most freaky paranoid headline of 2010

most freaky paranoid headline of 2010

Yeah, cos it's definitely the headline that's being paranoid in this picture!

The pant-pissing weapon and ammo hording, end-times believing whackjob the story is actually about is totally not being paranoid at all, right Verm

Seriously, Dude, are you actually getting dumber?

Man, Spud woulda put money on that being an impossibility but apparently Vern has re-set the bar once again.

Kudos, Wingnut.

Be Well.

My God!!! he had camouflage clothes. Throw his sorry ass in jail.

yup. the purpose of the teabag party is to destroy legitimate dissent.

corporate governance all the way.

Reminds me of the sensational headlines here in Pa about a guy with hundreds of weapons. It really was a BIG hit with local media. Nothing 'alleged', it was pre-determined he was a criminal......

A couple days later, it came out that he use to own a gun shop, and that was his old inventory. Hardly anyone carried any sort of retraction.

Well I guess he is the posterchild now for anyone who supports the tea party movement or opposes the socialist agenda going on in Washington today.

This type of story is a warm up for the perfect excuse Barry will need to declare martial law and take over the country. Luckily we have the military, police and FOX news on our side.

Tea Party Thom

Well, FOX fake news anyway.

This guy's Palin quote is priceless.

The guy does not trust the government and so he exercises his right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of defending himself against an oppresive government should the need arise. And he exercises his right to free speech by stating that he doesn't agree with the current administration and actually gives his own opinion as to who could do a better job. Looks a little like Obama's handlers decided it was time for a little deflection.

+1 #9

Apparently people don't like it when folks exercise their Rights as recognized by the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

Poor guy is in "NastyChewEttes" which has had a recent record of trampling those recognized rights. He really needed to move to Vermont or some other rights-friendly state.

Correction. The name is Teabaggers. Sarah has requested this name for the party and aim to oblige her.

I feel its become clear that the time has come to nip this tea-bagger shit in the bud. If you even think about any association with them you are a domestic terrorist and will be confined to a detention camp. Says who? More to come, watch!

Girard's wife said her husband had recently told her: "Don't talk to people, shoot them instead," and "it's fine to shoot people in the head because traitors deserve it."

But it appears that Girard had lately found a community with which to share some of his growing fears. A "Greg Girard," listing his location as Manchester, Mass., has a personal page on the "Patriots of America" online network, a popular site affiliated with the Tea Party movement. The phone number listed on the page is the same as the number listed on the website of Girard's consulting firm, which appears to have been run out of his home.

Authorities were tipped off by his wife, a Cambridge psychiatrist.

Oops. The psychiatrist had a mental patient for a husband. Total BS. Nice try.... Muckracker found a profile matching a name and company phone number. Wow. It must be his then. The mental case wife couldn't have made the site to build her divorce case?

Pundits claim the tea partiers are angryand they arebut the most striking thing about the atmosphere in Nashville was how cheerful everyone seemed to be. I spoke with dozens of people, and the responses were surprisingly similar. Hardly any had ever been involved in politics before. Having gotten started, they were finding it to be not just worthwhile, but actually fun

#11 | POSTED BY DAPROF

Okay. Interesting, although a bit dramatic.

But what does that have to do with my post about the Palin quote?

The guy does not trust the government and so he exercises his right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of defending himself against an oppresive government should the need arise.

There is no legal right to bear grenade type explosive devices or to set up a shooting range inside your home.

"My God!!! he had camouflage clothes. Throw his sorry ass in jail.
#3 | Posted by Sniper"

The guy has military grade weapons, explosive devices and bulletproof vests, but Sniper wants to talk about his clothing. That's queer.

There is no legal right to bear grenade type explosive devices or to set up a shooting range inside your home.

#17 | Posted by rcade

Is there a law against it?

seems like open season on tea party folks here....

Hey... I read that a Democrat robbed a bank once....

John Dillenger was a Democrat...
Bonny and Clyde? Democrats.....
Ted Bundy???? Democrat.....
John Wayne Gacy? Democrat....
John Warnock Hinckley? Democrat......
lee harvey Oswald???? Democrat.....
machinegun Kelly? Republican
Ma Barker? Republican
The Grassy Knoll Shooter? Republican for sure... Only a republican would use a mercury tipped round and kill a man in front of his wife like that.

Specifically where in the Constitution is it prohibited?

Another Branch Davidian.

There are lots of folks with large gun collections.

Of course the fact he's in Massachusetts is proof this clown should have answered in the affirmative on question f.

#20 | Posted by themaniscoming at 2010-02-13 06:16 PM | Reply | Flag: Can't even spell Dillinger.

Yo Zat.. The tent under the sheet is hysterical.... No wonder why Hoover had Dillinger's dick placed in a Specimen Jar... LOL

Sombody tie that monster down... There are Women in the room.... How the hell are they supposed to respect their husbands after seeing something of that Magnitude!

There is no legal right to bear grenade type explosive devices or to set up a shooting range inside your home.

#17 | Posted by rcade at 2010-02-13 03:34 PM |
go read the second amendment and the rest of the
constitution, you might learn something.
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution, are null and void." Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 5, U.S. (Cranch) 137, 174,176
I do not think YOU would care for someone telling
you what you can and cant do in your own home.
I am unaware of any law against an in home range,
but if there is any see chief justice marshall's
quote above.

Even though the 2nd Amendment is read by the right as the right to bear 'arms' (even if you're not in a 'well regulated militia', right) What about the other 'arms' owners?), should that mean hand grenades, a bazooka, mortar, Atomic Weapons, Depleted Uranium srtillary shells, cruise missiles? All 'arms'.

Even though the 2nd Amendment is read by the right as the right to bear 'arms'

How the right reads it ain't worth a pile of beans. It's how the Supreme Courts over the decades have read it that's important.

Have they ruled against private ownership of the latest military weapons, or is that a law enforcement issue?

Have they ruled against private ownership of the latest military weapons

I'm pretty sure they have, though to be honest, I can't cite the case.

Is there a law against it?

He's been charged with crimes for possessing grenade devices and operating a shooting range in his home.

People who think there's a constitutional right to bear grenades don't know what the hell they are talking about.

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. THEIR SWORDS AND EVERY OTHER TERRIBLE IMPLEMENT OF THE SOLDIER, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People." Tench Coxe (1788)

rcade YOU are a true usefull IDIOT!

If you have a family would you move next door to this teabagster?

rcade YOU are a true usefull IDIOT!

Calling me names does not change the simple incontrovertible fact that anyone who owns grenades must register them with the ATF under the National Firearms Act of 1934. Breaking this law subjects the person to up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

"anyone who owns grenades must register them with the ATF"

I used to have a practice grenade.
Dad gave it back.

The loons are stacking up.

There is no legal right to bear grenade type explosive devices or to set up a shooting range inside your home.

#17 | Posted by rcade at 2010-02-13 03:34 PM | Reply |
-----------------
...... not change the simple incontrovertible fact that anyone who owns grenades must register them with the ATF under the National Firearms Act of 1934. Breaking this law subjects the person to up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

www.atf.gov

#35 | Posted by rcade at 2010-02-13 08:46 PM | Reply | Flag

-----

So you CAN own them, if you jump the hoops and get the appropriate permits.. And you CAN set up a range in your house if you get the proper zoning and put in place the proper construction for a shooting range. (Of course, in some counties you can just go out in your back yard or rural area and shoot all you like.)

========================

So you CAN own them, if you jump the hoops and get the appropriate permits.

That part varies by state. Some states outlaw grenades entirely.

How the right reads it ain't worth a pile of beans. It's how the Supreme Courts over the decades have read it that's important.

#28 | Posted by goatman at 2010-02-13 08:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is true. In fact, it doesn't make any difference what the Constitution says--it is how the Supreme Court interprets or eliminates the words that count. The second amendment says:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Supreme Court interprets that to mean:

Individuals have the right to keep and bear arms, but such right may be infringed as the government sees fit.

Well regulated--gone

militia--gone
being necessary to a free State---gone

The right of the people---changed to "individuals".

Shall not be infringed---changed to--"may be infringed as the government sees fit".

I want a plutonium bomb, so I'll have no problem buying one wherever I can or building my own (with Plutonium from Ace Hardware) without fear of prosecution, right? LOL I mean, it is an 'arm'. My God forsaken right, right?

I want a plutonium bomb, so I'll have no problem buying one wherever I can or building my own (with Plutonium from Ace Hardware) without fear of prosecution, right? LOL I mean, it is an 'arm'. My God forsaken right, right?

#40 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2010-02-13 09:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

If you think the second amendment applies to individuals, you are right.

However, if you think the second amendment allows for the formation of well regulated militias capable of defending a State against a tyrannical central government, you are incorrect. Allowing States to defend themselves was the purpose of the second amendment---it was written in plain English, so I see how many people get confused. No other government on the planet allowed for such a condition within its own borders. A well regulated militia like the State Militia--or National guard, could well have such a weapon, and some do have control of such weapons.

Allowing citizens to have handguns and rifles is in no way a protection against a strong central government. You might as well be fighting for the right to own BB guns.

Guys a racist lunatic who'd shit his pants confronted with a real criminal. Most of these "hoarders" are sissy boys who got slapped around by older white boys and use the black man as his source of demented revenge.

Put this guy in a hand to hand/mano y mano fight, and he'd cry like the little scared Republican girly man he is.

Only a large penis object in his hands make him feel secure. Typical inferiority complex. Minorities are the cause of his little penis syndrome.

pitifull...(sic) ad homonim -penis interuptis...whatever...

and, he likes testicles in his mouth...as most teabaggers do. That's his 15th Amendment right...the right to suck balls.

I'm off my meds today...

show me in the constitution where it authorizes creating things like the batfE or the '34 firearms
act or the irs or on and on.

The National Firearms Act has been around since 1934. The Internal Revenue Service has been around since 1862. The ATF has been around since 1886.

This would suggest to most people that they have passed Constitutional muster.

the constitution doesent give us our rights, it is supposed to prevent govt from taking them away,

#43 | Posted by perfman at 2010-02-13 09:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

You should have been around to tell the slaves that they had rights. You should go to China and tell all those Chinese they have the right to Free Speech.

Tell us how loud they laugh at you or look at you like you are crazy.

All rights come from the government. There is no other source.

All right come from the government *SQUAWK!*
Car antennaes are the best weapons *SQUAWK!*
Smokestacks on the moon *SQUAWK!*
Two countries *SQUAWK!*

Someone quit giving Polly a cracker, or teach him some new phrases, please.

#46 | Posted by goatman at 2010-02-13 10:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Said the parrot. I am talking to people who disagree with that statement. People who have something valid to say. You don't seem to qualify. I suppose since you have said "Good Morning" to your fellow workers, you never find it necessary to say it again. Besides---you simply fill the space with lies, That makes you a liar.

You are the only one saying car antennas make the best weapons.

That makes you a lair.

You are the only one claiming smokestacks on the moon.

That makes you a liar.

I believe you are truly in love with me, and are trying to fight your latent homosexual urges, by attacking me and lying about what I have said. I think it is becoming more and more obvious to the people who read your posts.

Simple isn't it.

;-)

Unloaded or dummy grenades, artillery shell casings, and similar devices, which are cut or drilled in an ATF approved manner so that they cannot be used as ammunition components for destructive devices, are not considered NFA weapons.

Cool. Can I have all of his toys?

Specifically where in the Constitution is it prohibited?

#21 | Posted by bogey1355

show me in the constitution where it authorizes creating things like the batfE or the '34 firearms
act or the irs or on and on.

#43 | Posted by perfman

Sorry guys, but it's time to snap back to reality.

The Constitution gave congress the power to enact laws as the Constitution wasn't set up to be an all encompassing document. There are many prohibitions we live by everyday that aren't explicitly spelled out in the Constitution.

The laws exist and disregarding them because they aren't explicitly written in the Constitution itself is a recipe for disaster (ask this guy, he'll tell you...).

#50 | POSTED BY JPW
"The Constitution gave congress the power to enact laws as the Constitution wasn't set up to be an all encompassing document. There are many prohibitions we live by everyday that aren't explicitly spelled out in the Constitution."

What's amazing, JPW, and also sad, is that you actually had to spell that out for some people.

Guy sounds kinda loony.

That said, I wonder how many Obama voters got sent to prison last month?

I really wish we could let all of these
Teabagger NUTS secede from the union...
either that or could we at least confine
them all in one state somewhere...like
maybe North Dakota...(sorry N. Dakota)...

EARTH

Maybe we should let 'em have Alaska? After all, the 1/2 term governor and her husband were regulars at Alaskan Independence Party meetings, where the only point of contention is whether to secede and join the Yukon Territory, Canada in general, or just be their own country. Of course, Todd got conveniently forgetful and couldn't remember 4 years of meetings where secession was the main topic and stated platform of AIP.

I would love to let California secede from the union so they could take all the debt with them

So you CAN own them, if you jump the hoops and get the appropriate permits.

That part varies by state. Some states outlaw grenades entirely. In Florida, NFA devices are allowed, with the proper permits. But in Hawaii you are out of luck. ( See http://www.mp5.net/info/ sbsconr.htm )

#38 | Posted by rcade at 2010-02-13 09:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

The point is that you can own them (See National Firearms Act of 1934, as amended in 1968.) You can even own a fully automatic weapon, a sawed off shotgun or a silencer, if you do the paperwork and pay the fees.

As for state laws for certain Destructive Devices, true, some states make it impossible to own them as a private individual but still makes exceptions for certain organizations or for certain kinds of Trusts that individuals can set up for NFA devices.