• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

U.S. Politics

Page 360 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
MarkvW said:
Kentucky long rifle can still do the job for a man who knows what he's doing.
LMAO can it now? Do you know what your talking about?


Can you even finish this for me without using google?

Ready on the right? Ready on the left?

oh and whats a dog target?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
patricknd said:
i wonder how the league city murder rate compares to washington dc? :D
When I read the link. I could not help but think I was hearing music in the back ground.

"Freedom isn't free theirs a hefty ****ing fee"
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,119
0
0
What is/are the tax(es) on guns? Is it set per state and what's the average tax rate? Does it fall under sales taxes just like any other good you can buy?
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
Anyone not convinced about how criminally easy it is to buy a gun with no questions asked needs to look at this clip.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_c3#/video/politics/2013/04/11/ac-pkg-savidge-gun-show-gun-buying.cnn

There is, of course, a supreme irony in the fact that the sellers in this film are part of the very same 'lobby' that screams about the need to be armed to the teeth because so many criminals have illegal weapons....and how do all those criminals get hold of all those weapons?:eek:
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,280
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
When I read the link. I could not help but think I was hearing music in the back ground.

"Freedom isn't free theirs a hefty ****ing fee"
Did you see the one about "America's gun" ? That was a little strange, even for me :D
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,119
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
sales tax.
Thanks.

Sometimes taxes for sinful/harmful products (cigarettes, alcohol, bacon (?)) are higher and I was wondering if that applied to guns/ammo as well.

Started googling some more and I found this:

U.S. pockets $20.6 billion in sin taxes (Jul 14, 2010)

There was also a spike in tax collection from the sale of guns and ammunition, said the report from the agency that has an annual budget of $99 million.

In October 2009, firearms and ammunition excise tax collection climbed 45 percent from the previous fiscal year, the greatest annual increase in the firearms tax revenue in the agency's history, the report said. By comparison, the average annual increase for fiscal years 1993 to 2008 was 6 percent.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
It's four years since the great recession ended.

Next year you will be lamenting the slow recovery again. I'm only shocked even you have given up blaming Bush.
Not doing too shabby.

U.S. economic growth accelerated from January through March, buoyed by the strongest consumer spending in more than two years.The Commerce Department said Friday that the overall economy expanded at an annual rate of 2.5 percent in the first quarter, rebounding from the anemic 0.4 percent growth rate in the October-December quarter
If it weren't for Republican insistence on unnecessary "austerity"...

The strength offset further declines in government spending that are expected to drag on growth throughout the year. Government spending fell at a 4.1 percent rate as the cuts from sequestration began. Without those reductions in federal spending, economists said, growth for the quarter would have eclipsed 3 percent.
...it'd be doing even better.

Hey, we could always go back to what you and the cons would prefer:

real GDP growth per capita during Bush's eight-year term averaged just 1.1 percent. That's way worse than under Clinton or Reagan or even Jimmy Carter.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
Not doing too shabby.

If it weren't for Republican insistence on unnecessary "austerity"...

...it'd be doing even better.

Hey, we could always go back to what you and the cons would prefer:
Obama admin dreamt up Sequestration. Remind me what that entails?

Austerity includes tax increases. What kind of idiot would push that in a four year long slow "recovery"?

Idiots in charge? You guessed it.

Btw, What's the U-6 lookin' like nowadays? Hovering around 14%. Well done.

Maybe another coupla trillion in shovel ready projects? Well, really, a trillion for shovel ready's and a trillion in an ad campaign to explain Obamacare to all the business dolts out there. Convince them the spiraling costs are actually a good thing. All about confidence, ya know?

Hey, we could always go back to what you and the cons would prefer
How many more people are working today that when Obama took office? What, it's like, minus 5 million? How many more in poverty? On govt assistance? Debt increase? Monetary policy?

Yep. Your Obama is killing it. Literally.

Oh, and what are we gonna do about Syria crossing the "redline?" Going to war I guess. How Bushesque.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

One final thought: Did you notice how outclassed Obama was yesterday at the Bush dedication? Peggy Noonan wrote a pretty good piece on the whole episode.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
Bala Verde said:
Thanks.

Sometimes taxes for sinful/harmful products (cigarettes, alcohol, bacon (?)) are higher and I was wondering if that applied to guns/ammo as well.

Started googling some more and I found this:

U.S. pockets $20.6 billion in sin taxes (Jul 14, 2010)
I really appreciate the cigarette tax (well, and the gasoline taxes). They are truly regressive and totally sock it to the poor. About time.



That's sarcasm in case anyone is wondering.
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
LMAO can it now? Do you know what your talking about?


Can you even finish this for me without using google?

Ready on the right? Ready on the left?

oh and whats a dog target?
My granddad had a gun store for many years (and I was also a soldier). I love to shoot. Still, I'm a strong proponent of gun control because the need is obvious (more obvious with every mass shooting).

Thanks for the insult, though.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
MarkvW said:
My granddad had a gun store for many years. I love to shoot. Still, I'm a strong proponent of gun control because the need is obvious (more obvious with every mass shooting).

Thanks for the insult, though.
Just the mass shooting that have your dander up?

You are aware we as a nation do a poor job of enforcing existing "gun control" laws, right?
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Just the mass shooting that have your dander up?

You are aware we as a nation do a poor job of enforcing existing "gun control" laws, right?
No. I see the gang violence, and the domestic violence, and the kids who get their hands on guns their moronic parents can't keep from them.

It's obvious. That's why 56 percent of the US is favoring some kind of gun control now. Every local incident makes the need more obvious.

We can always do a better job of enforcing our laws.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
MarkvW said:
My granddad had a gun store for many years (and I was also a soldier). I love to shoot. Still, I'm a strong proponent of gun control because the need is obvious (more obvious with every mass shooting).

Thanks for the insult, though.
How did I insult you? I asked a question. Army soldier? You were a grunt or a POG? NonCom or a Commissioned officer?

My grandpaw on my dad's side owned No guns. My PawPaw on my mothers side had rifles and shotguns. But we never went to any rifle ranges especially not any military rifle ranges.

So I took you for someone who does not know his weapons but I really don't see the insult in either laughing my *** off at your post regarding Kentucky long rifle. Just did not sound like something you knew much about in my opinion.
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
How did I insult you? I asked a question. Army soldier? You were a grunt or a POG? NonCom or a Commissioned officer?

My grandpaw on my dad's side owned No guns. My PawPaw on my mothers side had rifles and shotguns. But we never went to any rifle ranges especially not any military rifle ranges.

So I took you for someone who does not know his weapons but I really don't see the insult in either laughing my *** off at your post regarding Kentucky long rifle. Just did not sound like something you knew much about in my opinion.
"Can you even finish this for me without using Google?"
Are you so used to insulting people that you can't even recognize when you're doing it?
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
MarkvW said:
No. I see the gang violence, and the domestic violence, and the kids who get their hands on guns their moronic parents can't keep from them.

It's obvious. That's why 56 percent of the US is favoring some kind of gun control now. Every local incident makes the need more obvious.

We can always do a better job of enforcing our laws.
Thanks for the concession.

I guess it then makes total sense to go out and pass a whole bunch of new laws. Make people feel like 'something's' being done.

Cool.

Just so we are clear, I think universal background checks (with teeth) make complete sense. But, I have no confidence in our various govt agencies actually enforcing new laws particularly when the won't enforce existing laws.

So, it becomes clear what this whole round of BS is about and it ain't about protecting innocent kids. It's just more incredibly cynical politics designed to make opponents "look" bad. Period.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
Hi Velo, maybe you can explain this one to me since things are so peachy and government spending has been growing so slowly;



Now that we have the first estimate of Q1 GDP growth in both rate of change and absolute current dollar terms ($16,010 billion), we can finally assign the appropriate debt number, which we know on a daily basis and which was $16,771.4 billion as of March 31, to the growth number. The end result: as of March 31, 2013, the US debt/GDP was 104.8%, up from 103% as of December 31, 2012 or a debt growth rate that would make the most insolvent Eurozone nation blush. There was a time when people were concerned about this unsustainable trajectory, but then there was an infamous excel error, and now nobody cares anymore.

In fact, moar debt is moar best-er.

Moar debt is moar bset-er. The Krugman/Obama rally cry.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-26/total-us-debt-gdp-105
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
How did I insult you? I asked a question. Army soldier? You were a grunt or a POG? NonCom or a Commissioned officer?

My grandpaw on my dad's side owned No guns. My PawPaw on my mothers side had rifles and shotguns. But we never went to any rifle ranges especially not any military rifle ranges.

So I took you for someone who does not know his weapons but I really don't see the insult in either laughing my *** off at your post regarding Kentucky long rifle. Just did not sound like something you knew much about in my opinion.
The Kentucky long rifle was one of the first American innovations that was considerably better than stuff made in Europe. That's one of the reasons I remember it.

The only drags about shooting are the costs of ammo and the time it takes to clean your weapon as clean as it ought to be afterward.

I don't own a gun, but if I lived in the country I think I'd have to have a shotgun, given our current gun laws.
 
May 27, 2012
5,293
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Hi Velo, maybe you can explain this one to me since things are so peachy and government spending has been growing so slowly;






Moar debt is moar bset-er. The Krugman/Obama rally cry.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-26/total-us-debt-gdp-105
We are still not at an historic high, and your side has yet to show a real world example of your "cut spending and taxes" policy working for any industrialized nation on the planet when dealing with a severe economic downturn. In fact, every day that goes by proves just how destructive and short-sighted that policy is in Europe. Not to mention that our level of spending on social programs is nowhere near as high as Europe even under their "austerity."

You will however have to allow me the chuckle I get every time I hear the word "socialism" banded about here...
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Good question, but easy answer: because we have the 2nd Amendment and cons, gun nuts, and the NRA would have a serious hissy fit.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/04/26/why-is-this-not-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction/

One of the more striking things about the charges against Dzhokar Tsarnaev is the use of a “weapon of mass destruction.” Legally, that’s certainly valid, given the current definition in the US criminal law with respect to terrorism:

any “destructive device” defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas – bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses

any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors

any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life

That includes a pressure-cooker Internet-recipe bomb that killed 3 people and injured many more. But why is a version of an AR-15, as used by Adam Lanza, that killed 28 human beings, not treated the same way? Why was that act not treated as a suicide bombing would be? If something that kills three people is responsible for “mass destruction”, why not a military weapon that can kill 28?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/24/iowa_gopers_cut_pay_of_justices_who_made_gay_marriage_decision/

Several Republicans in the Iowa House of Representatives are pushing to cut the pay of the Iowa Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage in 2009 — though they contend that it’s not meant to punish the justices. Rep. Tom Shaw, a Republican, said that the bill was meant “to maintain the balance of power” between the different branches of government in the state. ”We’re just holding them responsible for their decision, for going beyond their bounds,” he said.
"We're just holding them responsible for their decision". Basically cons in Iowa want the power to blackmail the state judiciary - rule the way we want you to and you won't be punished. Cons really love that Constitution, eh?

Or you could just shoot them instead.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/21/chris-nogy-arkansas-shooting-lawmakers_n_3128047.html

The 2nd amendment means nothing unless those in power believe you would have no problem simply walking up and shooting them if they got too far out of line and stopped responding as representatives. It seems that we are unable to muster that belief in any of our representatives on a state or federal level, but we have to have something, something costly, something that they will fear that we will use if they step out of line. If we can’t shoot them, we have to at least be firm in our threat to take immediate action against them politically, socially, and civically if they screw up on something this big. Personally, I think a gun is quicker and more merciful, but hey, we can't.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
I must be wearing the cloak of invisibility today. Didn't any of you watch that film I posted a couple of pages back? What further evidence is needed that existing gun show loopholes need to be plugged?:eek:

In other worrying developments, the US and UK are now claiming to have 'evidence' of the use of Sarin gas by Assad. No doubt, invasion preparations will now be stepped up.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
We are still not at an historic high...
That is not very reassuring. The historic high was because of WW2, which left the rest of the world smashed and the U.S. the preeminent industrial power. Until the 70s, the debt steadily declined, aided by the U.S.' economic position relative to the rest of the world and its own internal economic growth. That was a completely different global economic situation than exists today.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS