HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » You're a f#%king liar and...

Tue May 27, 2014, 07:44 PM

You're a f#%king liar and you f#%king know it!

Yes, YOU, Wayne Lapierre and anyone who swallows your bullshit.

All you do is twist and pervert the Constitution to try to make money for yourselves.
You know damn well that nobody is coming to take your fucking toys but you keep on whining about it like the little spoiled brats you are. "Mommy, Mommy! They want to take my toys away!"

So the fuck what if more people get killed by guns than die in car wrecks. We absolutely must protect our "God given right to shoot cardboard, make believe people at the shooting range on weekends. Too fucking bad if a bunch of real people have to die for that. It's so much fun pretending to be a brave hero.

just ask any gun idiot to recite another Constitutional Amendment and get ready for the standard reply, "duh..."

Besides all that, the amendment clearly states something about a "well regulated" militia. By definition, regulated means there are some restrictions. But when any kind of regulations concerning guns is brought up you just whine louder. You are all a bunch of assholes. And tell Joe the plumber I said "fuck you too"

59 replies, 13175 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 59 replies Author Time Post
Reply You're a f#%king liar and you f#%king know it! (Original post)
world wide wally May 2014 OP
doc03 May 2014 #1
Loudly May 2014 #2
Vattel May 2014 #3
hack89 May 2014 #4
IronLionZion May 2014 #21
hack89 May 2014 #5
Stryst May 2014 #17
nomorenomore08 May 2014 #20
hack89 May 2014 #23
nomorenomore08 May 2014 #25
hack89 May 2014 #27
nomorenomore08 May 2014 #29
hack89 May 2014 #32
nomorenomore08 May 2014 #35
AtheistCrusader May 2014 #47
Warren Stupidity May 2014 #44
Scootaloo May 2014 #26
hack89 May 2014 #28
world wide wally May 2014 #33
AtheistCrusader May 2014 #48
billh58 May 2014 #6
vlakitti May 2014 #38
rurallib May 2014 #7
Egnever May 2014 #8
ErikJ May 2014 #9
blkmusclmachine May 2014 #10
Gman May 2014 #11
47of74 May 2014 #12
LineReply .
toby jo May 2014 #13
Logical May 2014 #14
world wide wally May 2014 #18
Spitfire of ATJ May 2014 #15
LuvLoogie May 2014 #16
lastlib May 2014 #19
3catwoman3 May 2014 #37
houston_radical May 2014 #22
hack89 May 2014 #30
houston_radical May 2014 #36
hack89 May 2014 #43
Crunchy Frog May 2014 #45
hack89 May 2014 #46
lastlib May 2014 #58
hack89 May 2014 #59
AtheistCrusader May 2014 #52
calimary May 2014 #34
houston_radical May 2014 #40
AtheistCrusader May 2014 #50
AtheistCrusader May 2014 #49
CSStrowbridge May 2014 #24
Dustlawyer May 2014 #31
mbperrin May 2014 #39
czarjak May 2014 #41
treestar May 2014 #42
AtheistCrusader May 2014 #51
JohnnyRingo May 2014 #53
world wide wally May 2014 #54
BlueJac May 2014 #55
aikoaiko May 2014 #56
Curmudgeoness May 2014 #57

Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 07:58 PM

1. Don't hold back tell us your real feelings. I agree 110% n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:05 PM

2. Your real beef is with Scalia and Thomas.

 

Those dirtbags have given that dirtbag Constitutional cover.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loudly (Reply #2)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:11 PM

3. Scalia hasn't said that the right to keep and bear arms

 

applies to any and all weapons, nor has he said that arms cannot be regulated. Read his opinion in Heller. It is very well-reasoned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loudly (Reply #2)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:13 PM

4. Scalia supports gun regulation. Read Heller. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loudly (Reply #2)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:50 PM

21. If/when one of them needs to be replaced

I really hope there are enough Dems in office to confirm a liberal judge to finally tip the balance on so many very important cases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:15 PM

5. So no one here supports gun bans?

Or is your point that those that do are wasting their time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:39 PM

17. I'm a (former) gun owner and I 100% support

restrictions and regulations. Not just for who initially gets a gun, but for tracking them. I would be fine with a gun registry. I would even be ok with the idea that I have to show the sheriff my guns once a year to keep my license to own them. I have to do that with my car already, getting an inspection in order to get my tags is part of being a responsible car owner.

I have zero worry that the scary government is going to kick in my door to take my deer hunting rifle. And if I was a police officer, I would want to know that a home was full of weapons before I knocked on the door to answer something like a domestic violence call.

The bureau of justice statistics estimates that 232,400 guns are stolen a year. And in most states, there is no requirement to report a stolen weapon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:47 PM

20. So background checks plus licensing/registration = "gun bans"?

Obviously not, but those who support even the mildest gun-control measures - milder than any other First World country - are lumped in with "gun grabbers" all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #20)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:54 PM

23. There are posters on DU that support gun bans

As in take away people's guns kind of bans. So it is disingenuous to say that no one wants to take away our guns when there are plenty of posters here perfectly willing to do exactly that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #23)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:56 PM

25. But they have no particular power to do so. And I would agree, on top of that, that they're both

misguided and unrealistic. But the specter of "gun grabbers" should not be used as an excuse to reject any and all restrictions, like the ones I mentioned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #25)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:01 PM

27. I support all proposed gun control with two exceptions

Registration and an AWB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #27)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:09 PM

29. The second I can understand, because of its necessarily arbitrary nature.

And there doesn't have to be anything like a national registry, but I would like to see some sort of licensing required to own a gun. If nothing else, it would be a certification that the person is competent to handle the weapon they're buying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #29)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:12 PM

32. I support firearm ID cards for gun owners. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #32)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:15 PM

35. Sounds like a good idea. And totally doable, LaPierre's shenanigans aside. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #27)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:17 PM

47. I support registration.

It works well for the NFA registry, and security through obscurity doesn't work for this issue anymore.

Repeal the '86 GCA/Hughes Amendment, and extend the NFA registry to all firearms. Ta-da.

Then the Lautenberg amendment gets a whole new set of fangs, because when the cops show up, they have a list of guns to collect. Same for involuntary committal to mental health institution, and other due process prohibitions.


I don't see any way to make this work without a registry, so as a gun owner, I want to be a part of the conversation to craft such a registry, to protect both sides of this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nomorenomore08 (Reply #20)

Wed May 28, 2014, 06:33 AM

44. any restriction on their precious is black helicopters taking all their gunz.

 

It is a slopery slip doncha know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:01 PM

26. I wouldn't be opposed.

 

I can't buy lawn darts. I can't walk around armed with a sword - even if I made it myself! If you're not able to buy a gun, it's no skin off my ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #26)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:07 PM

28. No surprise there

Fortunately civil rights don't depend on how people feel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #28)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:12 PM

33. They really depend on whether someone shoots you or not

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #26)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:18 PM

48. Why can't you carry a sword?

I can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:27 PM

6. K&R

The NRA is the most evil and insidious political organization in the United States of America. They corrupt our politicians at all levels and branches of government, while inciting their followers to undertake armed revolution.

The NRA, the right-wing gun lobby, and their extremist followers, are a threat to public safety and should be treated as such. This has absolutely nothing to do with civil liberties or the Second Amendment, and everything to do with corporate greed. The SCOTUS Gang of Five fabricated Citizens United and Heller from the same right-wing neoconservative cloth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #6)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:27 PM

38. You are absolutely right.

Thank you. The NRA is trying to drag this country down into lunacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:46 PM

7. La Pierre's paycheck depends on not giving a shit who gets killed

What a strange job. Whenever someone gets shot he has to dance for his supper and scare the pants off the timid little politicians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:47 PM

8. Haha!

 

Awesome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:51 PM

9. Evil geniuses. With every mass shooting NRA tells members "Obama comin to git yer gunz fer sure now!

 

.and they dutifully run out and buy more guns. Gun sales spike. Sick! Marketing 101.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 08:55 PM

10. Never

 

Really

Accountable

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:04 PM

11. Very good rant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:13 PM

12. Fuck you Wayne. Fuck you Joe the Plumber.

And fuck all the craven politicians who enable this sociopathy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:15 PM

13. .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:17 PM

14. The NRA is a group of right wing nuts with Ted Nugent as one of their leaders. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #14)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:43 PM

18. Fuck him too

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:31 PM

15. Everyone sing along!!!

 

Last edited Tue May 27, 2014, 10:35 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:34 PM

16. You mean Not Joe Not the Plumber...

Yeah, fuck that guy...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:47 PM

19. Did LaPee-Error speak again? I thought I heard a disgusting noise.

FUCK HIM! AND his GUN-FELLATING followers!! ESPECIALLY the ones in Congress and other offices!

[font size=10]NOT ONE MORE!![/font size]

. . . . . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #19)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:26 PM

37. I like your take on his name.

I don't usually bet, but I'd be willing to lay down a few bucks that ol' Wayne would be one of the first to pee his pants if involved in a real life shootout scenario.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:52 PM

22. "A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state,

 

the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

is of course the 2nd Amendment. Many remember this second half, but not the first half. I read this to mean that we have the right to "keep and bear arms" in order to participate in "a well regulated militia" to ensure the "security of a [our] free state".

Actually the word "state" probably refers to one of the several states in our union - from some historical discussions on the formulation of this Amendment.

Check Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution and the well-known, "The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States", which of course many know, but read just a little further, "and of the Militia of the several States ...".

So not only is the right to keep and bear arms meant to defend the state, but those participating must take orders from Obama!!

I love pointing this out to gun-nuts - who also often self-identify to be "strict constitutionalists". Checkmate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to houston_radical (Reply #22)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:11 PM

30. Go read the Democratic Party platform

It says the 2A protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. President Obama has publicly said the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:19 PM

36. the Democratic Party platform is not law

 

a platform is just a list of ideas, values and actions desired by a political party - I was quoting from the supreme law of the land.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to houston_radical (Reply #36)

Wed May 28, 2014, 05:05 AM

43. Heller is the law of the land.

The party and the president support Heller.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #43)

Wed May 28, 2014, 07:13 AM

45. So is Citizens United.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crunchy Frog (Reply #45)

Wed May 28, 2014, 07:19 AM

46. Do the party and the president support Citizens United? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #46)

Wed May 28, 2014, 10:29 PM

58. Looks like somebody woke up on the wrong side of the syllogism this morning.........

Heller, like Citizens United, McCutcheon, and a few other Roberts Court rulings are bad law because they are anathema to the best interests of the American people. They need to be overturned, overruled, or amended into the obscurity they deserve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #58)

Thu May 29, 2014, 07:18 AM

59. Heller specifically emphasizes that guns can be strictly regulated. How is that bad?

the only thing it specifically protects is the right to own a handgun in ones home for self defense. Unless your goal is a total handgun ban (is it?), Heller is no obstacle to registration, AWBs, magazine size limits and other proposed laws. Your problem is cultural and political, not legal. It is nonsense to think that if Heller went away, there would be sweeping national gun control laws being passed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crunchy Frog (Reply #45)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:27 PM

52. A problem the legislature can remedy.

Just like the 2nd Amendment.

(In fact, IIRC, the Citizens United decision explicitly stated the legislature was the correct avenue to address the problem at hand)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to houston_radical (Reply #22)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:14 PM

34. Welcome to DU, houston_radical!

WOW!!! FABULOUS post!!! VERY glad you're here! Impressive! And your second-to-last line - PRICELESS!!!!! OMG!!! I'd bet the gun-nuts have no clue about that part!!! "Strict constitutionalists" my ass. Just use the first syllable in "constitutionalists" and you've about pegged it. Just another CON-job...

But I think I understand how some of these folks think. Use a highfalutin' word to throw 'em off. Makes you look smart and makes 'em think you're smart (or, better, smarter than they are). Also, I'm sure they've noticed that when bill o'reilly says "constitutionalist," or even "traditionalist" or the really fun one - "originalist," it sometimes stops his on-air opponent for a moment. It's a mind-fuck. But not one person across the table from him ever makes HIM stop and define what he means by those phrases? And if one IS indeed, an "originalist" or "traditionalist," shouldn't all Second Amendment's references to "arms" refer to the arms known, recognized, and used at the time the document was originated? Wouldn't that be during an era of widespread use of muskets, bayonets, and blunderbuss-style weaponry? So therefore should we not read the strict original sense of the Second Amendment to apply to the owning and using of muskets, bayonets, and blunderbusses (blunderbi?)? Seems to me the Second Amendment covers all things musket/bayonet/blunderbuss - and nothing else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #34)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:32 PM

40. it just says "arms"

 

SCOTUS has recognized, and common-sense dictates, that in order for the Constitution to "live", that it must change as our society does - which means accepting technological / scientific advances, etc. So regarding what type of "arms" is a no-win argument for either side I think. I prefer to focus on the "well regulated militia" part of the Amendment.

thanks for the kind words btw : )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #34)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:24 PM

50. Yes, because the first amendment covers moveable-type press only.

The 2nd scales with technology just like the first. The courts have held that the 2nd doesn't apply to area-effect weapons like explosives, and artillery however, so weapons greater than .50 in caliber, and other items classified as 'destructive devices' rather than firearms, are still prohibited even in the face of the 2nd Amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to houston_radical (Reply #22)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:22 PM

49. The President and any individual state's governor both have the power to call forth the militia.

I have suggested my governor do so, several times, for the purposes of combating flooding, and wildfires, to no avail.

'Security of a free state' need not mean fending off a herd of armed Mounties, riding moose across the border, to resume the Pig and Potato War. Natural disasters are 'security' issues as well.

I'd like to test how many show up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 09:55 PM

24. You are being too kind.

"just ask any gun idiot to recite another Constitutional Amendment and get ready for the standard reply, 'duh...'"

You are being too kind. Ask them to quote the Second Amendment and most won't remember the part about the well-regulated militia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:11 PM

31. Bad to study this epidemic of shootings? Really! At some point the media needs to ask

ol' Wayne, "Really, are you serious?" How can the media even take this as a serious argument? Wait, I know the answer to this question! It's because of who and how few the owners of the MSM are. This shite will go on too because even if 100% of Americans wanted background checks, the NRA and Congress would still not pass any restrictions on guns what so ever! As long as we are willing to put up with corporations and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce owning their (formerly "our" Representatives, Judges, and most regulatory agencies and of course the media.
I wish I believed in Hell just so I can really mean it when I say that "I hope when he dies, Wayne LaPierre goes straight to F'in HELL!!!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:31 PM

39. Wayne the Peter is a perfect example of the lowest common denominator.

I almost admire him, being able to remember to breathe all the time. Can't be easy with only a brainstem working.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 10:37 PM

41. "I've got a gun, I must be somebody"

Wayne used a nervous disorder to avoid the draft, doesn't want background checks because he couldn't pass one. Just like that brave patriot Ted Nugent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Wed May 28, 2014, 04:47 AM

42. What is such a big deal about having a gun?

And there should be laws against having more than one, outside hunting rifles. Some of these people are just obsessed. They are the ones with mental illness. Like they are going to be attacked any moment and only a gun will save them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #42)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:25 PM

51. Does it really matter how many?

Honestly? How many hands do you have?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Wed May 28, 2014, 03:48 PM

53. LaPierre works for the gun manufacturers, and he's very good at what he does.

I'm not saying he's noble, not at all. Personally as a gun owner I can't stand him, but if you judge him on how many customers he sends to Winchester and Smith & Wesson a year, he's doing an unprecedented job as a lobbyist.

In an industry where a customer really "needs" only one or two of a company's items, LaPierre has convinced owners that they need a freakin' arsenal. He's actively exploited social fear and mistrust of the government to drive shooters to stockpile thousands of rounds of ammo that they can't possibly use in three lifetimes.

Unlike the oil industry lobby, the NRA pretends they represent the people who own guns instead of the companies that sell them. It'd be like if the AAA worked behind the scenes to defeat production of hybrid cars and kept gasoline prices at a premium for the sake of Exxon Mobil profit.

In LaPierre's case, while we're focusing on his right hand as it pounds the podium in anger, we're distracted from his left hand that's getting well greased by the gun makers, and no one can argue that they aren't getting their money's worth. For that reason. LaPierre could not care less that you call him a liar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnnyRingo (Reply #53)

Wed May 28, 2014, 04:07 PM

54. That's why I called him a "fucking" liar

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Wed May 28, 2014, 04:22 PM

55. I get it ......

and I love it. Well said! Awesome rant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Wed May 28, 2014, 04:24 PM

56. He deserves most of that, and yet, he and the NRA are still effective.




Its really quite amazing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Original post)

Wed May 28, 2014, 06:24 PM

57. I like the cut of your jib.

I almost said about the same thing this past weekend to a gun nut who was "explaining to me" why there should be no regulation on gun ownership to "law abiding citizens"......because they will need those guns to protect themselves from the government. I chose instead to laugh my ass off at how ridiculous that is, no matter what guns they have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread