BREAKING: House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, multiple aides shot at Congressional baseball practice

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: Phoenix


Just to be clear, do you honestly believe that violence, such that it is, has no place what so ever in any civilized democracy? There is never and will never be a time when violence may become necessary?

The subject is well covered by writings of our founders as found in federalist papers.

As you are not having your home or property conficated, your effects searched without due process, your fields bounty conficated, your weapons seized, all without representation or due process then making any comparison to revolutionary period is quite disingenuous and downright silly.

There is no modern equivalency unless one is very intellectually dishonest.

Anything else is seditious or criminal or acts of the insane.

I asked you a simple question that you decided to disproportionately magnify into revolutionary period.

So the answer to my question is yes, there are circumstances where violence may become necessary, correct?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Phoenix

and you don't think that groups like blm and the like don't have files opened in the fbi??

Hopefully but what of plethora of far left groups receiving shadowy funding.

a reply to: alphabetaone

As well laid out by our founders but in no way justified by recent events or history.

The acts that are sideways alluded to and ones you seem to be seeking justifications for are seditious and unlawful acts based upon falsely conceived ideology rather than real events such as our founders experienced at the hands of the despotic British of the time.

I will not agree or justify what is implicated by your gamey question.

Go play word games with someone else.

Phoenix

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Grambler

Is that your job? Pointing out personality disorders in OTHER posters? You don't take into account the violent times we live in, with perpetual war and mass killings. Do you ever look outward and ask what can I do to help?

I can help by pointing out when other people ideologies become dangerous, like when they liken policies positions to murder.

I am not saying you advocate murder or are a murder, in fact I have seen nothing at all to suggest that. I said your ideology justifies it.

If you think getting rid of Obamacare is the same as murdering 24 million people then its morally justifibale for someone to say they need to use violence to stop those 24 million murders.

I am guessing you would tell that individual "No its not" but a weaker mind will take your ideology and take it to its logical conclusion.

a reply to: Phoenix

the point I am making is that you can't target the investigations according to their political leanings...quit unconstitutional... so, if you increase the scrutiny of the likes of blm, msn, ect... you will also have to increase them for the likes of some of the prolife groups, the militias, ect.

and I have a question for all the conservatives on this thread...

reckon what would be the reaction of some of your more far right members if the investigations into trump actually come up with something that justifies his removal from office. I mean, most of yous it seems don't even want to consider that there is anything to it, but what if there is??? listening to some of your favorite media outlets, I can't help but wonder if it would be all out warfare, far more than just one senator getting shot..

and, don't for a second think that this is all happening by chance.. I don't think it is... I think they will keep increasing the animosity till it blows up so they can pass the legislation that some of yous are calling for before the big blowup comes... and the economy fails completely, and we all wake up to closed banks and much less money that we had before.
so bear in mind, whatever you want to pass that you think is gonna just effect one side of the political spectrum more than likely will be effecting you sooner or later!
when the people lose everything, they lose it!!

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: Phoenix


Just to be clear, do you honestly believe that violence, such that it is, has no place what so ever in any civilized democracy? There is never and will never be a time when violence may become necessary?

The subject is well covered by writings of our founders as found in federalist papers.

As you are not having your home or property conficated, your effects searched without due process, your fields bounty conficated, your weapons seized, all without representation or due process then making any comparison to revolutionary period is quite disingenuous and downright silly.

There is no modern equivalency unless one is very intellectually dishonest.

Anything else is seditious or criminal or acts of the insane.

I asked you a simple question that you decided to disproportionately magnify into revolutionary period.

So the answer to my question is yes, there are circumstances where violence may become necessary, correct?

Of course there are circumstances where violence becomes a necessity.
I assume you are not claiming that this was one of them?

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: alphabetaone

As well laid out by our founders but in no way justified by recent events or history.

The acts that are sideways alluded to and ones you seem to be seeking justifications for are seditious and unlawful acts based upon falsely conceived ideology rather than real events such as our founders experienced at the hands of the despotic British of the time.

I will not agree or justify what is implicated by your gamey question.

Go play word games with someone else.

Phoenix

You're the one playing word games, not me. I'm asking you a simple question to which you decide to keep making excuses for the here and now. I too do not think it's warranted now but I still am of the belief that violence at some point could become necessary.

It's no gamey question and stop accusing me of that. My follow-up question is who is the decider of when "that time comes". You? Who makes that decision should the time come? Who decides precisely when the userpations are "enough"?

What you're doing, imo, is closing off avenues for possibly staving off oppression by your rhetoric and instead creating avenues for needless and unconstitutional legislation that would hamper the average American's ability to actually fight back.


Seeking justifications for....gimme a effin break already...im not seeking justification for a goddamn thing. I did my time for this country and have praised it's core principles at every possible moment. Just because that is true, it does not mean I decide to put blinders on and NOT face reality or the reality of any potential situation.

originally posted by: UKTruth
I assume you are not claiming that this was one of them?

Yes. I am not claiming that this was one of them. Correct.

Cutting to nitty gritty,

Bit speculating here,

Can anyone on far left claim with seriousness and straight face that the shooter would still have acted without all the angst and encouragement provided by social media, media and leftist politicians tacitly agreeing with his extreme writings and ideology.

I tend to believe if one removed all the reinforcing provided externally then the internal justifications would not have been reinforced and driven to insane action.

This is why the far left should own the incident and make positive changes so no repeats occur.

Tables turned this is exactly what we on the right would be told we should do.

Along with cheerfully handing over our arms

a reply to: dawnstar

I do agree on points that if goes down, we all go down - I have some inoculation but not immunity.

So which left groups were targeted by Clinton when he pogrommed the militias.

Or was his action unconstutional?

a reply to: Phoenix

the problem is is that I can't help but wonder if those "extreme things" you are griping about are just one side of a story that has just as much possibility as being the truth as the other side... and what you are asking is more like,
wouldn't it be better if the people in power were the only ones who were allowed to have their side of the story presented to the public? ignorance is better!!
and no it wouldn't be better...

and I'll remind you that the tables were turned not that long ago, and well......just one word...
PIZZAGATE!!

a reply to: TrueBrit

I have 50rd mag for my SKS and AK, not all uncommon. Even using my 25rd mags I can drop the mag and reload in about a second flat. Side note: I agree on many remarks in this thread that this is some jackass trying to spark a civil war. That being the case all I can say is rack em!

a reply to: Phoenix

clinton???? don't ask me, that was what 20 years ago???
one thing that I remember happening during that time was the oklahoma bombing....
which is probably why the militia types were investigated alot...
just like today, there's probably agents embedded in many of the mosques in this country.

a reply to: Phoenix

I am same age as the killer. He witnessed the middle class disappear under Reagan. Social media is just catching up with that history. And now Reagan 2.0 is in the works. I am in a lot of social media. Not once did it occur to me to shoot innocents in a ball field. I like debating and arguing.

a reply to: alphabetaone

When we suffer depradations our founders faced, yes, then only recourse would be armed rebellion.

As to me deciding,

It's not up to me and my personal opinion. It's up to me to agree with my fellow citizens or not when the call comes.

My posting history is a testament to not making new laws but rather application of those we already have
way more than enough of to deal with - fact of the matter plenty needs sunsetting.

As mentioned founders are my guide and go far in assisting my thoughts on this and most other matters.

Satisfied?

a reply to: dawnstar

You'll actually be surprised that I agree. It's just that the ones in power past decade don't want to relinquish power that was voted away from them and their version of the story.

a reply to: Phoenix

??? why is obama still hiding somewhere in the white house, do we have senators hiding in the capital building somewhere???
seems to be we've had a peaceful transfer of power for the most part...
but it seems that some thought that they should relinquish their voice also???

a reply to: MOMof3

See, I'm old enough to have seen Jimmy Carter deal the deathblow to middle-class and when Reagan policies came into full effect it launched me into solid middle class status.

He was big on merit and small on excuses unlike his depressing predecessor.

That lying charlatan Clinton rode those coattails almost his entire presidency.

Still is rather sickening to see excuse making and tepid tacit approval is being used to reason out insanity and externally driven radicalism.

a reply to: Phoenix

Your husband was probably not union laborer in Idaho when it went Reaganism and right to work. They cut his pay by $8/per hour, no benefits, instant poverty level. Not counting the tax deductions we use to have.

a reply to: dawnstar

The entire left mobilization after election is no secret and the resulting incident should have been predictable in hindsight.