published Tuesday, July 24th, 2012

Joining the Ranks

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

145
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
alprova said...

WELL DONE, MITT! As Governor Of Mass, Romney Banned The Assault Weapon Used In The Colorado Massacre

Another flip-flop is in the works for Mitt Romney. In 2012, he does not favor banning assualt weapons, but just 8 years ago, he did favor banning them, and did so, as Governor in his home State of Massachusetts.

In 2004, as Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney banned the sale of assault weapons like the one used to spray 50-60 bullets a minute in the Colorado massacre.

On FOX News, Romney explained his position as follows:

"I believe the people should have the right to bear arms, but I don’t believe that we have to have assault weapons as part of our personal arsenal."

The ban in Massachusetts is permanent, regardless of what the Federal Government does to restrict or to ban all assault weapons. The law still stands today.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/romney-bans-assault-weapons-2012-7#ixzz21VdjKeiU

July 24, 2012 at 12:06 a.m.

This will provoke a lot of useful and productive discussion.

Oh who am I kidding.

July 24, 2012 at 12:08 a.m.
Salsa said...

Owning a gun doesn't make one nuts but I'm not surprised that an extremist cartoonist would take that view.

July 24, 2012 at 12:09 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Rising gun ownership is a reflection of declining hope for society.

July 24, 2012 at 12:37 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

nucanuck: Rising number of democrat voters is a reflection of declining hope for society.

July 24, 2012 at 1:07 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

Well said, nucanuck. These random mass killings with assault rifles and semi-automatics have become part of the landscape of our society and the NRA's and the gun lovers' only solution to it is to put more guns in the hands of more people. If we become a society where everyone has to carry a gun everywhere they go, we will have come full circle and reverted to the days of our Wild West past. The gun fetishists would love that, but that does not say much for the evolution of the human spirit. If peace is attained only through the threat or presence of a gun, that is not really peace at all but merely a desperate acquiescence to living in a state of permanent warfare amongst ourselves.

July 24, 2012 at 1:18 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

I think you're missing the point, Salsa. Bennett is not necessarily saying that all gun owners are nuts. Only your extremist view of Bennett's "extremism" is seeing that. He's simply depicting the fact that we have become such a gun-happy, violent society that ordinary people who normally would never consider owning or carrying a gun are feeling more and more compelled to "join the ranks."

July 24, 2012 at 1:22 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN CALLED

Salsa strikes out swinging with his comment:

"Owning a gun doesn't make one nuts but I'm not surprised that an extremist cartoonist would take that view."

Go read the caption again. With SO MANY... NOT, owning a gun makes one nuts. NOT, everyone who owns a gun is nuts.

Don't you read well?

The gunman in the Colorado shooting massacre was someone most folks seem to agree was off his rocker. Nuts. Bananas. Loony. Naturally, the same was said about the gunman in the shooting massacre before that, and the shooting massacre before that, and the shooting massacre before that, &c.

BTW, the Romney campaign called and now claims you said, "Owning a gun makes you nuts!"

Congrats.

July 24, 2012 at 1:28 a.m.
alprova said...

I know this is a bit off-topic, or maybe it isn't, but if anyone has a little time to kill, and is interested in reading up on Mitt Romney, the following link will take you to John McCain's file on the vetting of Mitt Romney for Vice-President in 2008.

Take notice of page 135, where you can read the following:

"Romney Served As CEO Of Bain Capital Through August 2001, Even Though He No Longer Ran DailyOperations."Although he gave up running day-to-day operations at the venture capital firm in order to head theSalt Lake Winter Olympics, he remained CEO and held his financial interest in the company through August 2001."

Page 179 - Who Is The Real Mitt Romney? - "Twelve years ago, Romney boasted that he would be more effective infighting discrimination against gay men and lesbians than Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), distanced himself from some conservative policies of the Reagan administration, and proudly recalled his family’s record in support of abortion rights. The apparent gulf between the candidate who ran for the Senate in 1994 and the one getting ready to run for president has raised questions as to who is the real Mitt Romney."

Page 181 - "Romney Supported Abortion Rights And Gays In The Boy Scouts." -- Eager to show that he is a moderate independent and no ideologue, Romney stressed his support for universal health insurance and abortion rights.

Page 195 -- Videos with Mitt Romney Quotes

Romney agrees with reporter that "same sex couples can be good parents."

Romney on immigration: "Those who are here contrary to the law should seek to establish legal residence, and if they do so, Id bedelighted to provide support."

Page 196

Romney: "All the benefits of the cap and trade program should be able to be realized."(Tape 25)

Romney: "Let’s not do something the U.N. said not to do."(Tape 51)

Page 197

Romney: "Pay me more taxes!"(Tape 17)

Reporter: "Are you a right-wing ideologue?" Romney: "NO!" (Tape 66)

Romney: "I’ve seen proposals out of Washington that said 'if you come to America and go to college, why you’re in the front of the line to become a citizen.' I think that’s a great idea.” (Tape 36)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78582788/McCain-2008-Oppo-File

July 24, 2012 at 1:33 a.m.
alprova said...

Oh...you're a Mitt Romney Supporter and a Gun Owner Too?

http://imgur.com/wIvcl

July 24, 2012 at 1:44 a.m.
alprova said...

White House signals Obama WILL NOT push for more gun control in the wake of Colorado shootings

President says steps need to be taken to protect Second Amendment rights

No plan to push to renew a ban on assault weapons which expired in 2004

"It is considered a basic right by many Americans and Barack Obama has shown no inclination to significantly tighten gun control laws in the wake of the weekend shootings at a cinema."

"The president reiterated the stance outlined in a piece published in an Arizona newspaper in March last year when he emphasised the need to protect citizens’ right to bear arms."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2177593/Colorado-shootings-White-House-indicates-Obama-push-stricter-gun-laws.html#ixzz21WFYtIJb

July 24, 2012 at 2:33 a.m.
cadmium_red said...
July 24, 2012 at 2:49 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Alprova,

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78582788/McCain-2008-Oppo-File

Great link! Everyone, especially Republicans, need to read that document.

It's the inside scoop on Romney!

July 24, 2012 at 2:54 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Now, I'm forced to re-examine the 2nd Amendment in the wake of the Aurora massacre; and for the first time, those two words "well regulated" kind of jumped out at me ... like DING! DING!

I mean, come on people. If these words "well regulated" don't at least suggest some kind of controls, if not spelling out in bold red letters "MUST HAVE GUN CONTROLS" .. I mean really ... I can't help but think that the Constitutional framers had SOMETHING in mind, other than what we have now ... which is an ongoing string of random mass murders by guns blazing psychopaths, with increasing frequency.

I totally fail to see anything "well-regulated" about that.

And even if contemporary forms of gun controls aren't exactly what they had in mind, it certainly seems to me to be WAY MORE than enough of a valid constitutional basis for having some rational controls in place, to avoid further scenarios like Aurora.

If only we have the will. Let's not blame the constitution. Let's expose those who are either blind to certain parts they don't want to see, or who are intentionally obscuring it's intent for personal gain and/or because they are psychopaths intent on creating bloodshed and mayhem.

July 24, 2012 at 5:24 a.m.
EaTn said...

I can relate somewhat to the toon of the day. I've been a gun owner my entire life and only recently have considered carrying one--not because of the criminal element that has always been around. But because of the the intolerable permit and non-permit carrying loonies I see walking around, just itching for someone to give them a half-ass reason to shoot.

July 24, 2012 at 5:58 a.m.
anniebelle said...

EaTn, I feel the same, being confined to a wheel chair I feel particularly vunerable. I have my gun by my bed and my two monster dogs with me at all times. Luckily, thus far, I've only had to use my gun for target practice. If you need 6000 rounds of ammo, that suggests you need to spend more time at target practice.

July 24, 2012 at 6:07 a.m.
hambone said...

2004- ban on the sale of assault rifles and high capacity magazines expired.

1-8-2011-- Cogresswomen Giffords and others shoot in AZ

559 days later Holmes shoots up theater in Colorado

Had Congress reinstated the ban Holmes could not have bought most of the weapons he had unless he did it out the backdoor of a gun show. Which is another rat-hole that needs to be closed.

559 days? How many more must die????

July 24, 2012 at 7:05 a.m.
MTJohn said...

I would like factual information that answers two questions:

  1. What percentage of the NRA's funding comes from companies than manufacture firearms and ammunition?
  2. What percentage of the "lawful" sales of firearms and ammunition are intended for unlawful purposes?
July 24, 2012 at 7:22 a.m.
joneses said...

When the weather gets hot all the little liberals start attacking corporate industry by spreading their lies to extend their agenda of total government control. When one person goes nuts and chooses guns for his rampage all the liberals start spreading their lies to control guns. Like Rham Emanuel said when he was working for Hussein Obama, "never let an incident be wasted".

July 24, 2012 at 7:27 a.m.
MTJohn said...

hambone said..."Had Congress reinstated the ban Holmes could not have bought most of the weapons he had unless he did it out the backdoor of a gun show. Which is another rat-hole that needs to be closed."

Although I share the sentiment of your post, please note that the purchase of shotgun and two handguns would have been lawful with the assault weapons ban in place. He might not have been able to legally purchase the AR-15 and he certainly would not have been able to purchase the extended magazine for it.

And, as a footnote, anyone who hunts big game with an AR-15 needs to re-think caliber choice. And, anyone who needs an extended magazine to hunt needs a lot more target practice.

July 24, 2012 at 7:29 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Joneses - Karl Rove and Grover Norquist are on your side. They have been pretty candid about the objectives of the K Street Project.

July 24, 2012 at 7:32 a.m.
degage said...

Everyone wants to blame guns, maybe we should think about banning hollywood movies because he was acting out a violent part of a movie. Most people wouldn't let the violence influence them , it only takes one, so curb the violence in movies.

July 24, 2012 at 7:32 a.m.
Ironhorse said...

Guns don't kill people......people kill people. Just because he used a gun doesn't mean he wouldn't have found another way to do what he did if he didn't have one. God forbid he might have found another possibly more disastrous method to carry out HIS evil. I just wish there was at least one decent American in that theater that was exercising thier right to bare arms that could have taken that idiot out.

July 24, 2012 at 7:33 a.m.
EaTn said...

ironhorse said...."I just wish there was at least one decent American in that theater that was exercising thier right to bare arms that could have taken that idiot out."

The shooter was(supposedly) covered in armour in anticipation of the possibility of being shot, so another shooter in the theatre possibly would have added to the casualties. There were accounts of numerous "heroes" who put their lives on the line to save others.

July 24, 2012 at 7:53 a.m.
conservative said...

We have a Constitutional right to own a gun but in the loontoonist's Liberal mind we are dangerous nuts if we do!

July 24, 2012 at 7:58 a.m.
hambone said...

Some one answer this question for me.

What reasoning was used to write an expiration date into the assault rifle ban?

July 24, 2012 at 8:01 a.m.

Ironhorse said... “I just wish there was at least one decent American in that theater that was exercising thier right to bare arms that could have taken that idiot out.”


You're dreaming. That's the stuff of movie plots and video games.

Ban assault weapons. More importantly, teach and model good character in schools, including reaching out to loners. Good post MTJohn.

As far as the cartoon, what a missed opportunity for something thought-provoking. Sometimes I think Mr. Bennett draws them, then let’s a 5th grade son or daughter come up with the caption when he or she is half asleep. Surely you can do better than this.

July 24, 2012 at 8:03 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

As gun ownership and the number of concealed carry permit holders goes up, violent crime goes down. The isolated exceptions are in areas where gang violence fueled by moral decay and the underground economy created by drug prohibition rule society. Throw in strict gun control laws and the thugs own the streets. Chicago comes to mind.

http://www.suntimes.com/13817699-761/prosecutor-teens-killed-man-in-knock-em-down-game.html

Kids in Chicago are killing with their fists. There is no respect for human life with these animals.

That reality must really bother idiots like Bennett. No, Bennett does not care about reality, he is ruled by the emotions that govern his simple misdirected mind.

July 24, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.
conservative said...

"Background checks for people wanting to buy guns in Colorado jumped more than 41 percent after Friday morning's shooting at an Aurora movie theater, and firearms instructors say they're also seeing increased interest in the training required for a concealed-carry permit."

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_21142159/gun-sales-up-since-tragedy?source=rss

July 24, 2012 at 8:44 a.m.

Yeah, boy, take away everyone's right to own a gun and EVERYTHING will be better. BigRidge has some good points.

July 24, 2012 at 8:44 a.m.
hambone said...

Gun control laws should be put to a national referendum.

It's a lot easier to intimidate and buy off a few politicians than the general public!

July 24, 2012 at 8:50 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

How about banning the reality show style news coverage of these idiots? I bet if they knew they wouldn't get any national or world wide attention they wouldn't even do these kind of things. Believe it or not, this guy is now a world renowned celebrity (although an infamous one).

I guarantee some basket case is plotting to one-up this retard. Just like this retard got the one-up on Loughner.

July 24, 2012 at 9:10 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

What are the gun laws in, say, Norway?

July 24, 2012 at 9:17 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Yeah zab. Street drugs have been illegal for decades, and just look at how well THAT worked.

July 24, 2012 at 9:18 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

alprova said... "White House signals Obama WILL NOT push for more gun control in the wake of Colorado shootings"

Obama is eager to sign the United Nation's gun control treaty which would be far more restrictive than anything that could get around the Constitution using the normal legislative process. Obama wants to use world governance to circumvent US law.

You are trying to paint Obama as more friendly to gun ownership than Romney. Romney has his problems, but you are a bold face liar. Typical MO of the democrat operative, lie, lie, lie until the lie becomes perceived as reality.

This “monument” in front of the UN building tells it all…

http://www.ammoland.com/2011/07/15/united-nations-push-for-gun-control-treaty-continues/#axzz21Xs9uK5q

July 24, 2012 at 9:29 a.m.
whatsnottaken said...

Guns do one thing: make it easier for pussies to kill people. Those who kill with guns aren't man enough to duke it out with somebody. They'd likely get their ass kicked, so they shoot from a distance. The reason I bought my 9mm was all the redneck southerners moving to my state for work, and bringing their baggage and guns with them. Crazy people.

July 24, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Guns don't kill people...people kill people. I'd be curious to know how a person could have killed 12 people and injure 58 more, several seriously, in a span of less than 2 minutes if that person had been armed with only his fists and knives.

July 24, 2012 at 9:32 a.m.
WHS1970 said...

Hey, all you wing nuts and libs, it's a beautiful day outside, go out and enjoy it.

July 24, 2012 at 9:34 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

MT John: Ted Kaczynski didn't use guns. Timothy McVeigh didn't use guns either. Get the point? And by the way, the 9/11 terrorists didn't use guns as well. What do you ban there? I'm sure you libs out there have the answer.

July 24, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

whatsnottaken: Why the regional bigotry? After all, we're all world citizens. Right?

July 24, 2012 at 9:50 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

"Blaming guns for murder is like blaming forks for obesity. Someone misused a gun; therefore no one's allowed to have one. This is what passes for logic among the left".

Rush IS right!

July 24, 2012 at 9:55 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

When I moved to the south, I didn't mind the guns at all. But I NEVER seen people eat so many biscuits in my life.

July 24, 2012 at 9:59 a.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

You're wrong about the U.N. Treaty. You've bought into the Republican propaganda.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp

July 24, 2012 at 10:04 a.m.
conservative said...

Great straw man MTJohn!

July 24, 2012 at 10:06 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

whatsnottaken said... "Guns do one thing: make it easier for pussies to kill people"

Guns make it easier for armed women to destroy the aspirations of physically stronger male attackers.

They also make it possible for a single male to fend off a small mob of attackers, which seems to be a growing problem in some cities.

The idea that guns only make it easier for pussies (with mal intent) to kill people is naïve and uninformed.

July 24, 2012 at 10:06 a.m.
bluesky said...

I own guns and I'm not agianst guns and I'm not a gun nut either. The NRA and the gun nuts which support them seem to be republican more than democrat keep stating that they need guns for protection against all the criminals that have them. All the mass shooting over the past decade all the shooters recently purchased their gun and ammo and then went to kill people. Not once did a someone step up and take down the shooter of which on at least 2 occations citizens in the crowd had them. Assult weapons and hand guns are made to kill people. Guns are fun for target shooting but considering the mounting death toll getting them out of circulation maybe worth while, even if it takes a decade or two.

July 24, 2012 at 10:07 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

All this gun bidness is just another red-herring to distract us from the lack of platform The Dear Leader has to run on.

July 24, 2012 at 10:16 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... You're wrong about the U.N. Treaty. You've bought into the Republican propaganda."*

Sorry brother, but I believe you are the one who is wrong. Grant you, the treaty is not yet complete and we have to wait to see the final version before we can make absolute declarations but the UN's intent is quite clear and the Snopes article uses semantics to avoid revealing that intent.

For Example...

Snopes choses a version of the claim that says the treaty has already been signed by Clinton. Most informed gun advocates know this is not the case, but Snopes makes a point of using that as an example of a FALSE statement. I actually wonder if someone did not intentionally write the error filled article for the express purpose of giving liberal fact checkers a piece that they can pick apart. The liars are creative, I will give them that!

July 24, 2012 at 10:18 a.m.
Easy123 said...

JackTroll,

How do you figure that?

Did Obama stage this mass murder in Colorado or something?

When issues like this arise, debate will ensue.

July 24, 2012 at 10:18 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

bluesky: Where would the gang members and street thugs drop off THEIR guns at? After all, they'll be the first in line to turn their guns in after your ban takes effect.

July 24, 2012 at 10:19 a.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

You're hopeless.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/10/15/us-arms-usa-treaty-idUSTRE59E0Q920091015

The proposed treaty has nothing to do with gun laws in the United States.

"The aim of a potential U.N. arms treaty is to combat the illicit international trade of small arms by "tightening regulation of, and setting international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons" in order to "close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market." Even if such a treaty came to pass, U.S. rights and laws regarding the sale and ownership of small arms would still apply within the United States."

You have bought the Republican propaganda.

July 24, 2012 at 10:22 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Toes,

No one is advocating a "gun ban". However, the majority of Americans would like to see certain restrictions like these:

86 % believe in further background checks, regardless of where a gun is purchased.

63 % want a ban on high capacity clips.

69 % want to limit the number of guns a citizen can buy in a period of time.

66 % want a National gun registry.

88 % want to prohibit those on the terror watch list from buying guns.

http://leanforward.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/23/12912461-most-americans-favor-gun-control-measures?lite

July 24, 2012 at 10:26 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "You are trying to paint Obama as more friendly to gun ownership than Romney. Romney has his problems, but you are a bold face liar. Typical MO of the democrat operative, lie, lie, lie until the lie becomes perceived as reality."

I posted a link to a news story that claims that the President has no intention of pursuing gun control. If that is a lie, someone besides myself told it.

Mitt Romney is not going to tote water for the Republican Party, despite what he is trying to represent himself to be for or against these days. There's no lies being told about that either.

"Obama is eager to sign the United Nation's gun control treaty which would be far more restrictive than anything that could get around the Constitution using the normal legislative process. Obama wants to use world governance to circumvent US law."

You cannot begin to prove such a claim, so who's lying?

July 24, 2012 at 10:26 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Obama DID manage to make it all about him though. Just like he does with EVERY issue. "Well, Malia and Sasha go to the movies too". Reminiscent of "That could have been my son" with the likes of Treyvon Martin. This guy is such an egotistical narcissist. Families are grieving and he just has to put himself and his family in the middle of it.

July 24, 2012 at 10:30 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123: Another non-partisan link from MSNBC. Bwahahahahaha BTW, how is summer camp coming along?

July 24, 2012 at 10:32 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Toes,

Everyone's family should be right in the middle of it.

Are you really faulting the President for being sympathetic? For trying to understand people on a real level?

You're warped.

July 24, 2012 at 10:32 a.m.
Easy123 said...

JackTroll,

I posted the poll results from the article, dumbass.

There are links to the polls in the article. The polls weren't done by MSNBC. They are just reporting them.

PLEASE, stop being so ignorant. Read the damn article. You might learn something, even at your old age.

July 24, 2012 at 10:34 a.m.
alprova said...

Easy123 wrote: "You have bought the Republican propaganda."

Slight correction. He has bought the NRA propoganda. Not all Republicans believe that particular piece of misinformation.

July 24, 2012 at 10:35 a.m.
Easy123 said...

alprova,

Very true.

I heard a quote last night:

"There are really 4 branches of government: Executive, Judicial, Legislative, and the NRA."

July 24, 2012 at 10:37 a.m.
hambone said...

The shooter in Tucson was only disarmed after he empted a 30 round magazine and went to reload. If the ban had still been in effect he would only have had 15 rounds.

How much damage did the extra 15 rounds do?

If the ban had still been in effect, Holmes would have had the shoygun (5 rds.) and 1 or 2 hand guns with 15 rounds each.

How many round did he shoot?

July 24, 2012 at 10:39 a.m.
mtngrl said...

BRP wrote: "You are trying to paint Obama as more friendly to gun ownership than Romney. Romney has his problems, but you are a bold face liar. Typical MO of the democrat operative, lie, lie, lie until the lie becomes perceived as reality."

OK BRP, please tell us which one - Romney or Obama - has actually banned the most guns in their political careers?

July 24, 2012 at 10:39 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

"There are really 4 branches of government: Executive, Judicial, Legislative, and the NRA.. Yes, Easy, only 4: Executive, Executive, Judicial, and Legislative. Blessed be The Dear Leader.

July 24, 2012 at 10:39 a.m.
Easy123 said...

JackTroll,

Your post doesn't make sense.

July 24, 2012 at 10:41 a.m.
hambone said...

Once again I ask.

What was the reasoning used when congress wrote a expiration date into the assault riffle ban??

July 24, 2012 at 10:42 a.m.
Easy123 said...

hambone,

It had a sunset provision.

July 24, 2012 at 10:44 a.m.
chatt_man said...

BRP is not hopeless, Easy, he is correct. Stay informed correctly, not thru snopes.

July 24, 2012 at 10:46 a.m.
Easy123 said...

chatt_man,

Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

Read what is being proposed. The proposed treaty has nothing to do with gun laws in the United States and CANNOT change or alter any gun laws (2nd Amendment included) in the U.S.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/international-gun-ban-treaty/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jun/09/chain-email/chain-e-mail-says-un-treaty-would-force-us-ban-con/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/10/15/us-arms-usa-treaty-idUSTRE59E0Q920091015

"The aim of a potential U.N. arms treaty is to combat the illicit international trade of small arms by "tightening regulation of, and setting international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons" in order to "close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market." Even if such a treaty came to pass, U.S. rights and laws regarding the sale and ownership of small arms would still apply within the United States."

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp

The NRA/Republican propaganda is making you ignorant! WAKE UP, BRO!

July 24, 2012 at 10:48 a.m.
chatt_man said...

I read that, Easy. But answer me this... Does a UN treaty have the ability ot overide the U.S. Constitution? The answer is yes. Once that is signed, changes can be made to that treaty thru UN votes that can overide our second ammendment.

I don't have a reading comprehension problem, you have a naive understanding problem.

July 24, 2012 at 10:53 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Chatt_man,

A U.N. treaty DOES NOT have the ability to override the U.S. Constitution.

You're 100% wrong.

You obviously have some type of mental deficiency because nothing you say is true.

July 24, 2012 at 10:54 a.m.
chatt_man said...

Well, Easy, it looks like I got ahead of myself on this one. As bad as I hate to admit it you're correct on this.

July 24, 2012 at 10:58 a.m.
Easy123 said...

chatt_man,

No big deal. It's easy to make mistakes this misinformation-filled media world.

July 24, 2012 at 10:58 a.m.
annisisbell said...

I resent Americans and gun owners being demonized and lumped together. One poor insane kid committed a crime. Millions and millions of gun owners have done nothing wrong. How does that justify calling all of us nuts?

The nuts are the ones who trust the un-American hostile elites who have taken over our government.

When you are being mugged by the travone martins of the world, dial 911. If it takes too long for the cops to get there kiss your unarmed butt goodbye.

It is a basic human right to be allowed to defend yourself. That I know of, the millions of gun owners have threatened no one Mr Bennett. But we are under threat and attack everyday. From the illegal aliens to the liberal/jew newspapers.

Perhaps those who write for liberal/jew newspapers have the most dangerous weapons and are the actual threat to freedom and liberty. When will we take our media back? Then maybe we wouldn't need our guns.

July 24, 2012 at 11:06 a.m.
Easy123 said...

annisisbell,

You ARE nuts.

July 24, 2012 at 11:11 a.m.
annisisbell said...

Easy 123, the UN and international treaties and trade agreements most certainly do have the power to over ride our Constitution. What's the matter with you? You think the Constitution supports illegal immigration? You think the Constitution supports aggressive war against other nations that have done nothing to us? You think the Constitution supports loyalty to foreign nations or for israel to control our foreign policies?

A drug dealer cannot call the cops if his drug money gets stolen. That's because a court won't hear or help you if you don't come to court with clean hands. So how is it that illegal aliens who are here illegally can use the courts to stay here? How come the founding stock of this nation has no say regarding immigration?

I think you can forget about the Constitution. They've already done away with it. I've tried to tell you they are destroying Western civilization in order to create a one world order.

I am consistent in my beliefs and my goals while others are blown with the wind and treat every issue from a different pov.

They are demonizing the founding stock of this nation and trying to take our guns so we will be defenseless against what the government is doing to us. jews own and control all our media. They couldn't do what they are doing to us without the help of what the jew derisively calls their shabbos goy. White people who sell us out in Congress, media and business.

Think of the leftwing media propagandists who attack and demonize and scapegoat us and men like Bill Gates who sell us out for cheap labor from India. Like Bill Gates needs more money. the only people who do NOT qualify for the Gates Foundation money are ANGLO SAXON WHITE PEOPLE.

If Christian people owned and controlled all major media, wouldn't there be demands that it be made diverse already?

The only people no longer allowed on our Supreme Court are Anglo Saxon Christians.

Demographics are everything. Everything. The founding stock of this nation will be a minority in another generation. Do you think we'll want our guns then?

July 24, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

annis: You sound remarkably like people in Germany, mid 1920's thru 1939. Do you not study history? (side-note to Easy123...really study history, not the Cliff-notes Wiki edition)

July 24, 2012 at 11:25 a.m.
Easy123 said...

anus,

You're wrong, Byron De La Beckwith.

Not to mention your a racist, anti-semite, xenophobic, etc.

July 24, 2012 at 11:29 a.m.
limric said...

whatsnottaken said at 9:30 a.m

“Guns do one thing: make it easier for pussies to kill people. Those who kill with guns aren't man enough to duke it out with somebody. They'd likely get their ass kicked, so they shoot from a distance.” And then followed with: “The reason I bought my 9mm was all the redneck southerners moving to my state for work, and bringing their baggage and guns with them.”

See anything slightly conflicting in the above – whatever it was supposed to convey.


Assault weapons needing complete regulatory review are the ‘Predator & Reaper’ UCAV (unmanned combat air vehicles). Used with impunity in Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia. A large part of the casualties were civilian and that number has increased dramatically since 2009. Their use violates national sovereignty, international law, morality and the U.S. Bill of rights. Who are the terrorists now?

July 24, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
annisisbell said...

Jack-Dennis - could you please tell me why jews have a right to a state of their own but Germans had no right to the state that already belonged to them?

Germans were the last in a long long long line of people who wanted to drive the jew out. jews were driven from every place they ever lived in Europe because they are trouble to the host people. They are historically known as a parasitic cancerous plague on other people.

What does the jew owned Federal Reserve actually do? How do we get rid of the Fed? JFK issued an Executive Order getting rid of the Fed. Like every other POTUS before him who tried to get rid of it he was assassinated. On the plane carrying his body from Dallas to DC, Lyndon Johnson rescinded the Executive Order.

Later israel committed a false flag attack upon the USS Liberty which was supposed to be blamed on Egypt. As soon as the Shabbos Goy Johnson learned it was actually israel that attacked our ship, he recalled the rescue boats and let our children who survived the attack die in the water.

What's the difference between Nazis and Zionists? What the heck do you think jews are doing this very minute to Palestinians with OUR money? Why the heck do you think they have us dying in the middle east this very minute?

Nazis! Nazis? Is that the best you can do? Why don't we talk about what jews and israel ARE doing since we can put a stop to that but there is nothing we can do to change history? Why?

What about the jews in Stalin's inner circle who killed TENS OF MILLIONS of Russians and Ukrainians in their own homelands? We never hear about that, we hear only about Nazis because we've allowed the self serving jew control of our media.

The most evil system that ever existed is jew communism and its gotten more people killed than any other. Lets examine the holocaust with modern forensic technology and learn what actually happened. Why should we have to take jew word for what happened while they continually demonize German people?

Why do we have to remember that history and put more emphasis upon it then the millions we just killed in Iraq? Why must we kill millions more in Iran as though its nothing but we have to remember Nazis? Please explain.

July 24, 2012 at 11:52 a.m.
annisisbell said...

Jews got Palestine by promising the Brits to drag us into WW1. jews got 40 million Anglo Saxon, Nordic and Christian people killed. Then world jewry dragged us into WW2 and got 60 million of us killed because the Germans and Hitler rightly considered them a threat within. So why don't we get history correct before we remember it.

July 24, 2012 at 11:58 a.m.

So anyone who goes into a gun store to buy a gun is crazy? That idea is much more insane than anyone who might buy a gun to protect themselves. Scared much Clay?

July 24, 2012 at 11:59 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

annis: What I remember about Stalin's inner circle is that STALIN was responsible for millions of deaths in Russia,the Ukraine, & elsewhere. Jews had little status within Stalin's circle. You, sir, are amazing.

July 24, 2012 at 12:02 p.m.
annisisbell said...

The Colorado shooter had spent the summer in the company of jews.

http://forward.com/articles/159737/batman-shooter-worked-at-jewish-summer-camp/

What do you think the liberal/jew media would be saying about now if he had spent the summer at a Southern Baptist summer camp?

For all we know he had a chip implanted that turned him into a Manchurian candidate and caused him to do what he did. That is as reasonable an explanation as anything else given what a bright and good kid he had been up until going off in a totally different direction and shooting up a theater.

July 24, 2012 at 12:03 p.m.

And to all those on here who think a gun ban will stop criminals from getting guns, check out the gun crime statistics for Washinton D.C. How is it that cities that ban guns have the highest rates of gun crime in the nation? Simple. Gun bans keep honest men from getting guns. Criminals and nuts could care less about your stupid laws and bans.

July 24, 2012 at 12:03 p.m.

One thing I actually agree with Easy123 on. Annisisbell, you need help.

July 24, 2012 at 12:10 p.m.
Easy123 said...

FPSE,

D.C. doesn't have a guns ban.

July 24, 2012 at 12:11 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

I'm thinkin Annis is having us on.

July 24, 2012 at 12:14 p.m.

It did until 2008. That isn't that long ago. Now it is prohibitively difficult to get a gun there. Most people would rather move than go through what it takes to own a gun in D.C.

July 24, 2012 at 12:14 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Easy123 said..."Toes,

No one is advocating a "gun ban". However, the majority of Americans would like to see certain restrictions like these:"

Exactly! No one is advocating a gun ban. Some of us, including many gun enthusiasts, are advocating responsible gun ownership.

Unfortunately, some folks fail to understand that, along with Constitutional rights, come Constitutional responsibilities. Not all gun owners are responsible and, absent responsible, society has a duty to curb irresponsible behavior, including constraints on gun ownership, consistent with the "well regulated" provision contained within the second amendment.

July 24, 2012 at 12:51 p.m.
tderng said...

not too long ago the ONLY place to legally get a gun registered in D.C. was actually in the police station,and the legal restrictions kept people from even trying.Registration of a firearm can Only be done at police headquarters not at any of the separate precincts.As of this year you must pass a firearms safety training course (which I have no problem with) that until this year took 4 hours.It can now be done online in about 30 minutes.A legally blind person cannot protect him/her self with a firearm.This registration must be re-done every three years (Load of crap).You must give up your s.s. number by showing your s.s. card,and some form of other I.D. (not a drivers license)that shows your s.s. number.

July 24, 2012 at 12:56 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

tdemg: showing all that ID seems like voter suppression to me.

July 24, 2012 at 1:41 p.m.
tderng said...

more like gun right suppression...lmao

July 24, 2012 at 1:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

OK annis. we get it now. go ahead and admit you're just pulling our rickshaw.

July 24, 2012 at 2:06 p.m.
annisisbell said...

I'll do that as soon as you answer the questions I asked. Go ahead, give it a shot, no pun intended.

July 24, 2012 at 2:23 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

8 HR safty / training course folliowed by backgroung check,finger prints and a couple hundred dollars will allow you to exercise your second amendment rights. At least in TN. That is the legal way to carry. Been doing it for a couple years now. If I wanted to do it illegally I could have bypassed the permit requirements, gone to the nearest pawn shop, pick one out, shove it in my waistband and be on my way. Unless I was convicted of a felony or drug crime, then I could go to the nearest gunshow and walk out with whatever I wanted, shove it in my waistband and be on my way. The person who had the hardest time carrying a firearm in the 3 senerios was the lawabiding citizen. That is not to mention the financial toll taken on the poor who would be hardest hit by the permit requirements. Imagine a 200+ $ tax being put on any of your other constitutional rights such as speech, religion or assembly. Whould you support taxing any of those rights?

July 24, 2012 at 2:34 p.m.
annisisbell said...

Look who is trying to disarm us, what a shock!

"I would take it one step further. I don't understand why police officers across this country don't stand up, collectively, and say, 'We're going to go on strike. We're not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what's required to keep us safe."

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/24/Mayor-Bloomberg-Says-No-More-Police-Until-Americans-Give-Up-Their-Guns?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigGovernment+%28Big+Government%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Cops would probably be very happy if blacks were disarmed and no doubt the world would be safer if israel were disarmed. What about it Mr Bloomberg?

Sadly the trouble makers will keep their guns if the Bloombergs of the world have their way while White people become defenseless.

When Whites become a minority in America in the next generation do you think we'll need our guns or will America be harmony and peace?

July 24, 2012 at 2:35 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

Allowing someone to buy at a gunshow without a background check undermines all other efforts being made to control access to guns. Could someone explain why this practice should be continued. As far as semi-automatic assault weapons go there are people out there (myself included) who believe the government is not always acting in our best interests. If the time ever came to stand up to an oppressive government, would they be more or less willing to hear grievences from a populace that is armed with AR-15's or one armed with rocks? An armed populace = a limited government.

July 24, 2012 at 2:49 p.m.
timbo said...

You all miss the point, these types of crimes are extremely rare. The liberals use these rare things to make it all about emotion. They want control and you can't control an armed society.

I have come to the conclusion that liberals are getting dumber and dumber. All around them there is evidence that liberal policies never work and yet they still cling to them like children cling to a security blanket.

It is kind of ironic that in every murder capital in this country, Chicago, Washington, etc. has the tightest gun control. It is illogical that controlling guns does anything.

Another example is Mexico, where gun rights are severely restricted. How many murders where in Mexico? There were over 15,000 in 2010 alone.

Just like you stupid liberals to take one step forward and two steps back.

July 24, 2012 at 3:11 p.m.
annisisbell said...

Now now Timbo, the liberals know what is best for everyone and you will do what they say because they will force it upon you.

July 24, 2012 at 3:19 p.m.
timbo said...

annisisbell...Not unless they are well armed.

July 24, 2012 at 3:37 p.m.
annisisbell said...

Good point.

July 24, 2012 at 3:39 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Japan has very stringent gun controls...almost no one has a gun. Result: alomost no deaths by gun in the entire country.

July 24, 2012 at 3:56 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

nucanuck: Well, there you go then. Ban guns and collect all 212 million of them here.

July 24, 2012 at 4:01 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Timbo,

"It is illogical that controlling guns does anything."

Please flesh this BS "logic" out.

Are you a complete moron?

July 24, 2012 at 4:31 p.m.
anniebelle said...

timbo, because you and your family have not been shot, I guess you think these numbers are insignificant. In 2010 - the latest year for which detailed statistics are available - there were 12,996 murders in the US. Of those, 8,775 caused by firearms.

July 24, 2012 at 4:36 p.m.
annisisbell said...

nucanuck - Japan is full of Japanese. They don't have any blacks or Arab hating warmongering jews or Hispanics.

Japan doesn't have a Congressional Black Caucus or an American Israeli Political Action Committee or hundreds of Arab organizations like Chicago alone does.

Japan has secure borders and whatever opportunity the high IQ Japanese create, jobs are filled by only Japanese and they do not owe them to anyone else.

Japan can seek only the interests of the Japanese. The Japanese are working with robotics so they can do the work of society with an aging population and never bring in foreigners to do the work.

Japanese have taunted Americans that we allow blacks into our most beautiful inner cities claiming that at least the French leave them on the out skirts.

Speaking of the French, the French elections are now determined by Muslims! We can all look forward to that and just imagine the murders that are yet to occur in our future.

July 24, 2012 at 4:45 p.m.
annisisbell said...

Guns don't kill people, minorities do. Hey liberals, better get rid of minorities.

July 24, 2012 at 4:46 p.m.

Nucanuck, In a FREE country with a constitution that specifically grants gun ownership as a right to all citizens, gun bans are the wrong thing to do.

July 24, 2012 at 4:47 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

DJHB...your reasoning for owning a semi-automatic or two or three is half-baked. If you honestly think that your semis are going to be your salvation if the "government" decides to put the ultimate screws to you, you might want to think again. Whoever is involved in this hypothetical takeover you imagine will obviously have the military on their side, and good luck with those little pea shooters against a fully armed military equipped with howitzers, mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, helicopter gunships, missiles...you name it. I own a simple .22 rifle, period. If there is a confrontation so bad that I can't defend myself with that, then there is some serious sh#t going down that I probably wouldn't survive anyway...or even want to survive, given the nature of the nightmarish existence that would probably ensue.

July 24, 2012 at 5:10 p.m.
annisisbell said...

Thank you Rickaroo. We couldn't defend ourselves against the army. But surely our children would never turn their weapons upon us no matter what orders they were given, would they?

However our military is being made diverse because the liberals claim its too male and too White. Foreigners earn their citizenship by joining the military.

Not only do they have historical grudges but they desperately want to take America from us.

So in every way non Whites are becoming a serious threat to us. We will be a minority in another generation. At least if we don't have to fight the army we might can defend ourselves from non Whites, depending of course on how the Zimmerman case goes.

We might not even be able to stand our ground.

July 24, 2012 at 5:23 p.m.
annisisbell said...

hahaha I love it

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-sales-aurora-colorado-shooting-spike-tuscon-161409369--finance.html

People are buying more guns because of the Colorado shooting! It was easy for the One World Order crowd to disarm White South Africans and it was easy for the communists to disarm Russians but if they try to take our nation they are going to have one heck of a fight on their hands. Go ahead, just try to take our guns!

July 24, 2012 at 5:28 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

limric said... "Assault weapons needing complete regulatory review are the ‘Predator & Reaper’ UCAV (unmanned combat air vehicles). Used with impunity in Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia. A large part of the casualties were civilian and that number has increased dramatically since 2009. Their use violates national sovereignty, international law, morality and the U.S. Bill of rights. Who are the terrorists now?"

Absolutely Correct.

July 24, 2012 at 5:29 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Interesting that annis' racist comments go unchallenged by most of you here today. Shameful for Americans, democrat or republican, liberal or conservative, to say nothing.

July 24, 2012 at 6:04 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

ikeithlu: I think the reason is that most believe this cat is pulling our leg. No one really thinks like that, right? He can't even get his history anywhere close to the truth.

July 24, 2012 at 6:19 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Actually, thanks to revisionists and white supremacy groups, I'm afraid there are people in the USA that do think and believe as annis does. In the past they were mostly isolated, brought back to reality by the fact that no one close by shared their views. Thanks to the internet, even the most outrageous beliefs can feel mainstream because they can be shared between larger numbers of like-minded people. No more village idiots.

July 24, 2012 at 6:45 p.m.
dude_abides said...

See, Jack_ ? You find it easy to paint the entire left with the looniest radical you can find, but it perplexes you when you see the underbelly of the beast you've been riding. Many more of your kkkindred spirits than you might like to believe feel that same way. I'm sure there were Germans who thought WTF when the Reich & Roll Show began in earnest.

July 24, 2012 at 6:59 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

dude_: As usual, you're making assumptions you can 't back up. I don't know what beast I've been riding, but you've got it all figured. So you're saying that people R of center are Nazis, mass murderers, etc.? Sound about right? Your moral high ground is all in your pointy head, pal.

July 24, 2012 at 7:05 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

MTJohn: Just how in the world do you enact "responsible gun ownership"? If the Aurora shooter only attended your liberal "responsible gun ownership" classes, this never would have happened? Liberalism is dreamers dreamin' separated from reality.

July 24, 2012 at 8:06 p.m.
alprova said...

Timbo wrote: "You all miss the point, these types of crimes are extremely rare."

As rare as they occur, I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if a loved one of yours winds up dead in the future as a result of one of these "rare" incidents.

"The liberals use these rare things to make it all about emotion. They want control and you can't control an armed society."

I don't have any problem at all with people arming themselves for protection, but I draw the line at weapons capable of firing more than 16 rounds without the need to pause and to reload.

"I have come to the conclusion that liberals are getting dumber and dumber. All around them there is evidence that liberal policies never work and yet they still cling to them like children cling to a security blanket."

While that is your opinion, it in no manner is fact.

"It is kind of ironic that in every murder capital in this country, Chicago, Washington, etc. has the tightest gun control. It is illogical that controlling guns does anything."

The only two cities that do not allow conceal/carry permits, are Washington D.C. and Chicago. That sets those two cities apart from the rest of the nation. While Washington D.C comes in at #10 in terms of violent gun deaths, per capita, Chicago is WAY down the list. This is according to the CDC, the most impartial evaluation source of information out there.

In terms of events, the larger a city is in population, of course the more people that will die, but the only fair measure when determining a rate of violent death by guns, is to measure the number of deaths per 100,000 people.

The Top Twenty List:

01.) New Orleans - 62.1 per 100,000

02.) Detroit, Michigan - 35.0 per 100,000

03.) Baltimore, Maryland - 29.7 per 100,000

04.) Oakland, California - 26.6 per 100,000

05.) Newark, New Jersey - 25.4 per 100,000

06.) The suburbs of Metarie and Kenner, just out of New Orleans and the City of St. Louis are tied - 24.1 per 100,000

07.) Miami, Florida - 23.7 per 100,000

08.) Richmond, Virginia - 23.1 per 100,000

09.) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - 20.0 per 100,000

10.) Washington, D.C. - 19.0 per 100,000

11.) Memphis, Tennessee - 18.4 per 100,000

12.) Atlanta, Georgia - 17.2 per 100,000

13.) Buffalo, New York - 16.5 per 100,000

14.) Cincinnati, Ohio - 15.9 per 100,000

15.) Kansa City, Missouri - 14.5 per 100,000

16.) Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Las Vegas, Nevada are tied - 13.5 per 100,000

17.) Houston, Texas - 12.9 per 100,000

18.) Indianapolis, Indiana - 12.6 per 100,000

19.) Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - 12.5 per 100,000

20.) Chicago, Illinois and all of the metropolitan Memphis, Tennessee are tied - 11.6 per 100,000

(To be cont.)

July 24, 2012 at 8:41 p.m.
alprova said...

(Cont.)

"Another example is Mexico, where gun rights are severely restricted. How many murders where in Mexico? There were over 15,000 in 2010 alone."

No thanks to the loose gun laws in the U.S., where guns are readily available to Mexican drug cartels hanging out around the borders, where most of these deaths are concentrated.

"Just like you stupid liberals to take one step forward and two steps back."

Your opinion is noted for the record. Just keep in mind that it is just an opinion, and nowhere near a fact.

July 24, 2012 at 8:42 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Jack... Silly Bunt. Only Klansmen have pointy heads. Pal.

July 24, 2012 at 8:43 p.m.
Easy123 said...

JonRoss,

You need to get lumped in the annisisbell "Crazy" category.

July 24, 2012 at 9:29 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

JonRoss said "Progressives have made slaves of black Americans." An element of truth to this.

July 24, 2012 at 9:35 p.m.
Easy123 said...

JackTroll,

Please reveal this element of truth.

July 24, 2012 at 9:36 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "alpo tell us what political party controls most of the cities you list above."

That Sir, is a meaningless statistic. A more applicable statistic would be to consider the incomes of the people living within a city limit. Most urban areas are Democratic, only because all the lily white, and affluent Republicans have made their way as far away from cities as possible, leaving the cities to be inhabited by most of the minority population in a metropolitan area, along with lower income whites.

"And then tell us it isn't the Dems fault that they have crime ridden cities."

It most certainly isn't the fault of either political party. Crime statistics are not tracked to determine which political party that a criminal supports.

"It's George Bush's fault, correct ?"

Is that a question or an accusation?

July 24, 2012 at 9:37 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "Liberals, Progressives, and Obamists are merchants of hate and death and have created as much havoc in this world as racism."

That's a very inflammitory statement. Can you back it up with some examples to illustrate it's relevance to anything that can be determined to be factual?

July 24, 2012 at 9:40 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "anusbelle is indeed talking like a German of the 1930s, but so is Barack Obama. Both spew crap and lies daily. Obama on a scale so breathtaking that he believes his own crap."

What's truly disturbing is that you believe your own crap about his crap, comes close to the truth.

It never has and it never will.

July 24, 2012 at 9:43 p.m.
degage said...

Al, Mar.30 2012 huff post reported Chicago murder rate up 35% from the same time last year.

Just last friday night 18 murders were reported for that night. I hardly think Chicago is a very safe city. Guess that is why we prefer a small town. Not a whole lot of crime.

July 24, 2012 at 9:45 p.m.
alprova said...

Jack_Dennis wrote: "JonRoss said "Progressives have made slaves of black Americans." An element of truth to this."

Wow!! A troll agreeing with a baseless statement written by another troll. What a surprise.

I challenge either one you you dim bulbs to write a coherant sentence or a hundred, that would begin to substantiate it.

July 24, 2012 at 9:48 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Progressives have created the entitlement society with a Trillion dollars of freebies, creating an entire underclass of dependent underachievers. In return, the L's get their vote..Disgusting.

July 24, 2012 at 10:26 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

dude_: Incorrect on the hats. Dunces wear them too. Hello?

July 24, 2012 at 10:28 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Too? Oh, so Klansmen aren't dunces in your book?

Torah,Torah,Torah, there, Jack_Annis

July 24, 2012 at 10:44 p.m.
Easy123 said...

JackTroll,

Your vague rhetoric is getting less and less coherent. Might want to pop that Viagra BEFORE you post.

July 24, 2012 at 10:52 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Easy, he needs Provigil, not Viagra. Lets not foment bestiality, even if it's consensual. Ouch, I take that back.

July 24, 2012 at 11:05 p.m.
alprova said...

degage wrote: "Al, Mar.30 2012 huff post reported Chicago murder rate up 35% from the same time last year."

Yep. They sure did. Did you pay attention to the numbers involved?

They cited 114 murder thru the end of March. 35% of that is 39. So there were 39 more murders in Chicago than there were by the end of March, 2011.

There are give or take 2,707,120 Chicagoans at any given moment within the city limits.

As of July 1, 2012, there had been 296 people murdered in Chicago thus far this year. Let's call it a halfway point, assuming that the rate holds and 592 people are murdered by the end of the year.

2,707,120 divided by 100,000 = 27.012. 27.012 divided by 592 = 21.91 people per 100,000 murdered in Chicago for the year 2012.

The rate is definitely up, about 4 people per 100,000, but not alarmingly so.

"Just last friday night 18 murders were reported for that night. I hardly think Chicago is a very safe city. Guess that is why we prefer a small town. Not a whole lot of crime."

Statistics show that nearly 50% of all people murdered, knew their murderer. 20% of all murders involve family members. Overall, as a U.S. citizen, your chance of being murdered sometime in your lifetime is about 1 in 18,000.

Living in the Chicago area, your chances of being murdered is about 1 in 4,600. Here in Chattanooga, your chance of being murdered is about 1 in 6,800. Living in Winchester, Virginia for the last three years, your chance of being murdered was 1 in 26,587, for they have had no murders at all the last three years straight.

July 25, 2012 at 1:04 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.