“If a (political) party’s a shopping mall, one of the anchor tenants is the Second Amendment.” – South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham in In the hunt to be the 2016 GOP pick, top contenders agree on 1 thing: Guns [at washingtonpost.com]
“If a (political) party’s a shopping mall, one of the anchor tenants is the Second Amendment.” – South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham in In the hunt to be the 2016 GOP pick, top contenders agree on 1 thing: Guns [at washingtonpost.com]
“If a (political) party’s a shopping mall, one of the anchor tenants is the Nazi Party Store and the other is the Communist Party Store, with statist boutiques in between.
Graham would be fine with either of those stores, as long as he got to be in management.
Oh gosh, the food court! Spoon fed meals from the Ministry of Truth and the Ministry of Love.
Of course, 99% of shopping malls ban the carry of guns. Wether legally binding in that state or not most if not all malls have a ” no berretas” sign or fine print on the malls rules board saying no concealed handguns. But Mr. Graham wouldnt know that because he doesnt have to go and shop with us filthy peasants. And even if he did he would have several ex cops acting as body guards that are exempt from such laws. And either way, Mr. Graham seems to be fine to let the second ammendment be re-written to say all you really need is a double barrel shotgun or bolt action rifle, for hunting only. He looks at Australia and England as a pretty good model for us…
If it’s not legally binding, then it’s not a ban… Hell, if there are not armed, security check points, it’s not a ban.
Says you. To the regular, everyday, normal guy, who doesn’t know the nuances of the law, such a sign looks official and he abides by it. Or he knows the law, but his spouse doesn’t, and gives him hell about carrying “illegally.” He doesn’t want to fight that fight, for the umpteenth time, so he goes unarmed.
De jure ban? No. De facto ban? Perhaps.
Will never forgive Sen. Graham for calling me a “bigot” for opposing illegal immigration amnesty.
Uh, oh, you are a non PC racist for sure now. Boo Hoo!
I was amazed by how few guns the GOP politicians own. The line about Rick Perry being extreme because he has a pocket pistol suitable for carry while jogging is classic. I wonder what this guy would think about my friends in Texas where 6-8 guns is a rather modest selection.
As for shopping malls, those places are going out of business. Too much overhead and too much expense for what you are buying. All show and glitz to attract people with money and not much sense. Built on credit, selling to people who buy on credit and want more and more stuff cause its popular. Sounds more like the DEM party.
It just seems that the indoor commons shopping malls are also hood hangouts having a lot of crime problems. It seems that the newer plazas are going to more of an outdoor commons theme.
Southtown mall (now closed and torn down) and Jefferson Point in Fort Wayne are good examples of this.
I wonder what this guy would think about my friends in Texas where 6-8 guns is a rather modest selection. I used to have more guns but I keep losing them in those darn canoe accidents.
From the article:
How dare he! Doesn’t he know that jogging is a gun-free activity… or something!
/pearlclutcher
From the comments section;
LongPurple
REPOST
The Freudian symbolism surrounding guns is obvious.
Men who fear and reject guns as “evil” are fearful of their own masculinity, and reject that masculinity as something “dangerous” which they cannot control. They are symbolically expressing a suppressed desire to be eunuchs, if they cannot be female.
They often recite the mantra “Guns have only one purpose – to kill”, but they know that is no more true than saying their “member” has only one purpose. Aside from the fact it is part of the two-purpose male uro-genital system, it can be used as an instrument of pleasure in love-making, or a tool of defilement and hatred in rape.
They attempt to deny the fact of that duality, and recognize only the perverted “evil” view of the gun/phallic symbol, enhancing the guilt and shame they associate with their masculine nature. It is that masculine nature they fear and hate, and want to purge by becoming a symbolic eunuch.
Of course, they realize how disadvantaged they would be as eunuchs among true males. To solve that problem, they propose spreading their symbolic mutilation by force of law. That way, they hope to make all competing males symbolic eunuchs like themselves.
Those men who enjoy owning and firing guns, and take pride in their safe handling and skill with them, are rejoicing in their masculinity. They do not feel guilt, shame, or any inadequacy in their masculine nature, but are both happy and proud to be male.
“No symbols where none intended.” —- Samuel Beckett
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” —- Sigmund Freud (attributed)
If the other political party’s a strip mall, one of the anchor tenants is the Welfare Office.
I don’t have to vote on this weenie, but I wonder how he got elected in SC.
There are 15 noteworthy contenders for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination. Together, they own at least 40 guns.
And if an American Citizen had his house raided,and they found more than two guns, these jokers would call it an arsenal. Screw the parties!
Glad to see him firing an AR-15 (his own) instead of decked out in FUDD gear.
#BlackIsTheNewOrange
Oh Lawd, this here instrument of vi-o-lence is liable to give me the vapahs..
I am a single issue voter, and that issue is gun rights. Not because gun rights is the only issue important to me, but because I find it a good ‘litmus test’ for how a politician stands on all the other issues.
“How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual; as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.” – Texas State Representative Dr. Suzanna Hupp
Comments are closed.