Tuesday, July 26, 2005

God Bless Barbara Boxer

Crooks and Liars posted this.

It amazes me the bombast of people like Bill Frist and it makes me glad that there are people like Barbara Boxer on the senate floor to point out their absurdity. I don't think any American could honestly argue with the absurdity of what Frist said. Basically this: "The Gun Liability Bill is more important than the Defense Authorization Bill during a time of war." Who are these people?

The Gun Liability Bill is absurd in and of itself, but Frist takes it a step further. I mean, of course the Gun Lobby doesn't want to be liable for all the ridiculous things people do with guns. But shouldn't they be? Really. Isn't McDonalds liable when their food kills someone (say it's poisoned or something)? Why shouldn't a gun manufacturer be responisble for a death when one of their guns is involved? I guarantee that they would be a whole lot more careful about who they sold them to. It might turn around the entire gun-crazy culture of America to make them liable.

And it amazes me even further that the gun lobby had the senator that was sponsoring the bill, their puppet as it were, pull the bill the last time it went to the floor because someone with a spine managed to attach a renewal of the assault gun ban on it.

I think guns are bad things in general. We don't need guns. We need words. Words are more powerful than guns anyway.

Screw Guns and the gun lobby.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your analogy of People suing mcdonalds over dieing because of there food and gun manufac. being sued is absurd.
McDonalds needs to take responsibilty for its food if it is faulty. Guns do not work like that, someone has to pick it up, and fire it at someone. Very rarly is a gun faulty, and if it is, then of course the gun manufacturers should be liable. But not just because someone picks it up and kills someone. What an absurdity. Barbara boxer is a socialist who wants all guns taken away, and the state to run and control our lives. Lets get this country back to where it should be, a REPUBLIC, not a democracy!

Anonymous said...

Guns are a protected Constitutional right, and even though i do not own a gun, i respect people's right to own one.
Its like i am not one to protest events in general, but if someone likes to protest events, i am not going to lobby to take away there first amendment right to protest.

Bryan said...

I'll be the first to admit my McDonalds analogy is a stretch, but the point I was getting across is that if someone makes things that are a detriment to people's health and lives, they should be held liable.

I don't think that people shouldn't be allowed to own guns. I would like to see a world without them, but people do have the right to them. I would like to see heavy regulation of them. Regulation at least as heavy as the rigors and constant updating you do for a drivers license.

Also, there's nothing wrong with socialists. Deep down, they really just want to help everyone. I don't agree with some of what they say, but I would say I agree with most. (I don't agree with all of what a "party" says. Parties are nonsense in general). But it seems that just attacking Barbara Boxer like that probably means you didn't watch the clip.

Also, I think a democracy is WAY better because it would mean actual representation.

Bryan said...

I think though that I sort of strayed with my comment. What I wanted to say was this: The intent of my post was to point out the absurdity of what Bill Frist did. And I think that every American during a time of war can get behind the absuridty of that clip.

The other thing that I wanted to get across in the post was that if gun companies were liable for who they sold the guns to, they would be more careful about who they sold them to. THAT IS NOT A BAD THING.

Personally, I think guns are barbaric. I don't think there's a place for them in this world. I don't think there's a place for anything that's only design is for the destruction of human life.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Bryan for writing back.
Here are some of my thoughts, and i really do appreciate your comments.
I appreciate your gun comments as a right, but regulation on guns is what is erroding the right to own a gun, regulation is taking over the right to own a gun. That is what is wrong. A little regulation may or may not be bad, but we have a ton of regulation, especially where i live in Los Angeles, and murders are prevalant, and also in Washington DC. Taking away guns or regulating them heavily, doesn't stop crime nor accidents with guns.
Socialism is not Good, socialists i believe may be good people, but the concept is not good, This country is about Freedom, and a republic, not a democracy or socialism. All i want is freedom, and one of the main reasons this country is going down is because of the social programs America has decided to accept. Throw out the Federal Reserve, fake fiat money, Social Security, Welfare programs by government, Medicare, Medicade. There all bringing us down. Those programs do not bolster freedom, they actually take them away, and you are now controlled by the state. Also, Both parties are controlled anyway, so voting for bush or kerry is not going to change much.

Good point about Parties being nonsense, though any party outside the main 2 i would rather hear from.

Barbara Boxer has a bad history is passing laws and getting behind things that a bringing down this country, the patriot act, welfare programs and much more.

A democracy is mob rule, Republic is a representation of the people as a whole, you have your terms backwards.

Anonymous said...

Lastly, your comment: " I don't think there's a place for anything that's only design is for the destruction of human life." is not true. Guns are a way of protection to out rights, take away our guns, we have no way to defend ourselves, no amount of words will save you from tyranny, Last time i checked the polls showed that American People think they are not being represented by there congressman, so all you can say won't stop this tyranny.
So much for a Democracy and the representation you were talking about.

Thanks again for your response, I really enjoyed this divided state when i saw it at usc, and plan to get it on dvd.

Anonymous said...

I just wanted to make sure that i was clear on one point. I am not for another revolution with guns and all. I will just say that people need to educate themselves, and hopefully one day people in masses will wake up and demand there rights peacefully, that is what i prefer over using guns to bring back out freedoms. I just wanted to make clear that guns are not "only designed" to destroy life, they can be used to protect life, just as when this country was founded.

Bryan said...

The thing with socialists is this: They believe (and I do to) that people have a right to freedom. Life, Liberty, Happiness, etc. But they also have a right to the freedom from want. One early slogan in the marxist world was this: Freedom and Bread for all. I don't see anything wrong with that notion. I think it's barbaric that we have to pay to be healthy. That we have to pay for water.

I think the things people NEED should be free. I think that socialists take things a step to far though... (I believe in personal property, I believe in free enterprise... I just beleive in them after all the basic needs of everyone are taken care of)

And like I said. I don't think we should take guns away. We just need to know who's getting them.

I think I'm way more "revolutionary" than this post might you to beleive... read my post down below...

http://thisdividedstate.blogspot.com/2005/07/read-this-article.html

Anonymous said...

Bryan,
Thanks for the response, There is one concept that you are forgeting when you discuss this, and that is that America is supposed to be a republic, A true representation of the people, not a democracy, not socialist. Socialist ideas do sound great and i like some of your throughts, and i don't think compaines should be taking over the water supplies like they are, but freedom and bread for all has nothing to do really with freedom. If you expect your government to supply you with bread and water, that takes away from the principle of work, for we work for food and shelter if nothing else. Your principle would turn this country into what it already is, a welfare state. People are always asking, where's my check. The founding fathers never imagined the big goverment you talk about, and i would encourage you to side with them on this issue.
Also, You use the word healthy in relation to food, and i know that is a huge topic, but most of the foods we eat, from the local stores, is garbage, filled with preservatives and what not, so the goverment providing these foods or similar foods is not healty to the public. I know you didn't say what healthy was, but that is something to think about.
The goverment should be protecting out rights, not doing what they are doing now by crushing all of them.
All in all, i really like what you had to say in the rest of your post. Thanks for your thoughts.

Bryan said...

I don't think that any one type of system (socialist, democracy, republic, etc.) has all the answers. I think there are things we can learn from all of them. I think that the socialist ideal of helping people from starving, or dying from treatable disease, or from being homeless is a good thing. Taking care of our citizens is what our government should do. And by taking care of, I don't just mean health care, or medicaid, or social security, I mean things like defense and education and the like too. The government is ours. It's of, by and for the people. We should use it as such.

And if the government becomes destructive to those ends (i.e., they continue on this path of "corporate culture") it's our job to take it back and set it on the right path.

Anonymous said...

Good point, not all systems have all the answers, nor are a utopia, but when this country was founded on a republic form of governement (that has nothing to do with the republican party), we should do all we can to uphold that form, and not vote for people that support big government nor the taking away of our rights. Ron Paul is one of the few representatives that believes and is trying get this country more to where it should be, with our freedoms back. I just want to make sure that when you hear about the 2008 election, hilary clinton, or whoever it is is not for securing your rights and freedoms, just more tyranny and big goverment. That goes for whoever is the republican canidate. There both controlled by corporations.

I agree with your on the idea of the government and defense, but public government schools filled with propaganda is something that is also tearing this country apart. I think the Federal Government in education is totally brainwashing the American people from thinking for themselves. The quality of schools in Los Angeles, is self evident of that.

Glad to hear your words about taking this country back, i'll be around to comment on other posts.

Bryan said...

I think there are checks and balances that can be integrated into the system to prevent brainwashing in public schools. I think the majority of brainwashing in public schools is going on in Texas and California with the text-book lobbyists. I read a book about these people... I'll have to dig up the title...

But I'm not so opposed to big government, I'm opposed to oppressive government.

But I don't exactly agree that this government should be the same as it was when we started. The framers of this system intended for it to change with the times. Others didn't expect it to last very long. I'm paraphrasing here, but I've heard it said that Thomas Jefferson beleived that if our country lasted more than 50 years we'd be in trouble.

Anonymous said...

Bryan,
Thanks for your comments
Public schools are never neutral, they support securalism, even if it is a form of religion and a set of beliefs. The government is not in business to teach us anything, they should be protecting out rights, but they have resorted to brainwashing us in the public school.
Whats the book called?
The founders wanted limited government, not what we have today.
Big Governments by nature oppress people, you should be for small government and no oppression of your rights.
I would love to know where u got that quote and under what circumstance TJ meant. The government has to make changes over the years, there have been many things that needed to change, but not a government that is controlled by the Money Cartel Federal Reserve. It would solve a lot of ou problems if you all stood against this organization that is killing our society.
Read the book: "The Creature from Jekyll Island" It will probably be a big wakeup call for anyone that reads it.

Anonymous said...

Also,
In 2008, Any canidate in the 2 major parties is only going to suppress you more, so i caution you from voting for either party.

Bryan said...

I voted 3rd party in '00. It took me almost 20 minutes in the voting booth to figure out who I was going to vote for in '04. I just didn't know who I should vote for, Nader or Kerry. Nader because I think he represented me better than any other candidate and Kerry because I wanted him to get more votes than Bush. To be honest, my animosity for Bush is the only thing that got me to vote for Kerry. But I can't see myself voting 2 party in an election like that in the near future.

Anonymous said...

Bryan,
I am really glad to hear your opinion on who you voted for in 2000, and am glad it was a third party, even if i do not agree with Nador on many issues. I see your view on your vote for Kerry, and i am glad you see that voting for the 2 big parties is pretty pointless.

Anonymous said...

history so soon forgotten,

first thing nazi's did was outlaw or "regulate" gun ownership. it is the first symptom of all tyrannies. if you don't want to own one fine. but leave people who are comfortable with that responsibility alone. if crime involving guns is causing you to fear them, then make mandatory sentences or tripling of sentences and convictions your effort. BTW, how many ex-cons and ineligibles were convicted for perjuring their info on the brady bill applications for gun purchases? zero, dems need to make an effort not to appear as window dressers.
barbara boxer is one of them.