Best
156 Comments
Post
  • #5
    !
    But wait a minute...I thought Democrats hated guns and they were "bad". And since he is a Democrat, he is immune to being randomly killed or ever being put in a situation that would ever require the use of a firearm!!!! It must be backward America!
  • #7
    !
    Because .25 cal won't kill you... go tell all the dead inner city people shot with .25 cal Saturday night specials that they aren't really dead from such a sissy caliber....
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #45
    !
    @cowboy67 yea no doubt. .25 Cali will kill. A .22 will kill. 38 special is what your looking for and it's pretty obvious that you have no clue about guns.
  • R Load more replies

  • #3
    !
    The pay is so bad being a Senator, he has to get a job as a security guard?!! Now I've heard everything...lol
  • #10
    !
    if thats the best lie he could come up with about having a gun... the Democrats ooght to force him out of office... he is a Chicago politician he's got a certain reputation to uphold.

    ( and please a 25 caliber? grow up
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #54
    !
    I apologize if I was too graphic in describing what even small caliber pistols can actually do to people. I may have had a similar reaction when I first got hold of a book called "The Medical Implications of Karate Blows" and found out exactly what happens to a person when the very same techniques that I have trained to perform are used in anger. Still, I think that a responsible gun owner is an informed gun owner. Shooting at targets does not prepare you for anything but hitting them.
  • R Load more replies

  • #8
    !
    Ha, in May of 2007 he voted against the manufacture and selling of large capacity magazines in the state of IL. Told you so!!!
  • #72
    !
    He is VERY anti-gun/anti-freedom, but no surprise there. Just another socialist elitist who thinks everyone should do as he says, but not as he does.
  • #94
    !
    You beat me to it Keyjo! Was going to say the same thing. They are just people like everyone else. Yet most politicians seem to think they are kings or royalty and rule above and over everyone.
  • #6
    !
    I bet if you check his voting record he's probably voted against pro-gun legislation! Funny huh, do as I say, not as I do.
  • #60
    !
    This little hiccup reminds me of the incident Chicago columnist Carl Rowan got into. Advocated tighter gun control but shot a kid that was intruding. And it wasn't even his gun.
  • #25
    !
    That's the wrong question, Politix. The question you should be asking is, should we keep electing lawmakers who are too stupid to know the law? Seriously, how much of a bonehead do you have to be to try to carry a gun onto an airplane these days?
  • #9
    !
    He makes approximately 175,000 a year or more, and he's 'moonlighting'? That's just too funny, he needs to be arrested for stupidity !...Maybe, there's more to the story.. I'm thinkin'.
  • #16
    !
    Are you sure Mimi? He's an Illinois State Senator, not a United States Senator.
    I can't speak for Illinois, but in a lot of states, Oregon for example, serving the State Senate or House is a part time job and doesn't pay a whole lot.
  • #27
    !
    Yes, he's a STATE Senator, and probably makes somewhere around $15-20K for the job, so I can understand the need for side-work...but that's beside the point: He's a Democrat, and an Illinois-Dem to boot. I'd like to see his voting-record regarding gun control-legislation in the state of IL.

    Looking at this from a different perspective altogether, I'd hate to think that the Libs would sacrifice one of their own in order to set up some kind of "false-flag" against the Second Amendment...HINT-HINT
  • #32
    !
    @Keyjo Well, I learned something new...I guess he does need a second job, I make more than him and I'm in
    social work, I'm glad I don't depend on my salary to live on...
  • R Load more replies

  • #81
    !
    Those rascally Democrats - always thinking the law applies only to the non-elite. And the irony is - they don't even see their own hypocrisy.
  • #55
    !
    There is yet one more example of Democrat hypocrisy. They want to take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens so we can not protect ourselves, but these idiots want to keep their protection. Democrats. when you get done trying to scare people that Christians want to control you(they don't), how about looking at the facts and see what party represents the control freaks. That would be Democrats! You try to take our guns, our school prayers, our christian holidays, the name of our Christmas trees, our freedoms not to pay to kill unborn babies, our freedoms not to buy health insurance, etc. etc. Get out of our lives you total hypocrites.
  • #95
    !
    Agree that the Democratic party platform is full of hypocracy, especially in regards to individual freedoms and Second Amendment rights! That said, the Republicans also have their share of hypocrites. I do not understand how most Republicans can be against legalizing all drugs and want the government to "protect" them against them with more laws, against any abortions - even in special circumstances, against gays and gay marriage, etc if they are for individual freedom. Also the party pushes religion a bit much, over logic sometimes. Denying evolution and other scientific facts, denying medical advances and research (stem cell), etc is all just blindly following a religious doctrine - which religion is just basically another form of government control based on fear, when one looks at it objectively. BOTH PARTIES need to step back and reevaluate their stances, and put individual freedom and personal responsibility ahead of partisan politics. Get back to the founding fathers notions of limited government involvement and individual freedom.
  • #122
    !
    @Concerned_Cit I agree on some of your points but not on others. When you try to put Abortion into the individual freedom category, you seem to forget about the freedoms of that unborn child. I realize you may think of that baby as a clump of cells. Many many millions of people know it is a living growing person and should be given respect. The GOP has always allowed abortions in instances of rape, incest or life of mother. Bush had control of the senate and house for a few years, did he ban abortions? No he only banned late term partial birth infanticide. Please don't spew the lies from the left trying to scare the voters from a few gaffes made by other republicans. It is sickening when the left paints the GOP with the brush of one person's statement. I'm sure there are Democrats who would force abortions on some women but does that mean the entire Democrats party are for forced abortions? The GOP does not deny the theory of evolution, they know it is a THEORY(not fact) and if our children are forced to hear your theories, then they should be taught other theories as well. Science is built on fact, not theory.
  • #123
    !
    @commonsense51 - "theory" in regards to science is based upon facts. "Theory of Gravitational Attraction" or gravity, is a theory, but it is also fact. Just as the left misleads people with talking points, so does the right in this regard. To deny evolution is to deny one's own existence, and reality as we know it. Sure one could get metaphysical and say nothing is real or fact and everything is debateable, but keeping it simple in the real world, facts are facts, and religion is religion. Let's not confuse them.
  • #124
    !
    @commonsense51 - In regards to abortion, it should be allowed in certain cases such as health risks, unhealthy babies, rape, etc. but not allowed simply for convenience. If a woman cannot control her body any better than to not get pregnant, then she deserves to be "burdened" with the responsibility of raising a child, or at least childbirth.
  • #125
    !
    @Concerned_Cit If you truly believe we evolved to this unbelievable complex being we are from a single cell, then you have way more faith than I do. Many scientists say the odds of us evolving from a single cell is about the same a Jet liner assembling itself when the parts are thrown from the top of a building.(or some such statement to that effect) If evolution were true we would be finding tons of missing links from civilizations over the millenniums. There would be thousands of skeletons in different stages of evolution. Why is it they don't find missing links?
  • R Load more replies

  • #35
    !
    Nothing more but the same hypocritical behavior from the lib/Democrats.
    "Do as I say, not as I do"
    ...." no one has the right to protect themselves except me"..... That's the typical liberal mindset. Then they want special privileges just because they believe their special.
    Maybe his right to own a firearm should be taken away. Since that's all they want to do to everybody else that's legal and law abiding.
    Hypocrites nothing more!!!!!!
  • #120
    !
    no!!! lawmakers should be, subject to all the same stupid laws they impose on us. representatives of the people, are not supposed to be treated any more special than we the people. and they should be under the same, health care and social security as we the people too.
  • #118
    !
    I have only one problem with his arrest. For the life of me I can find no where in the second amendment where it says a fire can not be carried. How ever I can find "shall not be infringed" As a matter of fact I can't see any limit placed upon ones right to to so. Not even fear. Like it or not the Constitution over rides any law. Any law contrary to it is not valid and any enforcement of that law is illegal irregardless of it's merit or intention. Sorry even if I agree guns and planes don't mix.
  • R Load more comments...
Post