Republican Scalise and Aide Shot

[stevenash]

30 minutes ago, REBgp said:

Anyone notice not one liberal has got on here and condemned the shooting?

total shocker!!

[baddog]

3 hours ago, new tobie said:

He had pictures of Putin and Grab um making out!

Only a totally uncaring individual would poke fun at America's leaders being gunned down. Wow, just when I think you couldn't sink any lower, you come on here with crap like this.

[baddog]

3 minutes ago, stevenash said:

total shocker!!

Of course not, but they screamed when a Sanders voter racially slurred some muslims.

[PAMFAM10]

Funny I haven't seen a conservative condemn either just blaming Hillary and the dems.

[baddog]

4 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Funny I haven't seen a conservative condemn either just blaming Hillary and the dems.

Typical answer. Most are just reporting facts. The only thing Dems will condemn is GUNS!!!!! Wanna bet?

Reb condemned it, and so do I. Had this happened in Texas, four people would have gunned him down before he could have gotten off 5 rounds.

[CardinalBacker]

It's the next logical step... Since we're okay with corporate sponsorship of the "Trump Assassination" play as well as Kathy Griffin's "comedy," you can't be too surprised when people start taking shots at each other. 

I like the way that Trump was "causing all of the violence" during the campaign with this speeches, but having the President assassinated or beheaded in effigy is all just good clean fun and protected free speech and totally not connected to today's targeted violence.  

[Hagar]

Started not to post.  Kinda long, but scan and hit the high points.  Rush doesn't miss much.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[new tobie]

52 minutes ago, REBgp said:

Started not to post.  Kinda long, but scan and hit the high points.  Rush doesn't miss much.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Rush is pure trash and scum, probably have been shootings after listening to his trashy talk show, which is just a shooters pep rally.

[BS Wildcats]

4 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Rush is pure trash and scum, probably have been shootings after listening to his trashy talk show, which is just a shooters pep rally.

Again with your blinders.  Funny that you talk about the Republican hate, but the idiot shooter asked if those on the field were Dems or Republicans.  When he heard Republicans, the shooting started.  You should be proud of your party new tobie.  The party of hate and the KKK. Leave those blinders on.

[new tobie]

14 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

Again with your blinders.  Funny that you talk about the Republican hate, but the idiot shooter asked if those on the field were Dems or Republicans.  When he heard Republicans, the shooting started.  You should be proud of your party new tobie.  The party of hate and the KKK. Leave those blinders on.

I didn't do the shooting and I don't have a party. I only argue against republicans because the board is so one sided. I don't even own a gun, I look to you gun toting texans to protect me. Although i don't see many stories of gun toting Texans protecting anyone or stopping any violence!

[Hagar]

8 hours ago, PhatMack19 said:

I don't trust media's description of guns, but this is interesting if true.

 

"Police Reporting the weapon was an M4.

Civilian ownership is significantly restricted on the M4. Military and police use primarily. 

The media is consistently wrong most of the time on the initial description of the weapon.  I read on CNN it was a Chinese SKS-30, 7.62mm..

[Hagar]

39 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Rush is pure trash and scum, probably have been shootings after listening to his trashy talk show, which is just a shooters pep rally.

Feel sorry for you nt.  All that hate will eat you up.

[six burg]

6 minutes ago, REBgp said:

The media is consistently wrong most of the time on the initial description of the weapon.  I read on CNN it was a Chinese SKS-30, 7.62mm..

trump started this media fake news crap. i believe he would like to do away with the media and have everyone listen to what he says only. Smart people listen to the news around them and then form their own opinion.

[six burg]

5 minutes ago, REBgp said:

Feel sorry for you nt.  All that hate will eat you up.

And you patronize Rush Limbaugh

[PhatMack19]

43 minutes ago, new tobie said:

I didn't do the shooting and I don't have a party. I only argue against republicans because the board is so one sided. I don't even own a gun, I look to you gun toting texans to protect me. Although i don't see many stories of gun toting Texans protecting anyone or stopping any violence!

If the Majority Whip would not have been there today with his security detail, this would have been a massacre.  There was no one there but Scalise's security to stop this madman.  Good guys(and girls) with guns stop bad guys.  

[texanabroad]

48 minutes ago, new tobie said:

I didn't do the shooting and I don't have a party. I only argue against republicans because the board is so one sided. I don't even own a gun, I look to you gun toting texans to protect me. Although i don't see many stories of gun toting Texans protecting anyone or stopping any violence!

What is there even to "argue" against on this issue? Some jacka** started shooting a bunch of innocent people and you want to "argue" because this board is one sided. You are a sick *%$#. Why not come out and say that everyone should tone down the violence rhetoric and that this is unacceptable. But no, you gotta go against those nasty conservatives. If I get suspended from this board for that, so be it. 

[stevenash]

8 minutes ago, texanabroad said:

What is there even to "argue" against on this issue? Some jacka** started shooting a bunch of innocent people and you want to "argue" because this board is one sided. You are a sick *%$#. Why not come out and say that everyone should tone down the violence rhetoric and that this is unacceptable. But no, you gotta go against those nasty conservatives. If I get suspended from this board for that, so be it. 

Texanabroad- you apparently have forgotten that the tolerance, mutual respect, and human dignity called for frequently by Mr. Obama applies only to the left.  The right can do as they please because they "care more".

[baddog]

How conveniently you forget the off duty police officer that killed both dumbass muslims who came to Texas for the ridiculing of Mohammed with cartoons. If I see a pos muslim about to harm you or your family, I would kill him/her. Just like shooting a varmint.

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, six burg said:

trump started this media fake news crap. i believe he would like to do away with the media and have everyone listen to what he says only. Smart people listen to the news around them and then form their own opinion.

So you conveniently forgot that Obama went after FoxNews and AP reporters, but somehow concocted out of thin air that Trump wants to do away with the media. I hope you didn't include yourself when you said "smart people".

[Hagar]

1 hour ago, six burg said:

And you patronize Rush Limbaugh

No, I rarely listen to Rush, but I don't mind listening to him.  As I said, I didn't like Obama, but I didn't hate him.  Evidently nt hates Trump.  Do you hate Trump?  Do you hate Rush?  Is the Left nothing but haters?

[Fee Dee]

Okay, here is one Liberal who thinks the shooting was horrible in fact I think most shootings are terrible,  I even have the nerve to think all guns should be less available, reading the comments here I can understand why we are so divided in this country. Of course, I do realize that Rush Limpprick has all the right answers, and I am sure Fox News will give as a fully and complete and objective analysis. 

[stevenash]

34 minutes ago, Fee Dee said:

Okay, here is one Liberal who thinks the shooting was horrible in fact I think most shootings are terrible,  I even have the nerve to think all guns should be less available, reading the comments here I can understand why we are so divided in this country. Of course, I do realize that Rush Limpprick has all the right answers, and I am sure Fox News will give as a fully and complete and objective analysis. 

Since you have such a strong aversion to Fox and Rush, just where do you get your unbiased, only the facts, news?

[Reagan]

Who radicalized this fruit cake?

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Englebert]

55 minutes ago, Fee Dee said:

Okay, here is one Liberal who thinks the shooting was horrible in fact I think most shootings are terrible,  I even have the nerve to think all guns should be less available, reading the comments here I can understand why we are so divided in this country. Of course, I do realize that Rush Limpprick has all the right answers, and I am sure Fox News will give as a fully and complete and objective analysis. 

So you think guns should be less available. My question is who should be denied the right to defend themselves, family and property based on an arbitrary set of rules that have no measurable set of statistical results. That is, how the hell do you think you, or anyone else, can determine who should be denied the right of self protection. Please enlightened us on this set of criteria that you would implement that would determine who is competent versus who is incompetent to own a means of self protection. Keep in mind, when you list these qualifications, use the simple test of "would Stephen King be disqualified" with your qualification test.

I've asked this question on this site at multiple times, and not one single person can come up with a comprehensive, or even partial set of qualifications that indicate the slightest evidence of future violence. To be fair, no one on this Earth has done any better.

Forgive me, but I've just heard a few incompetent Liberal nut-cases spouting off about more gun control, and I apologize for attacking your post. Yours was the first I saw on this topic, and I would have started my own topic if I couldn't find a thread to attack. Having said that, let me restate my question. What laws would you enact to disqualify someone from self-protection? (This is not directed specifically at Fee Dee, but an open question for everyone on this board.)

[Fee Dee]

1 hour ago, Englebert said:

So you think guns should be less available. My question is who should be denied the right to defend themselves, family and property based on an arbitrary set of rules that have no measurable set of statistical results. That is, how the hell do you think you, or anyone else, can determine who should be denied the right of self protection. Please enlightened us on this set of criteria that you would implement that would determine who is competent versus who is incompetent to own a means of self protection. Keep in mind, when you list these qualifications, use the simple test of "would Stephen King be disqualified" with your qualification test.

I've asked this question on this site at multiple times, and not one single person can come up with a comprehensive, or even partial set of qualifications that indicate the slightest evidence of future violence. To be fair, no one on this Earth has done any better.

Forgive me, but I've just heard a few incompetent Liberal nut-cases spouting off about more gun control, and I apologize for attacking your post. Yours was the first I saw on this topic, and I would have started my own topic if I couldn't find a thread to attack. Having said that, let me restate my question. What laws would you enact to disqualify someone from self-protection? (This is not directed specifically at Fee Dee, but an open question for everyone on this board.)

I said less available, people who jump to their own conclusions are part of the divide in our country, You know as  well as I do that anyone can get a gun and there are too many loop-holes in the law, as for who will protect us, isn't that what we pay the police to do?  I am not a liberal nut-case against gun ownership, I am the owner of guns, had them since I served in the military and holder of an (LTC), I want every gun owner to do what I did, get background check etc before owning a gun. I realize that will not solve the problems but it would probably help. 

 

2 hours ago, stevenash said:

Since you have such a strong aversion to Fox and Rush, just where do you get your unbiased, only the facts, news?

I watch Fox along with other TV news also newspapers and online news, also news online from other countries, I think even with that it's hard to get accurate news and the plain truth, You are right I don't like Rush Limpprick nor Rachel Madcow because they give their opinions not NEWS. You know what they say about opinions, everybody has one just like A--H---- .