Skip to comments.
Barbara Walters On Rosie's Gun Control Surrender: 'Made Me Sad'
Newsbusters.org ^
| April 18, 2007 - 14:02.
| Justin McCarthy
Posted on 04/18/2007 11:33:31 AM PDT by meg88
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-70 last
To: meg88
You make me sad.
61
posted on
04/18/2007 12:42:09 PM PDT
by
P-40
(Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
To: meg88
a teddy bear, has more regulations on it than a gun in terms of safety.
62
posted on
04/18/2007 12:43:30 PM PDT
by
absolootezer0
(stop repeat offenders - don't re-elect them!)
To: meg88
Barbara Walters: I'm Glad VT Students Were Disarmed
63
posted on
04/18/2007 1:30:13 PM PDT
by
an amused spectator
(Why didn't the VT gunman didn't attack the police station?)
To: meg88
Whats wrong with these skanks? Ths is the perfect storm to prove gun control does not work! They were killed in a campus where no guns where allowed; a gun free zone, and yet 50,000 gun laws on the books did not stop 1 b@stard from shooting up the place!
If they can't locate and get rid of 20 million illegals, what makes anyone think (provided anyone on that idiot show does think) that the govt can locate and destroy 500 million guns?
64
posted on
04/18/2007 1:57:30 PM PDT
by
Bommer
(Global Warming: The only warming phenomena that occurs in the Summer and ends in the Winter!)
To: pandoraou812
Thanks.
A little humor is a good thing at times.
65
posted on
04/18/2007 2:01:04 PM PDT
by
ZULU
(Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
To: meg88
"It made me sad, too, but it was really hard, you know, the "Million Mom March" after the 1999 Columbine, I mean, everyone thought that would work." No Rosie, EVERYONE didn't think it would work, only those in your liberal echo chamber thought gun control would work. Turns out, the bad people don't pay attention to gun laws, so the only people who are at risk are the ones who OBEY the laws, and thus don't have the means to defend themselves.
66
posted on
04/18/2007 2:08:50 PM PDT
by
SuziQ
To: Cyber Liberty
I feel a potential disturbance in the Force. For the first time I can recall, people I see are wondering not “How did he get the gun?” but “Why wasn’t somebody else armed?”Good question, Padawan learner.
67
posted on
04/18/2007 2:09:51 PM PDT
by
SuziQ
To: meg88
No one want to take away hunter's rights to hunt. Hunters don't HAVE a right to hunt. None.
We just want to sort of have sensible gun laws.
Just like good ole uncle 'Dolph did in Deutschland a few years back.
You know, a teddy bear, has more regulations on it than a gun in terms of safety.
Absolutely, totally, utterly, provably false statement. Period.
68
posted on
04/18/2007 2:14:47 PM PDT
by
Hardastarboard
(DemocraticUnderground.com is an internet hate site.)
To: Hardastarboard
Hardastarboard said:
"Hunters don't HAVE a right to hunt. None. " Actually, in some jurisdictions, they do. Taking of game animals or fish are one of the ways that animals, including humans, can feed themselves and their offspring.
69
posted on
04/18/2007 8:18:38 PM PDT
by
William Tell
(RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
To: meg88
Rosie: “...the “Million Mom March” after the 1999 Columbine, I mean, everyone thought that would work.”
Everyone? Not *too* out of touch, are you, Rosie?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-70 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson