MSNBC admits that citizens with guns

are you one of those foolish people who believe the gun makes the man?

Is this "cop with a gun" from Chicago?

Nothing good comes out of Chicago, Right?

They are a person with a gun that requires 16 bullets to subdue one individual.

you one of those foolish people who believe the gun makes the man?

YES,,,,I believe the gun makes the man...Makes the man dangerous.

All you need now is money to purchase a firearm...nothing else, should be required to see a shrink, maybe even go to church for a couple years(at least once a week)....IF/WHEN they complete that, they can apply for a permit to go on the practice range for a few months...THEN apply for a firearm permit.

Instead of using for attaching studs and other objects, that nailgun just speaks to someone to go out and shoot people with it? What's your weedeater whisper to you to do? Cut people off at the ankles? Does someone with a motorcycle helmet just beg you to try out a baseball bat on it to see if it really protects? Does a propane torch scream out to burn some building down? Does a backyard barbeque turn on some pyro urge to burn other things down? Does an instant camera turn on the voyeur urge to use it secretly in places people bathe or change clothes?

All such are tools and can be used responsibly or improperly. It's the person who makes the difference, not the tool.

into 'sicko' territory with your examples and thought process during debates and discussions in a public manner, does that mean you are dangerous because you can't control your impulsive/compulsive instincts? Should someone hear 'see something, say something' because we are worried for your neighbors since you can't get to any of us?

You're getting weirder and weirder, JP.......

You're getting weirder and weirder, JP.......

As Al pacino questioned.....Are YOU talkin' to ME?....Are YOU talkin' to ME?....

I didn't make THIS post

nailguns? What's your weedeater whisper to you to do? Cut people off at the ankles? Does someone with a motorcycle helmet just beg you to try out a baseball bat on it to see if it really protects? Does a propane torch scream out to burn some building down? Does a backyard barbeque turn on some pyro urge to burn other things down? Does an instant camera turn on the voyeur urge to use it secretly in places people bathe or change clothes?

YOU think family members SHOULD rat out their relatives receiving them, because YOU asked if I had ratted out my neighbors and relatives who HAD received them....or did you forget THAT end of the discussion, conveniently? Check that Alz, JP.

I didn't expect one...had to ask though.

don't actually READ internet posts (or they would be catching a lot of home grown bad guys out there).....but YOU were encouraging me to make a call even to the point of asking me repeatedly over time if I finally had.

Some of the stupidest crap bothers the hell out of you when you find you can't debate something anymore.........

without hurting or killing anyone.

you fail to understand matters like range laws in the western states. You just like to blabber.

Do they consider inside a government building "Open Range"?

how bout on top of a 200 foot fire watch tower?

No cattle up there "grazing".

you toss things that have nothing to do with the discussion into it, no application whatsoever, and act like it applies. Nobody was talking about buildings. Do you even know the difference between an ranch house and a barn? If so, maybe there's a hope you will eventually understand what "range" and "open" mean. We keep hoping for you...

I was ...and Bundys Gang is occupying them

you claim it's about "open range laws/range laws" WHAT are they doing in "federal buildings"?

Armed protesters refuse to leave federal building in Oregon

Give YOUR explanation of range laws and being in government buildings...they are using the building to shelter the animals?

doesn't recognize the Federal Government's land grab, which includes that building, because they never had permission from the State's government to take it. THAT'S what their fight is about.

and suddenly huge swaths of it is then considered "Federal Land" instead of belonging to the state? Sounds like a historically illegal land grab to me.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/06/upshot/why-the-government-owns-so-much-land-in-the-west.html?_r=0

The article actually never addresses the real land grab from the affected states by the federal govt.

Those 3 comprise about 15% of federal land holdings. All the rest should belong to the states in which they are located, and let the states manage it as they see best. We need a law that limits the federal govt from owning more than a percentage of property in each state, perhaps somewhere between 5-10%, of course it would be greater where there's national parks, but even those should be examined to see if all the land in the parks are necessary for the park or would better serve the states being sold into private hands.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/federal-land-ownership/422637/

Call a bluff

When someone pretends to be about to do something, and another person challenges them to actually do it.

Originally from poker, when someone acts like they have good cards and their opponent makes them prove it.

The aim of a bluff is to scare or intimidate someone. The use in poker is so that an opponent will quit the round. >>>

I never pretended to be about to do anything......you made that assumption as you usually do about me, and then nagged me repeatedly about it by asking if I had done it yet.

Unfortunately, you failed miserably at 'calling a bluff' and couldn't intimidate or scare me into doing your bidding.

You mean I couldn't get you to show your cards/prove you claim?

That's because you "folded"

Fold... To fold is to discard one's hand and forfeit interest in the current pot. No further bets are required by the folding player, but the player cannot win. Folding may be indicated verbally or by discarding one's hand face down into the pile of other discards called the muck, or into the pot

I NEVER made any claim.......IF you assumed one, that's on you, as usual.

because it was an 'out of the blue' admission that you never see from the left, let alone THAT particular program. That doesn't mean that I have hope for them coming out of the 'dark side' because they are nothing if not consistent in their radical beliefs.

Would YOU use a FoxNews source willingly? Even when they defended your views, which they actually DO more often than you think? I don't think so because you couldn't bring yourself to subscribe to their website (which you don't have to do in order to read anything) nor could you watch their cable tv channel.