Curious

All of them.

I'm trying to figure out what the "this crazy" is referring to. Maybe it's referring to the crazy people who want to blame guns(including guns that weren't even used in the shooting) for the actions of people. If that isn't crazy, what is?

__________________
"I don't want everyone to like me; I should think less of myself if some people did."
— Henry James

But they only think it's racist now!

If you can't argue against what a person's saying, attack the person. Calling them a racist often works, if the goal is to distract attention from the lack of arguments.

__________________
"I don't want everyone to like me; I should think less of myself if some people did."
— Henry James

Another "have you stopped beating your wife" question to be ignored. Boring.

__________________
For we used to ask when we were little, thinking that the old men knew all things which are on earth: yet forsooth they did not know; but we do not contradict them, for neither do we know.

Steff, I don't blame you for not wanting to tell everyone where you spend time on the internet. I wouldn't either. But it's not an unfair question since in your op you ask us to provide linkes to where we "rant" on the internet.

You also say: "I do support them whether they work or not, I also support not allowing a teen to buy alcohol whether that works all the time or not, It is a precaution not a total solution. And if it saves just one human life In my opinion it will be worth it regardless what you might have to give up. " Does that mean that you want to ban all firearms and not just assault weapons?

Back in 1994 - almost 20 years ago - many of us were rather open-minded, free thinkers.

Since then, a lot of us have wbecome better informed and knowledgeable. Evidently, some have not....

__________________
This is the government the Founding Fathers warned us about.....

Well, all I can say is, the agenda is working and we are well on our way to being a totally divided and resentful society.

I do remember people complaining about Pres. Bush, and I was one of them. I was accused of 'just hating him', and it was called 'Bush bashing'. We have the right and the duty to speak out when we think something is wrong. We have that obligation whether that person claims to belong to the same mythical politcal party as yourself.

When the housing bubble was hot and growing, I was saying it can't last, it is going to cause a lot of problems. Republicans accused me of hating President Bush so badly I just couldn't admit he had presiding over the greatest increase in person wealthy ever in this nation, and we had a wonderful, stable economy.

There were plenty of name calling, ugly insults, etc., not based on any particular action - just insults. That really serves no purpose.

We have/had plenty, under Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama to criticize, to complain, even to be angry about. Name calling, clearly partisan rhetoric really gets us no where.

It only produces strain, anger and resentment toward each other. The politicians don't care. You can rant, name call, insult, slander, do whatever you please. They are going to do whatever they have be told to do, take their pay when it is over, and live safely and well when out of office. We people, however, will be left divided angry, hurt, frustrated, etc.

In 1994 many of us believed the government knew what they were doing, and that the AWB would have an effect on crime. We now know that it didn't work then, yet we are told we should try it again.

Wasn't it Einstein who said the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over, but expecting different results?

Steff calls us "crazy", yet it's her type that best match Einstein's definition.

I think there is another saying out there that applies. It goes: "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Steff, please suggest something sensible that will actually prevent mass shootings so we can begin a discussion. These old ideas on gun control have been disproven time and time again.

__________________
The government can't give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
--Dr. Adrian Rogers

In fact some have been called Adulterers, Murderers and so on..

Oh and if you do the research you will see I'm talking about the 1800's as well as the 1900's and present day..

This isn't anything new...

__________________
Pennsylvania Constitution, Article 1 Section 21 "The Right of the Citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned"
www.pafoa.org
http://www.45thpacok.com

That's all it is
It's her pattern

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

I imagine all of these from the point the term became commonplace. It's probably one of the milder ones.

__________________
For we used to ask when we were little, thinking that the old men knew all things which are on earth: yet forsooth they did not know; but we do not contradict them, for neither do we know.

You forgot broke.

"how can you even hint she doesn't care? Or call it trolling?"

Posting a thread starting out calling everybody who doesn't see things through your narrow blinders "crazy" would be considered trolling on many boards.

__________________
"I don't want everyone to like me; I should think less of myself if some people did."
— Henry James

That, too.

It means we are so fractured, and broke, we couldn't get together to thwart this agenda - even if it was a common desire. We are so programmed to attack each other, if it goes on much longer, it may never heal.

Home Harvest - I guess I always believed the government knew exactly what it was doing - I didn't know what they were doing - that's the dangerous part. .I began to see it somewhere around LBJ. I also realized during the civil rights era, the government's desire was to keep us divided and therefore each 'side' would have a large contingent to use to carry their water and make excuses for, support, and deny their wrong doings for them - and built in voters.

It was to keep us so divided each 'side' would support whatever their man/woman wanted to get done.

Of course, my Grandparents probably instilled the thought in my head much earlier.

I will admit, I was dazzled by President Reagan's likeability, I actually thought he might be different. I didn't realize until after his administration just exactly what had been done. But I made no mistake about his successors.

And there was a movie called "Death of a President", which was a scenario of Bush Jr.'s assassination. It was a commercial and critical flop, and at least one commentator said that a movie about the death of a sitting president was beyond sick.

The gun lobby was fairly relaxed back in the Clinton admin.

It was Brady and AWB combined with the internet that really got the gun lobby at the level it is today.

While I DO think that something needs to be done to restrict the amout of weapons capable of mass killing from falling into the hands of people who abuse them. I DO think it is good to think back to that time.

At the time of AWB/Brady the public sentiment was even stronger for gun control than now. Also they received some republican support AND many blue dog dems voted for them as well.

THIS time the polling is not showing anti gun sentiment as strong.

Any gun control will have trouble making it past the DEMOCRATS in the Senate much less the house.

But what it COULD do is the same thing as it did in 94. Result in a Republican takeover of the house and senate lasting 10 years or more.

My prediction is that this is the republicans to lose. If they are so crazy on the debt and other issues the public will vote the dems. But if they act sane on most issues and concentrate on saying they are the party that will prevent further gun control, they will regain both houses.

This is a fine example of one who, when faced with having no cogent argument, finds that lack justification for calling those who disagree racists.

__________________
“The power of accurate observation is often seen as cynicism by those who do not have it”. George Bernard Shaw.

A segregated, second class citizen of HT

He is tearing the country I love and lived in all my life and I can't say anything negative about him because he has a different complexion than me? Give me a break. I ain't quite that PC stupid YET.

"He is also darker in complexion which might be why some people in the US are ranting more. Not you, but some people."

What a coincidence. He is also darker in complexion, which is why many people in the US voted for him(as THEY said). Not you, but some people. So, are both groups racist?

__________________
"I don't want everyone to like me; I should think less of myself if some people did."
— Henry James