| The Second Amendment is not required! |
|
|
|
Asked 142 days ago
by BlackOrchid  United States |
|
About
"This is not about insuring the uninsured. This is not about health care. This is about stealing one-sixth of the U.S. private sector and putting it under the control of the federal government. And when they get this health care bill, if they do, that's the easiest, fastest way for them to be able to regulate every aspect of human behavior, because it will all have some related cost to health care -- what you drive, what you eat, where you live, what you do. And there'll be penalties for violating regulations. It's going to be the biggest snatch of freedom and liberty that has yet occurred in this country." -- Rush
|
| 7 Points |
http://tinyurl.com/dkd8ej
This comment was deleted.
[2 points] 142 days ago by deleted user ReplyHow simple can you make it! He has an awesome way of putting it, doesn't he!
very good video!!
You need to put the url in the answer, so people who are not members but see the question once it goes out into the world can watch the video.
I am all for disagreeing with this because we should be able to bear arms because there are many deep traditions that have to do with hunting and if they take guns away they might as well go comunistic on us!
What does that have to do with the fact that the answers provided refer to information that will not be available to people who see this question on other websites? (You do know that the questions appear on other websites, right?)
Communists don't have guns and they don't hunt?
I like hunting and love target shooting, but I also believe in limiting the kind of weapons we can have and where we can take the ones we are allowed to have. The dispute is not, no weapons vs unlimited weapons, the dispute is who should be allowed weapons, what kind of weapons should be allowed allowed and where.
Don't care, most other countries don't have a 2nd amendment to protect!