Sandy Hook Shooting Fully Exposed Gone Viral!

[Ambu]

You're damned right I share the opinion ! Personally I have had enough of the senseless slaughter on American soil. This has nothing to do with our second amendment rights. Seven year old second graders did not die defending the Constitution or our right to bear arms. They died because some jackass defied the Constitution by hiding behind the second amendment and did the unspeakable. This whole issue of gun control is not the panacea the moderates are believing it will be or accomplish what is desperately needed. The horse left the barn long ago when we passed the second amendment into constitutional law. What we need now is a equal deterrent to keep the yin and yang in check.

Thank god.

Been waiting for someone to be an idiot.

Are you familiar with the phrase "first they came..." ?

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Let me summarize this up and make a connection to the gun world for the weak minded:

If you let the government get their foot in the door "because it doesn't affect you". It WILL affect you sooner or later, at this rate, it's looking like sooner.

 

[Ambu]

They died because some jackass defied the Constitution by hiding behind the second amendment and did the unspeakable.

PLEASE CITE FOR ME IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS WHERE IT SAYS THE 2ND AMENDMENT ALLOWS THE USE OF WEAPONRY FOR ILLEGAL CRIMES.

 

[Indy60]

I'm still waiting for responses from those I called out.

Why does INGO not have a pit...

Why not put a little more thought and some added vocabulary into your posts then you would not feel as though you have waited so long? Three word taunts hardly deserve a dissertation of intellectually stimulating well thought out logically worded response. Although I have made an exception in your case.

 

[Indy60]

PLEASE CITE FOR ME IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS WHERE IT SAYS THE 2ND AMENDMENT ALLOWS THE USE OF WEAPONRY FOR ILLEGAL CRIMES.

And there is no reason to shout.

 

[Ambu]

Why not put a little more thought and some added vocabulary into your posts then you would not feel as though you have waited so long? Three word taunts hardly deserve a dissertation of intellectually stimulating well thought out logically worded response. Although I have made an exception in your case.

Yes, thank god you can write long sentences and use big vocabulary. You sure showed me.

Here, let me use REAL INTELLIGENCE and cite literature rather than argue through ignorance.

United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54.

Did you read LAWFUL PURPOSES? Obviously, massacring people is not a "lawful purpose" and therefor no hiding was done behind the 2nd amendment.

Do some reading. Come back with facts.

 

[traderdan]

The American people have not said "Enough is enough"....That is just what Barry says that they have said! If Barry had tried to issue an executive order banning what he terms assault weapons,THEN you would have heard the American people say"enough is enough.

 

[Indy60]

So what do you want done?

Just like the NRA proposed. Armed guards in the schools, vigilant and ready to respond. Fight the battle with superior forces, that is the American way. There comes a time when words will not make a difference, only proactive action will save the day and the children.

 

[Ambu]

And there is no reason to shout.

There is no reason to act superior due to your proficient writing skills, but you chose to do so anyway.

Three word taunts hardly deserve a dissertation of intellectually stimulating comma well thought out comma logically worded response

You may have big words in your vocabulary, but your grammar is terrible.
The more I read that sentence, the less sense it makes. You tried to make yourself look more intelligent than me, but instead you simply look arrogant.

A "dissertation" IS long written out logically worded response. So why repeat the definition in your sentence.

 

[Indy60]

Yes, thank god you can write long sentences and use big vocabulary. You sure showed me.

Here, let me use REAL INTELLIGENCE and cite literature rather than argue through ignorance.



Did you read LAWFUL PURPOSES? Obviously, massacring people is not a "lawful purpose" and therefor no hiding was done behind the 2nd amendment.

Do some reading. Come back with facts.

Slow down a bit and think of what I said and the real purpose the second amendment was penned. The 2nd was designed to defend our freedom from threats to our democracy, foreign and domestic. The shooter misused the second amendment by using the weapon his mother held to defend our freedom and constitution for the wrong purpose. That is how he hid or was a wolf in sheep's clothing hiding behind the second amendment. You have applied a literal interpretation to a figurative analogy I was trying to convey.

 

[Indy60]

There is no reason to act superior due to your proficient writing skills, but you chose to do so anyway.



You may have big words in your vocabulary, but your grammar is terrible.
The more I read that sentence, the less sense it makes. You tried to make yourself look more intelligent than me, but instead you simply look arrogant.

A "dissertation" IS long written out logically worded response. So why repeat the definition in your sentence.

If you dare to hang with Indydave on the political forum, you had better hone your skills son!

 

[Ambu]

Slow down a bit and think of what I said and the real purpose the second amendment was penned. The 2nd was designed to defend our freedom from threats to our democracy, foreign and domestic. The shooter misused the second amendment by using the weapon his mother held to defend our freedom and constitution for the wrong purpose. That is how he hid or was a wolf in sheep's clothing hiding behind the second amendment. You have applied a literal interpretation to a figurative analogy I was trying to convey.

So...you're telling me...that all firearms used in crimes are misused?

Jesus Christ somebody get this guy a Nobel Peace Prize or something!

What EXACTLY do you think the .gov should do about this "misuse" of firearms and the "hiding behind the 2nd amendment"?

I mean, if we subjects weren't allowed to own such weapons of destruction, we wouldn't be able to hide behind the 2nd amendment then would we?

 

[Ambu]

If you dare to hang with Indydave on the political forum, you had better hone your skills son!

Yeah.

INGO had better watch out for us people asking questions, we're "Bad for the brand".

Judging who's right and wrong on their ability to form compound sentences with "prodigious" words isn't "Bad for the brand"

 

[Indy60]

Yeah.

INGO had better watch out for us people asking questions, we're "Bad for the brand".

Judging who's right and wrong on their ability to form compound sentences with "prodigious" words isn't "Bad for the brand"

What the hell are you talking about? Brand?

 

[Indy60]

 

[Ambu]

What the hell are you talking about? Brand?

INGO should censor this garbage. It is an embarrassment to their brand.

Clearer now?

 

[Indy60]

Clearer now?

I love the tools available for use on this forum. One of my favorites is the fly swatter or ignore list. Congratulations you just made it!

 

[Ambu]

I love the tools available for use on this forum. One of my favorites is the fly swatter or ignore list. Congratulations you just made it!

And this ladies & gentlemen, is what happens when people lose arguments.

They have no facts to use against their opponents.

So they resort to jabs at the way that person talks.

When they fail in that aspect, they change the subject.

When all else fails, ignore them so you can pretend you're right without having to listen to logic.

 

[ParaManAR15]

The video really did go viral. My wife sent it to me yesterday and she said she actually liked one of the facebook pages that was in the video (no she didn't donate any money) and she went back to look at it and it had been deleted. When I watched it yesterday it was right at 5 million views and now it's at 9.3.

 

[88GT]

So you're going to throw away all the other facts just because you don't agree with one of them?

If one of your "facts" is suspect, why should I trust that the rest of your production is based on sound information?

BINGO. there's plenty of great evidence in this video!

There was a man detained in the woods near the school. That's a fact. That does not make it evidence that there was a second shooter, that he was a second shooter, or that he was even associated with the school or the shooting. If all you have to "prove" a second shooter is the man in the woods, you've got nothing. Well, you might have America's second grassy knoll.

And this ladies & gentlemen, is what happens when people lose arguments.

They have no facts to use against their opponents.

So they resort to jabs at the way that person talks.

When they fail in that aspect, they change the subject.

When all else fails, ignore them so you can pretend you're right without having to listen to logic.

LOL, it's ironic that you say 'lose the argument' because you haven't even made one.

I haven't read one post in this thread from you that presents anything concrete in support of your position on Sandy Hook. On the contrary, you have behaved very much like a school yard bully, delighting in the fact that someone finally decided to "be an idiot" and chest thumping your physical superiority by challenging those with differing opinions to an imaginary brawl. This isn't that place. We don't do that here.

I haven't yet watched the video, but when I do, and I have questions about the value of the information, are you going to respond with the same tactics?

 

[Ambu]

LOL, it's ironic that you say 'lose the argument' because you haven't even made one.

I haven't read one post in this thread from you that presents anything concrete in support of your position on Sandy Hook. On the contrary, you have behaved very much like a school yard bully, delighting in the fact that someone finally decided to "be an idiot" and chest thumping your physical superiority by challenging those with differing opinions to an imaginary brawl. This isn't that place. We don't do that here.

I haven't yet watched the video, but when I do, and I have questions about the value of the information, are you going to respond with the same tactics?

The "position on Sandy Hook" was not in question.

Rather, it was a position on where we stood on the "American people" saying that "enough is enough"

I find it funny that I am the school yard bully, when I was being insulted for not using big enough words and sentences?