Rights for me but not for thee.

[Steve in Sunny Fla]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/07/robert-farago/ca-senator-diane-feinstein-why-i-oppose-national-concealed-carry-reciprocity/

  Dianne Feinstein rejects the notion of national concealed carry, because she must protect Cali's right to autonomy on the subject. Yet she happily supported  Gay marriage rights being extended to all the states, even those that didn't want it. 

  This is exactly what I was referring to in the #lovewins thread. We all deserve to express ourselves though exercising our rights. It's not for any of us to deny another that opportunity, but it seems that many think it's "rights for me, but not for thee". there is only one word for this... hypocracy.  steve

[gPink]

...but that's diiiiffferent! Love never killed anyone but guns do. 

[twowheeladdict]

...but that's diiiiffferent! Love never killed anyone but guns do. 

That is not a true statement.  Many are killed because of love, or unrequited love.

[Steve in Sunny Fla]

...but that's diiiiffferent! Love never killed anyone but guns do. 

  It's not different. we are discussing our constitutional rights.

  If you want to follow that line of thinking, I think you'll find aids has killed many more homosexuals percentage wise  than it has killed heterosexuals. Does that constitute " love kills" ?  Regardless the whole line of reasoning is a red herring;  equal opportunity to enjoy constitutional rights is for all. Just because one person doesn't like another's version of expression doesn't cut it.  Society under our constitution is a compromise... nobody gets all they want;  we need to respect each other's rights equally.  Steve

[T Cro ®]

.... we need to respect each other's rights equally.  Steve

Herein lies the base of the problem as there is little respect between opposing opinions anymore... One of the biggest hurtles I face in my workplace is biting my tongue among a hypercrite...

[Mettler1]

   " very interesting"

           

[Flat-spot]

 

...but that's diiiiffferent! Love never killed anyone but guns do. 

Don't worry, g....I caught the greezy sarcasm....and the wink. 

[just gone]

...but that's diiiiffferent! Love never killed anyone but guns do. 

That is not a true statement.  Many are killed because of love, or unrequited love.

  It's not different. we are discussing our constitutional rights.

  If you want to follow that line of thinking, I think you'll find aids has killed many more homosexuals percentage wise  than it has killed heterosexuals. Does that constitute " love kills" ?  Regardless the whole line of reasoning is a red herring;  equal opportunity to enjoy constitutional rights is for all. Just because one person doesn't like another's version of expression doesn't cut it.  Society under our constitution is a compromise... nobody gets all they want;  we need to respect each other's rights equally.  Steve

c'mon guys....I'm not the most astute here for sure, but even I can see the tone of what gPink was saying by his past posts and the way he spelled "different" in that whiny tone (and then there's that winking emoticon thingie). Serious passionate stuff for sure, but it's not going to get settled on this forum...make your points...but don't take every post as seriously as you take yours..allow some to have fun with it. Take a breath, state your position and reasons, but have some humor at hand. You seem to be rising to the bait that wasn't even bait. A little humor is therapeutic for your frustrations, it also attracts those to the thread (and your points) that would otherwise skip over it as "that political crap" as they go in search of a good oil thread to pontificate their expertise on oil analysis to the unknowing masses.

Don't worry, g....I caught the greezy sarcasm....and the wink. 

Ditto, but I type slower..and apparently too much. 

 

[Deziner]

I'm pretty sure more than a few of us caught g's drift. I was just kicking back, patiently wait to see where it would lead. The entertainment value alone is worth the price of admission here. 

[Steve in Sunny Fla]

seriously, I'm having some issues with my eyes, i don't know exactly what it is, allergies or what, but they're all bloodshot, swollen and runny. ugly! I'm not seeing the screen really well, I didn't see there was anything there other than a statement... no winky exposed itself to me.

   Trust me... this is minor - yesterday I was at home deopt with my wife. She went one way, I went the other.  a little later she showed up in a massive tizzy. Crying, p*ssed, the whole deal. I asked her what happened. She was mad at ME because I walked right past the aisle she was in without noticing her. She swears I was trying to get away from her.  when I told her I didn't see her, she swore I was lying (like I need to?) . It wasn't until last night when My eyes really blew up did she believe my eyes were messing up aand I couldn't see well.  UGH . Steve

[Deziner]

Sounds like you have a case of welder's flash

[Deziner]

And do you really want gPink to expose his winkey?

[Steve in Sunny Fla]

And do you really want gPink to expose his winkey?

  got me with that one

  actually it feels like welders flash, all scratchy like there's sutff in my eyes. we're relodeling around here, all kinds of deadly stuff floating around, I think I'm the filtration system    Steve

[gPink]

    (close as I can get  )

[VirginiaJim]

Happens to me when I stare at a screen all day...

[Deziner]

Happens to me when I stare at a screen all day...

You expose your winkey?

[Flat-spot]

    Killin me!!

[VirginiaJim]

Well, we certainly try.

[Strawboss]

Many posts here point out the hypocrisy and irony of whatever politician another poster refers to, or, an original posters link or comment. Sometimes meant to make fun, stir the pot, roll your eyes, click your tongue, feed the roll, take your pick,  I would think this wouldn't need to be pointed out to such astute and observant folks such as us, unless of course they are being ironic in response, what that be called then?