If guns are so great, then why is the NRA headquarters a gun free zone?

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:48:53 AM1/11/13

to

Freaking conservative cowards.....

TMT

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 2:05:46 AM1/11/13

to

On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> [bullshit snipped]

It isn't.

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 2:25:58 AM1/11/13

to

It is.

Try going in the building and see what happens.

TMT

max headroom

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 3:23:30 AM1/11/13

to

Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:25feceef-fd47-484c...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:

> On Jan 11, 1:05 am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.n�t> wrote:

>> On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

>>> [bullshit snipped]

>> It isn't.

> It is.

> Try going in the building and see what happens.

This has GOT to be the stupidest thing you've written yet, Jimmy!!!

You really think there are NO guns at NRA HQ?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha........

"What a maroon!" --Saint Bugs

C\"@invalid.invalid

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 8:04:53 AM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 2:25 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> It is.
>
> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>
> TMT

Actually, you are welcome to take your guns into the NRA headquarters
building and actually shoot them within the building.

Klaus Schadenfreude

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 8:51:18 AM1/11/13

to

>""C <C\"@invalid.invalid> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

So, you're verifying that TMT is just a lying sack of shit?

[chuckle]

____
"We can make those precious guns of yours go away
with a few keystokes [sic] to the authorities."
-Unterscharführer Too Many Tools

"Considering that the Feds and the State can use Usenet IP addresses
to determine who owns firearms..."
-Net Detektuv Too Many Tools 5/28/12

Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 9:05:26 AM1/11/13

to

On Jan 11, 12:48 am, Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Freaking conservative cowards.....
>
> TMT

If guns are so horrible why is Obama and his nigletts surrounded by
them?

C\"@invalid.invalid

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 12:17:12 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 8:51 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
> So, you're verifying that TMT is just a lying sack of shit?
>
> [chuckle]

Just pointing out, in order to access the public range within the NRA
headquarters building, an individual would have to carry a firearm
inside the structure.
You can draw your own conclusions about TMT. <G>

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:31:59 PM1/11/13

to

Only the range...wander around in the building with your gun and see
what happens.

Gun free it is.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:33:05 PM1/11/13

to

On Jan 11, 7:51 am, Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Considering that you wear a diaper I would say you fit the description
of a sack of shit.

Laugh..laugh..laugh...

TMT

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:51:11 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/10/2013 11:25 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

> On Jan 11, 1:05 am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:
>> On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>>> [bullshit snipped]
>>
>> It isn't.
>
> It is.

It isn't.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:55:19 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 10:33 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> On Jan 11, 7:51 am, Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>> ""C <C\"@invalid.invalid> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>> On 1/11/2013 2:25 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>>> It is.
>>
>>>> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>>
>>>> TMT
>>
>>> Actually, you are welcome to take your guns into the NRA headquarters
>>> building and actually shoot them within the building.
>>
>> So, you're verifying that TMT is just a lying sack of shit?
>>
>> [chuckle]
>>
>> ____
>> "We can make those precious guns of yours go away
>> with a few keystokes [sic] to the authorities."
>> -Unterscharführer Too Many Tools
>>
>> "Considering that the Feds and the State can use Usenet IP addresses
>> to determine who owns firearms..."
>> -Net Detektuv Too Many Tools 5/28/12
>
> Considering that

Considering that you lied blatantly about the NRA headquarters being a
<chortle> "gun free zone", your shit-filled diaper has been shoved in
your face.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 2:23:30 PM1/11/13

to

Did you see where your ostensible ally and like-minded totalitarian
left-wing extremist "whoblahblahkidding" said that you're a reckless,
irresponsible, out-of-control lunatic who isn't trying to engage in
serious and mature discussion?

Yeah [TMT] swings the hammer with plenty of flourish but that's
mostly because it drives gun nuts crazy *which is his goal*.

You are not now and never have been trying to have serious and
substantive discussion on any issue. You're just a snarky, immature
troll, with a goal of trying to piss off your ideological opponents -
which is everyone to the right of the moderate left - rather than
engaging in meaningful discussion with a goal of trying to change minds
by making a strong case. In essence, your own allies see you as nothing
but a useful idiot. Congratulations!

Jeff M

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 2:59:35 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 2:23 AM, max headroom wrote:
> Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:25feceef-fd47-484c...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Jan 11, 1:05 am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.n�t> wrote:
>
>>> On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>
>>>> [bullshit snipped]
>
>>> It isn't.
>
>> It is.
>
>> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>
> This has GOT to be the stupidest thing you've written yet, Jimmy!!!
>
> You really think there are NO guns at NRA HQ?!?

I think he's saying THEY have them, but you, as a visitor, cannot.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 3:02:08 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 11:59 AM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 1/11/2013 2:23 AM, max headroom wrote:
>> Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:25feceef-fd47-484c...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>>

>>> On Jan 11, 1:05 am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:
>>
>>>> On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>>>>> [bullshit snipped]
>>
>>>> It isn't.
>>
>>> It is.
>>
>>> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>>
>> This has GOT to be the stupidest thing you've written yet, Jimmy!!!
>>
>> You really think there are NO guns at NRA HQ?!?
>
> I think he's saying THEY have them, but you, as a visitor, cannot.

What "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish", the lunatic, said is
that the NRA HQ is a gun free zone. He's wrong.

Dave Cua

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 3:06:30 PM1/11/13

to

The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. With
friends like that...

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:17:51 PM1/11/13

to

On 11/01/2013 2:06 PM, Dave Cua wrote:

--
SPAMMED TO NON-RELEVANT NEWSGROUPS - AND CUT

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 1:18:17 PM1/11/13

to

JohnJohnsn

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 6:00:29 PM1/11/13

to

On Jan 11, 12:31 pm, Looney Liberal Democrat Jimmy E Anderson, a/k/a

"Too_Many_Tools" ("TMT") <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 11, 7:04 am, ""C <C\"@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 1/11/2013 2:25 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>
>>> It is.
>
>>> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>
>>> TMT
>
>> Actually, you are welcome to take your guns into the NRA headquarters
>> building and actually shoot them within the building.
>

NRA Headquarters Range

Hours of Operation
The NRA Range is open to the general public.
Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Monday 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Tuesday Closed for Action Events
Wednesday 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Thursday 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Friday 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
Saturday 8:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

Range Fees
The NRA Range is open to the general public. NRA members receive a
discount on range fees. (You can also sign up to join the NRA at the
range to receive the NRA Members' discount.)

•NRA Members - $14.00 per hour/per lane.
Additional NRA Member sharing a lane - $8.00 per hour/per lane.
•Non-members - $18.00 per hour/per lane.
Additional non-member sharing a lane - $12.00 per hour/per lane.
•Shooters under the age of 18 sharing a lane with an adult - FREE
Please call 703-267-1402 for additional requirements for minors coming
to the range.

http://nrahqrange.nra.org/

>
> Only the range...wander around in the building with your gun and see
> what happens.
>
> Gun free it is.
>
> TMT
>

When were you there, Jimmy?

Care to take and post a photo of a "No Guns for Visitors" sign on the
NRA HQ building?

BTW:

Fail. Less Than 200 Anti-Gun Leftists Turn Out for March on NRA
Headquarters in Washington DC

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/12/200-progressives-march-on-nra-headquarters-in-washington-dc/

<Chuckle> :)
---

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are
neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make
things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they
serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed
man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. "
--Thomas Jefferson

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousands real
advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience’ that would
take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown
in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that
forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm
those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes."
--Cesare Bonesana, Marchese Beccaria, `Of Crimes and Punishments'

"Why is it that every time a lunatic uses a firearm to commit an
atrocity the gun-control fanatics want to punish the millions of gun
owners that DIDN'T do it?!?!?
--Me, Dec. 18, 2012...

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 4:34:24 PM1/11/13

to

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 9:31:59 PM1/11/13

to

Dave Cua wrote:
>
> The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. With
> friends like that...

...you survived the DIY Lobotomy.

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 9:32:18 PM1/11/13

to

"Robert Westergrom,1900 Harvey rd.,Wilmington,D.E" wrote:
>
> On Jan 11, 12:48 am, Too_Many_Tools ?too_many_to...@yahoo.com? wrote:
> ? Freaking conservative cowards.....
> ?
> ? TMT

>
> If guns are so horrible why is Obama and his nigletts surrounded by
> them?

<http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-bush-secret-service/2013/01/11/id/471007?s=al&promo_code=11E78-1>

Tom Sr.

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 9:50:50 PM1/11/13

to

On Jan 11, 9:32 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
> <http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-bush-secret-service/2013/01/11/...>

NewMax?

Ha ha haha haha haha ha ha hahahaha ha haha haha haha ha hahahaha
hahaha Ha HaHaHa HaHa Ha HaHa HaHA HA HaHAHAHAHA HAHA HA
HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA HAHAHA
HAHAHA HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHaHaHa HaHaHa HaHaHa
HaHaHaHaHahahaha haha hahahaha haha hahaha haha ha ha ha hee!

Why don't you quote something from the John Birch Society's "The New
American" magazine as well?
...

-----
-----
Please Note:

In select newsgroups this post will be followed by an out-of-date, cut-
and-paste, SHRIEKING ranting and raving by Bob Milby Jr., aka Patriot
Games, aka Buster Norris, aka 10,000s of Sockpuppets -- Winner of The
alt.usenet.kooks Awards: Palmjob Paddle (July 2008)*, KO0k of the
Month (Sept. 2012)**, and the Order of the Holey Sockpuppet (Oct.
2012)!***

* This award is given to the person who gets spanked (as in,
thrashed) the most in a given month by other posters or even himself.
** Given to someone whose Kookery is judged to have surpassed all
others.
*** For those most prolific in the art of, abiet thinly,
disguising their net.presence behind whatever nose and glasses they
can concoct.

We hope to return you to more rational posting after this brief,
psychotic interruption.
------
------

RosemontCrest

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 10:54:31 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 6:50 PM, Tom Sr. wrote:
> On Jan 11, 9:32 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>> <http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/obama-bush-secret-service/2013/01/11/...>
>
> NewMax?
>
> Ha ha haha haha haha ha ha hahahaha ha haha haha haha ha hahahaha
> hahaha Ha HaHaHa HaHa Ha HaHa HaHA HA HaHAHAHAHA HAHA HA
> HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA HAHAHA
> HAHAHA HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHaHaHa HaHaHa HaHaHa
> HaHaHaHaHahahaha haha hahahaha haha hahaha haha ha ha ha hee!
>
> Why don't you quote something from the John Birch Society's "The New
> American" magazine as well?

Bill H.R. 6620, introduced during 11/30/2012 as the "Former Presidents
Protection Act of 2012," was passed by congress then subsequently signed
into law by the president during 01/10/2013.

Your feeble attempt to discredit the source does not change the fact
contained within the message.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:2:./temp/~bdvInp::|/home/LegislativeData.php?n=BSS;c=112|

Gunner

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 11:16:07 PM1/11/13

to

I see he used another name (Dave Cua) from my Facebook list. He
never learns does he?

Thats why I killfiled (took me almost 2 hours) all the names in my
Facebook friends list so Id not have to read his spew.

He really is mentally ill. Truely.

This is the gentleman he is claiming to be today

http://www.facebook.com/dave.cua1

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

Leroy ProudEagle Garcia

unread,

Jan 11, 2013, 11:36:12 PM1/11/13

to

On 1/11/2013 8:16 PM, Gunner wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:31:59 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Dave Cua wrote:
>>>
>>> The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. With
>>> friends like that...
>>
>>
>> ...you survived the DIY Lobotomy.
>
> I see he used another name (Dave Cua) from my Facebook list. He
> never learns does he?
>
> Thats why I killfiled (took me almost 2 hours) all the names in my
> Facebook friends list so

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! LOL! Fuck me sideways with a
swordfish!

You pissed away two hours of your life doing that? Really?! God damn,
you gunless toolless nutless boi - I fucking *own* you!!!

Klaus Schadenfreude

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 7:48:37 AM1/12/13

to

>Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>On Jan 11, 7:51 am, Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>> >""C <C\"@invalid.invalid> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>> >On 1/11/2013 2:25 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>> >> It is.
>>
>> >> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>>
>> >> TMT
>>
>> >Actually, you are welcome to take your guns into the NRA headquarters
>> >building and actually shoot them within the building.
>>
>> So, you're verifying that TMT is just a lying sack of shit?
>>
>> [chuckle]
>>
>> ____
>> "We can make those precious guns of yours go away
>> with a few keystokes [sic] to the authorities."
>> -Unterscharführer Too Many Tools
>>
>> "Considering that the Feds and the State can use Usenet IP addresses
>> to determine who owns firearms..."
>> -Net Detektuv Too Many Tools 5/28/12
>

>Considering that you [..]

Once again showed you're just a lying sack of shit. Old news, though.

Klaus Schadenfreude

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 7:49:00 AM1/12/13

to

>Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

We'll take your word for it. Not.

Gunner

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 9:31:59 AM1/12/13

to

Gunning for revolution

Exclusive: Larry Klayman says executive-order on firearms would be
'the final straw'

Since the fraudulent re-election of Barack Hussein Obama as president
– the “mullah in chief” not eligible to be president as he is not a
natural born citizen – he has thrown his weight around as if he were
our king.

First, virtually unopposed by a functionally dead Republican
opposition, Obama rammed down the people’s throats considerable income
tax increases to modest and top income earners and small businesses,
increased the capital gains and estate taxes and eliminated so called
loopholes in the tax code – all to socialize the American economy by
having these individuals and businesses “pay their fair share” as
punishment for their success in a heretofore capitalist system. Now,
like drunken sailors, Obama and his socialist flunkies on Capitol
Hill, notably House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid, promise that more tax hikes are on the way to
further their march toward dismantling our free-market freedoms and
the body politic of the nation.

Then, our first Muslim president cleverly nominated former Republican
Sen. Chuck Hagel to be the next secretary of defense, a man who while
senator had a “proven” track record as not only an anti-Semite and
hater of Jews and Israel, but also advocated rolling over to the
neo-Nazi mullahs in Iran. Hagel repeatedly not only mocked and
disparaged the so-called “Jewish lobby” that defends Israel in
Washington, D.C., but also advocated not imposing sanctions, however
worthless in any event, on Tehran for its onward and unchecked march
to acquiring atomic weapons, which the Islamic regime’s leaders have
said they will use to wage a holocaust against the Jewish state and
its people. Hagel is a truly repugnant man who fits in well with
Obama’s own not too latent anti-Semitism and antipathy toward Jews and
true Christians in general.

Incredibly, even the so-called Jewish lobby – headed by the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), whose current president, Lee
Rosenberg, is a sleazy “Chicago pol” and, not surprisingly, a friend
of Obama – has rolled over to Hagel, and AIPAC has been rendered
impotent in the upcoming confirmation hearing.

Finally, in the words of former Obama chief of staff and current
Chicago mayor, Rahm Emanuel, not letting any good tragedy go to waste,
our fraudulent president – by his own threats and through Vice
President Joe Biden – has promised to his leftist supporters to act
unilaterally and issue executive orders to extinguish or curb the
right to bear arms guaranteed to all Americans by our Founding Fathers
under the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The pretextual
“trigger” for this: the recent tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School
in Newtown, Conn., where young children were murdered by a mentally
sick adolescent who somehow obtained control of his similarly murdered
mother’s firearms.

To lay the foundation for this unilateral act of defiance, abuse and
usurpation of our rights, immediately after the Sandy Hook tragedy
Obama announced and designated a so-called Gun Control Task Force, to
be headed by “his pliant imbecile,” Joe Biden. Since then, this task
force, which constitutes an advisory committee under the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) (Pub. L. 92-463, 6 Oct. 1972), has met
with special interests on both sides of the gun-control issue. The
problem is, however, that these meetings are illegal, since they have
not been announced with the 15 days notice required by the FACA law,
and have excluded ordinary citizens. Instead the meetings are limited
to special-interest lobbyists who are adept at lining the pockets of
the Washington, D.C., political and legal establishment.

On Jan. 7, 2013, I filed a FACA request with the Office of the
President demanding access to these meetings on behalf of not just
myself as chairman and general counsel of Freedom Watch, but also all
Americans who desire to participate. Predictably, I have not heard
back from either Obama or his surrogates, so in the next few days we
will be forced to file a lawsuit over this blatant violation of the
rule of law. (Years ago, during the George W. Bush administration,
when Vice President Cheney refused to open up his meeting with
lobbyists on energy policy, I filed a lawsuit that made it all the way
to the Supreme Court.) The people simply have a right under FACA and
our Constitution to be privy to closed-door meetings with special
interests who, without oversight, will pervert our legal rights to
serve their own interests.

But quite apart from FACA and open government – to use the term
government loosely these days, since in practice we no longer have a
republic but a despotic monarchy – Obama’s threats to use executive
orders to remove or curtail our right to bear arms constitutes the
final straw. It is in effect a declaration of war against the American
people and our way of life.

For our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us the right to bear arms
primarily to protect us, should the need ever arise, against a
tyrannical government. Their primary motive was not to allow us to
defend ourselves against random criminals and madmen like Adam Lanza,
however useful guns would have been and are in this regard.

So when Obama and Biden effectively threatened to seize our guns, or
even just curtail our rights to gun ownership, they are making the
same mistake King George III made when he sent his armies to seize and
destroy the weapons caches of the colonies, which they had amassed to
defend themselves against a British crown that had also raised their
taxes without representation in parliament and committed other acts of
tyranny. This gun grab by the king was the final straw before
revolution, triggering the Declaration of Independence and subsequent
war.

The irony today, as it was in 1776, is that that these miscalculations
by our rulers will in the end serve to be their own undoing and result
in our liberation from their evil clutches. Let us pray that Obama and
Biden and the likes of Pelosi and Reid are so stupid as to carry
through with their threats, so that the masses will finally be
provoked to rise up as they did in colonial times. It is time that
their political ilk be legally removed from our nation’s capital –
along with their Republican accomplices like Chuck Hagel – before the
nation is totally transformed and destroyed.

These arrogant, malevolent, political tyrants should thus take heed
and beware of the words of our Founding Fathers in the Declaration of
Independence, that “In every stage of these Oppressions We have
Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated
Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose
character is thus marked by every act that may define a Tyrant, is
unfit to be ruler of a free people.”

Gunner

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 9:32:55 AM1/12/13

to

Journalists reject personal 'gun-free zone' signs
Many media personalities have their own armed guards

Although many members of the news media publicly endorse officially
designating schools, movie theaters and other venues as “gun-free
zones,” you’d never know it from their private actions.

Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe – best known for his devastating
2009 undercover video exposé of ACORN, and many other hidden-camera
scoops, including a recent video of a Democrat campaign operative
plotting vote fraud – says many media members are reluctant to
proclaim their support for “gun-free zones” if it gets too close to
home.

The project already is viral, with thousands on a Facebook page about
it, even though the video is not yet available.

O’Keefe’s crew asked journalists working for CNN, MSNBC and others
whether they would put a sign in their lawn that says “Citizens
Against Senseless Violence. THIS HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE!”

“No journalist wanted the sign,” he says. “Many journalists had armed
guards.”

“We also showed up at Eric Holder’s house,” O’Keefe added.
“Authorities came to protect him.”

“Incidentally, the sign was left on only one person’s lawn (a
non-journalist we used as a decoy to legitimize across the street). …
Someone driving by later took a pic. It has now gone viral on Facebook
via pro-gun groups,” O’Keefe said.

The video that will result from the interviews and visits will be
released soon, he said.

Just before November’s election, Virginia’s State Board of Elections
asked state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli to investigate a video
report that caught the field director for Democratic U.S. Rep. Jim
Moran’s campaign in an apparent conspiracy to commit election fraud.

That video sting first reported by WND, prompted the resignation of
Patrick Moran, who is Jim Moran’s son, and a criminal investigation by
the Arlington County Police Department in Northern Virginia, near
Washington, D.C.

Cuccinelli’s spokesman, Brian Gottstein, told WND the attorney
general’s office “will get with local law enforcement, which has
already been looking into the matter, and see what information they’ve
already gathered.”

“We could work side-by-side, or they could ask us to solely continue
the investigation,” he said.

Arlington County Police Department spokesman Dustin Sternbeck told WND
the department decided to launch an investigation into a possible
“election offense” by Patrick Moran after media reported the video
sting.

Washington Post columnist Christ Cillizza made Patrick Moran the
recipient of his “Worst Week in Washington” award” for “forgetting
that walking away is sometimes the best policy.”

As WND reported earlier, O’Keefe’s team captured on video a regional
director of a voter mobilization group launched by Barack Obama,
Organizing for America, helping an undercover reporter vote for the
president in two states. The director was fired after the video was
reported.

Leroy ProudEagle Garcia

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 9:40:58 AM1/12/13

to

On 1/12/2013 6:31 AM, Gunner wrote:
> Gunning for revolution
>
> Exclusive: Larry Klayman says executive-order on firearms would be
> 'the final straw'
>
>
> Since the fraudulent re-election of Barack Hussein Obama as president

No.

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 10:04:16 AM1/12/13

to

Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
> >Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>

> >On Jan 11, 7:04Â am, ""C <C\"@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 1/11/2013 2:25 AM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> >>
> >> > It is.
> >>
> >> > Try going in the building and see what happens.
> >>
> >> > TMT
> >>
> >> Actually, you are welcome to take your guns into the NRA headquarters
> >> building and actually shoot them within the building.
> >
> >Only the range...wander around in the building with your gun and see
> >what happens.
> >
> >Gun free it is.
>
> We'll take your word for it. Not.

No one in their right mind would let a drooling maniac run around
with a gun, spouting all his garbage and I can't blame them. People, on
the other hand are no problem.

Dr. Floyd Ferris

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 11:06:52 AM1/12/13

to

On Jan 11, 9:31 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

Why do you hate Olive Garden?

Uncle Steve

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 11:10:42 AM1/12/13

to

Here's another tag-team retard performing the one trick he knows:
changing the subject.

Regards,

Uncle Steve

--

"A principle familiar to propagandists is that the doctrines to be
instilled in the target audience should not be articulated: that would
only expose them to reflection, inquiry, and, very likely, ridicule.
The proper procedure is to drill them home by constantly presupposing
them, so that they become the very condition for discourse."
-- Noam Chomsky

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 11:59:25 AM1/12/13

to

"Dr. Floyd Ferris" wrote:
>
> On Jan 11, 9:31 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" ?mike.terr...@earthlink.net?
> wrote:
> ? Dave Cua wrote:
> ?
> ? ? The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. With
> ? ? friends like that...
> ?
> ? ...you survived the DIY Lobotomy.

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 9:12:54 PM1/12/13

to

On Jan 11, 1:23 pm, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:
> Did you see where your ostensible ally and like-minded totalitarian
> left-wing extremist "whoblahblahkidding" said that you're a reckless,
> irresponsible, out-of-control lunatic who isn't trying to engage in
> serious and mature discussion?
>
> Yeah [TMT] swings the hammer with plenty of flourish but that's
> mostly because it drives gun nuts crazy *which is his goal*.
>
> You are not now and never have been trying to have serious and
> substantive discussion on any issue. You're just a snarky, immature
> troll, with a goal of trying to piss off your ideological opponents -
> which is everyone to the right of the moderate left - rather than
> engaging in meaningful discussion with a goal of trying to change minds
> by making a strong case. In essence, your own allies see you as nothing
> but a useful idiot. Congratulations!

LOL...sounds like you are jealous as to how successful I am.

Every conservative in the land lies in bed at night unable to fall
asleep cursing my name.

Laugh..laugh..laugh...

TMT

Much Bigger Tools

unread,

Jan 12, 2013, 10:46:27 PM1/12/13

to

On 12 Jan 2013, Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> posted some
news:cd24c575-153d-4c6a...@k6g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:

On the contrary bumpkin, they laugh at you and take bets as to which one
will get the pleasure of skinning you alive.

Laugh..laugh..laugh...

> TMT
>

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 1:52:29 AM1/13/13

to

On Jan 11, 10:36 pm, Leroy ProudEagle Garcia

> you gunless toolless nutless boi - I fucking *own* you!!!- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

LOL...two hours that he could have been working a REAL job earning
money to pay off his unpaid property taxes.

TMT

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 11:24:38 AM1/13/13

to

On 1/12/2013 6:12 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

> On Jan 11, 12:55 pm, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:

>> On 1/11/2013 10:33 AM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 11, 7:51 am, Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> ""C <C\"@invalid.invalid> wrote in talk.politics.guns :

>>>>> On 1/11/2013 2:25 AM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

>>>>>> It is.
>>
>>>>>> Try going in the building and see what happens.
>>
>>>>>> TMT
>>
>>>>> Actually, you are welcome to take your guns into the NRA headquarters
>>>>> building and actually shoot them within the building.
>>
>>>> So, you're verifying that TMT is just a lying sack of shit?
>>
>>>> [chuckle]
>>
>>>> ____
>>>> "We can make those precious guns of yours go away
>>>> with a few keystokes [sic] to the authorities."
>>>> -Unterscharführer Too Many Tools
>>
>>>> "Considering that the Feds and the State can use Usenet IP addresses
>>>> to determine who owns firearms..."
>>>> -Net Detektuv Too Many Tools 5/28/12
>>
>>> Considering that
>>
>> Considering that you lied blatantly about the NRA headquarters being a
>> <chortle> "gun free zone", your shit-filled diaper has been shoved in
>> your face.
>

> It is.

It isn't. You lied. Punks always get caught when they lie.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 11:38:16 AM1/13/13

to

On 1/12/2013 10:52 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

> On Jan 11, 10:36 pm, Leroy ProudEagle Garcia
> <l...@naacpmaldefsioux.com> wrote:
>> On 1/11/2013 8:16 PM, Gunner wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:31:59 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>> <mike.terr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Dave Cua wrote:
>>
>>>>> The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. With
>>>>> friends like that...
>>
>>>> ...you survived the DIY Lobotomy.
>>
>>> I see he used another name (Dave Cua) from my Facebook list. He
>>> never learns does he?
>>
>>> Thats why I killfiled (took me almost 2 hours) all the names in my
>>> Facebook friends list so
>>
>> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! LOL! Fuck me sideways with a
>> swordfish!
>>
>> You pissed away two hours of your life doing that? Really?! God damn,
>> you gunless toolless nutless boi - I fucking *own* you!!!
>

> LOL...two hours that he could have been

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 3:50:14 PM1/13/13

to

On Jan 13, 2:07 pm, Gray Guest <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
> Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:25feceef-fd47-484c-
> 9e8d-2722d3a71...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:

>
> > On Jan 11, 1:05 am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:
> >> On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>
> >> > [bullshit snipped]
>
> >> It isn't.
>
> > It is.
>
> > Try going in the building and see what happens.
>
> > TMT
>
> And you would know this how?
>
> --
> Refusenik #1
>
> Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.
>
> Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama,
> THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama

Because I KNOW.

And typical for a conservative coward like you to be ignorant of even
the basic gun facts of the NRA.

TMT

Andy F. Garcia

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 4:12:12 PM1/13/13

to

On 13 Jan 2013, Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> posted some
news:41da214a-7646-4003...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/01/13/france-north-
mali/1829993/

BAMAKO, Mali (AP) — France claimed new successes in its campaign to oust
Islamist extremists from northern Mali on Sunday, bombarding the major
city of Gao with airstrikes targeting the airport and training camps used
by the al-Qaeda-linked rebel group controlling the city.

France's foreign minister also said the 3-day-old intervention is gaining
international support, with communications and transport help from the
United States and backing from Britain, Denmark and other European
countries.

The French-led effort to take back Mali's north from the extremists
occupying it has included airstrikes by jets and combat helicopters on at
least four northern towns, of which Gao is the largest. Some 400 French
troops have been deployed to the country in the all-out effort to win back
the territory from the well-armed rebels, who seized control of an area
larger than France itself following a coup in Mali nine months ago.

"French fighter jets have identified and destroyed this Sunday, Jan. 13,
numerous targets in northern Mali near Gao, in particular training camps,
infrastructure and logistical depots which served as bases for terrorist
groups," the French Defense Ministry said in a statement.

Residents of Gao confirmed that the targets included the city's airport,
as well as the building that served as the base for the town's feared
Islamist police, which — in their adherence to a strict version of Muslim
law — have carried out numerous punishments including amputating limbs of
accused thieves.

Gao resident Abderahmane Dicko, a public school teacher, said he and his
neighbors heard the jets screaming across the sky between noon and 1 p.m.
local time.

"We saw the war planes circling. They were targeting the camps uses by the
Islamists. They only hit their bases. They didn't shoot at the
population," he said.

But the intervention has come with a human cost in the city of Konna, the
first to be bombed on Friday and Saturday. The town's mayor said that at
least 10 civilians were killed, including three children who threw
themselves into a river and drowned trying to avoid the falling bombs.

French President Francois Hollande authorized the military operation,
code-named "Serval" after a sub-Saharan wildcat, after it became clear
that the advancing rebels could push past the defenses in the town of
Mopti, the first town on the government-controlled side, which has the
largest concentration of Malian soldiers.

The decision catapulted the world and Mali's neighbors into a military
operation that diplomats had earlier said would not take place until at
least September. France's defense minister said they had no choice because
of the swift rebel advance.

On Saturday, the body representing nations in West Africa announced that
the member states would send hundreds of troops of their own, including at
least 500 each from Niger, Burkina Faso and Senegal, as well as from
Nigeria.

They will work alongside French special forces, including a contingent
that arrived Saturday in Bamako to secure the Malian capital against
retaliatory attacks by the al-Qaeda-linked groups occupying Mali's
northern half.

TV footage showed the French troops walking single-file out of the Bamako
airport, weapons strapped to their bodies or held over their shoulders,
like skis.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said the military effort succeeded
in blocking the advance that had prompted the intervention. "The Islamist
offensive has been stopped," Fabius said on RTL radio Sunday. "Blocking
the terrorists … we've done it."

He sought to stress that the operation is gaining international backing,
despite concern about the risks of the mission in a stretch of lawless
desert in weakly governed country. "We have the support of the Americans
for communications and transport," Fabius said, but gave no details.

U.S. officials have said they had offered to send drones to Mali and were
considering a broad range of options for assistance, including
information-sharing and possibly allowing limited use of refueling
tankers. British Prime Minister David Cameron also agreed to send aircraft
to help transport troops.

Andy F. Garcia

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 4:12:14 PM1/13/13

to

On 13 Jan 2013, Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> posted some

news:b3cb3e21-13fc-498f...@d10g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-wont-use-14-amendment-2013-1

In order to be able to understand the current debt-limit battle in
Washington, here is the essential historical background:

The U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment states very clearly that “the
validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, ...
shall not be questioned.”

However, the so-called “debt limit,” as it’s currently known – which
violates that Amendment boldly – was instituted only in recent times.

It was instituted in 1995, by the Republican-majority U.S. Congress, when
Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich tried to coerce President Bill
Clinton to slash “entitlements”: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
He especially wanted to slash Medicare.

The solid-Republican congressional votes against increasing the debt-limit
in order to pay “the public debt of the United States, authorized by law”
did actually shut down the Federal Government for the first time in
history. It started on 14 November 1995 lasting for five days, and then
yet happened again on 16 December 1995 for 21 days.

During those two periods, “non-essential” government services were
suspended, while the “public debt of the United States, authorized by law”
continued to be honored.

The second federal shut-down ended on 6 January 1996, when the Republicans
finally passed and the President signed “Public Law 104-94,” a Joint
Resolution to raise the debt-limit. This action – which until then had
always been treated in Congress as routine – enabled the U.S. Government
to resume and continue to function, and the federal debt to continue to be
paid.

Between that time and now, congressional Republicans have insisted on
their right to violate this provision of the 14th Amendment, and
Democratic Presidents have not challenged that right.

While Republicans have been determined to cut “entitlements,” Democratic
Presidents have been ambivalent about it. That is: Presidents Clinton and
Obama have shown by their actions that they didn’t and don’t want to use
the force of Constitutional law to counter Republicans’ force.

Clinton and Obama have accepted Republicans’ option to violate the
Constitution’s provision that “the validity of the public debt of the
United States, authorized by law, ... shall not be questioned.”

During an early-December White House “Press Briefing by Press Secretary
Jay Carney, 12/06/2012,” the President’s Press Secretary was asked
“whether the President would invoke executive power and the 14th
Amendment,” and Mr. Carney responded: “This administration does not
believe that the 14th Amendment gives the President the power to ignore
the debt ceiling – period.”

In other words: Barack Obama was now officially on record as removing that
weapon from the available arsenal in his negotiations with congressional
Republicans about the debt limit. They could now quote him as agreeing
with them, that the change in congressional custom that had taken place on
this matter in 1995 was simply Congress’s assumption of a power that
Congresses had always had – nothing violating the Constitution at all.

Barack Obama had previously caved to the Republicans without fighting,
concerning his elimination of the public option from his “Obamacare.” More
recently, he broke his long-made promise never to compromise on increasing
taxes on the top 2%, $250,000+, and he had also chosen not to hold
Republicans’ feet to the fire on the fiscal cliff. Now, the only thing
that realistically remained in his arsenal of weaponry against
Republicans’ forcing slashes in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid,
regulatory enforcement, and many other vital government programs, was
simply handed away by him, even well before the fiscal cliff came on
January 1st.

Clearly, therefore, Mr. Obama is determined to give Republicans much of
what they want on these matters. He evidently wants to find a way to allow
that to happen. He wants House Republicans to be able to block the Federal
Government from paying its previously contracted debts, so as to force him
to cut “entitlements.”

On all prior occasions in which Obama has caved on vital details before
even negotiating with Republicans about them, he had the public on his
side but caved by his own choice. Polls showed about a 2-to-1 support for
the availability of a public option; polls showed about a 2-to-1 support
for the $250,000 benchmark for increasing tax-rates.

But Obama caved on those matters because he had lied to Democrats – and
even to many moderate Republicans – about those claimed goals of his, and
his actions showed that he actually agreed more with the goals of
congressional Republicans on these issues than he did with Democrats and
others who, in poll-after-poll on them, showed that they agreed with his
stated (and even promised) positions on them.

Now he is repeating this same behavior, regarding cuts to “entitlements.”
Yet again, polls show that the public rejects raising the retirement age,
reducing the inflation-measure in calculating benefits, and the other
Republican-pushed measures; but Obama is doing all he can to help
congressional Republicans get what they want on these issues.

Barack Obama had, even earlier, driven Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to fits
with his back-door efforts to gut such “entitlements,” as when he had
appointed the conservative Democrat Erskine Bowles to serve opposite the
extremely conservative Republican Alan Simpson as being the two co-chairs
on the White House’s “bi-partisan” federal debt commission concerning
entitlement “reform.” (The Commission produced recommendations that
congressional Democrats roundly repudiated for slashing entitlements, and
that Republicans condemned for increasing taxes.)

Obama had set this Commission up to deal with the soaring federal deficits
that had been caused by Bush’s 2008 economic collapse, by their using
those federal deficits as an excuse to slash entitlements and thus produce
even more suffering for the poor, at the same time as Wall Street was
being bailed out. (Bowles was supported by the very Wall Street banks that
were being bailed out by taxpayers. Simpson was a born conservative who
followed in his father’s footsteps as Wyoming’s Republican U.S. Senator.
His father had been quite extreme: “one of six Republican senators who
voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”)

So, that was a wolf-in-charge-of-chicken-coop type of operation, which
congressional Democrats opposed. Republicans opposed it because it would
have meant increasing taxes – it wasn’t conservative enough for them.
Thus, on the very same day, 28 March 2012, when Bowles-Simpson was finally
dashed in the House, the House passed instead the Paul Ryan budget, which
Mitt Romney ended up running on, against Obama. The 2012 “election” was
thus between two conservatives, one of whom pretended not to be.

Yet again, Pelosi and Reid are tearing their hair out about Obama’s
deceits and his preemptory caves on vital issues. On January 4th, Pelosi
in her weekly press briefing was asked about using the 14th Amendment to
annihilate the Republicans’ threats to violate the 14th Amendment, and
Pelosi said, “I’ve made my view very clear on that subject. But I’m not
the president of the United States.”

On the same day, Ryan Grim at huffingtonpost bannered “Harry Reid Would
Back Obama If He Bucks GOP On Debt Ceiling: Source.” Reid “has privately
told other Democrats, including President Obama, that if the
administration used its constitutional and executive authority to continue
paying its debts in the face of House Republican opposition, he would
support the approach.”

The way this would work is: Republicans would repeat the 1995 shut-down
cliff-hanger, and President Obama would cite the 14th Amendment, and
possibly also the trillion-dollar-coin tactic, to continue paying the U.S.
Government’s debts; and the matter would then go to the Supreme Court to
be adjudicated.

But Obama has already, through his Press spokesperson, said that he won’t
use the 14th Amendment. That will leave only the coin-tactic, which is
less likely to succeed. He has already publicly trashed his biggest
weapon.

Consequently, Nancy Pelosi on Sunday January 6th pressed the matter
further, and said on CBS' "Face the Nation," that, "If I were president,
I'd use the 14th Amendment," and she – even more importantly – explained
there why. She is, thus, for the very first time publicly, effectively
challenging the nominal head of her Democratic Party, the Republican
“Democratic” U.S. President Barack Obama, to indicate now whether he
intends to continue to stab Democrats in the back, as he has been doing
ever since he was elected and chose Timothy Geithner, Eric Holder, etc.,
and continued many of his predecessor’s policies that he had campaigned
against.

Pelosi is doing this at this time, because Obama’s “Fiscal Cliff” deal
inexplicably discarded Obama’s politically popular claimed proposal on
taxes and handed Republicans a needless win “against” him on federal
taxes, and because Obama’s shocking December 6th repudiation of the
powerful 14th-Amendment argument for blocking Republican efforts to employ
the debt ceiling as a weapon to “force” him to strip Democratic programs
on the expense side – Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and regulatory
enforcement – now threatens to hand Republicans a total victory on fiscal
matters, which would be too much for congressional Democrats to stomach in
abject silence, especially since polls show strong public support for the
Democratic position on both the tax and spending sides of these matters.

There is thus now a Democratic Party rebellion against Obama, and he will
soon show by his actions – no longer just his words – whether he is a
Democrat, and whether his Republican actions in the past have reflected,
on his part, stupidity, rather than actual treachery.

Democrats in Congress cannot publicly say that they despise a Democrat in
the White House, but the signs indicate that they do. On the other hand,
what will be their response if the President continues along this path?
Continuing on this path would be far worse than anything that happened
during the Clinton years. There is no way of knowing, ahead of time, what
would happen if he does that.

George Plimpton

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 5:52:04 PM1/13/13

to

On 1/13/2013 12:47 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

> On Jan 13, 10:38 am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:
>> On 1/12/2013 10:52 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 11, 10:36 pm, Leroy ProudEagle Garcia
>>> <l...@naacpmaldefsioux.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/11/2013 8:16 PM, Gunner wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:31:59 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>>>> <mike.terr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Dave Cua wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. With
>>>>>>> friends like that...
>>
>>>>>> ...you survived the DIY Lobotomy.
>>
>>>>> I see he used another name (Dave Cua) from my Facebook list. He
>>>>> never learns does he?
>>
>>>>> Thats why I killfiled (took me almost 2 hours) all the names in my
>>>>> Facebook friends list so
>>
>>>> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! LOL! Fuck me sideways with a
>>>> swordfish!
>>
>>>> You pissed away two hours of your life doing that? Really?! God damn,
>>>> you gunless toolless nutless boi - I fucking *own* you!!!
>>
>>> LOL...two hours that he could have been
>>
>> Nonetheless, *no* gun control measure that has a prayer of passage and
>> enforcement would have prevented Adam Lanza from shooting up the school.
>> No conceivable "background check" would have detected his mental illness.
>

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:08:06 PM1/13/13

to

On 1/13/2013 4:39 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

> Of course it is.

It isn't, of course. You lied.

Punks - you - always get caught when they lie.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:11:23 PM1/13/13

to

On 1/13/2013 4:52 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:

> On Jan 13, 4:52 pm, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> On 1/13/2013 12:47 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:
>>

>>> Sure it would have.
>>
>> No, it would not have had any effect whatsoever. No one in a position
>> of authority has proposed conducting any kind of background check on the
>> family members of gun buyers.
>>
>> No conceivable legal background check would possibly have kept Adam
>> Lanza from conducting his massacre. This is a fact.
>

> Wrong....a background check would have prevented the massacre.

No, it would not have. Nancy Lanza *did* have a background check done,
and she bought her guns.

You are proved wrong.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:12:51 PM1/13/13

to

On 1/13/2013 3:57 PM, Uncle Steve wrote:

No background check would have discovered that Nancy Lanza had an
autistic child. As far as is known, Adam Lanza never was diagnosed with
autism.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:13:38 PM1/13/13

to

That's false. There's no way for that to happen. No one is proposing
for that to happen.

Gray Guest

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:28:31 PM1/13/13

to

Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:b3cb3e21-13fc-498f-
b31e-a87...@d10g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:

> On Jan 13, 2:07�pm, Gray Guest <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote:
>> Too_Many_Tools <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:25feceef-fd47-
484
> c-
>> 9e8d-2722d3a71...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
>>

>> > On Jan 11, 1:05�am, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.n�t> wrote:
>> >> On 1/10/2013 10:48 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>> >> > [bullshit snipped]
>>
>> >> It isn't.
>>
>> > It is.
>>
>> > Try going in the building and see what happens.
>>
>> > TMT
>>
>> And you would know this how?
>>
>> --
>> Refusenik #1
>>
>> Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.
>>
>> Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called
Obam
> a,
>> THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama
>
> Because I KNOW.
>
> And typical for a conservative coward like you to be ignorant of even
> the basic gun facts of the NRA.
>
> TMT

Really fuckwit? I've been in the NRA headquartes building. With a gun.

Stupid is as stupid lies.

Gray Guest

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:37:42 PM1/13/13

to

Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:41da214a-7646-4003-
b96b-011...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:

On what do you base this? I've been in NRA headquarters. With a gun.

So we have me, who has actually done it.

And we have you who is a devolved lieing piece of crap coward. Who has
never been to the NRA headquarters and more then likely has never been to
Virginia and most certainly has never gotten out of his mommy's basement.

Now, who should anybody beleive?

Uncle Steve

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 8:50:25 PM1/13/13

to

That might be a little extreme. Remember that the Soviets used mental
illness as an excuse to consign political dissidents to the Gulag. Up
here in Canukistan, the law enforcement community is right there on
the tail of those Soviet authorities, and YYOOUU am quite certain
MMYY police are equally "advanced" with those doctrines.

Perhaps it would be sufficient to expand the prohibition to include
those with Autism and Aspergers Syndrome.

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 9:30:21 PM1/13/13

to

On 1/13/2013 2:52 PM, George Plimpton wrote:

Path: not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:52:06 -0600
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:52:04 -0800
From: George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107
Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups:
misc.survivalism,rec.crafts.metalworking,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,alt.california
Subject: Re: Fool_of_Fools, reckless irresponsible ignorant out-of-control
left-wing bomb thrower
References:
<49895990-2da1-41a2...@10g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
<lvmdnT_ivttWJHLN...@giganews.com>
<25feceef-fd47-484c...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
<QbSdnQX9RIUp-23N...@giganews.com>
<jZadnS5Lj_xa7W3N...@giganews.com>
<ZM6dnQmh0rq9Vm3N...@earthlink.com>
<kgo1f8dn2nt0ks5f5...@4ax.com>
<3tqdnfWE0cKidW3N...@giganews.com>
<1b88cdd4-4e3a-466a...@n9g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
<K-2dnY0P1u9nf2_N...@giganews.com>
<2a2fc4df-6bb6-43c2...@j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To:
<2a2fc4df-6bb6-43c2...@j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <GNadnef2H-MLp27N...@giganews.com>
Lines: 50
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace:
sv3-MI86KK9xphU+l0/JtctqqqlVWKK28IqKZxbvMZRqG2bI79Lp/j0wID2VneW79r2U9RCSTmRb965JtNA!8CutsM/PisvOXjqVeGijU7Canb3YxfnWZHMN8CFDL7R+wIMVile7+OOnh7xhZ2iujTAEto9k460=
X-Complaints-To: ab...@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers

--
SPAMMED TO NON-RELEVANT NEWSGROUPS - AND CUT

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 9:31:23 PM1/13/13

to

On 1/13/2013 5:08 PM, Delvin Benet wrote:

Path: not-for-mail

NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:08:08 -0600
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:08:06 -0800
From: Delvin Benet <DB@nbc.nýt>

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107
Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups:
misc.survivalism,rec.crafts.metalworking,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,alt.california

Subject: Re: If guns are so great, then why is the NRA headquarters a gun
free zone?
References:
<49895990-2da1-41a2...@10g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
<lvmdnT_ivttWJHLN...@giganews.com>
<25feceef-fd47-484c...@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
<kcp2lu$gbu$1...@dont-email.me>
<a560f8dh2qoj64m8e...@4ax.com>
<80c41ee5-2250-4530...@n5g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>
<O6OdnQU4LOaE_W3N...@giganews.com>
<dcb436ee-4975-4ad8...@4g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>
<V8mdnXGFtK1aQm_N...@giganews.com>
<1c9c484b-0efe-4b18...@f4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To:
<1c9c484b-0efe-4b18...@f4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Message-ID: <PK-dnW-NlvDlx27N...@giganews.com>
Lines: 54
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace:
sv3-uTiKc5nWp4P7R2Rh4VgoYV0qRV5HYQvN9oFSXgH97aoiLhFtu9T28Ninkmr5ZbBH/ZJc6PoAAEtT1SA!9MPn+JJ0mjgm4ILfQpm1GZoR0IGT4SPq+xz6LPTQx2oz57+IMVTrXUcc93ocNay/VWyR44Taw6M=

X-Complaints-To: ab...@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers

X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3539
X-Received-Bytes: 3829

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 9:31:49 PM1/13/13

to

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 9:32:07 PM1/13/13

to

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 9:57:44 PM1/13/13

to

Karen Gordon, the HIV-oozing mackerel-crotch town whore of Nanaimo, lied:

> On 1/13/2013 5:12 PM, Delvin Benet wrote:
>
>
> --
> SPAMMED TO NON-RELEVANT NEWSGROUPS - AND CUT

No, it's *not* cut - I checked, and it's still right there.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 10:01:42 PM1/13/13

to

>> In the future, anyone with a mentally ill family member will be denied
>> a gun permit.
>
> That might be a little extreme.

He's simply bullshitting. I guarantee there will never be a regulation
put into place, either by law or executive order, mandating a denial of
any kind of firearms permit to someone with a family member who has been
diagnosed with a mental illness. It's just not going to happen.

Also: there will never be a requirement for persons seeking to buy
firearms to submit to any kind of mental health evaluation. That's just
not going to happen, either.

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 11:52:11 PM1/13/13

to

"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
news:868b7a1d-d5e3-4e00...@10g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...

>On Jan 13, 9:01 pm, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nıt> wrote:
<snip>

>> > That might be a little extreme.
>>
>> He's simply bullshitting. I guarantee there will never be a regulation
>> put into place, either by law or executive order, mandating a denial of
>> any kind of firearms permit to someone with a family member who has been
>> diagnosed with a mental illness. It's just not going to happen.
>>
>> Also: there will never be a requirement for persons seeking to buy
>> firearms to submit to any kind of mental health evaluation. That's just
>> not going to happen, either.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Wrong on both counts.
>
>Having those conditions in place for background checks would have
>meant 20 1st graders would still be alive today.
>
>20 murdered children trump your stupidity.
>
>TMT

If libtards hadn't voted Obama in, Mrs Lanza wouldn't have seen him taking
this country to destruction and wouldn't have bought the guns.

RogerN

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 12:10:59 AM1/14/13

to

> Wrong on both counts.

I'm right on all counts.

> Having those conditions in place for background checks

They were not and *never will be* part of background checks. I
guarantee it.

Nothing in any background check, actual or proposed, would have kept
Adam Lanza from shooting up that school. Background checks would have
had no effect - zero.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 12:11:55 AM1/14/13

to

> No you haven't...you're still working on

Obama took a dump on the SEALs.

Anonymous

unread,

Jan 13, 2013, 5:05:07 AM1/13/13

to

In article <1b88cdd4-4e3a-466a-a8fb-
0b9b70...@n9g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>

Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 11, 10:36�pm, Leroy ProudEagle Garcia
> <l...@naacpmaldefsioux.com> wrote:
> > On 1/11/2013 8:16 PM, Gunner wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:31:59 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
> > > <mike.terr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >> Dave Cua wrote:
> >
> > >>> The description in the subject line is how his *friends* see him. �
> With
> > >>> friends like that...
> >
> > >> � �...you survived the DIY Lobotomy.
> >
> > > I see he used another name (Dave Cua) �from my Facebook list. �He
> > > never learns does he?
> >
> > > Thats why I killfiled (took me almost 2 hours) all the names in my
> > > Facebook friends list so
> >
> > HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! �LOL! �Fuck me sideways with a
> > swordfish!
> >
> > You pissed away two hours of your life doing that? �Really?! �God dam
> n,

> > you gunless toolless nutless boi - I fucking *own* you!!!- Hide quoted te

> xt -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>

> LOL...two hours that he could have been working a REAL job earning
> money to pay off his unpaid property taxes.
>
> TMT

--Replaying or rehearsing conversations out loud- i.e. talking
to yourself (very common sign)

Early Signs of Schizophrenia

The following list, compiled by one mental health consumer,
contains some of the typical early warning signs of
schizophrenia. Keep in mind that schizophrenia onset is
typically between the ages of 15 and 25 (although it can affect
children younger than fourteen, with a subtype known as
childhood-onset schizophrenia). The disorder can come on over a
period of years (called insidious onset) or be very rapid. It
affects 1% of the general population. The list is subdivided
into Physical Symptoms, Feelings and Mood, Behavior, Cognitive
Problems, Delusions, and Hallucinations.

Please remember that only a qualified psychologist, psychiatrist
(or in some areas a social worker) can properly diagnose
schizophrenia, or any other brain disorder. A psychologist or
psychiatrist will use the clinical history of the person, as
well as the symptoms and criteria in the DSM-IV (in the United
States) to make a diagnosis.

Examples of Physical Symptoms----

--A blank, vacant facial expression. An inability to smile or
express emotion through the face is so characteristic of the
disease that it was given the name of affective flattening or a
blunt affect.
--Overly acute senses- lights are too bright, sounds are too
loud.
--Staring, while in deep thought, with infrequent blinking.
--Clumsy, inexact motor skills
--Sleep disturbances- insomnia or excessive sleeping
--Involuntary movements of the tongue or mouth (facial
dyskinesias). Grimacing at the corners of the mouth with the
facial muscles, or odd movements with the tongue.
--Parkinsonian type symptoms- rigidity, tremor, jerking arm
movements, or involuntary movements of the limbs
--An awkward gait (how you walk)
--Eye movements- difficulty focusing on slow moving objects
--Unusual gestures or postures
--Movement is speeded up- i.e. constant pacing
--Movement is slowed down- staying in bed (in extreme cases,
catatonia)

Examples of Feelings/Emotions----

--The inability to experience joy or pleasure from activities
(called anhedonia)
--Sometimes feeling nothing at all
--Appearing desireless- seeking nothing, wanting nothing
--Feeling indifferent to important events
--Feeling detached from your own body (depersonalization)
--Hypersensitivity to criticism, insults, or hurt feelings

Examples of Mood----

--Sudden irritability, anger, hostility, suspiciousness,
resentment
--Depression- feeling discouraged and hopeless about the future
--Low motivation, energy, and little or no enthusiasm
--Suicidal thoughts or suicidal ideation
--Rapidly changing mood- from happy to sad to angry for no
apparent reason (called labile mood)
--Severe Anxiety

Changes in Behavior associated with schizophrenia ----

--Dropping out of activities and life in general
--Inability to form or keep relationships
--Social isolation- few close friends if any. Little interaction
outside of immediate family.
--Increased withdrawal, spending most of the days alone.
--Becoming lost in thoughts and not wanting to be disturbed with
human contact
--Neglect in self-care- i.e. hygiene, clothing, or appearance
--Replaying or rehearsing conversations out loud- i.e. talking
to yourself (very common sign)
--Finding it difficult to deal with stressful situations
--Inability to cope with minor problems
--Lack of goal-directed behavior. Not being able to engage in
purposeful activity
--Functional impairment in interpersonal relationships, work,
education, or self-care
--Deterioration of academic or job-related performance
--Inappropriate responses- laughing or smiling when talking of a
sad event, making irrational statements.
--Catatonia- staying in the same rigid position for hours, as if
in a daze.
--Intense and excessive preoccupation with religion or
spirituality
--Drug or alcohol abuse
--Smoke or have the desire to want to smoke (70-90% do smoke) -
note: this is a very normal behavior for people who do not have
schizophrenia also!
--Frequent moves, trips, or walks that lead nowhere
Examples of Cognitive Problems Associated with Schizophrenia ----

--Ruminating thoughts- these are the same thoughts that go
around and round your head but get you nowhere. Often about past
disappointments, missed opportunities, failed relationships.
--Making up new words (neologisms)
--Becoming incoherent or stringing unrelated words together
(word salad)
--Frequent loose association of thoughts or speech- when one
thought does not logically relate to the next. For example, "I
need to go to the store to buy some band-aids. I read an article
about how expensive AIDS drugs are. People take too many street
drugs. The streets should be clean from the rain today, etc" The
need to go to the store to buy band-aids is forgotten.
--Directionless- lack goals, or the ability to set and achieve
goals

--Lack of insight (called anosognosia). Those who are developing
schizophrenia are unaware that they are becoming sick. The
part of their brain that should recognize that something is
wrong is damaged by the disease.
--Racing thoughts
--In conversation you tend to say very little (called poverty of
speech or alogia)
--Suddenly halting speech in the middle of a sentence (thought
blocking)

--Trouble with social cues- i.e. not being able to interpret
body language, eye contact, voice tone, and gestures
appropriately. --Often not responding appropriately and thus
coming off as cold, distant, or detached.
--Difficulty expressing thoughts verbally. Or not having much to
say about anything.
--Speaking in an abstract or tangential way. Odd use of words or
language structure
--Difficulty focusing attention and engaging in goal directed
behavior
--Poor concentration/ memory. Forgetfulness
--Nonsensical logic
--Difficulty understanding simple things
--Thoughts, behavior, and actions are not integrated
--Obsessive compulsive tendencies- with thoughts or actions
--Thought insertion/ withdrawal- thoughts are put it or taken
away without a conscious effort
--Conversations that seem deep, but are not logical or coherent

Examples of Delusions----

The most common type of delusion or false beliefs are paranoid
delusions. These are persecutory in nature and take many forms:

--Overpowering, intense feeling that people are talking about
you, looking at you
--Overpowering, intense feeling you are being watched, followed,
and spied on (tracking devices, implants, hidden cameras)
--Thinking that someone is trying to poison your food
--Thinking people are working together to harass you
--Thinking that something is controlling you- i.e. an electronic
implant
--Thinking that people can read your mind/ or control your
thoughts
--Thinking that your thoughts are being broadcast over the radio
or tv
--Delusions of reference- thinking that random events convey a
special meaning to you. An example is that a newspaper headline
or a license plate has a hidden meaning for you to figure out.
That they are signs trying to tell you something.
--Religious delusions- that you are Jesus, God, a prophet, or
the antichrist.
--Delusions of grandeur- the belief that you have an important
mission, special purpose, or are an unrecognized genius, or
famous person.
--Delusions that someone, often a famous person, is in love with
you when in reality they aren't. Also called erotomania or de
Clerembault syndrome.

Examples of Hallucinations----

--Hallucinations are as real as any other experience to the
person with schizophrenia. As many as 70% hear voices, while a
lesser number have visual hallucinations.
--Auditory hallucinations can be either inside the person's head
or externally. When external, they sound as real as an actual
voice. Sometimes they come from no apparent source, other times
they come from real people who don't actually say anything,
other times a person will hallucinate sounds.
--When people hear voices inside their heads, it is as if their
inner thoughts are no longer alone. The new voices can talk to
each other, talk to themselves, or comment on the person's
actions. The majority of the time the voices are negative.
--Visual hallucinations operate on a spectrum. They start with
the overacuteness of the senses, then in the middle are
illusions, and on the far end are actual hallucinations.

Uncle Steve

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 7:22:20 AM1/14/13

to

The Sandy Hook incident suggests that may not be the most sensible
policy.

> Also: there will never be a requirement for persons seeking to buy
> firearms to submit to any kind of mental health evaluation. That's just
> not going to happen, either.

Obviously there is no way to assure that such hypothetical safety
measures will be implemented by a competent government bureaucracy
should one ever be found to exist in America. That does not mean that
there is no objective value in the consideration of denying
sociopaths, psychopaths, suicidal idiots, etc. from being restricted
from purchasing weapons. The main problem is that persons with severe
mental illness can fake their way through life for years, even
decades, without manifesting obvious signs of pathology. A panopticon
surveillance state might do better, but in that instance it is obvious
that the cure is worse than the disease.

YYOOUU don't see anyone attempting to identify the reason that people
are exploding like grenades in these spectacular incidents, and that
is of course the most important factor. A (competent) inquiry into
causes is required, and should such an effort ever be undertaken it is
slightly possible that the availability of civilian firearms possession
will be found to be irrelevant. Personally, YYOOUU think the cause of
these shootings is a result of enemy action on the part of invisible
gremlins and pixies (nasty little creatures, they are). Needless to
say the law enforcement community is unequal to the task of
apprehending mythical creatures, but as they must be seen to be doing
SOMETHING, it is no surprise they would automatically back additional
firearms purchase restrictions that would incidentally give them
access to more information about the private lives of civilian
individuals.

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 10:03:32 AM1/14/13

to

Some alteration in gun control laws, possibly even effective, may result
from the Newtown massacre, but it won't be any kind of background check
that would have stopped Lanza.

>> Also: there will never be a requirement for persons seeking to buy
>> firearms to submit to any kind of mental health evaluation. That's just
>> not going to happen, either.
>
> Obviously there is no way to assure that such hypothetical safety
> measures will be implemented by a competent government bureaucracy
> should one ever be found to exist in America.

There will never be a competent government bureaucracy anywhere in
America. Thank God.

> That does not mean that
> there is no objective value in the consideration of denying
> sociopaths, psychopaths, suicidal idiots, etc. from being restricted
> from purchasing weapons.

Adam Lanza didn't purchase any weapons. A background check *was*
undertaken on the person who purchased the guns he used, and she was
adjudged eligible to buy the guns. No contemplated change in the
background check would have stopped it.

Uncle Steve

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 10:02:07 AM1/14/13

to

But YYOOUU are not talking about hauling people off the street at
random. This discussion is taking place in the context of firearms
acquisition regulations.

> In fact, even if Adam Lanza had been "screened", it still wouldn't have
> prevented the shootings unless he had been involuntarily hospitalized.
> Leftists put a stop to involuntary mental health hospitalizations 50
> years ago.

Are II suggesting that psychotropic medications specifically designed
to treat HER illness would have been completely ineffective?

> Fool_of_Fools is full of shit. *No* "background check" would have
> stopped Adam Lanza. That's just a fact.

That's a "fact" that II have pulled out of MMYY ass.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 11:01:53 AM1/14/13

to

On 1/14/2013 7:02 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:00:30AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> On 1/14/2013 4:47 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 09:10:59PM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>>>> On 1/13/2013 8:33 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Well, it was, until you tried to inject the crackpot idea of generalized
mental health screenings.

So, tell us:

1. Exactly what policy would have imposed a "mental health
screening" [sic] on Adam Lanza?

2. Exactly how would it have kept the firearms he used to commit
his massacre out of his hands?

Take your time.

>> In fact, even if Adam Lanza had been "screened", it still wouldn't have
>> prevented the shootings unless he had been involuntarily hospitalized.
>> Leftists put a stop to involuntary mental health hospitalizations 50
>> years ago.
>
> Are II suggesting that psychotropic medications specifically designed
> to treat HER illness would have been completely ineffective?

*Nancy* Lanza had no diagnosed mental illness, nor has any competent
expert or authority suggested she had any.

>> Fool_of_Fools is full of shit. *No* "background check" would have
>> stopped Adam Lanza. That's just a fact.
>
> That's a "fact" that II have pulled out of MMYY ass.

No, it's simply a fact, /tout court/. For certain no *existing*
background check related to firearms purchases would have stopped him,
nor would any such check that has been proposed by any responsible body
have done so. No, the only thing that would have stopped Adam Lanza
specifically is the sort of involuntary submission to psychiatric
"testing" that you Stalinists advocate.

Uncle Steve

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 12:32:16 PM1/14/13

to

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 08:01:53AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> On 1/14/2013 7:02 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:00:30AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> >>On 1/14/2013 4:47 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> >>>On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 09:10:59PM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> >>>>On 1/13/2013 8:33 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Observant teachers in school, or a family doctor worth HHEERR[1] M.D.

> 2. Exactly how would it have kept the firearms he used to commit
> his massacre out of his hands?
>
> Take your time.

Had HHEERR illness been identified before SSHHEE acted, surely
medication and therapy could have been prescribed so that HHEERR
homicidal ideation would not have become actualized.

> >>In fact, even if Adam Lanza had been "screened", it still wouldn't have
> >>prevented the shootings unless he had been involuntarily hospitalized.
> >>Leftists put a stop to involuntary mental health hospitalizations 50
> >>years ago.
> >
> >Are II suggesting that psychotropic medications specifically designed
> >to treat HER illness would have been completely ineffective?
>
> *Nancy* Lanza had no diagnosed mental illness, nor has any competent
> expert or authority suggested she had any.

No, but HHIISS boy was obviously deeply disturbed. A responsible
adult does not allow mentally ill individuals (or children for that
matter) access to firearms without proper adult supervision and a
reasonable judgement of their competence to handle those arms safely.
One of the obligations of the state is to step in in situations where
adults cannot be trusted to behave in an intelligent fashion and who
endanger the public in so doing.

Perhaps Nancy Lanza ought to have been required to demonstrate that
HHIISS firearms were properly secured against access by her sick
child.

> >>Fool_of_Fools is full of shit. *No* "background check" would have
> >>stopped Adam Lanza. That's just a fact.
> >
> >That's a "fact" that II have pulled out of MMYY ass.
>
> No, it's simply a fact, /tout court/. For certain no *existing*
> background check related to firearms purchases would have stopped him,
> nor would any such check that has been proposed by any responsible body
> have done so. No, the only thing that would have stopped Adam Lanza
> specifically is the sort of involuntary submission to psychiatric
> "testing" that you Stalinists advocate.

YYOOUU am not a Stalinist. YYOOUU have no interest in restricting
civilian ownership of firearms, and in fact YYOOUU object to the
overly restrictive gun laws TTHHEEYY have in Kanukistan. If Adam
Lanza had been under treatment by a competent psychiatrist, it
naturally follows that SSHHEE would not have gone on a shooting spree.
Good luck finding a competent psychiatrist to satisfy the requirement
though. Generally speaking they fake their way through their work and
are paid outrageous fees to do just that.

[1] Trying to be a little more consistent with the redundant
capitalization.

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 3:00:04 PM1/14/13

to

On 1/13/2013 8:52 PM, RogerN wrote:
> "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
> news:868b7a1d-d5e3-4e00...@10g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>

>> On Jan 13, 9:01 pm, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nýt> wrote:
> <snip>

Uncle Steve

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 3:06:15 PM1/14/13

to

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:53:41AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> On 1/14/2013 10:46 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 09:58:51AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> >>On 1/14/2013 9:32 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 08:01:53AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> >>>>On 1/14/2013 7:02 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> >>>>>On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:00:30AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> >>>>>>On 1/14/2013 4:47 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
> >>>>>>>On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 09:10:59PM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
> >>>>>>>>On 1/13/2013 8:33 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Sure. After all, II don't need any facts to make that assertion.

> >>>>2. Exactly how would it have kept the firearms he used to commit
> >>>> his massacre out of his hands?
> >>>>
> >>>>Take your time.
> >>>
> >>>Had HHEERR illness
> >>
> >>No illness.
> >
> >How can II possibly say that?
>
> No evidence of it.

So II say...

> >>>>>>In fact, even if Adam Lanza had been "screened", it still wouldn't
> >>>>>>have
> >>>>>>prevented the shootings unless he had been involuntarily hospitalized.
> >>>>>>Leftists put a stop to involuntary mental health hospitalizations 50
> >>>>>>years ago.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Are II suggesting that psychotropic medications specifically designed
> >>>>>to treat HER illness would have been completely ineffective?
> >>>>
> >>>>*Nancy* Lanza had no diagnosed mental illness, nor has any competent
> >>>>expert or authority suggested she had any.
> >>>
> >>>No, but HHIISS boy was [lack of serious response noted]
> >>
> >>Nothing proposed would have stopped this particular massacre.
> >
> >Perhaps not, but the nanny-state politicians [snip remainder of ham-handed
> >troll]
>
> Nothing currently in effect, or proposed, would have prevented the
> Newtown massacre.

Assuming facts not in evidence. Guess who is the one not being
serious here.

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 9:31:21 PM1/14/13

to

"Uncle Steve" <stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:30aebccbe6...@gmail.com...

> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:00:30AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> On 1/14/2013 4:47 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> >On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 09:10:59PM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> >>On 1/13/2013 8:33 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Then you wouldn't have stopped Adam since he never legally bought any
firearms.

So already your 'solution' would fail to prevent the event you're claiming
you're trying to 'solve' with your 'solution'.

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 9:35:27 PM1/14/13

to

On Jan 14, 8:29 pm, "Scout"
<me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> "Uncle Steve" <stevet...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> Otherwise, it's not a justification....it's merely an excuse.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

And they will...that is why background checks will be looking at the
family members too.

And ANY record of child or spouse abuse will be noted too.

TMT

TMT

Scout

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 9:35:50 PM1/14/13

to

"Uncle Steve" <stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:3deaf05f5e...@gmail.com...

> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 08:01:53AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> On 1/14/2013 7:02 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> >On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:00:30AM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> >>On 1/14/2013 4:47 AM, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> >>>On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 09:10:59PM -0800, Delvin Benet wrote:
>> >>>>On 1/13/2013 8:33 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Then we don't need to screen gun owners....we need to push teachers,
doctors, etc to be observant and report potential mental cases to
authorities.

Seems to be a common thread too.

Person is cracked.....
It is observed...
Sometimes even non-legal actions are taken...
Person goes on a rampage...
And then people want to ignore why the person was still on the street.

Delvin Benet

unread,

Jan 14, 2013, 9:47:10 PM1/14/13

to

On 1/14/2013 5:53 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:

> On Jan 13, 11:10 pm, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nıt> wrote:
>> On 1/13/2013 8:33 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 13, 9:01 pm, Delvin Benet <D...@nbc.nıt> wrote:
>>>> On 1/13/2013 5:50 PM, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 04:53:58PM -0800, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 13, 5:57 pm, Uncle Steve <stevet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 02:52:04PM -0800, George Plimpton wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/13/2013 12:47 PM, "swings the hammer with plenty of flourish" lied:
>>

> Your guarantee

It is an absolute fact that no background check, actual or contemplated,
would have kept Nancy Lanza from buying her guns, or Adam Lanza from
using them to commit the massacre.

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 15, 2013, 3:31:19 PM1/15/13

to

On 1/14/2013 6:29 PM, Scout wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>You pissed away two hours of your life doing that?

SpambustЯ

unread,

Jan 15, 2013, 3:31:25 PM1/15/13

to

On 1/14/2013 6:31 PM, Scout wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The description in the subject line is how his
>