myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Gun Nuts
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 81, 82, 83 ... 160, 161, 162  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gun nuts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3334

PostPosted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey BB were you going to show us the source of these fake quotes esp the one from Obama?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5776

PostPosted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm willing to give beaglebuddy's the benefit of doubt about the posted quotes being true. However, what we don't know is the context of the discourse in which the quotes were made. To be fair, it would be important to share that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3334

PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is fake one for you.
" I deeply regret accepting a million plus a year salary from gunmakers for turning a respectable gun club into the marketing arm for them.
We have lied shamelessly by claiming to support the enforcement of current gun laws while spending hundreds of millions each year trying to overturn them and causing the US to have the highest gun death rate in the world.
My only defense is that we do this in public because our members are too brainwashed to object to our lying in their faces
Fake quotes are just a small part of the way we treat our supporters like the sheep they appear to be."
Pierre at NRA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14054

PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

beaglebuddy wrote:
isobars wrote:
stevenbard wrote:
I've always said welfare recipients should be drug tested annually.

So have I ... until extensive drug testing of welfare recipients in FL and one other state (AZ?) recently revealed an extremely tiny rate nowhere NEAR cost-effectiveness. Now I'd want to see more research before calling for it.

I read the story and I came up with a different conclusion.

Here's one of many articles on the subject:
http://tinyurl.com/dxq3twf
It begins:
TALLAHASSEE — Required drug tests for people seeking welfare benefits ended up costing taxpayers more than it saved and failed to curb the number of prospective applicants, data used against the state in an ongoing legal battle shows ... only 108 of the 4,086 people who took a drug test failed.

Another twist on it:
Does Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Save Money?
Seven states have enacted drug testing for welfare applicants in an effort to cut costs and combat fraud -- but it’s not clear the move does either.

BY: Alan Greenblatt | July 2012

A total of seven states have enacted drug testing or screening laws for welfare applicants over the past two years (Arizona, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah this year; Florida and Missouri in 2011). Although courts have been skeptical about such laws, legislators say they don’t want taxpayer money to subsidize illegal behavior. “If you have enough money to buy drugs, then you don’t need the public assistance,” Colorado state Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg told the Associated Press.

Opponents of such laws say they end up backfiring in a couple of ways. Numerous states have performed drug screenings of welfare applicants for years, says LaDonna Pavetti of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, in hopes of guiding them into treatment and making them more employable. The new round of laws, she suggests, is more punitive and will turn people away from treatment.

[Editorial comment: that's freaking tough. Honest, sober people have to put forth some effort to get their money; why shouldn't the same apply to welfare recipients? What are they ... Jabba the Hut or the plant from "Little Shop of Horrors" shouting "Feed Me"?]

She also argues that it will cost a lot of money to test everybody in order to find a small number of users. The Florida chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union recently showed that drug testing actually cost the state money. The $30 spent per test ended up costing an aggregate of $45,000 more than the state saved in welfare payments.

But those figures were misleading, says Tarran Bragdon, president of the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability, which backed the Florida law. Once a judge blocked it and made the state pay out benefits retroactively, costs grew quickly.

In other words, if legislators can come up with a drug-testing regimen that passes legal muster -- which has proven difficult for more than one state -- they may see a net savings. But sponsors of these bills insist that while cost savings are nice, these measures are really about changing behaviors. “Benefit payments that have been wasted on drug abusers will be available for the truly needy,” says Oklahoma state Rep. Guy Liebmann, “and addicts will be incentivized to get treatment.”

???????
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4061

PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not for drug testing a welfare applicant. More likely once they've been on it for a year. Acceptance of long term welfare destroys human potential. The more time that passes, the more potential stolen from that person.

In my youth, I worked for a company that had HUD and Section 8 housing. I saw 1st hand what these kinds of programs do to people. Drug abuse was rampant. Hollow sad humans that were born with potential now useless.

As for the mom who didn't store her guns correctly, even though she'd contacted police and mental health professionals about her crazy son. She had an epic failure to protect herself and the public. This can easily be corrected with training and safety locks. Every new gun sold in Cal already has a safety lock included in the box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beaglebuddy



Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 689

PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When people know they will be drug tested many will stop using drugs, and that is the ultimate goal isn't it?
Not how many they can kick off welfare. Idea
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5145

PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zero Republican votes for closing the gun-show loophole, that 90% of the public wants closed. The Republican's idea of responsible governance? Reintroduce Ryan's budget to defund health care.

I do believe that these stances will hurt the Republicans in the midterms.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2643

PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 4:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
This can easily be corrected with training and safety locks. Every new gun sold in Cal already has a safety lock included in the box.

And it can be even more easily corrected by not allowing her to have assault weapons in the first place.

Does every new thermonuclear weapon sold to a private citizen include all the necessary safety training and locks?
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanWeiss



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1933
Location: Connecticut, USA

PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To me, this typifies the false notion peddled by some in the GOP that wrongly attempts to equate banning certain guns with a government overreach at best and an erosion of not only the 2nd Amendment but other rights as well. Sen. Cruz was grandstanding a bit too much and had his lunch handed to him by Senators Feinstein and Leahy.

Why can't people understand that the least convincing argument on nearly any issue is that of the slippery slope. I hold no issue with honest, open debate about constitutional matters, but feel like crying when Senators attempt to rewrite about 200 years of jurisprudence while knowing their reasoning is false.

Sen. Cruz ate it in fashion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYI3MEhegvQ&feature=player_embedded

_________________
Support Your Sport. Join US Windsurfing!
www.USWindsurfing.org

www.konaone.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 81, 82, 83 ... 160, 161, 162  Next
Page 82 of 162

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group