Re: 2nd Term, Part VI: Burnin' down the House
Your ignorance is only exceeded by your smugness. Law enforcement is a local matter. And I defy you to find one instance where I've suggested or agreed with the notion that teachers or students should be armed. I have argued repeatedly that "gun people" never consider the downside in those scenarios. So when, for example, armed students at Virginia Tech begin shooting back at Woo Tang Clan, nothing bad could happen in that free fire zone. No innocent kids could be hit.
The problem of gun violence in our major cities is far more complex than your libtard analysis suggests. While not a gun person myself, we have a Second Amendment, and the Supreme Court has ruled it means individual citizens have a right to possess weapons. Chicago, as it happens, has gun ordinances so strict part of them were deemed unconstitutional by the Supremes. Libtards love to swoon over so-called "assault" weapons. A made up category of firearms which are almost never used in any kind of crime, let alone drive bys. A ten year ban on these weapons produced no decline in crime. And ten years after the ban expired, there has been no increase in their use. But, like the moron who keeps hitting his head on the wall because it feels so good when he stops, the left continues to flog this worthless "solution" to the problem of gun violence.
There was a time when the libtard trope was: "Conservatives have simple answers to complex questions." Now it's the libtards who assert a simple solution to a complex question: ban a made up category of weapons almost never used in street crime as a solution to the problem of gang violence.
You may be unable to see the hypocrisy of Neveille jumping in to the Martin shooting but remaining largely silent about the black on black slaughter in our streets, but most of the rest of us, including the ones who seldom agree with me, do.
Your ignorance is only exceeded by your smugness. Law enforcement is a local matter. And I defy you to find one instance where I've suggested or agreed with the notion that teachers or students should be armed. I have argued repeatedly that "gun people" never consider the downside in those scenarios. So when, for example, armed students at Virginia Tech begin shooting back at Woo Tang Clan, nothing bad could happen in that free fire zone. No innocent kids could be hit.
The problem of gun violence in our major cities is far more complex than your libtard analysis suggests. While not a gun person myself, we have a Second Amendment, and the Supreme Court has ruled it means individual citizens have a right to possess weapons. Chicago, as it happens, has gun ordinances so strict part of them were deemed unconstitutional by the Supremes. Libtards love to swoon over so-called "assault" weapons. A made up category of firearms which are almost never used in any kind of crime, let alone drive bys. A ten year ban on these weapons produced no decline in crime. And ten years after the ban expired, there has been no increase in their use. But, like the moron who keeps hitting his head on the wall because it feels so good when he stops, the left continues to flog this worthless "solution" to the problem of gun violence.
There was a time when the libtard trope was: "Conservatives have simple answers to complex questions." Now it's the libtards who assert a simple solution to a complex question: ban a made up category of weapons almost never used in street crime as a solution to the problem of gang violence.
You may be unable to see the hypocrisy of Neveille jumping in to the Martin shooting but remaining largely silent about the black on black slaughter in our streets, but most of the rest of us, including the ones who seldom agree with me, do.
