Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Point proven I'd say n/t [View all]discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,771 posts)16. See #15
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
62 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
As long as their "Victories" are limited to DU threads, I can live with the petty insults
DonP
Mar 2015
#40
I hope you are right. Democratic Party elites can't seem to resist the glance back at Sodom.
Eleanors38
Mar 2015
#41
Imagine yourself as a snake lover on a cat fancy website, so the juries have a pro-cat bias.
Electric Monk
Mar 2015
#19
Read your own post, and reflect upon why juries will tend not to have your desired pro-gunner bias.
Electric Monk
Mar 2015
#24
You're seriously sending folks unsoliticed pm's trying to hunt down the alerter?
stone space
Mar 2015
#53
Forget to mention - attributing quotes without disclosure of the author, and then attack the quote? Really?
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#48
On the contrary, flattered to be the subject of a whole post....and who can argue with the result?
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#50
Banning 20 round and over mags (for example) would not be a "human rights violation". nt
Electric Monk
Mar 2015
#52