DUers don't give a DAMN about the issue of children's safety in gun laws

[dandi]

Make no mistake.

First of all, the fact that they're all just shits 'n' giggles over the holocaust of 53,000,000 abortions in this country over the past 40 years is in itself enough to obliterate any credence at all they may claim in "doing it for the children".

Secondly, if they're so sick and tired of people "claiming their freedom to be more important than human lives" as we've seen them repeat ad nauseum today in reponse to this tragedy, then why are they so against things like DUI checkpoints, TSA searches, surveillance drones, or for that matter, forceful interrogation of terrorists? Those things are much less intrusive upon basic American rights than confiscation of the means for individuals to defend themselves, and they unquestionably hold the potential for saving lives. Why not a police checkpoint at every interstate on-ramp and many surface streets, given the number of children that die as a result of accidents? Yet to suggest such a thing at DU would bring the howling mob down upon you in short order.

No, their agenda has nothing do to with being "for the children", whom you rarely hear about in that shithole unless it's a complaint about the Duggars having too many or a Palin having one out of wedlock or overpopulation or their crying on airplanes and in restaurants, and let's not forget the charming little term "crotch-droppings" coined by none other than the loving, tender hearts of The Hive.

Their agenda is the same as all good Leftists throughout history seeking to pave the way for their depradations - they know that an armed populace will never accept the full-blown Socialism their black, soulless little hearts so crave. So, that populace must be disarmed, and they don't care how low they have to stoop into hypocrisy and arguments from emotion, that they otherwise claim to despise, in order to do it.

[txradioguy]

[MrsSmith]

Make no mistake.

First of all, the fact that they're all just shits 'n' giggles over the holocaust of 53,000,000 abortions in this country over the past 40 years is in itself enough to obliterate any credence at all they may claim in "doing it for the children".

Secondly, if they're so sick and tired of people "claiming their freedom to be more important than human lives" as we've seen them repeat ad nauseum today in reponse to this tragedy, then why are they so against things like DUI checkpoints, TSA searches, surveillance drones, or for that matter, forceful interrogation of terrorists? Those things are much less intrusive upon basic American rights than confiscation of the means for individuals to defend themselves, and they unquestionably hold the potential for saving lives. Why not a police checkpoint at every interstate on-ramp and many surface streets, given the number of children that die as a result of accidents? Yet to suggest such a thing at DU would bring the howling mob down upon you in short order.

No, their agenda has nothing do to with being "for the children", whom you rarely hear about in that shithole unless it's a complaint about the Duggars having too many or a Palin having one out of wedlock or overpopulation or their crying on airplanes and in restaurants, and let's not forget the charming little term "crotch-droppings" coined by none other than the loving, tender hearts of The Hive.

Their agenda is the same as all good Leftists throughout history seeking to pave the way for their depradations - they know that an armed populace will never accept the full-blown Socialism their black, soulless little hearts so crave. So, that populace must be disarmed, and they don't care how low they have to stoop into hypocrisy and arguments from emotion, that they otherwise claim to despise, in order to do it.

 

[Mr Mannn]

Their agenda is the same as all good Leftists throughout history seeking to pave the way for their depredations - they know that an armed populace will never accept the full-blown Socialism their black, soulless little hearts so crave. So, that populace must be disarmed, and they don't care how low they have to stoop into hypocrisy and arguments from emotion, that they otherwise claim to despise, in order to do it.

Hi5. well said.

[USA4ME]

I watched Dear Leader do his little presser about what happened.  I don't believe he cares at all, it's just a political opportunity to him, that's all.  Same with the political left.

.

[Randy]

Liberals don't give a damn. All they are doing is banding together and throwing gun control chaff into the air so that the real problem isn't discussed. How their failed policies are directly responsible for this and all the other tragedies.

ETA: I saw a lot of crying yesterday over all this and it was all real IMHO except in one case and that one was shown over and over just as the faker intended.

[USA4ME]

How many more people are killed each year by drunk drivers than by gunshots?  Have we yet seen the primitives demand that cars be made where the driver had to prove via breathalyzer they were sober before the engine could start?  No, that would cut into their precious "freedom."  Oh sure, they'll claim drunk driving is a problem, but will they start demanding the resolution of drunk driving via "car grabbing" the way they're promoting gun grabbing?

We all know the answer to that.

.

[Freeper]

I watched Dear Leader do his little presser about what happened.  I don't believe he cares at all, it's just a political opportunity to him, that's all.  Same with the political left.

.

I am not angry that 0bama made a speech yesterday about this massacre, it did bug me that it sounded like he intends to use this as an excuse to start talking about more gun control. Never let a crisis go to waste. It also bugs the hell out of me that he could clear his schedule for this, yet it took how many days before he addressed the Ft Hood "work place incident".

[GOBUCKS]

When that Connecticut beast landed in Hell yesterday, he probably got a high-five from Killer Tiller.

[jtyangel]

Of course they either don't care or don't get it. Children always seem to be their casual 'workhorses' when they can use them to champion something that they want passed or support. Otherwise, they have no use for them and encourage every woman to clean their womb when one of the inconvenient creatures rears its ugly head in her womb. A child to them is an invader unless they need to use it to support their cause du jour.

That said, the common theme they seem to be missing is the profound mental illness in many of the more recent shootings. the gun is incidental; it was only the instrument use to complete the delusions of the deranged mind. It could have just as easily been a knife or an ax. I find more correlation with their incidence and the fact we can no longer 'house' mentally ill as we did 50 years ago to have more to do with it. What we seem to find in EVERY case was indications that the individual due to a severe mental illness could not cope with the stressors of the real world. Once upon a time, we committed those people when this instability and early signs showed and it protected them from the stressors of the world in a contained and controlled environment and the world from the damage a 'break' could cause like the recent shootings. I find considering putting severely mentally ill people with precursors in asylums to be far more compassionate then allowing them to go unchecked by all but their family and to end up killing 20 babies.

why do liberals avoid this reality? I can only find a couple reasons:

1) Many of those sitting on DU are afraid they may be the ones ending up institutionalized. The truth is there probably are some who should be too. Those incapable of their own care should not be allowed to languish on the public dole and get sicker and further inflict self-injury or injury on others and those who show serious signs of dangerous and violent behavior(there are a few in that category there I can think of too).

2) The politicians don't want to go there because let's face it, considering the makeup of DU, they get a significant little voting blocked from the more disturbed among us.

Anyway, just my thoughts on all this.

[franksolich]

Two things that bother me about the primitives' attitude de jour re: firearms.

Number one, did the primitives notice that ten people (separate incidents) were shot in Chicago last night, Friday night?  All by people having illegal firearms?

How come the primitives haven't come out against taking away illegal firearms?

They've come out only for taking away legal firearms.

Number two, apparently the town in Connecticut where this event happened is pretty much lily-white, while the shootings in Chicago appear to involve mostly, if not all, victims of African derivation.

Are the primitives saying that white victims are more important than black victims?

I thought so.

[jukin]

I must admit that I was a bit naive about leftists organizations until the Billy Jeff Clinton rape and Lewinsky charges came up. I then was hit in the head about how all the womenses groups said nothing. No they did say something, they protected a multiple accused raper. Then it dawned on me that anything goes as long as you are for big government and taking individual freedom away from Americans to a leftist.

Mostly I'm confused as to why this could happen under the magnificent benevolence of our first modern god-king 0bama.