-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Article: KARL ROVE: VIOLENCE WILL CONTINUE UNTIL THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS REPEALED
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
JayMcB
NES Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2011
- Messages
- 22,446
- Likes
- 109,914
F him, and F his quisling puppet masters
All you need to know about W and most republicans. They are not working on your behalf. (neither are the democrats).
StevieP
NES Member
Violence will continue until the Second Amendment is repealed.
And then it will get worse. Much, much worse.
And then it will get worse. Much, much worse.
So glad that this fat F$%^ has been outed as the statist and POS that he truly is.
He and his clan in the establishment side of the Repub party are nothing more than libs that like blow $hit up.
Violence will continue as long as pols continue to divide us and until the REAL issues are solved. NOT taking away inanimate objects.
He and his clan in the establishment side of the Repub party are nothing more than libs that like blow $hit up.
Violence will continue as long as pols continue to divide us and until the REAL issues are solved. NOT taking away inanimate objects.
Personally I think he is a dick, I also think the far right are making more out of this than it really is. They are using his quote, out of context to turn the gun vote against Jeb. (as if we aren't smart enough to steer away from him already)
PaulR
NES Member
Cue the Civil war when they start sending the National Police Force door to door to collect the guns.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Karl Rove is a danger to freedom
The politicians have done so well on poverty, drugs and illegals. I predict more of the same.
GO-FOR-IT
NES Member
He's a washed up POS and Fox News should dump his sorry ass !
Typical dick drip
From "DON B. KATES AND GARY MAUSER" Paper of Facts - pesky facts.
In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban of all handguns and many types of long guns. Hundreds of thousands of guns were confiscated from those owners law‐abiding enough to turn them in to authorities. Without suggesting this caused violence, the ban’s ineffectiveness was such that by the year 2000 violent crime had so increased that England and Wales had Europe’s highest violent crime rate, far surpassing even the United States.19
Despite constant and substantially increasing gun ownership, the United States saw progressive and dramatic reductions in criminal violence in the 1990s. On the other hand, the same time period in the United Kingdom saw a constant and dramatic increase in violent crime to which England’s response was ever‐more drastic gun control including, eventually, banning and confiscating all handguns and many types of long guns.22 Nevertheless, criminal violence rampantly increased so that by 2000 England surpassed the United States to become one of the developed world’s most violence‐ridden nations.
The fall in the American crime rate is even more impressive when compared with the rest of the world. In 18 of the 25 countries surveyed by the British Home Office, violent crime increased during the 1990s.35 This contrast should induce thoughtful people to wonder what happened in those nations, and to question policies based on the notion that introducing increasingly more restrictive firearm ownership laws reduces violent crime.
In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban of all handguns and many types of long guns. Hundreds of thousands of guns were confiscated from those owners law‐abiding enough to turn them in to authorities. Without suggesting this caused violence, the ban’s ineffectiveness was such that by the year 2000 violent crime had so increased that England and Wales had Europe’s highest violent crime rate, far surpassing even the United States.19
Despite constant and substantially increasing gun ownership, the United States saw progressive and dramatic reductions in criminal violence in the 1990s. On the other hand, the same time period in the United Kingdom saw a constant and dramatic increase in violent crime to which England’s response was ever‐more drastic gun control including, eventually, banning and confiscating all handguns and many types of long guns.22 Nevertheless, criminal violence rampantly increased so that by 2000 England surpassed the United States to become one of the developed world’s most violence‐ridden nations.
The fall in the American crime rate is even more impressive when compared with the rest of the world. In 18 of the 25 countries surveyed by the British Home Office, violent crime increased during the 1990s.35 This contrast should induce thoughtful people to wonder what happened in those nations, and to question policies based on the notion that introducing increasingly more restrictive firearm ownership laws reduces violent crime.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. All the idiots in Wahr-shington (as Rove says) are insane by Einstein's definition.
The reality is the violence will continue until GUN-FREE ZONES are banned!!!
Anytime your feeling froggy Karl.
Or any other little dictator wanna-be's .
I'm not as good as I once was , but I'm as good once as I ever was.
Or any other little dictator wanna-be's .
I'm not as good as I once was , but I'm as good once as I ever was.
Sparky123
NES Member
I'm surprised that this a**hole isn't running for president.
I don't know why more people don't get this. Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. They both love big government and guns are ALWAYS a direct threat to government.
THAT'S WHY THE SECOND AMENDMENT EXISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I think it's a good thing that Rove comes out and says this - because it's a good ball kick for the very small percentage of "conservatives" who will finally be forced to wake up a little and see what's really going on.
THAT'S WHY THE SECOND AMENDMENT EXISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I think it's a good thing that Rove comes out and says this - because it's a good ball kick for the very small percentage of "conservatives" who will finally be forced to wake up a little and see what's really going on.
The Repunklickan Establishment has no more use for a free middle-class than the Bolsheviks!!! Do you want to be owned in a company town or a Government Gulag???
Yea no guns equals no violence ![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
18 police officers killed in knife attack on Tuesday
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/china-uighurs-launch-deadly-knife-attack-killing-18-police-officers-after-beijing-bans-ramadan-1507659
33 killed in train station knife attack
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26402367
18 police officers killed in knife attack on Tuesday
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/china-uighurs-launch-deadly-knife-attack-killing-18-police-officers-after-beijing-bans-ramadan-1507659
33 killed in train station knife attack
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26402367
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
If it happens, it will be messy
FrankD
NES Member
This is all about the New World Order.
FrankD
NES Member
Our Liberal state, last week a MSP Trooper shot a white male four times in Boston. I was not at the scene and troopers evidently do not carry tasers. The guy was known and is mentally sick. This incident does not follow the norm.
A black person is shot by a LEO in Missouri. This officer lost everything defending himself. He lost his job had to relocate and his name was dragged thru the mud. The riots started and next came the Local and State police, US military followed by a curfew. The black guy was known to be a trouble maker. The press and his family made him out to be an outstanding citizen.
So why did the MSP Trooper end up with practically zero press compared to the Missouri shooting. The local channels dropped it like a hot potato. The white guy was surrounded yet the Trooper chose to shoot. I'm surprised that this shooting was not investigated like the one in other parts of the country. I'm not in any way sticking up for the criminal but lets have a equal set of laws dealing with shootings. I'm sure it ended up with a lethal force situation. But four times, was the trooper surprised by the attacker or in immediate danger? How many LEO's at the scene? Time to issue tasers and cameras to the MSP?
I just find this strange since we live in a liberal state with plenty of laws to go around for the average citizen to comply with.
A black person is shot by a LEO in Missouri. This officer lost everything defending himself. He lost his job had to relocate and his name was dragged thru the mud. The riots started and next came the Local and State police, US military followed by a curfew. The black guy was known to be a trouble maker. The press and his family made him out to be an outstanding citizen.
So why did the MSP Trooper end up with practically zero press compared to the Missouri shooting. The local channels dropped it like a hot potato. The white guy was surrounded yet the Trooper chose to shoot. I'm surprised that this shooting was not investigated like the one in other parts of the country. I'm not in any way sticking up for the criminal but lets have a equal set of laws dealing with shootings. I'm sure it ended up with a lethal force situation. But four times, was the trooper surprised by the attacker or in immediate danger? How many LEO's at the scene? Time to issue tasers and cameras to the MSP?
I just find this strange since we live in a liberal state with plenty of laws to go around for the average citizen to comply with.
Similar threads
