GOP truly has become a parody of themselves

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Oct 29, 2016
1,018
439
713
US
If you're defending assault rifles, especially after the murder of children because of said assault rifles, you're a sociopath and you may need mental health treatment.

How would you react if one of your loved ones or child murdered by an assault rifle, then seeing a bunch of sociopaths claiming, "you see my loved one or child that was murdered? Look at that dead body.. can you BELIEVE that THAT is the reason they're wanting to ban, or make it extremely more difficult to obtain an assault rifle? CAN YOU BELIEVE IT! PFFFT! 2ND AMENDMENT! EFF MY LOVED ONE! EFF MY DEAD CHILD! LOOK AT ME POINT AT MY DEAD CHILD.. AND THAT IS THE REASON! Unbelievable. Pff. Who gives a damn about my dead child.. my dead child should NOT BE A REASON WHY WE SHOULD BAN ASSAULT RIFLES! FREEDOM, BABY! I luvs my assault rifle. I luvs them so much! Much more than my worthless dead child!"
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
27,087
11,154
1,743
Earth
No such thing as “temporary” removal of firearms by the government.
Who's removing any firearms? Not that I don't agree with you on most topics, but we do need to have red flag laws and an age limit as well as restriction on certain types of weapons. I do NOT think that it's appropriate for a citizen to own a Tank or a Nuke for example...but those in my party who think they need enough weapons to fight off a rough government aren't responsible nor are they using their brain. Yes, in the 1700's we needed a militia to fend off overreach of the British. Now we have that in each state as the national guard. It's not as if the citizens would be able to hold off our own military more less any other major powers. Good luck with our "AR against a Blackhawk Helicopter." I'm not arguing against guns for citizens, but I am arguing for logic and sensibleness. These extremists who are unwilling to compromise on anything at all are an embarrassment to the party. They, not their list of senators, need to be voted out of office. I'm hopefully someone in the party will have the balls to stand up to the Trump idiocy and fend them off. Someone needs to finally come out HARD against his banter and the like....the guy lost everything when he attempted a coup (or at least kind of did). It was a moron move and he needs to be ousted from American political life....This coming from someone who voted for him twice and stumped for him on this board. If we cannot learn from this, and continue to support him in any way, we are indeed fools and deserve to lose elections.
 
Last edited:
May 4, 2011
3,605
1,624
1,743
Charleston, SC
Who's removing any firearms? Not that I don't agree with you on most topics, but we do need to have red flag laws and an age limit as well as restriction on certain types of weapons. I do NOT think that it's appropriate for a citizen to own a Tank or a Nuke for example...but those in my party who think they need enough weapons to fight off a rough government aren't responsible nor are they using their brain. Yes, in the 1700's we needed a militia to fend off overreach of the British. Now we have that in each state as the national guard. It's not as if the citizens would be able to hold off our own military more less any other major powers. Good luck with our "AR against a Blackhawk Helicopter." I'm not arguing against guns for citizens, but I am arguing for logic and sensibleness. These extremists who are unwilling to compromise at all are an embarrassment to the party.
We may disagree on a lot of things, but I appreciate your willingness to go against your party.

Also, doing more 2A research of late and it's amazing to me how much we overlook that those drafting and voting on the bill of rights wanted to eliminate any standing army during peacetime and to essentially keep a reserve of arms among citizens so that an army/militia could be quickly raised. I knew they wanted to eliminate standing armies after the revolution, but hadn't seen how much the laws and opinions that influenced the 2A explicitly stated that citizens' rights to arms allowed a country to dramatically reduce the military. That's relevant here because our persistently massive military completely eliminates that function of the 2A for the reasons you articulate above (I've seen arguments that Ukraine shows why you need arms even against an advanced military and I think their need for support and advanced weaponry shows the opposite.)
 
Jul 5, 2020
1,896
381
213
59
Broken Arrow
If you're defending assault rifles, especially after the murder of children because of said assault rifles, you're a sociopath and you may need mental health treatment.

How would you react if one of your loved ones or child murdered by an assault rifle, then seeing a bunch of sociopaths claiming, "you see my loved one or child that was murdered? Look at that dead body.. can you BELIEVE that THAT is the reason they're wanting to ban, or make it extremely more difficult to obtain an assault rifle? CAN YOU BELIEVE IT! PFFFT! 2ND AMENDMENT! EFF MY LOVED ONE! EFF MY DEAD CHILD! LOOK AT ME POINT AT MY DEAD CHILD.. AND THAT IS THE REASON! Unbelievable. Pff. Who gives a damn about my dead child.. my dead child should NOT BE A REASON WHY WE SHOULD BAN ASSAULT RIFLES! FREEDOM, BABY! I luvs my assault rifle. I luvs them so much! Much more than my worthless dead child!"
Who's removing any firearms? Not that I don't agree with you on most topics, but we do need to have red flag laws and an age limit as well as restriction on certain types of weapons.
I direct your attention to the 4th paragraph, and remind you this "idea" is actively discussed at the federal level at this moment in time. So I'll say it again, there is no such thing as "temporary" removal of firearms in the feeble, warped mind of a progressive liberal.

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004...-gun-removal-laws-from-the-justice-department
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
8,119
3,319
1,743
47
DFW
Oct 29, 2016
1,018
439
713
US
I direct your attention to the 4th paragraph, and remind you this "idea" is actively discussed at the federal level at this moment in time. So I'll say it again, there is no such thing as "temporary" removal of firearms in the feeble, warped mind of a progressive liberal.

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004...-gun-removal-laws-from-the-justice-department
Here ya go. Not sure if you live in Oklahoma or not. But if you do, this is a list of mental health treatment providers from all over the state. And yes, you are a sociopath for even attempting to justify assault rifles after mass murder of children, as well as adults. Sad part is, is that you probably don't have the ability to even comprehend the seriousness of your situation

I would seriously suggest contacting a mental health treatment center. They will be help you. Get the help you need.

https://integrisok.com/services/line/mental-health-and-psychiatry
 
Dec 9, 2013
1,846
633
743
52
https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1539569761847283712?t=1idQ_3tnQQK_ewLU8KyIiw&s=19
I am not saying that Greene is smart enough to understand what the implications are for using counties vs states or cities but if she is and she used it intentionally then this is another veiled call to white nationalists.
 
May 4, 2011
3,605
1,624
1,743
Charleston, SC
I direct your attention to the 4th paragraph, and remind you this "idea" is actively discussed at the federal level at this moment in time. So I'll say it again, there is no such thing as "temporary" removal of firearms in the feeble, warped mind of a progressive liberal.

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004...-gun-removal-laws-from-the-justice-department
Working with suicidal patients and especially when I briefly worked at the VA, I couldn't tell you how much we wanted to be able to really have the ability to prompt removal. I've had colleagues whose patients died because we couldn't get firearms out of the house. It was always a sigh of relief when they were willing to turn over control to a partner or family member. We try to get them in inpatient, but they're usually smart enough to say just enough that they can't be involuntarily admitted. I see stuff like this and just find it profoundly sad.

Also, you realize you quoted an article about DOJ guidance for state level action, not a proposal for federal action, right? Also, there's no discussion either way about the return of firearms, but states have various mechanisms for returning them.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
27,087
11,154
1,743
Earth
Here ya go. Not sure if you live in Oklahoma or not. But if you do, this is a list of mental health treatment providers from all over the state. And yes, you are a sociopath for even attempting to justify assault rifles after mass murder of children, as well as adults. Sad part is, is that you probably don't have the ability to even comprehend the seriousness of your situation

I would seriously suggest contacting a mental health treatment center. They will be help you. Get the help you need.

https://integrisok.com/services/line/mental-health-and-psychiatry
Being a jerk doesn't solve anything nor persuade people to change their opinions. It just cements them in concrete. I don't think OSUgrandad85 is a sociopath...that's a long way to jump from someone who simply doesn't trust the government.
 
Last edited:

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
27,087
11,154
1,743
Earth
I direct your attention to the 4th paragraph, and remind you this "idea" is actively discussed at the federal level at this moment in time. So I'll say it again, there is no such thing as "temporary" removal of firearms in the feeble, warped mind of a progressive liberal.

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1004...-gun-removal-laws-from-the-justice-department
The thing is no one is losing their guns...not the legit person who has them at least. This is just to stop some of the more irresponsible from getting them. It's an easy compromise...can't understand why others think they have to go crazy over it....it's being used to divide and conquer by the morons to the far right...and yes, they are morons and need to be voted out. Taylor Green, Matt Gaetz, Boebert, and a few others are indeed only about division and have nothing productive to add to the discussion...They are the rights version of AOC. Anyone who doesn't refer to their fellow Americans as fellow Americans and instead thinks we need to hunt "RINO," especially since the ones calling people RINO's are the real RINO's. Additionally anyone who says they will "fight" for you in Washington is trying to get your vote by tapping into your triggered emotions. I challenge you to think about that prior to voting this time. Don't vote for dividers, vote for uniters who see America as positive and want to move us in good directions for all people. Not just people who want to attack the "other side" and "fight." It's self defeating to elect these types. We all need to WAKE up...
 
Jul 5, 2020
1,896
381
213
59
Broken Arrow
Working with suicidal patients and especially when I briefly worked at the VA, I couldn't tell you how much we wanted to be able to really have the ability to prompt removal. I've had colleagues whose patients died because we couldn't get firearms out of the house. It was always a sigh of relief when they were willing to turn over control to a partner or family member. We try to get them in inpatient, but they're usually smart enough to say just enough that they can't be involuntarily admitted. I see stuff like this and just find it profoundly sad.

Also, you realize you quoted an article about DOJ guidance for state level action, not a proposal for federal action, right? Also, there's no discussion either way about the return of firearms, but states have various mechanisms for returning them.
I totally get your point (and example) regarding suicidal patients, but federal politicians have a nasty demonstrated history of changing the definition of words that fit their political agenda. In this case, temporary will end up being perpetually temporary. It's too ripe for subjectivity and political bias in its application, which will just end up removing guns from law abiding citizens.I realize what I quoted, and am saying the federal politicians are discussing this option at the federal level. Regardless, for example let's take any liberal state you want that currently has what amounts to be an approved red flag law at the state level...Oregon? California? I have a family tragedy that prompts me to go visit a Psychiatrist to deal with my issues. Wham, physician reports to government, government seizes the firearm. Six months later I'm no longer seeing the physician; you really believe their state-level "mechanisms" will result in the return of that firearm to me? They'll come up with something to avoid it.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
27,087
11,154
1,743
Earth
I totally get your point (and example) regarding suicidal patients, but federal politicians have a nasty demonstrated history of changing the definition of words that fit their political agenda. In this case, temporary will end up being perpetually temporary. It's too ripe for subjectivity and political bias in its application, which will just end up removing guns from law abiding citizens. I realize what I quoted, and am saying the federal politicians are discussing this option at the federal level. Regardless, for example let's take any liberal state you want that currently has what amounts to be an approved red flag law at the state level...Oregon? California? I have a family tragedy that prompts me to go visit a Psychiatrist to deal with my issues. Wham, physician reports to government, government seizes the firearm. Six months later I'm no longer seeing the physician; you really believe their state-level "mechanisms" will result in the return of that firearm to me? They'll come up with something to avoid it.
These laws will be challenged by the courts and many will and many won't hold up...it's not a big deal at all for responsible gun owners like you and I...but it has the possibility of saving lives. Does it not concern you that more and more people that don't need guns are driving around with them in their cars? Do you not think that some crazy dude my off you if you cut him off accidentally in traffic? Not to mention that some mentally Ill kid with horrible parents won't go kill kids in a school tomorrow? Both this incident and the one at St. Francis would have been prevented with responsible gun laws and waiting periods. Kid was under the 21 age limit that should be placed on guns, bought his right when he turned 18...which was BUT should not be legal...Gun in Tulsa was bought day of his murders. My big time gun owner and pro gun friend even said no citizen needs an AR15 and he's the biggest gun guy I know. It's time we are more sensible but we don't, and won't go all Australia or UK...but we will be better and have less lives lost for being a bit more selective in who we sell too.
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
8,653
8,007
1,743
Working with suicidal patients and especially when I briefly worked at the VA, I couldn't tell you how much we wanted to be able to really have the ability to prompt removal. I've had colleagues whose patients died because we couldn't get firearms out of the house. It was always a sigh of relief when they were willing to turn over control to a partner or family member. We try to get them in inpatient, but they're usually smart enough to say just enough that they can't be involuntarily admitted. I see stuff like this and just find it profoundly sad.

Also, you realize you quoted an article about DOJ guidance for state level action, not a proposal for federal action, right? Also, there's no discussion either way about the return of firearms, but states have various mechanisms for returning them.
Curious... what are (some of) the mechanisms for returning them?