XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: do@le.nz
On 2/21/2014 12:34 PM, Bill Steele wrote:
> On 2/21/14, 5:21 AM, Hunter wrote:
>> In article , janeanddano@yahoo.com says...
>>>
>>>> "Hunter" wrote in message
>>>> news:MPG.2d6f95afad1bbb1798b6aa@news.optonline.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>> Liberal democrats hate guns so the characterization doesn't make sense.
>>>
>>> Your characterization of "liberal democrats" makes no real sense either.
>>> The notion that we (yes...I admit it...I'm liberal) "hate" guns is
>>> ludicrous. Some of us even own them. What most object to is the
>>> unrestrained distribution...the lack of registration ...control. I love
>>> cars too...but I don't want every untrained imbecile driving one without
>>> registering and even insuring it. In fact...maybe that would help
>>> with guns
>>> too. Require insuring them too. But certainly doesn't seem
>>> outrageous to
>>> want better laws regarding something so dangerous.
>> ----
>> I know some do, but I believe Stan is saying that a "liberal democrat"
>> was the
>> shooter is in order to separate the tragedy from the debate about gun
>> ownership. That is to deflect the issue he is saying anyone who shoots
>> up a
>> place is a "liberal democrat" because, in his view, liberal democrats
>> will jump
>> on the issue to take "their" guns. That is the way I believe the
>> author of the
>> thread Stan would interpet you saying "...want better laws regarding
>> something
>> so dangerous" because they really hate guns and want to take them away
>> for
>> example.
>>
>
> Nothing to do with liberal views on guns. Trolls just like to use terms
> like that in association with anyone who did anything bad.
Like the liberal trolls who jumped right up to immediately claim
Loughner was NRA and "Tea Party"?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
