Sheriff John Brown always hated me…


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. look the treasonous bastards in the white house have no intention of supporting us. It is time to pick sides, one must simply not tolerate liberal and democrats any more.

    Comment by Lip — January 10, 2013 @ 6:02 pm

  2. I believe the Kenyan POS wants to push us into a revolution. They didn’t buy billions of. 40 and .223 for plinking.

    Comment by JoeBandMember&#8482 — January 10, 2013 @ 6:37 pm

  3. American minds have to be— changed — to hate guns it’s not kool like smoking JHC– have you ever ???? !!!! They are looking for members of congress of both parties who are interested in having an honest conversation———well— good luck to you on that honest thing—or any party thing— not going to happen. If they don’t watch their shit it’s going to hit the fan big!!!
    #2 You’re right on!!!
    By the way did anyone listen to Rush today? He had a call from a wounded soldier that gave me goose bumps. He reminded me of all of you vets on the porch.

    Comment by geezerette — January 10, 2013 @ 7:16 pm

  4. Wonder if the Beltway Republican Establishment is going to blotch this one as badly as they have taxes and budgets.

    Comment by Ironic in Denver — January 10, 2013 @ 7:32 pm

  5. Hope all those Pennsylvania hunters fools who voted blue in 2012 are happy with their choice.

    Comment by Ironic in Denver — January 10, 2013 @ 7:44 pm

  6. They should have asked the White House if they’re really interested in gun control. When they respond– on the record– in the affirmative, ask them how their desire squares with Operation Fast & Furious, walking guns into Mexico. Or Operation Castaway, running guns out of Tampa into Honduras and the ultra-violent gang MS-13. Or Project Gangwalker in Indiana, walking guns to inner city gangs, mostly in Chicago (who does Rahm like them apples?).

    Get their response on record.

    Comment by Fat Baxter — January 10, 2013 @ 7:52 pm

  7. I’m just wondering what fuckery Øbama and company are engineering while everyone’s focused on gun control.

    Comment by rickn8or — January 10, 2013 @ 8:21 pm

  8. wants to push us into a revolution


    GMTA…you, me and PatrickP too…

    Comment by SondraK, Queen of my domain — January 10, 2013 @ 8:25 pm

  9. As usual, like a stuck record, we’ll be told that gun control will work this time because we’ll control “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines. Baloney. This country had an assault weapons ban from 1994 until 2004. Senator Feinstein claims that the ban resulted in a 6.7% reduction in murder rates, but the fact is that the study she cites uses data for only one year of the ten year period. I suspect that the year was cherry picked or that the data set was too small to draw a statistically valid conclusion that the ban had anything to do with murder rates. Data for a recent year shows ~300 murders with ‘assault’ rifles and 600+ murders with hammers, so why aren’t we licensing and registering hammers?
    Because Feinstein, Uhbama & Co. don’t give a rat’s ass about lowering murder rates or protecting children – they want our guns. Period.

    Make no mistake about it, Senator Feinstein’s revival of the assault weapon and magazine ban is not about protecting the children. If she was truly concerned about child safety she’d address the real threats to children. Ten to twenty children have been killed each year in school related shootings over the past thirty years. Each and every child’s death is a tragedy, but fer crying out loud, a hundred or more children drown every year in buckets, tubs, toilets, and pools, about 150 in bicycle accidents, and hundreds are killed annually in car accidents, many of which are caused by drunk drivers.
    If it were truly for the children, Feinstein would be crying to ban buckets, toilets, pools, spas, and bicycles, cars and alcohol. (Prohibition worked reaalll good didn’t it?)
    She is not addressing those ‘problems’ because Feinstein, Uhbama & Co. want to ban all guns in the hands of private citizens – end of story. In 1995, in a CBS interview, Feinstein said “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them [guns] . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.”

    I have a reply for the next asshole who asks “What do you need more than ten shots for? You don’t need more then ten bullets”.
    Ans: Just for starters, have you ever had someone break into your house at night while you are sleeping? No?
    Well I have – and I can tell you, it’s scary. It’s dark, you’re not sure where they are, what they’re doing, how many there are, what their intentions are, and how and if they are armed. In those circumstances, it’s entirely possible you may need a lot more than ten shots to stop the invasion and protect you and yours. Just wait until that happens to you and you’re fumbling in the dark to dial 911 and wondering if help will arrive before the intruders find you or your family members. Until you’ve had that experience STFU.

    BTW, do you own and drive a car? Will it go 80 mph or more? You don’t ‘need’ to go that fast, in fact, you don’t ‘need’ a car at all. Ride a bicycle.
    How do you like someone else telling you what you ‘need’? Doesn’t sit well does it?
    I’ve never hurt anyone with my firearm, but lemme tell you something: I need it to kill you if you come to my house to try to take away my means to defend myself.

    I think the tipping point is fast approaching and the sleeping tiger will roar. I’ve heard a number of cops call in to talk shows and say they would not obey an order to round up guns. I hope there are many more like them out there.

    Comment by dick, not quite dead white guy — January 10, 2013 @ 8:30 pm

  10. rickn8or (7)
    I was just thinking about that.
    They’re probably planning on throwing a dozen major issues into the arena soon in order to distract and saturate the political conversation and demoralize/exhaust the opposition in an attempt to slide a few of ‘em through unopposed.

    Comment by DougM (Progophobe) — January 10, 2013 @ 8:31 pm

  11. ^ They’re distracting us with guns when it’s going to be bullets………

    Comment by SondraK, Queen of my domain — January 10, 2013 @ 8:55 pm

  12. I’m going to the local gun show Saturday.

    Was going to trade a couple Ruger mags, but now I think I’ll probably keep them and just look for ammo. .38, .357, 7.62X39, 16 gauge buck and or slugs, and even hot .22 like stingers.

    I plan on being there when the doors open.

    Honestly I believe the Howdy Doody Monkey Boy President is trying to get a revolt happening so he can declare Marshall Law, if not Sharia, the D***licker.

    Comment by JoeBandMember&#8482 — January 10, 2013 @ 9:08 pm

  13. My HTML always goes bad when I’m pissed off…

    Comment by JoeBandMember™ — January 10, 2013 @ 9:09 pm

  14. Buy more guns and ammo, as quickly and as much as you can.

    The Sh*t is getting ready to hit the fan big time if the a$$hole thinks he can ban anything with an executive order.

    Comment by JoeBandMember™ — January 10, 2013 @ 9:11 pm

  15. The NRA was “disappointed”.
    What did they expect?

    I have come to strongly suspect that firearms are really, in themselves not the issue; the right to keep and bear arms is, rather the “canary in the coal mine”. If and when the Gov’t is truly committed to disarming the citizenry, its actions will serve as the warning bell that said Gov’t is gearing up to do some other really nasty things.

    After all the posturing and shadow dancing is over, at the end of the day, it comes down to just this:

    If you try to take our guns, we will turn them upon you.

    Comment by Lucius Severus Pertinax — January 11, 2013 @ 1:44 am

  16. If some sort of outright ban fails, look for a punitive tax on registered firearms and future sales of arms and ammo and a repeat of the tobacco settlement, all for the children of course.

    Comment by Joe — January 11, 2013 @ 6:31 am

  17. One scary thing is that our soon to be ex Governor, Crispy Gargoile, who had the vote counted three extra times in 2004, having stated beforehand that if she could get to the third recount she would win, is under consideration for heading the EPA job killing agency.

    She wanted to ban lead fishing sinkers in WA when she headed the State Ecology Dept.

    See where this is going?

    Comment by JoeBandMember™ — January 11, 2013 @ 1:55 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.203 Powered by WordPress