+1 It's always about people control.

 

i guess the liberals didn't take any world history. we, as a country, are starting down the same road that 1936-1939 Germany did. disarm folks, get'em on the welfare wagon, govt takes care of them, govt does all for them, govt owns everything, govt controls everything, and then there was a takeover. BAM, the rest is history. total societal control is what they're after. that's precisely why our forefathers put in the 2nd amendment; to keep the govt in check.

 

Thats a scary thought.
Dont be fooled. Its the left and right. When was the last time government made it self smaller or less intrusive?

 

Liberal arguing for gun control.

 

If you take gun away from the citizens, you are giving the criminals a big playground. They know they can get black market guns and rob any place they please without fear of getting shot. I think if every citizen was required to carry a gun, the criminals would think twice before robbing a place in fear of getting shot. but i know thats not gong to happen. so to be more realistic woould be to put stricter guidelines on getting guns. I live in Texas, and like going in and walking out with my guns in 30 min, but if stricter gun laws would prevent the school shootings, im willing to wait for them, rather than not being able t get them at all.

Also, just as others have said, Mental Health is the key to the solution. If they would get these people the help they need, they would not do this kind of thing.

As my daughter says, guns dont kill people, men with mustaches do, lol

 

FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles. Time to outlaw all those deadly assault hammers and clubs, especially evil black ones. Bare hands kill twice as many people as rifles. FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles

 

you are right!!!!! HMMM....last time they were smaller and intrusive was at the founding of this country when we broke from England and just started out. so, since then, we've reverted back to european trains of thought.

 

One thing I've noticed is that once the government opens an office or new department it's never done away with even if it becomes obsolete. Ross Perot mentioned this in 1992. This is where a lot of spending cuts the Republicans want can come from,but leave SS and Medicare alone!! OPT

 

OPT, the only thing i would change to SS or medicare is the "giving" of benefits to those who don't deserve it or have not paid into it. such as, illegal aliens and the like. generational welfare recipients should have more "pride" in themselves but that's their own personal problem. apparently they have no conscience and don't want to work because they can "make just enough" on welfare or SS that's been "given" to them for their vote. other than that, i wouldn't want the govt to touch it except to root out the rampant fraud.

 

Holy crap, I almost fell out of my chair... Someone agrees with what I say in this area of the forum...
Just my 2 cents. I feel as long as someone can make a career out of being a politician nothing will change. They will pander to people who vote for them because they are trying to keep their job. If we were to make all politicians have a 2 term limit and no pay things would be much different. If these A-holes in office had to volunteer to be congressmen/senators etc. 90% of them would be gone in the blink of a eye. But we would have to rely on them to kill their own career at this point.
Funny thing is Mitt is a proven 10%er.....