Guns, guns, guns, guns

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.28.00 PM

Two presidents on guns. First, the one Republicans (mostly) loved …

Then, the one Democrats (mostly) love …

Both sensible. Both reasoned. Both ignored by the modern NRA and the pro-gun movement. Without nuance. Without debate. Without internal dialogue. Just … they’re wrong. They must be wrong. They have to be wrong. Because the Second Amendment is absolute, dammit, and even though it’s an amendment (look up the meaning of the word, “amend”) and even though times change and people adapt, well, there’s no changing gun laws, or giving in, or trying anything new. Because that would be restricting the rights of citizens. Like making people wear seatbelts. Which has been just … just—never mind.

I have a horrible habit; one I struggle to suppress. When something happens with guns in America, I go to Twitter and argue with morons who think nothing should be done about access to firearms. Dolts like, well, these folks …

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.07.48 PM Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.08.16 PM Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.08.46 PM Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.08.57 PM Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.10.20 PM Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.11.12 PM

And you know what happens? Nothing. They don’t bend and I become a lunatic. Why? Because I can’t stand this any longer. I just can’t. I don’t understand being so stubbornly wed to a position that—even when mass slaughter is involved—you refuse to bend. And I know … I know—conservatives will say, “Well, what about abortion?” Here’s my answer: I have bent on abortion. So have many people I know. Do I believe it should be legal? Yes. Do I consider it murder, per se? No. But do I also believe there must be restrictions on the age of the fetus? Yes, I do.

But what about you, Mr. NRA? Mr. Second Amendment? Would you bend a little, without freaking out about your rights being taken away and the government coming after your stash? Would you consider, perhaps, longer waiting periods? Or a strict limit on magazine size? How about mental health screenings for every person applying for a gun license? Or how about all guns need to be registered in a federal database? There are a million potential things we can try. But will you budge?

Answer: You won’t. Not until some lunatic kills 50 in a mass NRA meeting shooting. Actually, scratch that. It won’t work. Because after he kills 50, then someone shoots him—you’ll thank God a gun protected the survivors. See, that’s the thing. There’s no reasoning with you; no debate or negotiations. You won’t budge. At. All.

So here’s my solution: Let;s give NRA the state of Texas. All your members can live there. It’s huge, there’s affordable housing. Hell, you can even have Pres. Rick Perry. You guys have fun with your guns, shooting one another, listening to Lee Greenwood songs, eating large quantities of steak. Meanwhile, we’ll stick here in the U.S.A.

Where guns have been outlawed.

Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 9.10.50 PM

64 thoughts on “Guns, guns, guns, guns”

  1. In comparing guns to abortion, let’s for a moment borrow the labels applied. The NRA sure as hell wouldn’t be the Pro-Life side on the gun debate. I guess they’d be Pro-Choice, as in if you choose to want a gun, regardless of your intent or mental status, they choose to let you have one. Or ten. And the rest of us can choose to move to a country where guns aren’t so prevalent (basically anywhere else in the civilized world). Or we can choose to stay here and worry whether our kids will come home without having been murdered at school and our spouses will come home without having been murdered by a disgruntled co-worker.

  2. In all seriousness — what would be your preferred policies here? And, if possible, how would those policies have prevented this, and other shootings? I’m not a gun nut, don’t own a gun, and I don’t really have a dog in this fight, but I’m curious.

    1. Given the number of guns in circulation in this country, it will take a long time and, eventually, assertive policies for us to join the rest of the developed world (with far fewer guns and both far fewer homicides and far fewer mass shootings).

      The first goal is to do our best to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them. Two things can contribute to that: Close background check loopholes (and increase the scope of what such checks look for), and choke off supply to the black market and thus increase black market prices dramatically, pricing many would-be “thugs” out of that market.

      The second goal should be to enforce an obligation of extreme personal responsibility regarding gun ownership. This can be accomplished through the legal doctrine of “strict liability” –which applies to particularly dangerous items, materials and actions, such as keeping wild animals or using explosives, which frequently cause harm even when reasonable precautions are taken to avoid such harm– holding those who assume the responsibility of owning an instrument designed to inflict deadly harm actually (civilly) responsible for any deadly harm inflicted on any innocent person through the instrumentality of that specific gun.

      By combining mandatory liability insurance with strict liability (or even, to a lesser extent, on its own), the monetized costs of the actual degree to which each gun owner is statistically endangering others is borne by that gun owner, sending market signals that will, to a degree depending on the elasticity of demand for guns, decrease demand, this reduces the number of new guns put into circulation and, through a multiplier effect, vastly increases black market prices, which addresses the first goal.

      In fact, strict liability means that straw purchasers (people who buy guns from a legal vender in order to sell them on the black market) can be held legally liable for harm to others committed with the guns they put on the black market, that further obstacle to supplying that market contributing even more to the sharp increase in black market prices, pricing ever more would-be “thugs” out of that market.

      The main point is that what we have to do is get serious about it, and start moving in the direction of rational and effective gun regulations. The situation in this country is out of control.

      1. This generally seems reasonable, thank you. Regulating guns the way we do driver’s licenses has been my preferred approach. Or treating it like a public health issue.

      2. If you don’t like America’s Constitution LEAVE COMMIE!! Quit trying to ENSLAVE the rest of us because you would rather live as a euroPEEon SERF!

  3. If you don’t like the Second Amendment KILL YOURSELF COMMIE!
    I find it hilarious that you subhuman Marxist VERMIN act as if something the DEMONcrats crammed through less than 5 years ago is set in stone to never be touched, but 200 years later you VERMIN are still attacking our second amendment rights.

    1. Jeez, angry much? I’m so sick of the same 2nd Amendment, constitutional rights, argument, coming out of your GOP echo chamber. Blah, blah, blah……

      Why don’t you go kill yourself Gun Nut?!!

      (I don’t really mean it-Seriously I don’t) But it wouldn’t surprise me if sooner or later someone gets hurt whether you own one gun or if your another gun freak who stock piles your weapons waiting for the zombie apocalypse…
      Or in your case “Commies”, or still waiting for Jade Helm 15 takeover? Lol….

      On a serious note, not that I could really penetrate an angry, hateful, maybe even bigoted person as you, with any real common sense but let me waste a few more minutes trying ….

      (I’m going to borrow some of my friend, Steve Harvey’s words on this one)

      “Here is yet another illustration of what I consider the obvious point. When you inject an overabundance of particularly efficient, convenient, provocative and easily misused instruments of deadly violence into the mix of human fallibilities –aggression, anger, rage, fear, panic, carelessness, bad judgment, stupidity, jealousy, greed, depression, despair, mental illness, militant fanaticism, vengefulness, bigotry, overconfidence, insecurity, pettiness, false certainty, immaturity, machismo, vigilantism, hero complex, petulance, and numerous other very normal defects abundantly distributed throughout the human population– you get exactly what we have gotten in this country: A far, far higher rate of deadly violence than any other developed country (except Mexico, Russia and Estonia). And he comes on here attacking this blogger, because he’s proud of the “point” he thinks he’s making, while he is demonstrating a profound cluelessness on multiple levels, as well as a depth of chip-on-his-shoulder-and-gun-in-his-hand folly that is almost off the charts.”

      Doesn’t sound anything like you does it?
      -Just sayin…

        The problem here is that you libtards lack the ability to think. That is why you CREATURES NEED the all powerful socialist nanny state to make ALL of your decisions for you. Newsflash RETARD, the rest of us don’t suffer from that DEFECT!
        If you want to be a SERF to mommy government so fucking badly GET THE FUCK OUT OF America! Or else, just go to court and have yourself declared incompetent, so that mommy govt will take care of you.
        It’s you commie VERMIN who are completely fucking CLUELESS!
        BTW, thanks for admitting that I am right while you are a complete and utter MORON! You ignorant Marxist FILTH only cry racist or bigot when you know your side is WRONG! The fact that you start out your delusional DRIVEL with a rant AGAINST America’s Constitutionally protected rights prove you are lower than WORMSHIT and want nothing more than to be a SLAVE!

      2. WOW! .. Dude, your so jacked up on fanatical ideologies and not sophisticated enough to understand that you just stuck both your feet in your mouth illustrating almost everything I wrote above as the problem with people like YOU bearing arms.

        Your just another TeaBilly frothing with fear armed and paranoid. With delusions of grandeur endorsed by your higher power: The NRA.

        The ONLY point CREATURES as sTUPID as you have is on top of your empty heads! It is LIBTARDS who commit mass shootings and assassinations when you vermin own guns RETARD!
        Of course the pathetic Marxist CUNT uprates itself.

      4. From: Debunking The Arguments of the American Gun Culture

        Part III: Why the “Defense Against Tyranny” Argument Has It

        1) Neither violence nor the general threat of tyranny are likely ever to
        cease. But we can affect the RATE at which violence occurs, and the DEGREE of the threat of the imposition of dictatorship, and, in fact, in the modern context, BOTH are reduced by a less rather than more heavily armed population.

        2) The right-wing belief that an armed population reduces the chance of
        dictatorship is questionable, since armed factions can as easily band together for the purpose of overthrowing the rule of law and imposing their own dictatorship as for the purpose of preventing a government that has no need to use such force from doing so.

        3) The political economy of developed nations has developed in such a way that the means of exercising power, and the benefits of that power, are much less dependent on the overt use of force against one’s own population, and much more dependent on the continued peaceful rule of law, than in any previous era.

        4) In other words, it’s really not in “the government’s” interests to
        fundamentally change the current status quo, and the current institutionalized rule of law.

        5) The very notion of “the government” is a bit of a fiction, especially in a
        modern democracy; it’s really a large, complex institution comprised of numerous people and branches with frequently conflicting interests, held increasingly in check by a combination of size, non-monolithic interests, and a complex web of civil restraints. The notion that these millions of people, or even hundreds of very centralized and influential actors will at any time in the foreseeable future have either the desire or ability to conspire to overthrow the system from which they already enormously benefit, in a political culture in which it would only serve to bring infamy and resistance down upon them and would almost under no circumstances succeed in actually improving any aspect of their lives
        by any measure, is a very large stretch of the imagination.

        6) The notion that a heavily armed faction of grease-painted
        citizen-fanatics, not so steeped in the reality of our political economic
        landscape, not so socialized into the pragmatic demands of the governance of a modern nation, might engage in activities which harm people and threaten our rule of law, is not at all a stretch of the imagination (in fact, there are numerous examples of it occurring in relatively recent history).

        7) Of the two threats to the rule of law in America, to our continued liberty and prosperity and security, it is beyond apparent that the by-far larger threat comes from the armed ideological fanatics, steeped in fictionalized nationalistic narratives, vicariously reliving the overly-sanctified centuries old birth of our nation due to a lifetime of political indoctrination that gradually detached them from any strong tether to modern reality.

        8) I would much rather take my chances with the population of current and future political office-holders who have no need or benefit from recourse to violent suppression of the American people, than with any number of potential armed citizen factions whose ideological zealotry and fanaticism could at any time get the better of them and lead to unnecessary and counterproductive armed insurrection, destroying the nation they claim to wish to defend.

        Pasting ignorant DRIVEL from a known MARXIST proves NOTHING MORON!!

    2. From: Debunking The Arguments of the American Gun Culture

      Part II: The Abuse of the Second Amendment

      1) By one historical analysis, the “well-regulated militia” language referred
      to the state and local militias southern states relied on to suppress slave
      uprisings. Since the south feared that the growing abolitionist sentiments of
      the northern states would lead to the use of the federal government to deny the
      southern states this indispensable recourse to violent preservation of their
      inverted understanding of what “liberty” means, they made the inclusion of the
      second amendment a requisite to their ratification of the Constitution.

      2) Even disregarding that particular historical analysis and accepting the
      conventional mythology instead, at no time previously in our history has the
      Second Amendment been interpreted to provide the absolute individual right to
      own and carry any firearms any time anywhere that our current gun idolaters
      insist it grants them.

      3) The language of the Second Amendment is clearly ambiguous, and the
      emphasis on a “well-regulated militia” clearly leaves
      room to regulate gun ownership.

      4) Discussion of the meaning of that term at the time (such as in Federalist
      Papers #29 by Alexander Hamilton) clearly defined “a well-regulated militia” as
      a state militia rather than as any gathering of individual gun owners.

      5) The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, not any and all
      arms in any and all times, places and circumstances. Just as the First Amendment
      guarantees freedom of speech, but not anywhere, any time, and for any purpose
      (it depends on the forum, on whether unfettered speech can impede the purpose of
      that forum, and whether the speech is malicious and harmful), so to it is well
      within the discretion of local, state and federal governments to limit what
      kinds of arms can be borne, where and when they can be borne, and for what
      purpose they can be borne (recent incidents of gun idolaters brandishing their
      arms in restaurants and at kids’ ball games, causing patrons to flee and the
      game to be cancelled, is an example of how the unfettered right can be used for
      malicious purpose without necessarily firing a shot or explicitly threatening

      6) Such ambiguities in Constitutional provisions are made functional through
      a process of legal interpretation and the institution of judicial review, by
      which the courts (and ultimately The Supreme Court) has the final word on legal
      interpretation. In the absence of judicial review, the Constitution would be
      reduced to a meaningless Rorschach Test on which each ideological faction
      superimposes its own ideological preferences and, through lack of any system for
      resolving such disputes, destroy the Constitution as a functioning legal

      7) Even the current ultra-conservative Supreme Court, in holding for the
      first time in American history that the Second Amendment guarantees an
      individual right, emphasized that the Second Amendment does not confer an
      absolute right, and that it does not prohibit reasonable regulations of firearm
      ownership and possession.

      8) By no reading of the Constitution, past or present, at any time in our
      history or by the current ultra-conservative Supreme Court, are such marginal
      restrictions as universal background checks or bans on high capacity clips (laws
      which got three Democratic state senators recalled, in an abuse of the recall by
      our fanatical gun idolaters) a violation of the Second Amendment or in any way
      unconstitutional. Declaring them so is akin to declaring “unconstitutional”
      a teacher’s request of a student to stop disrupting a high school class with
      constant loud yelling of obscenities and other verbal misbehaviors, since it is
      a governmental action limiting a person’s speech. None of our rights are
      unlimited in that way, and no rational person believes they are.

      9) In any case, when discussing these issues, we should always discuss
      legality, reality, and morality, not just one to the exclusion of the others.
      The ideal we are challenged to approach is the perfect alignment of the three.
      The quasi-sacred status of the Constitution means that when people cite it, and
      particularly the Bill of Rights, they do so as if that answers all three
      questions automatically. In truth, it only answers the question about current
      legality, not about morality (what really best serves our shared humanity) or
      reality (what a pragmatic recognition of the current social institutional
      landscape recommends). Citing The Second Amendment, regardless of its
      interpretation, does not prove either the morality or the practicality of our
      gun culture and the laws which help to perpetuate it; it is only a discussion of
      legality, and, as popular sovereigns, it is always our responsibility to
      question whether current legality aligns well with reality and morality or

      1. Easy, tiger….. Lol

        Statistics on relatively likelihood of a gun injuring the owner or a member of the household, v. being successfully used for self-defense:

        As for crime rates and gun ownership: Homicide rates are positively correlated with gun ownership both domestically in the United States and internationally among developed countries:

        One classic expression of the mindset expressed by Douglas:

        Another classic expression of the mindset expressed by Douglas:

        The insistence that guns protect people from rape and violence is not rooted in scientific reality:

        Far left SCUM have been making up so-called studies based on nothing more than fantasy for 20 years MORON!

      3. Trever Taylor:

        First, vitriol and vulgarity do not improve your position. Reading your responses to PanDORA reveals an unstable and vicious personality type, the kind that is easily triggered and acts violently when triggered…, just the kind of person we all are delighted to see so infatuated with instruments of deadly violence.

        Second, the notion that there is no connection between instruments of deadly violence and incidents of deadly violence is ludicrous on the face of it.

        Third, to be burdened with an irrational political cult that insists on that ludicrous notion in the nation that has by far both the highest gun ownership rate in the world (about twice the next highest) and one of the highest homicide rates among developed countries (2 to 49 times higher almost all others) is an enormous injustice to all American citizens.

        Fourth, numerous studies show a positive correlation between gun ownership rates and homicide rates, both domestically across US jurisdictions, and internationally among developed countries.

        Fifth, numerous studies show an increased risk of deadly violence to householders with guns in the house.

        Sixth, it is easy to understand why these correlations exist: 1) greater availability of a preferred technology, as a general rule, increases the frequency and efficiency with which the function that technology is designed to perform is actually performed. Building cranes increase the amount of building that is done. Communications technologies increase long distance communications. Transportation technologies increase the number of people who travel and the average distances they travel. Killing technologies increase the rate and efficiency with which people are killed. 2) Given the litany of human fallibilities and propensities (fear, anger, rage, panic, jitters, carelessness, poor judgment, bigotry, greed, jealousy, insecurity, humiliation, overconfidence, machismo, militant ideologies, paranoia, delusions, overreaction, and on and on), placing particularly convenient, particularly efficient and particularly easily discharged instruments of deadly violence within easier reach of more people more of the time is likely to increase and amplify the rate at which intentional and unintentional incidents of deadly violence occurs.

        Seventh, in the US, with our hyper-individualistic culture and an influential right-wing faction that is highly retributive and reactionary, the connection between guns and deadly violence is heightened.

        Eighth, please, share with me any of the familiar list of objections you have to this self-evident truth, that the rest of the developed world (to their great good fortune) and rational and sane people everywhere implicitly understand. Because I’ve heard them all, from the best to the worst, and can explain for each why those who adhere to them as a means for insulating their ignorance and brutality are mistaken. I’d be glad to do so for you as well.

        You attacked this young lady with the unhinged brutality that is all too common and all too well armed in this country. By opening your own virtual mouth, you have presented the most cogent argument against yourself imaginable.

        All my posts prove is that I, along with the rest of the SANE people of America, am sick to death of you brain dead subhuman Marxist SCUM trying to ENSLAVE us! You CREATURES may need mommy govt to wipe your asses for you, but we don’t.
        Take out the DEMONcrat gang bangers and America’s stats on violence are not that bad RETARD!
        The ignorant CUNT deserves everything IT gets and more MORON!!

      5. I take it, Trevor, that you think this represents your position well? Here we have, on the one hand, some obviously unbalanced troglodyte hurling meaningless obscenities and pejoratives, and, on the other, a lawyer, scholar, teacher and author, who apparently doesn’t rise to your level of wisdom and grace. You do realize, don’t you, that the only person you’re discrediting is yourself and the only position you’re discrediting is your own? So, have at it, my friend; continue to do our work for us.

        I’m just treating you COMMIES the way you SCUM have treated the rest of us for most of my life RETARD!! Funny how you CREATURES don’t like it when the shoe is on the other foot!

      7. “retard”? Really? What are you, seven years old? (Most kids grow out of that word by eight or nine.)

        Look, Trevor, I have nothing against people who are unfortunate enough to be so obviously poorly endowed in any number of ways, but you are under no obligation to broadcast the fact as loudly as you are able to.

        If you far left CREATURES possessed the ability to think, you VERMIN wouldn’t be socialists!

      9. Strange thing to say coming from someone who seems to think that a bunch of foul language passes for deep thought, and who champions an ideology that, for its survival, has to dismiss as bastions of liberal bias precisely those professions that methodically gather, verify and analyze information, the overwhelming majority of whose practitioners feel as I do on this matter.

        LIEberalism requires NO thought COMMIE!! Your entire ideology is based on handing over your right to think for yourself to some faceless bureaucracy MORON! If being that fucking STUPID is what it takes for you CREATURES to consider one intelligent, I’m GLAD to not be in your goof graces COMMIE!

      11. And you insist that I’m lying on the basis of what evidence? None, of course, because your entire relationship to reality is one of convenience, filling your mind with mindless ideological bigotry and rage, and then pretending that it is the height of wisdom, a pretense that does not successfully disguise your real nature, one oh so representative of those who share your ideological orientation.

      12. WRONG COMMIE!!
        It is you far left VERMIN who have no connection to reality MORON! That is why you CREATURES need mommy govt to wipe your asses for you.

      13. Will “mommy govt” do that for me? Gee, and all this time I’ve been missing out. Where do I apply for that valuable service?

        Tell me, Trevor, do you enjoy being a buffoon, or is it just a compulsive behavior that you wish you could cure yourself of?

      14. You’re a very articulate fellow, with many interesting and well-considered points to make. It’s been a pleasure chatting with you.

        (I wish everyone as dumb as you were as dumb about being dumb as you are. It would be a far better world for the increased transparency.)

  4. Gosh, I came on here because my son is in Mrs. Boys class this year. After reading what great things Jeff wrote about her teaching abilities,
    it peaked my curiosity to check out some other topics Jeff has written about…. And ended up here
    being verbally assaulted by a delusional FOOL clinging to his fanatical myth, spewing out HATE because he can’t defend himself with logical argument. SMH

      1. Wow, I truly believe you should stay far away from women, children and animals. It’s frightening to even mention it. Someone as unstable minded as yourself could snap at any given moment so filled with hateful rage.

        OR, you could just be another poor, lonely, unsightly guy, who TROLLS the internet, because, you know, it’s really hard to make friends, and the girls, oh don’t mention the girls… Maybe it’s the guys?… It’s okay, I won’t tell. It must suck having no life. The anger takes over and your capacity to be civil and compassionate is much to vulnerable of a place.
        I understand, I really do, It must be really complicated and confusing being you and all. Tragic, really….

        It is you subhuman commie VERMIN who insist on pushing your BULLSHIT on everyone else who truly don’t have lives WHORE! CREATURES as STUPID as you do not deserve civility TWAT! What you deserve is to be fed feet first into the nearest wood chipper to be used as fertilizer!
        If you don’t want to own a gun, FINE! It’s when you commie SCUM then attack the rights of the rest of us that we get PISSED at you VERMIN!!
        You prove that LIEberalism truly is a mental illness.

      3. So, what you’re saying, Trevor, is that when a misogynistic bigot with obvious anger management problems, frothing at the mouth with obscenity-laden rage whenever anyone in any way challenges or disagrees with him, says that he really loves guns and it’s no one’s business, that we should all be fine with such poster children for unhinged, violent hatred being ready to act on that easily-triggered personality type strongly associated with staunch support for unfettered gun rights having a gun ever at the ready, we should all find that to be a convincing argument in support of your position? Thanks for sharing.

        Hating RETARDS is NOT misogynistic MORON! If the TWAT had a functioning brain I wouldn’t hate it! Since I am NOT a DEMONcrat there is little chance of me going on a shooting rampage MORON! REmove your empty head from your Marxist ASS and look up the history of those shooting IDIOT!!
        LIEberalism is a mental illness.

      5. Let’s try a little substance:

        Democrat economics: Detroit

        Humanity: Every filthy ghetto in America, Democrat..

      6. Bob, after I replied to you on one site, you’ve randomly shown up on two others to reply to my comments there. Stalk much?

        You want to compare the relative merits of competing economic paradigms? Sure. Here in the US, the developed country held hostage to the greatest degree by your ideology, we have the highest gini coefficient (the statistical measure of economic inequality) in the developed world, one of the highest absolute poverty rates, one of the highest infant mortality rates, by far one of the highest homicide rates, absolutely the highest incarceration rate, one of the worst performing and most inequitable health care systems, and, in general, are underperforming the rest of the developed world by just about every single statistical measure of human welfare.

        THAT’S what substance looks like.

      7. I responded where I saw fit.

        If you felt stalked, you ought not have responded.

        “You want to compare the relative merits of competing economic paradigms?”

        Sure: Detroit/Dallas

    1. Trevor, has it ever occurred to you that your obviously unhinged, explosive, easily triggered rage is not exactly a great argument in favor of unregulated access to guns by, well, people like you? I don’t mind your making our case for us; I’m just wondering how clueless you really are.

      1. WRONG MARXIST SPERM GARGLER!! I am NOT a libtard therefore there is zero evidence of mental illness against me RETARD! If I were clueless I’d be agreeing with you ignorant VERMIN!

      2. You really like that “sperm gargler” thing, don’t you? You’re very cute. Don’t change; the world needs more people like you, if only to illustrate that the far-right is good for one thing and one thing only: Comic relief.

      3. FUCK YOU COMMIE! At least Conservatives don’t need mommy govt to make all of our decisions for us RETARD!

      4. Ah, sneaking in a comment that actually has a tiny grain of substance to it! Unfortunately, that tiny grain of substance is as clueless as the rest of you. Here’s the thing: Throughout history, humans have grappled with the fact that we are driven by individual and local interests, but mutually benefit from broader cooperation. That “mommy government” you so banally refer to is part of the ongoing effort to balance individual liberty and social cohesion, something intelligent people understand and value, whereas brainless clowns like you thrive on platitudes and vitriol alone.

      5. WRONG MARXIST FUCKTARD!!! The fact that America’s founding fathers started with the Articles of Confederation PROVE that the goal was as little government INTRUSION as possible MORON! That is why they also wrote the 10th Amendment RETARD!
        Just because CREATURES like you cannot think and need to be told what to do, doesn’t mean the rest of us possess that DEFECT! More power for the govt means LESS freedom RETARD, not the opposite! if you want to be a SERF so damn badly, GET THE FUCK OUT OF America!!
        Thanks for proving that LIEberalism is a mental illness.

      6. Or, more historically, it was that at the time of the revolution each state saw itself as a separate country, the original plan being to be mere confederation of sovereign “states” (the word state originally, and still many contexts, meaning a sovereign political unit). The evolution into a single, consolidated nation-state continued even after the ratification of the Constitution, through the Civil War and beyond.

        But, of course, that’s an inferior historically informed perspective, rather than your obscenity laden reduction of reality to the caricature of your ideological preference.

      7. QUIT LYING BRAIN DEAD SUBHUMAN MARXIST COCK GOBBLER!! FEDzilla goes against EVERYTHING America’s founding fathers believed COMMIE! You VERMIN on the left are trying to DESTROY the greatest nation the human race has created because you CREATURES cannot handle taking care of yourselves!

      8. First, the Constitution itself, in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, grants Congress unqualified authority to tax and spend in the general welfare. The restraint on that taxing power is enumerated in the various electoral provisions, by which we, the people, decide if our representatives accurately and faithfully reflected the popular will in how much to tax and in what constitutes the general welfare. So, as a matter of Constitutional law, you’re wrong.

        Second, the Founding Fathers had a range of beliefs, few identical to yours (because they were generally very rational and thoughtful people). Ben Franklin, the only founding father who was present at and instrumental in the drafting of every single one of our founding documents and treaties, who was most respected among the founding fathers themselves (with the possible exception of Washington), who was the world-famous face of the American Revolution, believed that all private wealth beyond that needed to support oneself and one’s family in modest fashion should revert to the state, “by whose laws it was created,” by means of very high luxury and inheritance taxes.

        Alexander Hamilton, Washington’s protégé, and John Adams, one of the co-authors of the Declaration of Independence and the second President, both believed in a very strong federal government with a national bank through which to control monetary policy. Thomas Paine, the author of “Common Sense,” which catalyzed the movement for independence, believed in redistribution of wealth from the wealthy to the poor. Washington himself favored a strong central government.

        Jefferson and Madison, in theory, were the voices for a weak central government, but once in office, they did not act as if that was what they believed in. Quite the contrary. Rather, they acted in accord with the exigencies of the moment, far more tyrannically by many measures than any executive in modern times.

        Of course, perhaps more important than all of that is the fact that we live in history; we are the sovereigns of a nation founded by those historical figures, not slaves to their wills reaching out from the grave. They established a foundational legal document, which forms the framework for our rule of law, and is interpreted by the courts when disputes of interpretation arise. Your ideological presumptions, fortunately, do not figure into that equation, other than being one of many manias that the rule of law must to some extent accommodate and to some extent contain.

        The things destroying this country are ignorance, bigotry, irrationality, zealotry, and an unfortunate reduction of our founding fathers and founding documents to saints and sacred scrolls. We would honor them all better by emulating them more and idolizing them less.

      9. GET A FUCKING CLUE YOU MARXIST RETARD!! The general welfare does NOT mean welfare state COMMIE!!
        If America’s founding fathers wanted a tyrannical state like you do, they would have instituted one from the start COMMIE! The FACT is that they chose to maximize FREEDOM and limit federal power!
        ALL the ignorance, irrationality, bigotry, zealotry and blatant STUPIDITY destroying America is coming from the LEFT!
        LIEberalism is a mental illness!

      10. Trevor, there’s nothing tyrannical about providing health care to those who need it. There’s nothing tyrannical about ensuring that children are fed. There’s nothing tyrannical about a society having the decency to take care or its most vulnerable and needy.

        But there is something tyrannical about refusing to. And most real tyrannies on this planet think and sound and act very much as you do, and not at all as I do.

        There is nothing more dangerous that fanatical ignorance, nothing more tyrannical, nothing more destructive to human liberty and human welfare. You are the problem, my unhinged friend, not at all a part of the solution to it.

      11. WRONG COMMIE FUCKTARD!! STEALING from the rest of us to provide for you useless lazy Marxist VERMIN IS WRONG!!! Since you need to be a SLAVE to a socialist govt so badly, LEAVE AMERICA!! We will NOT be turned into a socialist euroPEEon nanny state! We’ll open hippy hunting season before that happens COMMIE!

      12. Ah, so there we have it. You would rather kill those you oppose than live within our Constitutionally framed rule of law. You are the anti-American one here, the one who would rather destroy the nation than live within the compromises that hold a republic together. You would rather impose your own will through violent force than accept the will of the majority exercised through democratic processes, would rather usurp power than accept the rule of law. You don’t know what America is, much less cherish and defend it. To you, America is mindless jingoism, a waving flag, a stirring military hymn. But to others less shallow and ignorant, America is a nation committed to reason and humanity, and I have no intention of surrendering it to thugs like you.

      13. WRONG COMMIE FUCKTARD!! it’s about killing you VERMIN who are trying to DESTROY America’s Constitution COMMIE! YOU are the anti-American ones for trying to force euroPEEon socialism on us! To me, America is FREEDOM! Something you CREATURES are constantly attacking! It is DEMONcrat who are imposing YOUR will on everyone, NOT the other way around COMMIE! There is NO reason or humanity in ENSLAVING everyone to a Marxist govt!

Leave a Reply