Comments by "Charles Eye" (@TheCharleseye) on "Hero describes chasing alleged Texas church shooter" video.

  1. Cool Beans You're missing the point. Labels are assigned based on evidence. A lack of evidence means you withhold the label until/unless evidence is found. A person who kills a bunch of people is a mass murderer. We have evidence of him being a mass murderer. A person who commits such an act due to a political motivation or to coerce a response from the general public is a terrorist. There is no evidence of that, yet. If they find evidence of such, his status will be moved from mass murderer to terrorist.
    3
  2. WAIT BUDDY I'll bite: What about the KKK?
    2
  3. azem321 A) How fast a story moves through the media has nothing to do with whether it's fully investigated. Are you really trying to claim that the FBI and local law enforcement stop investigating once the cameras are off? B) We have a homeless problem in this Country, too. By your reasoning, we should start calling it "Political Removal of Residence," even though it's not about politics.
    2
  4. azem321 You've got that backwards. When LAW ENFORCEMENT decides it's an act of terrorism, they apply different resources. The media calling it a terrorist attack has nothing to do with it. If the Feds call it a terrorist attack, the media will report it as such. If not, they won't. It's that simple.
    2
  5. b1itsjustme Last I checked, we've only ever "changed" one amendment and it was the one prohibiting us from having alcohol. Not siding with the other guy but we don't make a habit of using the Constitution to remove people's rights. The one time we did, it went very badly for everyone.
    1
  6. b1itsjustme Yes. However, in those 27 changes to the Constitution, only one time was one implemented specifically to restrict the freedoms of the people. It was changed back very quickly when the government realized that doing so caused a massive, nation wide backlash that they couldn't control. No amendment has sought to restrict citizen rights that were previously outlined and secured by another amendment. Comparing, say, redefining the second amendment to, for instance, giving women the right to vote...is disingenuous at best. Nobody reading this thinks you're talking about trying to give American citizens more rights. Your stumbling block is that you can't seem to get your head around the idea that this Country was founded on the principles of individual liberty and personal responsibility. The act of altering the founding document to the contrary is simply not something we will stand for. It's just that simple.
    1
  7. b1itsjustme No you won't. There are over five million members in the NRA and hundreds of businesses support it. They rewrote their bylaws so that the organization can't be derailed by mob rule. You have to be a lifetime member or a five+ year member to even vote for the officials who still answer to guys like LaPierre. You can't and won't take over the NRA. It's an empty threat. The funny thing is that I'm no fan of the NRA. They play games that I can't stand. I'm just not ignorant enough to A) think staging some kind of coup would work or B) that the NRA is even worth arguing about in this. The NRA backed or stepped aside for every major gun rights violation since their inception. They did nothing to stop the '94 AWB. They ENDORSED the NFA. The talking heads have people like you shouting about an organization that promotes gun safety and responsible ownership. Ooohhhh, scary. Do away with the NRA and its members will just go over to the GOA, who, unlike the NRA, staunchly opposes any and all infringements to the second amendment, whatsoever. They want to fight - not only to retain the guns we have - but also to repeal past restrictions. So you go ahead and pretend you're going to do anything to the NRA. Hell, accomplish it if you think you can. Just be aware that the Devil you know is often better than the Devil you don't.
    1
  8. b1itsjustme No, it's not easier to buy a gun than to adopt a dog. Stop with the ridiculous rhetoric. Meanwhile, you're technically right about none of the politicians saying they want to ban all guns. Of course, what he said was that IDIOTS want all guns banned. While there are a lot of idiotic politicians, most idiots are not politicians. Anyone who has read through a comments section on a video having to do with guns knows there are plenty of idiots out there who want to ban all guns. Nice attempt at misdirection, though.
    1
  9. b1itsjustme Meanwhile, I can go on Craigslist and adopt hundreds of dogs in ANY State LEGALLY, WITHOUT being a resident and without the need for a driver's license OR a Concealed Carry Permit. I can adopt puppies outside of most supermarkets in the Country at certain times of year, too. I wouldn't mind that you're full of it...except that you're completely aware that you are and spew this crap anyway. What's next? Are you going to try to claim it's easier to buy a gun than a car? I'll save you some keystrokes: It's not.
    1
  10. PsalmsofOblivion Promotions What do you mean, "now"? This isn't a new thing, just news to you.
    1