I've had so many insults thrown at me....initially for just posting articles...even from conservative sites.....met with the term n***a, spook, kunta, monkey pictures....as all the rest of you sat their in silent agreement and never said anything to your own...and if I throw an insult...I expect them back...comes with the territory....it is like I used to pick on bullies who picked on smaller guys who did not want none....never mind the bully wasn't messing with me....he just got from someone what he gave to someone else.....so I talk schit because I'm thick-skinned...so if I say something about any con...feel free to throw one my way...it is expected......so if you all talk about Obama, black people....even white liberals....i'll talk smack to you all............

I'm calling Cool Breeze a r****t for his comments about Dr. Carson. The liberals always do that if one does not agree with their party. We know which party was against s***ery. We know which party started the KKK. We know which party filibustered the civil rights act/ Sen. Gore (Al's father). I studied my history in school. Too bad Cool Breeze didn't. Just because you have had a change of heart on civil rights
(that's great), just do do not think we went the other way.
That does not mean I agree with Mr. Obama because he is part black.

Less than a month after the December 2012 Newtown massacre, the National Rifle Association's then-president, David Keene, warned that the new White House task force on gun violence would "do everything they can to strip Americans of their right to keep and bear arms, to essentially make the Second Amendment meaningless." Three weeks ago, after a k**ler shot three people and wounded eight near Santa Barbara, California, conservative activist "Joe the Plumber" posted an open letter to the victims' families. "Your dead kids," he wrote, "don't trump my Constitutional rights."*

As America grapples with a relentless tide of gun violence, pro-gun activists have come to rely on the Second Amendment as their trusty shield when faced with mass-shooting-induced criticism. In their interpretation, the amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms—a reading that was upheld by the Supreme Court in its 2008 ruling in District of Columbia. v. Heller. Yet most judges and scholars who debated the clause's awkwardly worded and oddly punctuated 27 words in the decades before Heller almost always arrived at the opposite conclusion, finding that the amendment protects gun ownership for purposes of military duty and collective security. It was drafted, after all, in the first years of post-colonial America, an era of scrappy citizen m*****as where the idea of a standing army—like that of the just-expelled British—evoked deep mistrust.
—By Hannah Levintova
| Thu Jun. 19, 2014 6:00 AM EDT
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/second-amendment-guns-michael-waldman No F*****t Conspiracies Please!

Well cool wind, here we go again. Use a little common sense. Look at the USA and go to the areas that have the strictist gun laws in our nation. They all have 2 things in common. They are all democratic areas, and second they have the highest death rates by gun violence. What do you want to do, write stricter laws and drive their rates higher? Only law abiding people obey the laws, not the crooks or crazies. Did you ever stop and think we have over 50 million laws on the books trying to enforce original 10?

Less than a month after the December 2012 Newtown massacre, the National Rifle Association's then-president, David Keene, warned that the new White House task force on gun violence would "do everything they can to strip Americans of their right to keep and bear arms, to essentially make the Second Amendment meaningless." Three weeks ago, after a k**ler shot three people and wounded eight near Santa Barbara, California, conservative activist "Joe the Plumber" posted an open letter to the victims' families. "Your dead kids," he wrote, "don't trump my Constitutional rights."*

As America grapples with a relentless tide of gun violence, pro-gun activists have come to rely on the Second Amendment as their trusty shield when faced with mass-shooting-induced criticism. In their interpretation, the amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms—a reading that was upheld by the Supreme Court in its 2008 ruling in District of Columbia. v. Heller. Yet most judges and scholars who debated the clause's awkwardly worded and oddly punctuated 27 words in the decades before Heller almost always arrived at the opposite conclusion, finding that the amendment protects gun ownership for purposes of military duty and collective security. It was drafted, after all, in the first years of post-colonial America, an era of scrappy citizen m*****as where the idea of a standing army—like that of the just-expelled British—evoked deep mistrust.
—By Hannah Levintova
| Thu Jun. 19, 2014 6:00 AM EDT
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/second-amendment-guns-michael-waldman No F*****t Conspiracies Please!

Well cool wind, here we go again. Use a little common sense. Look at the USA and go to the areas that have the strictist gun laws in our nation. They all have 2 things in common. They are all democratic areas, and second they have the highest death rates by gun violence. What do you want to do, write stricter laws and drive their rates higher? Only law abiding people obey the laws, not the crooks or crazies. Did you ever stop and think we have over 50 million laws on the books trying to enforce original 10?