#18 Because land mines are so common, right? I don't recall hearing of a anyone running over or stepping on a land mine in the United States in recent history (if ever). I ask because if I can get land mines, I have a neighbor whose dog keeps crossing under my fence into my kingdom and crapping in my yard. Where does one order functioning land mines?

Moron.

The video at the link shows why police departments would want them. They have thick bulletproof glass and a bunch of other features that make them safer to take into a live shooting situation.

#6 | POSTED BY RCADE

But are local PD's getting them? If not, who is? If that were the case, why would DHS be handling this instead of the DOJ? If it were DOJ, I could write this off as FBI, DEA, etc.. but this is DHS. Who will be driving these around...ICE? Customs? FEMA? I would be interested in how you have subtly distinguished between purchasing and 're-purposing'. Whether they got them for free or not, they now have 2,717 MRAPs and paid a company to do put new engines and suspension systems in them...for a reason.

The source is a little sketchy, but if this is true, you have to ask yourself why DHS needs vehicles like these? And which agency within the DHS will be using them?

This article on the atrocities would have stood on its own, but either the author or the editors decided they needed to jazz it up and injected a completely unrelated reference to the KKK into both the article and the headline title. Someone who just glazes over an article might come away with the impression that the KKK was somehow tied to the abuse, instead of the State of Florida. Shameful 'journalism'.

You probably thought you were SOO clever....until you realize as you read this that unlike the internet, a school controlled the content of its library. In essence, it had already "word-filtered" the available material. Ever hear of "banned books"? GASP! You mean school districts chose not to make some material available? They don't carry HUSTLER!? Waah! Some kid might go kill themselves if they can't read the latest exploits of Honey Hooker!

This liar is trying to shift the war from class war to generational war.

Yeah! How dare he move away from the race wars, gender wars and class wars that the Liberals have been pushing for the last half century and focus on something else! The hubris!!

#3 | POSTED BY KBM

One of the things that makes me shake my head in disbelief is the apparent lack of awareness by the anti-gun crowd of "jungle style" use of box magazines.

#2 Take the computers away! Tell them to go to a public library for their research if they need to go online. It's obvious that this future Rachel Maddow clone has internet access outside of school, given that she managed to post a YouTube video.

I don't know if he's smart enough to qualify as a racist, Dalton. He could plea mental incapacity.

I would warn the DR gun-haters about this slippery slope, but they DON'T CARE. They WANT everyone to give up ALL their guns and become easily herded sheep, dependent on others for their safety.

The islands may be useless, but the waters around them are what is really in dispute. China would claim territorial waters around those islands and thus gain all the fishing rights, which a major part of why they want them. Part two is their 'long game' strategy, which could be viewed as knocking down dominoes. If they get their hands on the Senkaku Islands and the waters surrounding them, they now have the waters strategically north of Taiwan, between Taiwan and the air bases on Okinawa. It's part of their Second Island Chain strategy. As part of "The First Chain", they genuinely believe that they own not only the waters and islands of the South China Sea, but also the Philippines. That strategy extends north to Taiwan and includes all the smaller Japanese Islands, including Okinawa, and all the waters between there and mainland China. The Second Islands extend clear out to Palau, Saipan and Iwo Jima.

You're trying to turn apples into oranges, Danni. Prop 8 is a law, passed by the majority. You are saying SCOTUS has the authority to rule on the constitutionality of that law. If they have the authority to rule on that law, they have the authority to rule on the constitutionality of EVERY law. You can't have it both ways. You even argue my point in #55:

[..] the primary authors of that Constitution also said they never intended to give the SC such power. It reduces democracy to powerlessness, the power resides in the court and that was never the intent of the authors of the constitution.

Sounds to me as if this judge (in the liberal 9th circuit!) just opened a door that the Japanese can exploit when they defend themselves from a pirate attack with force. Piracy is an international crime and any vessel engaged in piracy can be destroyed without repercussion. In fact, the whalers don't even have to defend themselves - other entities can provide the defense. That means that if a US Navy vessel is in the area and the whaler says "Mayday! I'm being attacked by pirates!", the US Navy vessel can render assistance (in the form of sending the pirates to Davy Jones). I expect that the JMSDF might find a Kongo-class DDG that needs some cold-weather training, for that matter. I hope the Shepherd's are streaming their video live, because if the JMSDF decides to sink them, there won't be any recorded video evidence left.

Because my garden wouldn't be same without it. Besides, adding any more crap to that region would just be piling on.

#67 You say you understand the risk to certain liberal causes. Does that mean you disagree with SCOTUS ruling on California's Prop 8 gay marriage ban, passed by a democratic majority?

I've been using IED-proof fertilizer for years. It's called manure.

"So I joined the Army.", he said in a self-retorting commentary.....

Good luck at Leavenworth, Brad.

Making gun owners serve in militias is a great idea. Insist that they all give up one weekend a month for training if they want the right to bear arms.

#1 | POSTED BY RCADE

Sure, why not? Hell, let's take it a step further and follow Heinlein's lead and require said military service as prerequisite for citizenship and the right to vote while we're at it! If rights come with conditions then let's assign requirements for EVERY right...right? Tell you what; you start goose-stepping down Main Street and see if people fall in behind you.

Congress the one's who make the laws and the court should interpret those laws not overturn them.

You are speaking of Judicial Review, established under Marbury-v-Madison in 1803, which also established the Separation of Powers (checks and balances). While not specifically addressed in the Constitution, it set a precedent. Every nominated Justice is asked "do you believe in precedent?" and they all nod their heads "yes". They're asked this, of course, because of Roe-v-Wade, but the principle applies.

At least when Biden became VP, we knew what we were going to get. He has lived up to our expectations (and the expectations of late-night comics everywhere) throughout his time as VP. The White House must wince every time Joe opens his trap.

#2 Totally concur: Never shoot to wound. Dead men don't testify.

I wonder how the state run media, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, and CNN are going to spin this, it should be interesting.
#74 | Posted by gtjr

Ask RCADE. Look what he did with the headline and you'll get a taste of what the MSLM (mainstream liberal media) is going to be saying.

No! Don't add "Onion" to the title. That was a headline WIN.

Posted this on the other thread on this topic....

Digging into one of his famous folders, Woodward said the tirade was followed by a page-long email from the aide, one of the four or five administration officials most closely involved in the fiscal negotiations with the Hill. "I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today," the official typed. "You're focusing on a few specific trees that give a very wrong impression of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here. … I think you will regret staking out that claim."

Digging into one of his famous folders, Woodward said the tirade was followed by a page-long email from the aide, one of the four or five administration officials most closely involved in the fiscal negotiations with the Hill. "I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today," the official typed. "You're focusing on a few specific trees that give a very wrong impression of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here. … I think you will regret staking out that claim."

I can't join you in the ropes and tall trees solution. Now, if you come around to a blow torches, pliers and ball peen hammers solution, let me know and I'll be there in a jiffy.