Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Jason Alexander’s amazing gun rant

Posted 11 years ago on July 23, 2012, 12:46 a.m. EST by shoozTroll (17632)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Clearly, the angry, threatened and threatening, hostile comments are coming from gun owners and gun advocates. Despite these massacres recurring and despite the 100,000 Americans that die every year due to domestic gun violence – these people see no value to even considering some kind of control as to what kinds of weapons are put in civilian hands.

Many of them cite patriotism as their reason – true patriots support the Constitution adamantly and wholly. Constitution says citizens have the right to bear arms in order to maintain organized militias. I’m no constitutional scholar so here it is from the document itself:

As passed by the Congress: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”


It's hard to find a single word here to argue with.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by MaryS (529) 11 years ago

Good article, thanks. People asked what can you personally do, I try to contribute a little to the Brady Campaign every year. He was shot and seriously wounded during the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan in 1981 and has been working for gun control ever since. Please take a look at his website if you get a chance. Well worth it. http://www.bradycampaign.org/

[-] 2 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

thanks for the link. i made a donation

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Thanks Mary.

I came up with a long term solution too.

Not sure if you saw this thread, but it would provide for the survivors of gun violence and their families.


It's not like that happens today.

[-] 2 points by MaryS (529) 11 years ago

Defintitely will give it a look.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

The officers who responded to the scene should speak at every NRA gathering for the next five years. It should be filmed, especially the members reaction, and broadcast so all could see. I think if that happened we would do something about this. I worked with a bunch of NRA members when Columbine happened. They were disgusting talking about getting black coats to wear in the upcoming Denver NRA march, just because some suggested they postpone or move it.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

The truth isn't high on the list of NRA priorities.

Paranoid delusions are.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

That and selling guns. Have you seen their rag, er I mean mag. It's not that I don't understand their problem, guns kill forever and they got to keep selling more to eat, I understand, it's just I wish they would find other work that didn't get so many people killed.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Yes I have.

That's when I realized that almost everything they promote is based on "conspiracy theory" of the most paranoid sort.

Listening to their webcast is the same thing.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

Getting people to understand the need for a gun in every room is hard work.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Which brings me back to requiring liability insurance on every gun, in every room.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

Libility insurance is a really good ideal, then your rates could be adjusted if you're careles and one is stolen.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

The more I think about it, the more i like it.

Since it's what they want, let the market rule.

Any other product out there that carries such a high probability of liable damage, has to carry insurance against it.

In the case of cars? All parties can hold liabilities for damages caused.

Why should guns be any different?

Why should their users/ and or manufacturers be less liable?

Why should they be allowed to shirk the liability inherent in their product?

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

I like it too, the concept of bending with the attacker is not new, using his weight and strength against him, , (grasshopper, lol) that is the beatuty and it shows that “market forces” can do good.

it is what is behind my suggestion to tie minimum wage to CEO pay, avg for the fortune 500, that way those who really know how well the economy is doing can set a fair average raise for the lowest at the same time they are adjusting their own pay, and since we know they are shrewd and never overpay, always rewarding according to performance, and if you average out the performance of the top 500 then you have the whole economy pretty well, so that’s the perfect amount to raise the minimum wage, not let some government bureaucrat decide what people should be paid, that would interfere with free enterprise

I invite you to read my profile if you haven't, more there

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

That's two ideas not promoted by any party nor the MSM.

Are you that surprised that they are both basically ignored here on the forum?

Are you that surprised we both get called partisan shills, by the REAL partisan shills?

The shills that attempt to bury the stuff that doesn't gibe with their own partisanship?

I'm not surprised at all.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

I think we form a new thing something that has never been before, through technology and with the efforts of (un-named heroes) UN-NAMED, I say, but you know who, we have an opportunity to introduce concepts that have not been discussed before, this work goes on in workgroups, on other places on the internets, I chose a public area as that is where I "trained" and those with law degrees are better suited to work out the details, but make no mistake, what we do matters, ideals matter, this thing will not be stopped.

This is what democracy looks like!

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

I came here to learn and to get info that would help me "think outside the box".

It's working, but I still get called names by folks that seem incapable of thinking that way.......

The ones that always repeat the same thing, over and over.

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

There will be many that fear the coming change, some for good reason, their wealth is at risk, many have been so indoctrinated by the think tanks that they are confused about what real freedom is, in time we will change this as we share with each other our understanding and explanations. The actions in the street, the few references we gain on air, even the police actions to silence us, little by little people become aware.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

I keep learning more every day......:)

Now if only I could get my concept of neolibe(R)tarianism across, we could move forward even faster..

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

Patience, no screw that, persistence, never give in, stick to the truth, their lies will crumble!!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago


Communications Outreach Education = Opening Eyes and Heightened Awareness.

Keep-on Keepin-on.


[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Good for you Mr Alexander.

All gun ownership should be illegal unless the owner is willing to go to thrice weekly training, regulation, registration. and counseling for work in a structured militia.

That sounds like "well regulated militia" to me.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Well regulated?

That's not fun. Most just want to look threatening, or run around in the woods with loaded weapons playing army man.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

"Macho, Macho man!"

Can you say overcompensation? LOL

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

The saddest thing is, nothing good has ever become of it.

It's waste of time, money and testosterone.

They can't even manage to hunt down the pythons in the Glades.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Depressing. One day we will look back and laugh, or shudder at the thought of all these weapons and the culture that has grown up around it.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Most of them buy them and use them as toys.

Just an ignorant, expensive fantasy.

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Cowboys & indians, John Wayne, Action movies.

Immasculated men who don't know what it means to a man/adult. Misguided into thinking might makes right by the culture.

Decent, generous, considerate, fair, these aren't the traits we lift up. In fact we put the down. This is a big part of the problem.

Seems impossible. It is daunting. But progress will be made. And we shall overcome.

Let me stop. gettin too serious. they're just gun nut, right wing wackos. ;)

[-] -1 points by Clancy (42) 11 years ago

So because I own and enjoy a gun it automaticaly makes me a right wing wacko?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago


maybe semi automatically! AAAHHHHH Ha Ha Ha! I'm kiddin. It's Just a Joke. Get it? Semi automatic? Like the gun?

Oh thats so funny.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

What really gets me is the nutjobs who want to protect their children. The nerve!

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Like Trayvon?

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

I don't know what kind of racist and ignorant statement you are trying to make, or what kind of racist stereotype you are attempting to prop up, but it is appalling that you would even assume a teenage male has children because he is black.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago


Trayvon was a child not protected by guns. He was killed because of guns.

All guns should all be illegal, unless the owner is willing to go to training 3 times a week for a "well regulated militia" And a life sentence should exist for any seller of illegal guns.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Whoa. When did you kids start taking an originalist interpretation to the constitution?

You see, I think of the constitution as more of a living document. You idiot tea party types are constantly saying that we need to do only EXACTLY what the founders intended.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago


Your doin the Karlrovian dance of accusing your adversary of your own crimes I guess.

You ain't foolin anyone.



[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Seeing the constitution as a living document is a crime now?

You will magically reverse your originalist stance 180 degrees when I clap my hands and say the magic words.... TENTH AMENDMENT!!!!

Whoa! I've never seen someone change their minds so quickly! You're fun to control LOL!


Also known as peace when the Democrats are in control LOL

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

You ain't makin sense Tray.

Maybe you need a break.


[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

No, it's okay, you just can't understand.

I will get you confused and soon you won't know which way is up. Then I have the control.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

LOL. Okay. Whatever you say.

[-] 1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Actually, someone has already gotten you horribly confused, if you think it's illegal to own tanks. I can't wait to see how you rationalize that absurd, factless statement.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Protect them from what, with what?

Some jerk with a gun, with more guns?

You should be protecting them from FLAKESnews.

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Or, you know, someone kicking your door in with a knife. Or, a rabid animal, someone with a bat, or a gang of your friends looting my house.

That never happens in my imaginary world! All people are nice and no one wants to hurt you! Don't have any guns and nothing bad will ever happen!

Or, you could examine some actual scientific evidence and realize that the non-firearm homicide rate in Estonia, where guns are banned from civilian ownership, is twice the US rate.

Or the fact that the violent crime rate in Britain is four times what the US rate is.

But we don't need to let facts or truth get in the way! Facts have a rational bias!

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Funny. the only armed people that have ever enter my home in the dead of night unbidden, were cops and had either my wife or I reached for a weapon we would likely be dead or in prison today.

Will you answer the questions I actually asked of you now?

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Sorry if I hurt your feelings by asking questions. But you see, I actually made both of those posts before you responded to the first one, with your follow-up questions.

Did they find your weed stash? And does anecdotal evidence such as this indicate that the only people who ever break into houses are police? Why, that's an interesting proposition, I think I will go ahead and look it up while I'm thinking about it...


Hmm, it says here that one in six homes are burglarized EVERY YEAR. Whoa... but as long as they are not yours, it's okay?

Also, what about a retiree in a wheel chair? They are incapable of fleeing from danger, and anyone who enters their house unarmed is still a threat to their lives. See, if you had some capacity for rational thought, you might be able to discover some of these revelations for yourself so I won't have to keep making you look silly. What about when I'm not here, and you need to objectively think about something? My goal is to train you into thinking objectively, so you'll still be able to think when I'm not here to help you.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

How many 2 year olds shoot other 2 year olds in Switzerland?

How many attack each other with knives in England?

Such stats are meaningless.

My favorite part of the article is the part dealing with a "well regulated militia", especial the founders comments.

You missed that entirely.

Idiots running around with assault rifles isn't part of the deal, yet you are quite willing to accept that, and the death they cause as what?

Please define that for me. Collateral damage?

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

That, for you legal types (not you, but actual scholars) is known as "murder", the very same thing it's been called since the dawn of humanity.

What's your thing with the founder's comments all of a sudden? Are you too scared to find out what they actually think? I pounded one guy into the ground on here with some founding father quotes, don't make me do it to you also.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Why of course, just throw the 2 year old in prison for life.

That ought to work.

The stuff on the founders was in the article that you responded to, yet didn't actually read.

It seems you much prefer living in lala land.

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Go tie your shooz... if you can figure it out lol

No, you see, if a two year old shoots another two year old, that is known as an "accidental homicide", and it's the product of poor parenting. And if you care, a child is around nine times more likely to drown. Oh, wait, that's known as a "fact", something you probably can't concern yourself with.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

You're the one who said it fool.

Do you always jerk your knee before your brain is in gear?

Perhaps you should put your feet back on the ground, and take them out of your gun infused lala land.

[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

I've got a revelation for you: The world is a gun-infused lala land.

I'm just glad I'm not one of the naive morons who think no one would dare hurt me.





[-] 2 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 11 years ago

These are the reasons we have such violent crimes and domestic terror attacks:

24/7/365 Right Wing Hate Speech, Laissez Faire Gun "regulation," Fox Lies, diminished education, our deplorable mental health system, the Shock Doctrine class-warfare conducted by a maniacal few in the top 1% and executed by their RW minions, and the dereliction of duty by the Department of Justice to prosecute the RW Terrorists who are operating on American soil with impunity!!!

Class War is on! We are losing! Wake UP!!!!!!

If porn, which hurts nobody, can be restricted and rated X, the Right Wing Hate Speech, which freely poisons the the minds of millions, should at the very least be treated the same, just to start with. Then we should proceed with measures to seriously control and restrict this violent and abusive domestic propaganda.

It's Class Warfare, stupid, we're losing, wake up!!

Jason, I've got a script for you!

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

You're not supposed to notice all that.

The (R)epelican'ts want to regulate YOU!

Don't look at that boob. Oh wait, it's just Limbaugh...........:)

Don't look at that nut. Oh, wait, it's just Beck.......:)

[-] 2 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 11 years ago

And there a lot of people oblivious to "all that." It's our duty to make them aware! Much work to be done!

Get out the Vote! Don't be Conned! 2010 Never EVER Again!!


[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 11 years ago

Not sure if this is the right forum, but consider this: I'm not allowed to carry a sword, even though I have years of training in how to use one. It's not legal in most cases for me to strap one on my body, even though it's a great tool, and noteworthy for the fact that it's hard to accidentally kill the wrong person with a sword. It's also illegal for me to serve a beer to a patron who is legally drunk, and I can be held liable if they hop in a car and go kill someone in a drunken road rally. But, we can still get a license to carry concealed guns, apparently as a deterrent to violent crime. I have no further comment, but it seems like we have some crazy, inconsistent rules in this country. Am I a fan of the nanny state? No, but remember in high school where one or two people could ruin a whole class? Yeah, there are always irresponsible problem children, and that's why we all have to suffer the indignity of laws and government. Maybe ak-47's are a step over the line, if it actually exists at all (it does... it stops at rpg's.)

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Thanks at least in part to the NRA, there are many means of self defense other than guns that are illegal.

Try carrying a shillelagh in NYC.

Scalia, has said that he would likely consider shoulder fired rockets as legal.....I believe he said it on FLAKESnews.

WTF is a member of SCOTUS doing on FLAKESnews, making these kinds of statements?

Welcome to our personal version of MAD.

Mutually Assured Destruction.

[-] 2 points by NLake72 (510) 11 years ago

LOL. Why am I not surprised? Yeah, I gotta vote "no" on the rpg's. In fact, I gotta vote Scalia off the island.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 11 years ago

So, just for fun, let's say that the "militia groups" (a broad definition of semi-military groups, as well as those whose main purpose is to be heavily armed and who train together for whatever combination of specific motivations.) Let's just say these militia groups are supposed to be as effective as professional govt. soldiers. That would mean arming them with some SERIOUS hardware (rockets, anti-aircraft, heavy explosives, drones, support equipment... etc.) Now, some countries allow their professional soldiers to take their guns home, but America, the firepower stays on base, under some form of security, (I'm guessing.)

I guess my question is, assuming we follow the Constitution, then we really need a citizen army to serve directly under the commander in chief... Thus, how do you "well regulate" that? Do we really desire a private, well organized army sworn directly to the Commander in Chief? Granted, the way this country is going, I have no huge desire to disarm citizens, but maybe assault rifles belong at the local militia armory? Maybe that militia needs rpg's too? What if that militia decides it can't be loyal to the Commander in Chief? Wouldn't that necessitate an armed conflict of some sort, you know, so the govt could bring those arms back under control? What if this militia became some sort of defacto brute squad, or simply a bunch of well meaning brownshirts?

Trust me, I'm all for making sure the govt. knows who wears the pants in this country, and guns DO have their useful applications, generally speaking (and, usually it's a pretty darn rare situation that they should even come out of the closet.) But... how much firepower is ever enough? And, are there enough weapons out there, right now, to take on the govt? Marauders? A pack of 10,000 grizzly bears?

And, how many people die stupidly every year because of guns that are "mishandled" one way or another (and, there will always be nutcases that slip through the cracks.) Also, how come 8 out of 10 of the largest arms exporters are American companies? Which candidate are their campaign donations going to? I don't offer answers in this case, just some realistic questions for people to sink their teeth into.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

There is no "fun" involved in gun violence.

None whatsoever.

There is perhaps a market solution though.


The second amendment was actually put in place to supplant a standing army.

It failed to do so.

It has become Constitutional baggage.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 11 years ago

I think you're right about the Constitutional baggage. I rather suspected as much, but yes I seem to remember reading that at some point... Interesting point of history, I'd say.

I'm not a gun owner, nor do I intend to become one (I just shoot my buddy's rifles at beer bottles, and it's always a semi-juvenile good time :)

No, I'm just asking questions. If you live in the boonies, and there's no cop for many miles around? I'd encourage you to be armed, you'd be a fool not to have a heater, you know, for bears and such. I'm really not opposed to gun ownership, or even hunting, or even shooting in a true self-defense situation.

I'm mainly trying to figure out if we need ak-47's in every home in America? Should they belong in a carefully regulated armory / gun range? Do we really want a semi-private army in America? If we do, shouldn't they be properly armed and outfitted? Is that what we, as American citizens, want in our towns and cities? Personally, I don't.

Is there an alternative to the tacit threat to our elected officials: Do your job, or we the people reserve the right to shoot you? Has this existing threat prevented our system from being corrupted? I'm just trying to figure out if ak-47's are actually necessary, useful, and should they be so easy to obtain? I'd want one if we were facing a situation like we saw in Iraq, but maybe we'd use different tools if we had something other than assault rifles in the tool box. Either way, the guns are already out there, and taking them away isn't going to work, and a small part of me thinks maybe we need a few guns as a reminder to our elected officials... Or, we need some creative solutions to a problem our forefathers didn't anticipate... Machine guns.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

This is why I've proposed an insurance based solution.

An AK would cost much more to insure than a .22 rifle.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Like a high powered sports car costs more to insure than a minivan.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

It makes more sense all the time..........:)

Optional, 100 round clips would add to it too.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Absolutely - and does not hazardous material require extra ins before it can be hauled down the road?

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 11 years ago

Ok, I'll go along with higher prices to keep heavy weapons off our streets, but let's think... Imagine if only the rich could afford guns, and ammunition is already pretty pricey (it's not nearly as much fun to go shooting as it was when I was a kid, too darn expensive...) Just imagine if the poor can't afford guns... I can already hear the NRA screaming about it.

However, maybe it's the gun manufacturers who should be taxed for every gun they sell, call it an insurance pool for whomever gets killed with one of their products. They would still pass this on to the consumer, but it helps if we keep our eye on who's making a profit off of firearms.

For example: was I the only one who saw that Ted Nugent was willing to inflame the wingnuts to promote his new product line of ammunition? His sales pitch was "hey, maybe it's time to go shoot some un-American citizens... And I have just the bullets to do it with... Step right up, get yer chance to shoot a politician..." Seemed a little bit like a rich guy willing to turn Americans on each other, in order to make a buck.

I dunno, but the end user of these products (guns and ammo) seems to be only partly to blame.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 11 years ago

Consider: We got rid of lawn darts because of a few unlucky shots. Try to buy a wooden boomerang like we played with as a kid... It's not unprecedented to hold the manufacturer accountable for issues that are decidedly an end-user error. By the way, have you seen the price of lawn darts on ebay? Man, talk about gold in granny's toy closet... sheesh.

[-] 0 points by Perspect1ve (-107) 11 years ago

You cannot buy fully automatic weapons in the USA without extensive background checks and expensive licenses. Semi-automatic guns ARE legal. If you choose not to purchase one that's fine but don't try to push your beliefs on others. Who made you the know all be all?

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."

  • Thomas Jefferson
[-] 1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

**"What purpose does an AR-15 serve to a sportsman that a more standard hunting rifle does not serve? Let’s see – does it fire more rounds without reload? Yes. Does it fire farther and more accurately? Yes. Does it accommodate a more lethal payload? Yes. So basically, the purpose of an assault style weapon is to kill more stuff, more fully, faster and from further away."

I wish you knew how hard I laughed at that. Wikipedia is a great resource if you'd like some actual knowledge on ballistic engineering, but if I were you I'd just keep searching for evidence and making assumptions that confirm my predetermined conclusions.

AR-15 weapons are chambered standard in the 5.56mm NATO cartridge. This round is wholly unsuited for hunting purposes and is banned for this use in many localities. It is much too low-energy to reliably kill most large game, often leaving the animal wounded. A more appropriate and common cartridge is the 7.62X54 NATO, an enormous beast that is not even in the same class. To claim that a 5.56 round equipped with a standard 60 grain projectile is "a more lethal payload" than a common hunting rifle is an absurd, and amusingly ignorant statement. Furthermore, standard AR-15 rifles come with 16 inch barrels, completely ineffective at long range, making your statement that they fire "farther and more accurately" even more hilarious. A well-trained sniper with a more inexpensive hunting rifle could out-shoot anyone with an AR-15 at long range.

Of course you won't quote this comment in your next article, because I didn't respond in a way that seems to confirm your predetermined conclusions. Well, there's hope, there's plenty of research on the topic you can do if you don't want to sound uneducated in your next article.


Nice comment lol

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

So then, an AR 15 is incapable of killing people?

It's just a great close range deer rifle, for those times when you are surrounded by the herd?

Or perhaps it's just great for making squirrel burger in an instant, when you're in a hurry?

Is it capable of self regulating a militia and doing so quite well?

No, you just ignored most of the article and focused on a single issue.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

No, I'm highlighting the stupidity of the writer and his uneducated predetermined conclusions.

A .223 is a poor choice for a deer rifle at any range. And a .22LR is about 28 cents cheaper to shoot every time you pull the trigger, plus not being overkill for squirrels.

So yeah, no inanimate object is capable of regulating a militia. I don't know why that would even cross your mind... have you taken your meds lately?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Great observation.

So what will regulate the militia?

FLAKESnews maybe?


Welcome to the rabbit hole, hope you can find room to maneuver an Ar 15.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

It's taking you way too long to respond to my comments. Is it that hard for you to find evidence to support your predetermined conclusions? I'll help you look if you want, that way it will be a fair debate. As it is, your behind is smoking. See what's gone on? I presented actual scientific analysis and factual arguments, you pretty much just got angry and started calling names. If you want to compel people to agree with you, (which you clearly do, or you wouldn't be responding to me) Then not only will you need some rational, sane arguments, but you will need some basic debate education so you can present them in a compelling way.

EDIT It's actually "AR-15". And they're medium engagement range weapons, totally unsuited to the conditions in a rabbit hole. Hand me a pistol if you want me to engage something in there.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

I actually did ask a question here.

You didn't answer. You just got lost in in the details.

So what will regulate the militia?

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

That wasn't what you asked, you asked if an AR-15 rifle will regulate the militias, which is an absurd proposition.

Now that you have asked an actual question, I'd be glad to answer it: The federal government is supposed to regulate the militias.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

I'm sure the NRA will be all about letting the government regulate guns and militias.

They will surely encourage that kind of thing.

Along with the teabagge(R)s of course, who claim to be against taxes, yet they raised mine.

Nothing but truth and honesty from those two, "right"?

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Whoa. You've just heaped up a big helping of identity politics. Also, for you naive types, all politicians are lying bastards, I can't believe you think any of them are honest. How old are you? Like O-bomb-ya raising taxes, pretty much all politicians raise taxes and lie about it.

What do you mean "guns and militias"? It says regulated militias, not regulated guns. You think I am a "militia" if I have one firearm and live alone? You're crazier than I thought.

Alright, fine, I'll go ahead and get the quotes. Stand by...

"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Oh well. You're a lying bastard too.

Are you a politician?


[-] -1 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

No, not yet.

I dream of a day in which I will wield the power necessary to get throngs of naive followers to defend every despicable action I make, all because I trick them into thinking I am on their "side", when everyone in the room knows the only side I have is mine... Only then will I be able to say I am a politician.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

So as of now, you're just their lap doggie?

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

Well, at least I have an idea of what's going on. If this is being a lap doggie, I'll take it over being a blind sheep any day.

At least I'm not some moron who thinks half the rich people in congress are on "my side" LOL

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Yes I know, you think the other half is on your side.

Although the part about not being a moron is questionable.

There is your chosen moniker to consider.

[-] 0 points by JusticeF0rTrayvon (-58) 11 years ago

So associating with a murdered teenager indicates that I am a moron? Whoa, you sound like one of these tea party bastards spouting nonsense on cable TV. For now you just have the internet to spout your nonsense, maybe someday you will graduate to Fakes News.

How did you do on reading comprehension in school? I said half the rich people, as in either half. You are one off the brainwashed idiots who thinks any politician is out to protect anyone but themselves?

This may seem like a pointless argument, but I'm actually learning how not to run my life when I get older.

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 11 years ago

Not presenting an argument against the premise, but it seems that the part about, "...right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is the only part anyone ever pays attention to...the previous part, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state," is the part that seems to get ignored an awful lot.

Shall we look at the word Militia for a moment.

mi·li·tia    [mi-lish-uh] Show IPA noun 1. a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies. 2. a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers. 3. all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service. 4. a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/militia

Other than the members of the various Guard units and the Reservists how many citizens are actually part of the militia? How many 'gather to train'? What about the paramilitary group label?

It just seems that the focus in regards to this Amendment is on the legality of the citizens owning arms and a total disregard for the reasoning for that ownership.

If one were a purist, I and millions of others could actually be in violation of the 2nd Amendment of our own Constitution. Owning arms and NOT being part of a militia.

Aside from that issue...anyone know where I could get a good deal on an tank?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

A tank?

You could try General dynamics, but you may run into weight restrictions on you local roads.

You can also try Oshkosh b'gosh.

With this option you can also purchase matching logoed overalls.......:)


[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 11 years ago

Nah, I'm thinking I want a WWII model...be great for clearing brush.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

I guess you could try Joe's Army Navy, unless you prefer German or Russian models.

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 11 years ago

Well, I DO have to think about parts...foreign models are always so hard to get parts for...LOL

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

An English Toad, mine clearing tank would be great for clearing brush and at least the parts dealer's can sort of speak English......:)


That is if your ego can handle a vehicle named Toad.......LOL

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 11 years ago

LOL, isn't this just fun?


[-] 1 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 11 years ago

Im am not angry,threating or hostile.But I am well regulated.

[-] 0 points by shantitraveler (0) 11 years ago

WRONG: The number of people killed in the United States by guns each year is dramatically inflated here. The number is NOT 100,000, but around 13,000. While this is still a large number, for every person that dies of a gunshot wound in the US seven die of medical error.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Just another angry gun owner, hung up on a single issue.

Whilst ignoring everything else.

Please tell me what gun is not designed to kill things?

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Kiss' Love Gun

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

This is the the most meaningless response I've seen in the many months of forum postings.

[-] 0 points by freewriterguy (882) 11 years ago

the only gun control that is really needed is the one where police panic when they pull you over and see one fastened to your waist.




[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

WTF is that crap all about?

The second amendment was written to prevent the formation of a standing army.

It failed miserably. As it stands, it's obsolete.


[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Closer to 130,000, but who's counting, "right"?


Now if only they would start paying insurance, things would improve.

I'm sure the NRA could give you a lower number, but they're not big on telling the truth.


[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Give 'em time. They're catching up.

That's why I promote gun liability insurance.

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Ladies and gentlemen, here to save the world, it's that guy from Shallow Hal.

Well, at least he's doing more than this guy:


[-] -1 points by freehorseman (267) from Miles City, Mt 11 years ago

I could find a lot to argue with.Than again life is short so why bother.You know Jason/George is washed up.Perhaps he can make a comeback as Festus.He always was just a side Kick.

[-] 4 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Yet you didn't, and as a side note resorted to insults.

Not exactly a good sign.

[-] 1 points by freehorseman (267) from Miles City, Mt 11 years ago

What insult? He is washed up. He was a side kick. And yet he does have the talent to make a comeback.And remember Festus lasted a lot longer than George.And why should we care what some small hollywood actor thinks?I never thought that burt Lancaster had anything importatnt to say on the topic. And ol Ted Nugent is another rattling can down the road.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

He's doing just fine. They can't all be Brad Pitt.

Whatever, what he said is still mostly true, especially on a conceptual level.

Particularly about the well regulated militia.

Loved the stuff from the founders, kind of puts it in perspective.

[-] 0 points by freehorseman (267) from Miles City, Mt 11 years ago

It has all been said before. Yes some one has to play the short fat bald guy.I would rather have a well regulated malita than an armed to the teeth goverment.Be that as it may I put very little stock in anything that comes from hollywood.No matter what issue it is.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

A preference for Ted Nugent and Addams family reruns for you then?

Or just a great love of paranoia?

[-] 0 points by freehorseman (267) from Miles City, Mt 11 years ago

Nugent had his day . And who did not love Angelica as Morticia.Distrust is not the same thing as paranoia.George and you may share the same opinion but that is all it is.Just like rush no fact only opiniated wind.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Yeah, whatever dude.

I came up with a solution.

I'm tired of arguing over stupid guns. I'm tired of people dying by them too, but there is apparently no acceptable cure that will prevent those deaths, so let's compensate all the victims......

I don't like all the dead people, yet you don't mind.

And that's a fact Jack.

Let's make it so market forces rule.


[-] 0 points by freehorseman (267) from Miles City, Mt 11 years ago

You can not legislate sanity.I think what could not hurt is firearm education.Most people today must have some sort of drivers ed get behind the wheel.I would have no problem wiyh requiring someone to go through some kind of course.I have no problem with background checks.Our police etc are to busy fighting a losing war on drugs.I do not feel it is the place of uncle Sam or any one else to keep placing restrictions on my rights.It is not an argument about guns but rather the encrochment of goverment in our lives.Also you should not make moral judgements on people you do not know.

[-] -2 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 11 years ago

jason alexander ??..who cares what he thinks? I do support the constitution though.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Yes, I'm sure you prefer FLAKESnews and CATO for all your info.

It shows, don't ya know.

[-] -2 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 11 years ago

I prefer The New Republic. I haven't a clue about flake/cato news? do you watch them?

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Don't worry about it, The New republic is pretty much the same thing, pure 100% propaganda.

[-] -1 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 11 years ago

where do you get your news cnn? all media is biased. your comments are silly.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

It depends on the subject. I often search for other sources and other views, when reasonably possible.

I actually used to read New Republic sometimes, until they became a complete propaganda mill.

Sad to see that you still read it.

[-] -3 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 11 years ago

A little tolerance goes along way.Your put downs reflect your insecure nature.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

As does your seeing one, where one does not exist.

[-] -3 points by TryingForAnOpenMind (-358) from Yonkers, NY 11 years ago

Don't be so sure. Look at yourself before you so quickly label others.. and put them down.

[-] -2 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

My problem is that everytime something like this happens, people freak out about guns (like here on this board) then after a couple of weeks, "poof", it's forgotten. Until next time, when we do it all over.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Has it dawned on you that you ignore them until these things happen?

You do realize that they happen rather often. 30 some times in 30 years.

Where are the calls for improvement in State mental health services?

Oooops, the (R)epelican'ts gutted them to save money.

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Well, what are you doing about it? Ignoring it or constantly thinking about it? Posting online or working to get people elected? What did you do after Fort Hood? How are you making the calls for improvement?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

You forgot to respond to what I wrote.

I've been calling for improved mental health care since before OWS.

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Calling? Does that mean volunteering and working with mental health organizations? Contacting elected officials? Or just telling your friends that you think it should be improved?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Wherever I can.

How about you, since you've changed the subject?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Good for you.

Do you help them buy guns too?

Or did you just loose track of what this was about?

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Little bit. I was talking about our national attention span and how we hop from tragedy to tragedy without real action, then you blamed something on the Republicans (which you don't usually do, so I was shocked to see that) then you patted yourself on the back for thinking nice thoughts, then congratulated me for doing something to try to help. Am i caught up?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Glad to see you're buying them some guns.......:)

In the mean time, I came up with a proposal.


PS. the (R)epelican'ts did and still are dismantling whatever is left of the public mental health system. So you can take your tongue out of your cheek now.

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

WOW! You came up with a proposal? And posted it in on the Internet? Like nobody does that, ever. Well then, let's just cancel OWS. All of our problems are solved so it's obviously not needed anymore Thanks for all the hard work! I bet you even typed it all by yourself. Take a break and get some rest, you've earned it.

Between that nutso first sentence and you bragging about what you've done to make the world a better place, I am literally ROFLMAO. Thanks so much.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Thanks, I will, and you're welcome.

It's still more than you've done.

So have fun insulting people, and playing smart guy.

I'll be back around later.

[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

are you heading out to volunteer somewhere?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Yep, so have fun insulting people.

I'm sure it's your strong point.

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Good to hear. With all of the republican cuts, people like us, who actually get out of the house and help others in the real world, are needed more than ever.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

So you don't like the freaking out about guns after these horrible gun deaths? Why? are you pro guns?

And you don't like how a couple of weeks later "poof" it's forgotten. Why? Are you anti guns?

Do you have an opinion about this?. Or just an opinion about others opinions.

[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Our national attention span is so short. We'll argue and fight for a while until something else happens, then we'll argue about that and forget this. Nothing gets done.

What's your opinion?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

It is sad reality that we must work against.

Do you have an opinion about gun control or not?

[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

i wish Obama would get off his a$$ and do something about it. Sad that George Costanza has bigger balls.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

So you have anti Obama vulgarity. Got it. I agree with you I wish all pols would do something.

Do you have an opinion about gun control or not?

[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Do you think I want Obama to get off his a$$ and make the gun laws more lax?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Why can't you say.? Why the word games.? I think you won't state your opinion. I'm not gonna state it for you.

Are you in hiding. Perhaps your against gun control but want to suggest you are for it.

Support more gun control? Or not?

[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

cause you seem like you're on edge and fun to play games with

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago


Y'know Hank Pym was kinda "on edge". In fact he was a little schizo wasn't he?

Is your position and login name reflective of this.?


[-] 0 points by marvelpym (-184) 11 years ago

Nah. Just thinking about the movie one day.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

You loves ya' guns. dontcha'?

'sok. We're all entitled to our opinions.

I think they should all be illegal. At the very least they should be illegal unless the owner is willing to go through training 3 times a week to be part of a "well regulated militia"

No private gun sales. And illegal sales should get a life sentence.

Whatta you think?

[-] -2 points by Porkie (-255) 11 years ago

It's a non-issue.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

You didn't notice there were multiple issues?