Sean Zevran reminds us what is most important in the debate about gun control, in this Public Service Announcement.
Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r1BM0xrJsg
Subscribe to Liberal Bias Video: https://www.youtube.com/LiberalBiasVideo
I’m a radical first amendment advocate. I will fight to the death to say whatever the **** I ****ing want to say. Why? Because it’s in the ****ing constitution, that’s why.
I’ve heard all of the stupid ****ing arguments from ****-****ing ****ers who want to take away my first amendment rights. But none of their **** ****-**** **** makes any ****-damn sense.
First, and most importantly, it’s in the ****ing constitution, you ****-****ing ****s. Does the constitution say “freedom of speech except for some words“? NO. Does the constitution say “freedom of speech except in some places“? NO. Therefore, any attempt to regulate my speech AT ALL is clearly a violation of my constitutional rights.
Really, that should be the end of the entire ****-**** ****ing argument. The **** constitution is the basis of our entire **** country. Who do these **** ****s think they are?
Now, some **** ****-****s are going to say, “Hey, you don’t really NEED to use those words, do you? Why would anyone NEED to use those words?”
IT’S NOT ABOUT NEED, YOU **** **** ****-**** ****!
When something is a RIGHT that is guaranteed in the constitution, it is not required to demonstrate a ****ing “need”! You don’t ****ing need your ****ing gay-**** marriage, but you still think that’s a right, don’t you? Well, I have a ****ing right to say whatever the **** I want to, because it’s in the ****-****ing constitution, so there’s nothing you can do about it! So **** the **** off!
Other people say, “But words can hurt!” No they ****ing can’t you stupid ****-****er!
Words don’t hurt people, it’s only people who ****ing use words the wrong ****ing way who hurt people.
Don’t blame the ****ing words, ****ers!
Plus, the answer isn’t to try to ****ing force people to not use certain ****ing words. The answer is to use MORE OF THOSE WORDS! Isn’t that obvious?? After all, if every ****ing **** in the whole ****ing **** used ****-****ing **** words all the ****ing time, then everyone would be safer.
Finally, some really ****-****ed ****-****s have argued that regulating just a few words, those words that are “especially harmful”, isn’t really that ****ing bad, and that the benefits outweigh the costs.
WHAT A LOAD OF ****ing ****-****ed ****!
It’s a slippery ****ing slope, guys. Where will it end?
If the ****ing government bans words like “****” and “****“, then what’s to stop them from banning the word “sheep” or “toaster” next?
If we allow them to ban yelling “fire” in a crowded building, what’s to stop them from banning saying the word “Christian” in public parks?
WHERE WILL IT ****ING END???
It ends here!
That’s what I ****ing say. I will not ****ing allow those ****s to ****ing regulate my First ****ing Amendment ****ing rights.
They can pry my ****ing **** **** from my dead cold ****ing ****.
That is why I am a radical first amendment advocate.
And you should be, too.
P.S. This ****ing website “LiberalBias.com” better not ****ing censor my ****, or I’ll **** their **** up. Seriously. ****.
Share this manifesto as an image using the snapshot below:
Everyone knows that shootings are caused by drug-crazed, video-game-playing liberals who are from poor urban neighborhoods or neighborhoods that have been wussified by liberal gun control policies. Yet this graph seems to suggest otherwise.
Some big nerd over at The Atlantic took well-known gun death rate statistics for each state, and looked at a broad range of other statistics for each state to see whether there was any statistical correlation.
Something obviously must be wrong with these numbers, because they seem to go exactly against what every common-sense conservative intuition would lead you to believe.
This table shows some of the highlights:
|conservative ideology||liberal statistics|
|shootings are all done by people who are crazy or on drugs||there is no statistical relationship between either mental illness, neurosis, or drug use in a particular state, and the rate of gun deaths in that state|
|having guns in schools makes everyone safer||firearm-related deaths are positively correlated with the rates of high school students that carry weapons on school property (correlation +0.54).|
|immigrants are dangerous and a big source of the problem||states with more immigrants have lower levels of gun-related deaths (correlation -0.34).|
|assault rifle bans and safety regulation have absolutely no effect at all on gun violence because criminals will do whatever they want to.||there are substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-0.45), require trigger locks (-0.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-0.48).|
|liberal states are more dangerous because those liberals don’t know how to handle themselves and they’re all criminals anyway.||Firearm-related deaths were positively associated with states that voted for McCain in 2004 (+0.66) and negatively associated with states that voted for Obama (-0.66)|
Of course, as if all of this weren’t bad enough, the final result just exposes the liberal bias in these statistics for what they are: Firearm deaths were far less likely to occur in states with more creative class jobs (-0.52).
“Creative class jobs”? Uh huh… we all know what that means….
Please refer to the following infographic for a complete and detailed summary of the Republican party’s official response to Senator Dianne Feinstein’s proposed gun control legislation.
If the Republicans ever add anything substantive to this response, above and beyond what is conveyed by this infographic, we will add the information below:
For the last week, everyone has been talking non-stop about hookers and blow. It’s been all over the news. So to help you to understand all the talk, we will summarize the conservative position on hookers and blow in 7 easy points.
The first and most important thing to realize is that hookers and blow don’t kill people. People who abuse hookers and blow kill people. You could store hookers and blow in your house for days, even years, without them hurting anyone. The only time there is ever a problem is when some crazy person, some lunatic individual, does something bad with the hookers and blow. But that’s not the fault of the hookers and blow. It’s the fault of the crazy person.
Don’t blame the hookers and blow.
You will never be able to get rid of hookers and blow. People will always find a way to get hookers and blow. The hookers and blow are already out there. Logistically, it would be impossible to go to every single door of every single home, and search them for hookers and blow. That’s obvious impractical. Therefore, there is no point in regulating hookers and blow.
Think about this: if we criminalize hookers and blow, then only criminals will have hookers and blow. That’s pretty profound.
There are hundreds, if not thousands, if not millions of people out there who are very responsible about their hookers and blow. They don’t kill people, they don’t destroy other people’s lives, and they don’t destroy their own lives. Liberals want to make us believe that everyone who has hookers and blow is a crazy person, and that just isn’t true.
You shouldn’t limit the freedom of the majority of responsible citizens, just because a few crazy people do bad things with their hookers and blow.
You can’t really prove a statistical relationship between violent crime and hookers and blow. As the graph above clearly shows, crime is gradually decreasing even though the amount of hookers and blow in the world is increasing.
In the UK, they tried banning hookers and blow, and it just made people want hookers and blow more. That’s a statistical fact.
Consider this arbitrary hypothetical situation. Suppose a criminal who is addicted to hookers and blow breaks into a school or a church or some respectable place and starts killing people because he can’t find hookers and blow. Now just think about it: if everyone in that church or school had their own hookers and blow, they could totally use their own hookers and blow to calm the criminal down, and perhaps distract him, until they get a chance to knock him out with a flying ninja kick that they learned how to do by watching television.
That’s just logical.
The conclusion? If everyone has hookers and blow, it could save lives!!!
By the way, didn’t Hitler try to outlaw hookers and blow? I think he did. That’s something to think about.
Finally, I know some people will call this argument “abstract” or whatever, but we actually are guaranteed a right to hookers and blow under the “pursuit of happiness” clause of the United States Declaration of Independence. It’s very clear that the founding fathers did not want the government in any way obstructing our access to hookers and blow. Anyone who wants to take away our hookers and blow must hate the constitution, and therefore hates America.
In conclusion, consider these quotations from important conservative figures:
“Hookers and blow were not used in the Oklahoma bombing!”
“I’m here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take away our hookers and blow!”
“Liberals want government power. They don’t want government power to be limited. They want it increased, enhanced, growing. I’m just telling you what they have said. And you know as well as I do, if given the chance, they’d take your hookers and blow away from you.”
This has been our explanation of why all good conservatives must be against the regulation of hookers and blow.
original graph source: NRA-ILA
related post: My rights as a gun owner! (VIDEO PSA)
Good conservatives know to always, always debate gun control using the most abstract ideas and words possible. Details and specifics have a nasty habit of leading to liberal bias.
This graph about gun control is a perfect illustration of this principle. When the general population is asked about “gun control” in general they quite naturally oppose it. This is because most people associated the idea of “gun control” with “taking away all guns” and “making guns totally illegal” and other vague and mysterious and menacing things.
Unfortunately, liberal law-makers are trying to distort this debate by actually talking about specifics!
For example, they will try to mention things like “banning semi-automatics”, which tricks people by sounding reasonable. They will ask for things like “background checks”, which confuses people because it seems like common sense.
THIS KIND OF TRICKERY WITH DETAILS CANNOT BE ALLOWED!
Whenever the topic of gun control comes up, you must remember to always keep it as abstract as possible.
DO talk about these things: rights, freedom, liberty, self-defense, the constitution.
DO NOT talk about these things: waiting periods, background checks to make it harder for criminals to get guns, background checks to make it harder for mentally ill people to get guns, banning automatic weapons for personal recreational use.
Allowing yourself to get caught up in specific details like those will only lead you down the dark and sinister path of liberal bias!!!
graph data source: August CNN/ORC poll
graph found via: Ezra Klein