Posted on 07/24/2016 8:04:18 AM PDT by Lazamataz
I’m not a graphic designer but I think this push for
more gun laws could be illustrated by having the words
“Gun control”.
Repeated several times in increasing size and more elegant
font each time.
It would be about as effective as increasing laws.
Nice idea!
Me, I’m doing a Rage Monkey (for the first time in YEARS) on it. :)
Posted at your blog, huh.
hg gonna git you.
As to the craze to ban legal weapons, these ditzes who write the laws neglect to ban the possession of illegal weapons. Gun bans of legal weapons puts guns in the hands of criminals and takes them out of the hands of citizens who need to protect themselves from illegal weapons.
Hell's too good for him.
How about New Jersey?
I don't think there is a toxic waste dump in New Jersey that can handle that kind of toxicity.
We could get him and Reggie Love a place out in Nevada. Call it the Love Canal Raunch. I mean Ranch.
I wonder what kind of gun laws he’s talking about.
Maybe guns should have to be sharia compliant by being black and halal before they can be used in a spontaneous lone wolf jihad.
It’s all about control with these people. Firearms in the hands of citizens threatens their ability to control us, which is exactly why the 2nd Amendment is exists- as a safety valve against tyranny.
If you are talking about Obama, I think you left a little something out of the name of this first rule.
I think one of the most powerful political things an individual can do this election cycle is to bring their non-shooting friends to the range, and introduce them to shooting sports. Guns are fun, they make a lot of noise, and once you learn the basics, they are not very scary. Guns teach you responsibility and self reliance on a very basic level.
Get a Democrat into shooting, and you are well on your way to creating a new Republican. That vote counts twice. One less for them and one more for us.
So get your Democrat friends to the range, at least three times between now and November. The money you spend will be a lot more effective than writing another check to the RNC.
If there were a bill in Congress with the exact text of the 2d amendment, how many Senators and Congressmen would vote for it? How many would conveniently be sick and not able to attend the day of the vote?
If the enumerated powers in the Constitution were a bill in Congress, how many would vote for it? How many would pass?
If the entire text were a bill who would vote for it?
“Under the Militia Act of 1792, every citizen was REQUIRED to own a military-standard rifle, along with ammo, bayonet, and other gear.”
They were not.
No official US-issue infantry arms existed at the time. Formal adoption of specific models did not happen until 1795, when the M1795 Muskets made at Springfield Armory and Harpers Ferry Armory were adopted (two similar but not identical weapons, closely patterned after the French Modele 1763, which had been sold used, in quantity, to the fledgling US during AWI).
Both were 69 cal smoothbore, hence were not rifles.
The United States did not approve a standard-pattern rifle for issue to the armed forces until 1803.
Smoothbore muskets remained the dominant military small arm until 1855, when the 58 cal rifle-musket was approved for issue, firing hollow-base conical bullets developed from those invented by Capt Claude-Etienne Minie, a French army officer.
The time will come when the GG organizations will turn in those who they even suspect own guns. It is a commie thing.
The police will be directed by the president to collect all guns. One hope is to elect honest sheriffs. That is not our only hope though. Keep your powder dry and get proficient at the range. It is all about the second amendment.
Very well done with one small error- “racists in the black community who’s”- “who’s” should be “whose”.
I always enjoy your work, I’m only pointing this out because you asked.
Move "like a clock" so that it follows "returned." Change "rotely" to "mechanicaly." "Mass shooting" is two words, but "media-hyped" shooting could stand alone.
It has almost become cliché.
Remove "almost."
He, of course, WILL NOT speak to the motivations of the assailants, except one time, when Dillon Root -- a true racist who happened to be photographed in front of a Confederate Flag -- and in this example, Obama spoke quite a bit about incentive, when he was not focused on gun control.
This sentence fell apart long before it ended. Let's see ... "Of course, he will not identify the motivations of the assailants. Only in the case of Dillon Root, a white supremacist who was photographed with a Confederate flag, did Obama add comments about white racism to his remarks on gun control."
Most of the rest of the attacks were motivated by Islamics who were strictly interpreting the Quran, or committed by racists in the black community who's anger was directed against Caucasians and/or police.
Most attacks are perpetrated by Moslems following the Koran. Others are attacks by black racists against Caucasians or police officers.
Here, however, Obama routinely ignores or actively covers up the motivations of the shooters.
In these situations, Obama typically ignores or obscures the motivations of the shooters.
He is greatly aided by a complaint and colluding press, who report Obama's words without questioning them or pointing out the fallacies included therein.
"press, who unquestioningly report Obama's words without remarking on his factual errors or logical fallacies.
The sequence of events have become monotonously repetitive:
... sequence ... has become ...
Shooting occurs, and within hours, Obama is calling for gun bans -- often before the nature of the attack, the identification of the attacker, and the discovery of the type and make of the firearm has even been made!
A shooting occurs. Within hours, Obama calls for gun bans, often before the attacker, the motive, or the weapon have been identified.
As always, your points are excellent. The sentences tend to be very convoluted, and you’ve gone overboard with the adverbs. Remember, if you use strong verbs, you don’t need adverbs!
Thank you!
I wish I was better, but I suck.
In your climatic paragraph, where you’ve linked the reports of various recent mass shootings, I think you need a stronger applause-line than, “Obama goes to guns.” “Goes” is a lousy verb.
You are far above average. You are interesting!
Dammit. I *knew* I was excessively, imprudently, lavishly intemperate and overindulgently unrestrained with my elocution, in an extravagently, unreasonably superfluous, and extremely disproportionate manner.
It pays to increase your word power!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.