serious conversation on the subject is overdue. Kids shouldn't have to worry about being mowed down in the classroom - but too many do these days.

 

[LDB]

I can't help others misinterpreting any more than I can help others having ignorant ideas based on false information. Poor Hillary is ignorant and misinformed as well.

 

[layoutshooter]

I can't help others misinterpreting any more than I can help others having ignorant ideas based on false information. Poor Hillary is ignorant and misinformed as well.

Hillary is not ignorant and misinformed, she is deliberately lying and misleading the People to assist her in getting rid of the Bill of Rights. She is, by her own words, a felon which means she can in NO way be trusted. She has NO problem doing whatever it takes to disarm the citizens of the United State, in direct violation of the Constitution.

 

[Moot]

Just the constant repetition of Sandy Hook, dead children, Sandy Hook, dead children.

Time to resurrect this:Hollywood Hypocrites Demand Gun Control For Citizens As Their Movies Promote Gun Violence - YouTube

 

[Humble2drive]

Soooo, viewpoints don't terrorize people... except Hillary's viewpoints... they terrorize people.

I'm just sayin'

In my opinion, Hillary's viewpoints do not terrorize people.

It is the irrelevant statements that she makes in an attempt to persuade people to agree with her viewpoints that can frighten people.

From the article:

. . . someone, for whatever reasons — psychological, emotional, political, ideological, whatever it means — could possibly enter that school property with an automatic weapon and murder innocent children, students, teachers,” Clinton said.

That statement utilizes fear to motivate others to agree that stricter gun laws will prevent future atrocities like that.

BTW - " automatic weapons" ? Aren't there laws against those things already?

 

[layoutshooter]

"BTW - " automatic weapons" ? Aren't there laws against those things already?"

They legal to own. It is a $200 "stamp" for each weapon. MILLIONS own them, collect them, and fire them legally, in no way committing a crime. I would bet that even Hillary would be hard pressed to show where a legal owner of an automatic firearm used them in a school shooting, or any other type of crime for that matter.

There have been NO LEGAL, or illegal, automatics uses in school shooting, that I know of.

IF you want to see some real autos in use some day, go see this, I went last year, it was a BLAST! (pun intended). LOTS of noise, NO crime and NO Obama/Biden bumper stickers ANYWHERE to be seen! LOL!! People come from all over the world to participate here.

http://www.knobcreekrange.com/events/featured-events/machine-gun-shoot

 

[cheri1122]

In my opinion, Hillary's viewpoints do not terrorize people.

It is the irrelevant statements that she makes in an attempt to persuade people to agree with her viewpoints that can frighten people.

From the article:



That statement utilizes fear to motivate others to agree that stricter gun laws will prevent future atrocities like that.

BTW - " automatic weapons" ? Aren't there laws against those things already?

Irrelevant? Really? Except for the weapons of choice, there is nothing in that statement that has not happened, too many times already. If people are frightened by that, it's not because Hilary persuaded them that they should be.
And I don't believe she implied that stricter gun laws will prevent future atrocities, because we all know better.
What should we be discussing, in an effort to address the problem?

 

[davekc]

It is too late to discuss gun control. "The horse is already out of the barn". The people that want guns, will get them or already have them. Anything else is basically window dressing with no meaning or results.

 

[layoutshooter]

It is too late to discuss gun control. "The horse is already out of the barn". The people that want guns, will get them or already have them. Anything else is basically window dressing with no meaning or results.

Gun control is easily taught. It primarily consists of, proper grip, steady hold, good sight picture, breath control and a smooth trigger.

Gun control, as witch Hllary sees it, is not legal under our Constitution and would do NOTHING to reduce crime and violence. As with all other such prohibitions, it would INCREASE the problems, creating an even bigger black market than exists today.

 

[cheri1122]

This is why there's gridlock: ask for suggestions, and all you get is "That [whatever was already suggested] won't work."
No ideas whatsoever, just : no.

 

[davekc]

This is why there's gridlock: ask for suggestions, and all you get is "That [whatever was already suggested] won't work."
No ideas whatsoever, just : no.

It is too late at this point to suggest anything that would have any value. The criminals ( the ones most want to stop), already have them or have access to them. Better off moving on to something else that matters. Sadly, it way too late to do something on this short of longer criminal sentences which we struggle to do.

 

[layoutshooter]

It is too late at this point to suggest anything that would have any value. The criminals ( the ones most want to stop), already have them or have access to them. Better off moving on to something else that matters. Sadly, it way too late to do something on this short of longer criminal sentences which we struggle to do.

Criminals will always be able to get their hands on anything that they want. The more laws we pass, the more crime will increase. That has been proven time and time again, and yet, their are still those who believe that "just one more restriction" on the rights of law abiding citizens will somehow do the trick. It did not work for booze, drugs or cigarettes. It did not work for explosives either. Now why in the world do people continue to fall for the idea that restricting those who do not commit crimes, will lower it? Making criminals out of law abiding citizens will just increase the number of criminals.

 

[davekc]

Criminals will always be able to get their hands on anything that they want. The more laws we pass, the more crime will increase. That has been proven time and time again, and yet, their are still those who believe that "just one more restriction" on the rights of law abiding citizens will somehow do the trick. It did not work for booze, drugs or cigarettes. It did not work for explosives either. Now why in the world do people continue to fall for the idea that restricting those who do not commit crimes, will lower it? Making criminals out of law abiding citizens will just increase the number of criminals.

Simple. Because it makes them feeeel good.
Remember, it is all about feelings.