« Joe-the-Plumr | Main | Obamunists Brainwash Toddlers »

You got to love a right wing Christian fundamentalist blog that celebrates homicide! no, more than that, rejoices over homicide and cites it as a core American characteristic at the heart of American "spirit".

Soon you'll be claiming that you are not a real American until you have committed at least one "justifiable" homicide.

Van Helsig, you are one sick puppy. I hope you make it through the next admininstration without totally snapping and taking out a bunch of innocents in some shopping mall. Good luck!

So, wnc, what you're saying is that if some shit for brains thug kicks in your front door to practice a little "free-lance wealth redistribution" before he kills you and anyone else in the house, you're just gonna help him by holding still?

Nice straw man, there, bub. Either you can't read or you don't bother with that whole 'comprehension' nonsense... it's quite clear that Van isn't talking about homicide in the criminal sense. But then, I suppose in a twisted LeftWingNut world, it makes *perfect* sense. You don't see any difference between a thieving felon, a murdering illegal alien, a rapist, and a law-abiding citizen trying to protect him- or herself and family. We're all morally equivalent in a Socialists eyes, right?

Well wnc, don't worry, those on your side are all real Americans. After all, murdering an unborn child is quite "justifiable."

This statistic is mislabeled. It is not justifiable homicide. It is prevented rape/murder etc. Makes me smile just thinking about the law breaking critters being dispatched, and my taxes not having to pay for keeping the scum alive in jail.

The post clearly celebrates the increase in homicide figures-he calls these figures "a glimmer of hope."

I don't see killing as something to be proud of, to celebrate, or to reward, whether that killing is "justifiable" or not.

I would certainly distance myself from someone who implied that this celebration of killing and death was a core characteristic of American national identity. that is sick.

Stephana is also happy people are getting killed so that she doesn't have to "pay" for them, although she's happy to pay to have more police on the streets...doh!

I can just feel the love.

Homocides are only condoned by the Left when "revolutionaries" like Che Guevera or "progressive leaders" like Joseph Stalin are behind them. We "wingnuts" are silly to believe it's ok for us to defend our Constitutional rights. What the hell were we thinking???

Thulsa Dumb,
I have personally neither praised Guevara or Stalin...Actually, I don't know anyone, ever, to have praised Stalin. Regardless, these are names you all love to through around in post after post after post, it's a tiresome, desperate and frankly, weak method of argument to find the most extreme loopy examples to base your oversimplified beliefs on. You simply can't compare a guy who doesn't mind seeing some of his tax money going to rehabilitate drug addicts instead of for military spending to Stalin- You just look like an idiot. But it's the argument of choice by the hysterical scardey cats here.

Second you hava consititional right to bear arms. You don't have a constitutional right to kill anyone. Futhermore it is certainly distasteful to celebrate an increase in homicide, and ugly to suggest that this is a "hopeful" devlopment.

The Glimmer of Hope was in the fact that we are still allowed to defend ourselves and our homes. Over here in the UK that right has been relegated to only the police. Is it terrible that people choose to commit crimes? Yes. Is it fortunate that American citizens still have the right to defend themselves and others from being victims of these crimes? Yes.

Also the fact that Americans are *gag* still 'allowed' (as if a right is granted by the government)to defend ourselves speaks on our independent nature. Not all of us dial 911. Not all of us are content in knowing that when seconds count the police are there in minutes.

Actually wnc, the Constitution was founded on the principle that everyone is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And when someone threatens my life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness, I have no qualms about defending myself. I don't have an explicit right to kill anyone, but I am allowed to stop someone from threatening my life, even if it means killing them.

No Harris, the "glimmer of hope" most clearly refers to the increase in homicide figures. The post celebrates killing. Period.

You miss the point entirely. The celebration isn't in the homocides. It's in the fact that we as independant American citizens are not willing to give up the right to defend what is ours, whether it be our property or our persons.

We see this as hope because this country was founded with enough room for us to defend ourselves from tyranny. When we see people willing to forcefully defend themselves we see a populace that is willing to not bow down to tyranny. We aren't arguing that it is a Constitutional right to kill... but it is sure as hell my right to "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." That phrase in the Declaration of Independance is protected by the Second Ammendment. We can't protect those things by deliberations or talking loudly. Sometimes we HAVE to defend what is ours with violence.

And listen up, good sir: don't start throwing insults at me for having an opinion that is different than yours. I've seen too many left-wing nutbags wearing Che shirts and spouting pro-Communist rhetoric to not be aware that a great many leftists idolize thugs like Che and Stalin.

I never said YOU were one who did... but I'm not so sure you don't.

But what does it matter. In your next post you'll no doubt call me some other ridiculous name and make your point that we're backward neanderthals who bitterly cling to our guns and our fake god.

Trust a leftist to indulge in selective reading to originate a slur on the moral principals of conservatives, who actually *have* morals.

What part of "justifiable" did you not understand, wnc?

Yes, in the pursuit of our free lives, we do have the constitutional right of self-defense. This is recognized in the many hundreds - by now maybe thousands - of cases not brought or dismissed every year as people commit "*justifiable* homicide".

If you are so morally opposed to self-defense, perhaps you might feel more comfortable moving to England where you can join them in their celebration of rampant home invasions, now that they've lost their self-defense rights.

"In your next post you'll no doubt call me some other ridiculous name and make your point that we're backward neanderthals who bitterly cling to our guns and our fake god."

Looks like I won't have to. You've done a pretty good job yourself.

Again, the post clearly rejoices over increased homicide figures and calls it an "encouraging sign". Just because you have a right to something doesn't mean you should be praised every time that right is exercised. I don't see you proudly defending communists for exercising their right to free speech and assembly every time one says something. I don't see posts saying hey isn't it great that the gays are exercising their right to free speech and assembly at that gay parade. any posts quoting statistics about the increase in transvestite groups forming as a encouraging sign and wonderful execution of a constitutional right.

No, the celebration here has nothing to do with constitutional rights being exercised. It's only about the increase of killing of what our calloused, cynical host calls, thugs and low lifes.

At least Stephana has the balls to straight out admit the killing makes her happy.

Stephana is right, the artical should speak of our RIGHT to SELF DEFENCE.

WNC doesn't want to get involved and thinks it's terrible that anyone has the GOD-GIVEN RIGHT of SELF DEFENCE.
By the way, Wingnut, the US (and the various state) Constitutions inforce "...the right of the people to KEEP and bear arms..." Many people only admit to "bear arms" in order to try to convince everyone that it's about military service, which makes NO SENCE. If it did mean military service, would the US armed forces be made up exclusivly of FOREIGN MERCINARIES if we didn't have the 2nd ammendment? Rediculous!
The Federalist Papers and the various writings of the founding fathers as well as several court decisions clearly reviel that the second ammendment was implimented for SELF DEFENCE and for the defence of the community, your family and neighbors.

Kharn, what drugs are you on? Now god gave you the right to kill? hmmm. Are you one of those guys that thinks god wrote the Constitution? Do you think it's a chapter in the Bible? I hate to break it to you Kharn, but not one of the rights you have has been given to you by God. I'm sorry to say that every single right you have today was given to you by people, most of whom didn't really believe in god. That's right kharn, the rights you have, as an american citizen were given to you largely by the founding fathers and the governments that followed thereafter. God had nothing to do with it. The founding fathers themselves made damn sure of that.

Hmm...I thought it clearly referred to justifiable homicides. If Van Helsing had posted, "the rate of homicides by both police and private citizens has been rising," as opposed to, "the rate of justifiable homicides by both police and private citizens has been rising," no one on here would have viewed it as a positive. And yet, the word justifiable is there, quite clearly, in the text.

Do you know what people are told to do here in the UK if they are attacked? Curl into a ball and try to use your personal security alarm. Oh, they also give females a rape whistle. That's because you aren't allowed to carry any weapons whatsoever. No firearms, no knives, no spray. If you kill someone over here in self-defense you will be prosecuted.
THAT, sir, is why I view the number of self-defense homicides as good news. It means we have not laid ourselves at the feet and upon the mercy of those who would do us harm. It means we still have the will to fight back, and we will not submit. I do celebrate our God-given right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. I do oppose any man who would try and take away the rights, not given by, but protected by the Constitution. Any man who would propose to deny me of these sacred rights is forever my enemy.

And actually, I do celebrate the deaths of criminals. I have a very hard time getting upset and worked up over someone getting their 'come-upins'. So sorry.

God given rights again? tsk tsk---I don't know what relgion you are a member of or what god you ar refering to but Christianity is certainly diametrically opposed to the notions of the pursuit of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

So here's my question, WNC: What would YOU do if you were threatened by violence and had, for some reason, the means to violently protect yourself or your loved ones? Let's say someone has entered your home and is going to kill you or your family and miraculously the means to stop them is within reach... what would you do? This is an immediate situation, and there is no hope of being rescued by the police or of talking your way out of it. I am honestly curious and really want to know.

"I would certainly distance myself from someone who implied that this celebration of killing and death was a core characteristic of American national identity."

Bye. Don't let the door hit you in the @ss.

"I would certainly distance myself (yada, yada, yada)..."

Bye. Don't let the door hit you in the @ss.

You really don't get it, do you?

I dont' have a problem with people defending themselves. I have a problem with people celebrating an increase in killing. any kind of killing.

I have a problem implying that to kill, even justifiably, is an American value to be admired. As the word "justifiable" is clearly open to interpretation.

I have a problem with this constant need to pull God into it, when you find yourselves incapable of using reason to argue your beliefs.

I have a problem with hysterical conclusions based on decontextualized and/or misinterpreted information. With absurd analogies and hyperb0lic accusations from barely literate cretins who go into a public forum and spout their misinformation as truth.

... aaaaaand with that comment, I'm done. The snobbishness of the comment just let me know that no amount of debate or conjecture will ever amount to anything. We're caveman idiots, and he's an enlightened demigod of infallable moral stature. Can't say this was fun.

If you don't like the term God-given, feel free to substitute inalienable, absolute, unchallengeable, unassailable, undeniable or any other term you desire.
I myself happen to be an Atheist Libertarian. Although I recognize your sophomoric attempts at debasement of the Constitution and subversion of your own country, I do concede that America has flaws. The U.S. government has often overstepped its Constitutionally granted boundaries, yet the country still remains a shining beacon of Freedom and Liberty for the world. I also believe that the good of America outweighs the bad, and all of the problems our country faces can still be fixed. We must be put back on the right path, and that path is not one of a larger government or a social-enslavement policy.

I know these ideals sound silly to you; your aspirations require the snuffing of Freedom and the strangling of Liberty.

You feel it is appropriate to take things that don't belong to you, most likely because you have never earned anything yourself. I could be wrong, but the majority of the time this happens to be the case. Just ask yourself, "Have I ever actually paid a dime in income taxes?"

There is an old saying that states, "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."

You seem to me to be the kind of person who has no principles. Like a child, you cannot see the larger picture nor can you imagine anything beyond this very moment. Perhaps you, like many of your comrades, will grow out of this phase once you reach adulthood.

As I stated in my previous post, there are conflicts between what the US government does and what it should be doing. (I have reread your earlier posts on this thread and have concluded that you are a True-Believer, and only a few years in what we adults call the 'real world' [not the reality show] will change your mind about your fuhrer and your beliefs.)

That being said, the answer for the nation lies not in a larger government; a bloated, pus-riddled tumor that infects and sullies everything it touches. The solution is a smaller government maintaining its role as defined by the Constitution. While certain justifiable (there's that word again) changes have been made to its text, its overall spirit remains the same.

Here is another simple question for you, since you are an Obamatron: If you have more money than I do, is it acceptable for me to take that money from you? "Spread the wealth around," so to speak.

It's not about celebrating the deaths themselves. Philosphically, I would not hesitate to end the life of any thug who demonstrated an intention to violate my rights to life, liberty, or property (the not-watered-down version of rights going back to Locke) however, keeping and bearing my arms, it would suit me JUST FINE if I NEVER had occasion to sight on anyone who could even remotely be classified as "human".

I'm ambivalent about the rise; either it represents a proportional increase in the exercise of the right to self defense, or an increase in the NEED to exercise the right to self defense. In the first case, I would celebrate, not because of more fatalities, but because more people were exhibiting necessary self-reliance. In the second, I would be saddened that more stupid criminals felt free to attempt to violate the rights of others.

Put simply, I'd rather not shoot anyone for any reason, but if I have someone that really needs to be shot, I'm equipped and prepared to do so. I'm thankful for the thoughtfulness of our forefathers, and the sacrifices made by so many since, that make this situation possible.

Harris: so, you're one of those subversive Atheist Libertarians too, eh?

Yep. I'm not the Ron Paul type, though. The LP fits me much closer than any other party, and the Republicans have become, hell, I don't know what they have become these days. I still side with them against Obama. There are some things my vanity can't abide, and socialism is one of them.

I'm amazed that so much type has been used to try and reason with Wingnut. Any imbecile can see that no one here is celebrating homicide.

Wingnut is simply using a strategy liberals use all the time, i.e., focus on a tangent to the central argument and then continue to press it in order to get an opponent off-balance to the original intent.

But in fact, this does speak to the core of the problem the country will face having an egotist like BO as President.
Since they see farther and are wiser than the Founding Fathers, liberals will always subordinate the great and good sense outlined in the Constitution to their personal agenda. BO's administration will try and appoint federal justices who will then construct fallacious arguments to destroy the intent and meaning of the second amendment.
Biden used erroneous and irrelevant "humanitarian" positions when arguing against signing on to McCain-supported Congressional briefs that would later aid the Supreme Court in their 5:4 Heller decision (BTW, no surprise: BO did not sign the briefs).


Its not that liberals do not understand the connection between gun ownership and the necessity of self-protection. Rather it's that they don't give a rat's @ss who gets hurt as long as they're out of the way.

Amen, guys.

Fiberal,

As I was writing my preceding posts I was aware of the futility in my attempts at explaining so simple a matter to a 'True Believer'. However, other readers, posters or lurkers, may have read my words and formed a more solid opinion on the matter.

So, ya see, wnc, we're not some kind of monolithic supporters of Bush/McCain, or whatever you consider our orthodoxy. Some of us are overtly religious, some are not. Some of us support Bush, some do not. What we have in common is that we've come to the conclusion, logically, intellectually, that Moonbattery is wrong in general, and that the Obama brand of Moonbattery in particular is very wrong.

I'll have to admit that I voted for Ron Paul in the Indiana primary, not so much because it mattered, but because it was the alternative to endorsing McCain at that point. I would much rather Fred Thompson had still been available. The stickers on my car should tell you... I have one that says "NOBAMA" and another that says "McCain 08 because a RINO is better than a Jackass."

Harris.

Actually, I thought your posts were very good.



And BTW I agree with you about calling 911. That's just to get the garbage picked up.

"Kharn, what drugs are you on? Now god gave you the right to kill?"

Yes He did. For one reason or another, ALL animals kill. Even the VEGAN who eats only vegetables has to KILL A PLANT to survive. Do you eat? Then you either had to kill something, or someone else killed FOR YOU.

You evil piece of scum.

But we were talking aboout the DEFENCE OF YOURSELF AND OTHERS, not about basic survival, weren't we? But then again, if someone comes at you with a knife demanding your life or property, it IS a matter of survival!

But back to God-given rights; ALL animals have the right to defend their teriitory, the food they collected or KILLED, their lives and the lives of their family/herd. To say that humans do not have such rights as you are doing, is to make humans LESS than the animals, no more than the dirt under the animals' feet. In that case, all of our laws (which animals have no conception of) are useless and we CAN kill without regret, without hesitation and for no other reason than for the sake of killing.

And that is what you seem to believe: that we would kill just because we have the means. Either that, or you believe that CRIMINALS are far more important than honest, law-abiding people and can rob, rape, destroy and KILL without opposition.

You evil piece of scum. (and this time, I mean it!)

I can't believe you guys are actually "debating" that incomprehensive lunatic. Didn't your granny every teach you that you can't argue with dipshit idiots?

Anyone who considers self defense homocide isn't playing with a full deck. Not even close. If I was a home invader I'd LOVE to know where that pussy lives.

Just last year a man shot and killed a couple of thugs that tried to steal items from his neighbors house in PASADINA TEXAS the BLACK PANTHERS showed up there to hold one of their stupid protests demanding the man who was aquited be prosicted for murder the citizens turned out in droves to give the panthers the heave ho out of town Te fact is becuase the two theives were of corse blacks themselves

SP - I believe the unfortunate deceased were actually Mexicans, illegally in the country, whose “work” (they were only here to work and support their families – as any dipshit would attest) was confined exclusively to thievery and assault. But you are correct in that an African-American communist terror organization came to the defense of the poor, dumb, dead social rapist bastards.

Sorry - I never mean to be an "anon" - the above post may be attributed to me, and any dipshit liberal is welcome to come to my house and argue about it.

But don't come unwelcomed. :-)

Anyone who is a complete failure at reading comprehension and who doesn't understand this post, is clearly devoid of any Constitutional understanding. Once I had to defend myself and my girlfriend from a drunk crazy who tried to kill me and her with a knife. You can't come out on the other side of that and be a liberal by any stretch. I hope you guys who write this off as 'hate speech' never experience that, but at the same time I hope that some day you realize the importance of self-defense.

"I'm amazed that so much type has been used to try and reason with Wingnut. Any imbecile can see that no one here is celebrating homicide.

Wingnut is simply using a strategy liberals use all the time, i.e., focus on a tangent to the central argument and then continue to press it in order to get an opponent off-balance to the original intent."

Yup, good point - no sense arguing with a troll. I won't respond again to his/her childish points again; suggest others don't either.

Umm, it sounds like you are suggesting it is ok to kill those threatening your family, country, etc. So, if you see Obama as threatening to all of those things, you and this website are advocating killing that threat. You guys are dangerous.

You guys are scary and DANGEROUS bigots.

Gosh, after that triple scolding, I just may have to curl up in a fetal position and cry.

Yes, bob, especially to you. If I ever see you, bob, I am going to take everything on your person that I want. You may call it a robbery, but really I'm just spreading the wealth around.

If you are very nice and call me sir, I just may let you keep your shoes.

You know what you call a guy in the swimming pool with no arms and no legs?

:-)

bob

:-)

They just refuse to get it don't they? We try and try again and again to explain, and they still refuse to get it. It's like they don't want to. Oh wait... they don't.

wingnutcracker is probably pro partial birth abortion

Wingnutpucker, actually local laws enable me to put a .30.30 round in your piehole if you care to illegally enter my house. Have a nice day. :)