PackFanWithTwins
12 years ago

I suppose you could use them for a door stop, or decorative art. Bottom line is that people are pissed and the left wing is going to shove this issue up the right wing's ass while the iron is hot. I could care less if assault weapons or 20 round clips are removed from the shelves - I just like to see how far radical right people will take their argument.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



The rights doesn't go far at all. Simply provides the fact, that removing them from the shelves won't sovle, fix or prevent a damn thing. Not nearly as far as the pathetic left wing freaks that use the loss of these poor lives to push for a policy under the lie of it being to prevent anything.

These weapons have been around for a long long time, and they didnt' cause mass shootings like are happening now. The weapons haven't changed, the people have. For once it would be nice if a left winger actually tried to address the actual problem.

We can make schools safer by putting up doors that actually can keep bad guys out.


The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Formo
12 years ago

I just read all of Niall Bradley's article and it is a work of brilliant brainwashing material. It reminded me of my psychology teacher's example of how to manipulate the mind with twisting details, omitting facts and inserting "gotcha" opinions. It also illustrates very well how "me first" of a society our news reporting is. News outlets want to have the first story because it will be the first found in search engines. If you doubt this, I can provide evidence. Look at our most visited date when we had over 1k visits. Take note of the date and and ask yourself what happened on that date that PH posted about FAR earlier than most news outlets.

This Niall Bradley fella is a master manipulator of the weak minded. It is actually amusing to read the brainless folks who lack mental fortitude soak it up ... but in the same sense it deeply saddens me as a Human that we're so ignorant as a group. We let people cleverly put words together and omit human nature, context and common sense. And more importantly, facts are left behind.

I expect this article to be analyzed by psychology professors all over as it is brilliantly worded and laid out to prey on the ignorant. I wish I had the time and patience and lets be honest, the give a damn to point by point defuse this articles objective.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Exactly how so? It poses very legitimate questions. Sure, he's coming at it from a conspiracy theorist angle, so there's that.. But just because it has that angle doesn't devalue the questions being asked.

You exclaim you are saddened that we humans are so ignorant, yet you exclaimed yourself that you are king ignoramous. What information do you know/have that this article (or updated articles on the same sight)is omitting ?
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
DakotaT
12 years ago

The rights doesn't go far at all. Simply provides the fact, that removing them from the shelves won't sovle, fix or prevent a damn thing. Not nearly as far as the pathetic left wing freaks that use the loss of these poor lives to push for a policy under the lie of it being to prevent anything.

These weapons have been around for a long long time, and they didnt' cause mass shootings like are happening now. The weapons haven't changed, the people have. For once it would be nice if a left winger actually tried to address the actual problem.

We can make schools safer by putting up doors that actually can keep bad guys out.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



But you've yet to provide a purpose these weapons serve other than mass killings. I doubt you come up with anything yet. I understand the fright wings spin on the issue, but I haven't heard a reasonable, legitimate reason why society needs assualt weapons available to it. Work on it and get back to us.


UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

Exactly how so? It poses very legitimate questions. Sure, he's coming at it from a conspiracy theorist angle, so there's that.. But just because it has that angle doesn't devalue the questions being asked.

You exclaim you are saddened that we humans are so ignorant, yet you exclaimed yourself that you are king ignoramous. What information do you know/have that this article (or updated articles on the same sight)is omitting ?

Originally Posted by: Formo 



Read the article again. You don't need any of the facts to decipher the manipulation lol. When it comes to gun knowledge, yes sir, I am ignorant. Never claimed otherwise. When it comes to picking out brainwashing, manipulation and words twisted out of context (which moves to the two former items) ... I'm quite astute.


Again, to clearly say this so the weak minded folks clearly understand and do not mistaken my words ... I do not know any facts regarding the shooting at Newtown, none. So, one could claim I'm ignorant with accuracy on that specific circumstance.
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
12 years ago

But you've yet to provide a purpose these weapons serve other than mass killings. I doubt you come up with anything yet. I understand the fright wings spin on the issue, but I haven't heard a reasonable, legitimate reason why society needs assualt weapons available to it. Work on it and get back to us.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Here is three. Target shooting, collecting, and driving liberals crazy.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
DakotaT
12 years ago

Here is three. Target shooting, collecting, and driving liberals crazy.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



When did spraying bullets around equate to target shooting? Just think if all the money wasted by men collecting small militias in their basements was actually used for something useful like feeding the homeless or cancer research?

PFWT - you have some weak ass arguments - please come back with something more concrete. You're wasting our time.

Here, for all of you that like to masturbate with stats, this is interesting:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/blow-on-guns-america-stands-out.html?src=me&ref=general&_r=0 
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
12 years ago

When did spraying bullets around equate to target shooting? Just think if all the money wasted by men collecting small militias in their basements was actually used for something useful like feeding the homeless or cancer research?

PFWT - you have some weak ass arguments - please come back with something more concrete. You're wasting our time.

Here, for all of you that like to masturbate with stats, this is interesting:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/blow-on-guns-america-stands-out.html?src=me&ref=general&_r=0 

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



You do realize, that in order to spray bullets around, the trigger has to be pulled more than one time don't you? Target shooting, can be done, with one shot, or multiple shots.

All the money those men waste, go to businesses, that employ people who make salaries so they can feed their families and donate money to cancer research.

My weakest arguments, are 1000 times more valid than you strongest arguments.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
dhazer
12 years ago

Maybe they should sit your crazy ass in a room with the twenty families that just lost their babies forever so you could explain your theory?

None of us has the right to own a machine gun. Semi automatic rifles and pistols are not necessary for hunting or self defense. We live in a violent society and the people that would benefit the most from destroying these types of weapons are the ones fighting to keep our "freedoms". Coincedentally, these are the same people who continually vote against their economic interests. I love living amongst dumbasses.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I guess we should ban cars also and airplanes because they kill alot more people than guns do. Look at Chicago and how strict their gun laws are working? They have the highest murder rate in the country and why is that? I'll tell you why and that is because you are taking guns away from regular people that only have them for self defense and who has the guns? The criminals aren't going to worry about any gun laws and what they can have and can't have.

Here is something for you to look at:

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996. In 1982, Kennesaw Georgia passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in their home, exempting those with criminal records or religious objections. Yet, after the law went into effect in 1982, there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997).Seven months after it took effect, the residential burglary rate dropped 89%, vs. 10.4% statewide. Crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982. And it has stayed impressively low.

In addition to nearly non-existent homicide, the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you? The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence. The facts tell a different story.

What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don't have a death wish.

Note in Switzerland, every household must have, by law, a fully automatic machine gun and ammunition. The crime rate is very low there.



Read up on this town, so once again tell me about not having guns.


I may sound heartless but I am actually tired of hearing about the shooting, kids die every day why don't they get the media coverage? I was so pissed when they cut into the Sunday night football game for that slimebag of a president, when you knew he was there to use the grieving families for his own good of taking away another one of our rights and thats right to bear arms.


If he uses his powers and pushes a ban thru, it will start the end of the United States of America and the revolution will start. But maybe the jerk in office might want that.
Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
12 years ago

You do realize, that in order to spray bullets around, the trigger has to be pulled more than one time don't you? Target shooting, can be done, with one shot, or multiple shots.

All the money those men waste, go to businesses, that employ people who make salaries so they can feed their families and donate money to cancer research.

My weakest arguments, are 1000 times more valid than you strongest arguments.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



Oh yes, the jobs creator argument. (I really wish we still had the eye roll smiley) I might as well just call up Rush instead of talking to you, then I'd get the information right from the jackass' mouth. It's been a real bad year for you fright wingers: lost the election, going to lose on the budget, and now guns. I'm surprised the revolution hasn't started yet.

Please come up with something else that would have more merit than saving some lives by elimating these stupid assault weapons.
UserPostedImage
dhazer
12 years ago

oh & btw...my kids school made some swift changes to the way people are allowed to enter the building.

as it was, they have a buzzer system on the front door - all doors are locked as soon as school starts.
now, the only door they can go in is the front door in the morning, the superintendent helps the kids out of their cars & watches them walk into the building. i like it! i'm proud that our school did something to better ensure the safety of the kids.

when the kids go out of the class for any reason, they have to wear a lanyard with a pass on it. any visitor has to be buzzed in (they have a camera so they can see who it is) then you go to the office, sign in for whatever purpose, & have to wear a guest pass. again, i like it!

i keep wondering how much longer it'll be before our schools look like prisons.

my kids weren't freaked out about the incident but asked alot of really tough questions. pretty damn sad that a 10 year old kid has to think about this kinda bullshit, isn't it??

Originally Posted by: 4PackGirl 



Hey Girl, the whole locking the kids in and prison reference is right but I ask this? What happens when they have a fire and damn the doors are locked and can't get out and kids die from that? Parents will be going after the schools for endangering the kids. Its a no win situation.
We had a school out here did what I think is the smart thing and they armed their security at the school. Think about it, will someone that wants to make a name for themselves go after a school where they won't even make it past the front door or just shoot thru the front door and walk in knowing they don't have to worry about anyone threatening them.
Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    packerfanoutwest (50m) : Feliz Navidad!
    Zero2Cool (5h) : Merry Christmas!
    beast (14h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
    beast (22h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
    Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
    Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
    beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
    beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
    beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
    packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
    beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
    packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
    beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
    beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
    beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
    beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
    beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    2h / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

    23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.