1911Forum banner
61 - 76 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,304 Posts
No such thing as a "Saturday Night Special" unless you're a gun ban person. What I see is an inexpensive method of self defense for those without many resources.
You are right. That's all some folks can afford, and they have the right to arm themselves, whatever the cost.

I was just quoting the Lynyrd Skynyrd song out of jest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
My guess is, this one won’t last long media wise either. Doesn’t really fit the narrative for the left.
What, ya mean the shooter wasn't some "white supremacist" who just couldn't stand to see a celebration of the end of slavery??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
I'm sure you're right, maybe I just missed it and you can direct me to an article where a Bill has actually been passed?
I'm sure it's more comfortable to maintain a Pollyanna-ish optimism than to acknowledge the handwriting on the wall. I wish your view were realistic, but I know it's not. "It can't happen here" are reassuring words, until they're not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Ok well just wanted to make sure I din't miss something. There is a HUGE difference between talk and actually passing something. I can always say I am in favor of something and then find reasons I am not happy about the current proposal. We will have to see but I just don't think anything will make it before the Mid Terms
...And those are months away! Why worry?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Washington DC shooting... 15 year old dead after un-permitted concert celebrating Juneteenth.

Yup... that's how emancipation is celebrated, by killing each other.
Naw, it had to have been the work of some RACIST!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Of course... South Florida is a Democrat strong hold.
And, sadly, it got that way, at least in part, because of all the folks who moved there to escape the Democrat strongholds of NYC and NJ. Not unlike the way Portland and Seattle got "Californicated."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
"What should be banned is little Communist punks like you." That's the only reasonable response to them, other than "No." or "FOAD"
Or, they could be dealt with the way Robert Stack dealt with the Hare Krishnas etc. in Airplane!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7in1911

·
Registered
Several
Joined
·
64 Posts
As Grampas50AE earlier lamented, "...it's okay to bare false witness." THAT (social tolerance for the telling of lies) is foundational to all of the other moral deterioration in our country. And when, exactly, did the telling of lies first become popular? Well, with the advent of TV. I know, I know...politicians and lawyers have told lies since the inception of our constitutional republic, but the general public wasn't aware/informed of this behavior until it began to be televised. Track it.

Television also legitimized plaintiff attorneys' use of litigation as a business tool (to enrich the lawyer, not the client). Televised moral outrage - fueled by the lawyers' shameless telling of lies - began to tilt the scales of justice away from facts and towards feelings. Once that happened, and plaintiffs' bar attorneys became print media darlings, why soon thereafter it became "OK" to televise the telling of lies as a way to deceive and manipulate viewers.

So at this point is created the nexus (i.e., the causal link) of our nation's corruption spiral: the media-fueled increasing popularity of actors (who are, after all, or nothing other than professional liars), media-fueled hero worship of plaintiffs' bar attorneys, and the migration of those two groups into politics. Almost 70% of our nation's senators and congressional reps were originally career lawyers. Now, successful plaintiffs' bar lawyers have rolodex lists chocked full of expert witnesses who are themselves shameless liars, thus extending the game. Some of these "expert liars" become key appointees in our governments - thus imbedding lies in our governmental processes and procedures. The list is endless.

How to reverse this? Make the telling of a falsehood - any falsehood - grounds for removal from elected office and/or disbarment from the courtroom. And make the telling of a KNOWN falsehood (i.e. a lie) grounds for criminal prosecution. Apply these policies equally to politicians, litigators, and the politicians'/litigators' expert witnesses (in all fields of endeavor including medical, economic, psychological, financial, etc.). Caution - many state and federal judges USED TO BE trial lawyers. So don't be surprised if judges issue rulings that essentially "protect" their former professional colleagues (indeed, judges who rule otherwise open themselves to blackmail by their former associates). It could well take a full generation to turn over all of the judicial positions that are currently filled by former professional liars (aka litigators). And if that's true, then we must make those changes immediately...we don't have a minute to wait.

[Note: my comments above are based on my 40+ year career as a CPA, the last 20 of which were spent as a forensic accountant and expert witness in civil and criminal litigation matters. My observations about trial lawyers, their experts and judges are a consequence of my experience. All I can say is, "Thank God the legal profession still includes some honest trial lawyers."]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,290 Posts
As Grampas50AE earlier lamented, "...it's okay to bare false witness." THAT (social tolerance for the telling of lies) is foundational to all of the other moral deterioration in our country. And when, exactly, did the telling of lies first become popular? Well, with the advent of TV. I know, I know...politicians and lawyers have told lies since the inception of our constitutional republic, but the general public wasn't aware/informed of this behavior until it began to be televised. Track it...
Firstly, it's bear false witness. We are not looking at a "naked" witness. ;)

So, essentially your thesis here is that TV made lying more prevalent? Not true. It was just as bad if not far worse in the past. I give you a pass however as I doubt you have read any excerpts from 19th century newspapers which I might add were usually outright financially supported by whichever party maintained them.

I found a basic Youtube video to give you a scholastic primer:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Washington DC shooting... 15 year old dead after un-permitted concert celebrating Juneteenth.

Yup... that's how emancipation is celebrated, by killing each other.


People running from gunfire, tripping and getting trampled.



Try to advertise and have an "un-permitted" 4th of July party in DC, and see what happens. It would be shut down before it even started, and organizers would either be arrested, or fined.
Totally different set of rules
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Firstly, it's bear false witness. We are not looking at a "naked" witness. ;)

So, essentially your thesis here is that TV made lying more prevalent? Not true. It was just as bad if not far worse in the past. I give you a pass however as I doubt you have read any excerpts from 19th century newspapers which I might add were usually outright financially supported by whichever party maintained them.

I found a basic Youtube video to give you a scholastic primer:

Thanks for giving him a "pass": Very magnanimous........:cautious:
 

·
Registered
Several
Joined
·
64 Posts
Firstly, it's bear false witness. We are not looking at a "naked" witness. ;)

So, essentially your thesis here is that TV made lying more prevalent? Not true. It was just as bad if not far worse in the past. I give you a pass however as I doubt you have read any excerpts from 19th century newspapers which I might add were usually outright financially supported by whichever party maintained them.

I found a basic Youtube video to give you a scholastic primer:

As to "...it's bear false witness." You might want to critically re-read the original post to which I was responding; I simply DIRECTLY quoted the OP's post.

As to "...your thesis is that TV made lying more prevalent? Not true." Again, re-read my post, which says, "And when, exactly, did the telling of lies first become popular? Well, with the advent of TV. I know, I know...politicians and lawyers have told lies since the inception of our constitutional republic, but the general public wasn't aware/informed of this behavior until it began to be televised. Track it.

As old trial lawyers say, "When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When the facts are not on your side, then just argue louder."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Let's not think about the economy or the price of gas. The GOP won't sign Gun Control bills
The GOP will sign any bill if it helps keep them in power. That is not a recent opinion of mine based on the GOP's helping ramrod a mostly (if not entirely worthless firearms bill) through Congress. GOP with both houses of Congress did not repeal ObumaCare, nor build the border wall (until forced by Trump), Bush 43 and the GOP controlled Congress spend money like a sailors on shore leave after 6 months at sea (except that insults sailors; at least they are spending their money not ours), Bush 41, "...read my lips no new taxes...", then signed a tax bill, and finally Reagan late in his term signed a tax increase. Can anyone tell me a bill that the U.S. Congress passed which attemped to fix or correct a major issue in this country that actually did fix the problem, and not made the problem worse? Not created more Federal bureaucracy? Not added more civil service to the federal payroll, or more executive branch appointees? Congress is exempt from many of the laws under which we have to live -- two examples are ObumaCare which specifically exempts Congress, another is insider trading, and campaign finance laws which are supposed to help restrict outside influence do just the opposie and I believe actually set up the process to allow elected officials to by-pass the law. Or, federal and state governments to too great a degree no longer represent "we the people" who elected them. The public needs to start enforcing term limitations on our elected representatives -- specifically meaning vote them out of office. The electorate controls who is elected (mostly albeit the 2020 elected argues otherwise) and for how long. We do not need term limits to rid ourselves of career politicians who do nothing but get rich, we just need to vote! If you want to see change, and I mean real change that reflects our will, we the people, then vote out most of the US House in November, and most of the 1/3s of the Senators up for reelection. Do the same at the state level. That would send shockwaves throught out the entrenched, career politicians, and we would start seeing some meaningful change in what they do that directly adversely affect us -- we the people. Do it again in two years and then ensure the new ones don't become just like what you got rid of by voting in new people say after 2 terms for senators, and 3 or 4 for representatives. Likewise, repeal or modify the 17th Amendment. Senators should not be directly elected by the people in the state. The Senate was intended to represent the States and specifically the state governements to ensure the state governments had representation in the legislative branch of our government. We lost that on April 8, 1913.
 
61 - 76 of 76 Posts
Top