Comments on: University professor calls cops after presentation on gun rights

By: Wyndeward

Wyndeward — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:36:36 +0000

Out of curiosity, what charge did she imagine the police would arrest these youths under?

She sounds like this woman…

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0…

By: Wyndeward

Wyndeward — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:33:17 +0000

At the core of matters, their issue is one of control. An armed populace is harder to bully into serfdom than an unarmed one. As Dims points out, they are less interested in prosecuting criminals than they are of disarming law-abiding citizens. Y'see, gun-control, pretty much by definition, is not an anti-crime measure, if only because the only folks who will obey such a law are the law-abiding citizens. It does nothing to get illegal arms out of the hands of criminals. Our Founding Fathers had a few things to say on the subject... Benjamin Franklin: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Nov 11 1755, from the Pennsylvania Assembly's reply to the Governor of Pennsylvania.) George Mason: "To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them." (3 Elliot, Debates at 380) Contrast these two august individuals with some folks from the left-wing of the political spectrum... Mao Tse Tung: "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." (Problems of War and Strategy, Nov 6 1938, published in "Selected Works of Mao Zedong," 1965) Diane Feinstein: "US Senator, If I could have banned them all- 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' -I would have!" (Statement on TV program 69 Minutes, Feb 5 1995)

By: Dimsdale

Dimsdale — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:49:44 +0000

It also justifies questioning their intentions: why is a lawfully armed citizenry such a threat to them? The people that actually commit crimes with guns are reflexively defended and protected by liberals (as opposed to the lawful gun owner acting in self defense), so they can be "rehabilitated" and get out of jail to commit more crime.

By: Dimsdale

Dimsdale — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:56:31 +0000

I think you hit the nail on the head! Democrats thrive on subjects in thrall to them, not citizens quite capable and desirous of living without them.

By: porschepete

porschepete — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:00:42 +0000

It seemes that the 2amendment really mades the libs very nervous. They really

don't know why it's in the constitution.It must have been important to make into the top ten. The old quote armed you are a citizen unarmed your a subject.

By: Dimsdale

Dimsdale — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:53:12 +0000

Rush: do you really want to see the "Fairness" doctrine enacted? LOL!

By: kellingc

kellingc — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:06:28 +0000

I took Comm 140 under Ms. Anderson at CCSU. It does not surprise me in the least that she did this. We had to give an impromptu speech at one point, and I gave a elegy for my uncle (who's last name was Anderson). She thought I chose that name because of her name being Anderson.

Seeing as I am a student at CCSU, I can see if I can get in touch with John but not sure.

By: Lazybum

Lazybum — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:46:13 +0000

What you people are not understanding is that on campus the first amendmaent only matters if you are agreeing wth the teacher. You guys are silly!

By: rush

rush — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:54:39 +0000

Dims,

I'll say it again.You have to get a show.

By: Dimsdale

Dimsdale — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:31:58 +0000

I see this crap on campus, in several different forms. Repression of speech comes from intimidation or outright harassment (and I use the correct pronunciation of that word, by the way, not the sanitized media version).

Methinks Paula Anderson has her liberal panties in a bunch. If she didn't like the topic, she should have specified her unnatural fears ahead of time.

It sounds like Wahlberg made quite an impression. I would love to have a copy of that presentation myself!