13
POPSHamdan Gulty. Guilty as Sin. The small fry is guilty. Now let's try the masterminds. Thanks to the hapless democrats, we can't frog march these monsters out and shoot them. No, thanks to liberals, these mass murderers have all the rights afforded American citizens. Lunacy.
0
POPSSpooks and Spies Among Us You just never know who is spying for whom. Good thing is: We have nothing to hide, it's the NRA and our government that have much to hide.
8
POPSOlbermann Explains the 2nd Amendment Those pesky rights that need to be explained. LOL Thanks, Keith, for explaining what our founders actually meant, given that they so woefully failed at expressing themselves clearly enough.
0
POPSA Must-read from Mother Jones This woman infiltrated anti-gun activist groups as a mole for the NRA. She also infiltrated animal rights groups. She had family members vending information about environmental groups to interested parties.
1
POPSREAL ID, A Real Threat to Gun Rights Gunowners of America has stated the same, but this article shows how. Like the Social Security card, now used as a national identifier for non-related purposes, REAL ID would morf beyond its stated purpose (because the SSN is one of its central components).
3
POPSLike I said, we won't need SCOTUS no mo'!
If one more "R" gets on SCOTUS we can all say TOOTLES to civil liberties & HELLO to Fascism. A statement from an everyday Alarmist? No its serious! The court now in lockstep with the "R" ideology which protects the wealthy and gives a nose-thumb at those who need help. The kind of social order they wish to spread across our land, is not democracy. Not with, cruel punishment for those who can't pay their way out of a guilt accusation. Not with, melt down of habeas corpus. Not with, stripping a woman of her right to choose what's best for her body & circumstances. Not with, laws, claiming Voter Id's before one can vote. Not with, reducing punitive damages to large corp. who will become more reckless not having to face large losses to their beloved capital. Not with, dismantling gun-control laws putting all at risk of being murdered by the disgruntled, the disturbed who should never possess lethal weapons. Remember 1 or 2 more "R" justices and you can kiss your, you-know-what bye-bye:-(
0
POPSGuns: This Is Why I live in Texas, a big gun-loving state. Just a few days ago when discussing the recent Supreme Court decision, I missed my opportunity to get on my soapbox when someone baited me by asking, "What, you wouldn't allow me to protect myself?" This is why, dumby: You are far more likely to blow yourself away than to protect your precious dvd collection. When people talk about guns, the words they use include "rights, freedom, American, 2nd amendment, protection, safety, etc." But somehow suicide and accidental gun injuries and death never rise to become part of that conversation. For the life of me I don't know why. Is it that we are confronted daily with images in the media of heroic gunfights between the bad guys vs. the good guys? But what about the good guy vs. himself? Or the bad guy grabbing the good guy's gun and using it against him? Or the good guy's young child accidentally shooting her foot off? Why do we never talk about these things?
5
POPSWe Won't Need The Expense Of A Supreme Court If McCain wins in November, we won't need a Supreme Court any longer. When he throws in a few more conservative ideologues to further unbalance this court, we will all know their rulings on EVERYTHING even before they cast their vote. It's almost that way now except for the conservative Kennedy who in his declining years of life has turned into a philosopher, that is a person who seeks truth by thinking! But he is the exception, not the rule. The other justices vote along the lines of WHATEVER THE HELL THEIR KING TELLS THEM TO VOTE. Now is this fair to the people in a democracy... HELL NO! Believe me, not only will progressives suffer many conservatives will suffer too! Left or Right we all feel the pain of injustice!
0
POPSSupreme Court Upholds 2nd Amendment, right to bear arms is personal but see even Scalia's "but" statements. They still want to "infringe". The idea of having a permit would be repugnant to Patrick Henry and the colonists of 1776. Notice how close this vote was, 5 to 4 by the Supremes , and even the most conservative do not deny some restrictions may be applied. "Shall not be infringed" is illegible to them apparently. So go buy yourself a Glock and learn how to safely use it. It's best to buy from private owners to keep yourself out of the "infringement" of federal data-bases which tracks gun sales, and could be accessed under PATRIOT ACT provisions upon any government desire to do so. My question is, what about the 4th amendment? This should be the next focus of challenges.
3
POPSSCOTUS Strikes Down DC Gun Ban Here's a fun question for the "strict constructionist" Scalia -- if this is true, why would 2nd amendment mention militias at all? And why doesn't it mention self-defense? Scalia's never been a "strict constructionist." All that means is "someone who'll be a judicial activist for Republican causes."
5
POPSCourt rules in favor of Second Amendment gun right riting for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted. The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
0
POPSFlint proves to be Labour loudmouth When Yorkshire wakes up and realise that this odious woman is their mouthpiece, they will understand how Nu LieBer can send us into illegal wars, undermine your, and mine RIGHTS. Allow gun culture to run rampant; 19 year olds seem to be able to get guns easier then an education; they do not have the courage to debate Human Right through the one choice they - the Yorkshire Tykes - have, the ballot box. If you will elected hung monkeys, you deserve the Caroline Flints of the world. On the Daily Politics today, this awful woman must have done much to add to Conservative recruitment figures. For those of us who really believe in freedom of speech, woman - shut up.
0
POPSyahoo gun lobby doesn't need the Republicans. the clips are in reversed order
3
POPSAre we a laughingstock on gun ownership? If a politician goes against the gun lobbies and the National Rifle Association's desire to lessen restrictions on gun ownership, they lose! We are a Pistol-packing mama and papa, gun toting SON OF A GUN, nation, for sure. (E J Dionee writes about the argument of - if everybody were carrying weapons, someone would have taken out the murderer and all would have been fine...This is a stupid argument, driven by the stupid politics of gun control in the U.S.. When Richard Reid showed that nasty things could be done with shoes on airplanes, airport security started examining shoes. If we can act pragmatically in the skies, why can't we be equally practical here on the ground?) The questions that should be asked is... Why is America so violent, are guns to blame? or How many more mass murders involving guns will it take?
4
POPSBarack Obama’s Priority: Global Poverty Act $845Billion Carbon Tax If that wasn’t enough to enlighten most of us to Barack Obama’s real agenda, let’s take a look at another part of the United Nations Millennium declaration,this time in reference to gun control. It seems to me, his first priority is not the people of America, what we need is a President of the United States, one who will stand for the rights of our citizens , even if it is against the global interests of the United Nations.
4
POPSThe Democrats And Gun Control Mr. Obama's campaign Web site touts his belief in the Second Amendment rights to have guns "for the purposes of hunting and target shooting." Conspicuously absent is the right to have firearms to defend one's self, home and family. A presidential candidate could of course swear devotion to the First Amendment, while declaring that the amendment's purpose is to protect sports reporting and book collecting. And that candidate could still support government lawsuits against publishers, local bans on newspapers, and draconian restrictions on political commentary. Civil libertarians who supported such a candidate because of his alleged love for the First Amendment would be foolish. Civil libertarians who support Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton because of their purported fealty to the Second Amendment may be bitterly disappointed.
1
POPSGun-running Chinese Scow Turned Away China’s decision to turn the ship around was welcomed by the dock workers, trade unionists, religious leaders, Western diplomats and human rights workers who have been campaigning since last week to block delivery of the weapons to Zimbabwe. They had said the weaponry could be used to carry out an even more violent crackdown on Zimbabwe’s political opposition, which is allied with the country’s unionized workers. “This is a great victory for the trade union movement in particular and civil society in general in putting its foot down and saying we will not allow weapons that could be used to kill and maim our fellow workers and Zimbabweans to be transported across South Africa,” said Patrick Craven, spokesman for the Congress of South African Trade Unions, which represents 1.9 million South African workers.
2
Pops
Newest Clips
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Print
Save
Turn on live update