Mental health checks should be performed on asshats that are in office or are seeking office paid for by the citizens tax dollars. Lets make sure he keeps his seat. Didiot!
1 posted on
03/03/2014 7:12:49 AM PST by
rktman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
To: rktman
I just want the lot of them on the Hill and in positions in the other two branches drug tested—all the way to the top. Fail, and find out what unemployment is all about.
2 posted on
03/03/2014 7:15:13 AM PST by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
To: rktman
Please, not this guy again.
3 posted on
03/03/2014 7:15:17 AM PST by
Obadiah
(I Like Ted.)
To: rktman
We already have 30,000 gun laws. Is the author saying they aren’t sensible?
4 posted on
03/03/2014 7:15:29 AM PST by
E. Pluribus Unum
(If Barack Hussein Obama entertains a thought that he does not verbalize, is it still a lie?)
To: rktman
The 2nd Amendment is a sensible gun law.
To: rktman
Before any “sensible” gun laws are passed, please repeal all of the “non-sensible” gun laws.
6 posted on
03/03/2014 7:16:25 AM PST by
W.Lee
(After the first one, the rest are free.)
To: rktman
We do welcome sensible gun laws:
- FULL REPEAL of the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended;
- FULL Federal reciprocity of all concealed carry permits;
- FULL Repeal of the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act, as amended;
- Enactment of law preferring a FEDERAL felony for any and all attempts at the federal, state or territory or city level to confiscate arms, including ammunition and accessories, without judicial due process.
To: rktman
Responsible gun owners should welcome sensible infringements on their 2nd amendment right, just as responsible Americans should welcome sensible infringements on their other constitutional rights..We will let you know we mean by sensible eventually.
8 posted on
03/03/2014 7:17:28 AM PST by
ArtDodger
To: rktman
Sensible gun laws should not prevent lawful citizens from owning and carrying guns.
Since all gun laws the left wants affect only honest people and makes no dent whatsoever in illegal/criminal gun access, their gun laws are not sensible by my definition of the word.
9 posted on
03/03/2014 7:17:33 AM PST by
BitWielder1
(Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
To: rktman
We do welcome “sensible” gun laws.
We already have one.
It ends with the words “shall not be infringed”.
So take your infringements and stuff them where the sun don’t shine! (to the author)
10 posted on
03/03/2014 7:17:55 AM PST by
MortMan
(Is a delayed shower a "stay of exablution"?)
To: rktman
"Responsible gun owners should welcome sensible gun laws." Hmm, first tell me, good reporter, would YOU support this:
Responsible reporters should support sensible press laws restricting what can be reported.
Responsible reporters should support sensible speech laws that restrict criticize of the government.
11 posted on
03/03/2014 7:18:16 AM PST by
apillar
To: rktman
Background checks collect information on the innocent.
13 posted on
03/03/2014 7:18:16 AM PST by
cripplecreek
(REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
To: rktman
Yea pulling out a shotgun and blasting away sounds sensible.
14 posted on
03/03/2014 7:19:28 AM PST by
Zathras
To: rktman
I do welcome sensible gun laws. For example, the use of a firearm in armed robbery, rape, assault, or murder should be severely punished. Other than banning the use of firearms in violent crime, I’d like to repeal all the nonsense gun laws on the books - federal, state, and local - the Second Amendment should take precedence as the supreme law of the land.
15 posted on
03/03/2014 7:19:43 AM PST by
Pollster1
("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
To: rktman
The problem is that “sensible” keeps changing.
17 posted on
03/03/2014 7:20:20 AM PST by
struggle
To: rktman
Responsible gun owners should welcome sensible gun laws That would be a point if sensible gun laws were the objective but sensible gun laws are not the objective.
18 posted on
03/03/2014 7:20:52 AM PST by
MosesKnows
(Love many, trust few, and always paddle your own canoe.)
To: rktman
How is it that the second I read the title I knew it was going to be some idiot lefty advocating registration or restriction or confiscation?
19 posted on
03/03/2014 7:21:40 AM PST by
NurdlyPeon
(It is the nature of liberals to pervert whatever they touch.)
To: rktman
Naturally, Waters is a Democrat. He'd have to be to think that CT. registration or outright forfeiture of a semi-automatic rifle and large cap magazines is a "sensible" gun law.
The fact of the matter is, responsible gun owners need only ONE sensible gun law. The 2nd amendment to the Constitution of The United States.
If Waters and the rest of his nut job gun grabbing Democrats want to keep guns out of the hands of the sickos, then they are welcome to do their best...but keep the law abiding, responsible gun owners out of it. We didn't create this problem.
20 posted on
03/03/2014 7:23:27 AM PST by
Bloody Sam Roberts
("The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell)
To: rktman
Mental health checks should be performed on asshats that are in office Every "journalist" too.
And every politician's and journalist's phone, p.c., Ipad, walkie-talkie, home intercom system and pet locator ought to be registered and monitered as well.
To: rktman
Since prisons are teeming with a population that alarmingly supports liberalism to an almost certainty, the most “sensible” gun law would be to confiscate weapons from all who support or register as democrats.
22 posted on
03/03/2014 7:24:24 AM PST by
Sgt_Schultze
(A half-truth is a complete lie)
To: rktman
Newtown was a case of an IRRESPONSIBLE gun owner allowing their gun to fall into the hands of a person with a known mental illness.
So what’s his point?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson