Quote of the day—sacrebleu14 / SA Hinchcliffe @sacrebleu141

Always love when the facilitators of Rapists & Hate Crime abusers expose themselves when demanding women, minorities, & LGBTQ+ be forced defenseless.


sacrebleu14 / SA Hinchcliffe @sacrebleu141
Tweeted on February 7, 2021
[This was in response to:

Martin Hussey @HusseyMartin

For a start in-depth background checks including mental health, raising the age limit for ownership of any firearm. Ban all assault weapons. Making it law that all firearms are stored in a secure place. Better still ban all firearms.

It is the obvious goal of the political left to make people helpless. That puts the politicians in a position to provide “protection” to those they decide are deserving. And, probably more importantly, to enable the punishment of those who would challenge their authority.—Joe]


13 thoughts on “Quote of the day—sacrebleu14 / SA Hinchcliffe @sacrebleu141

  1. I expect some politicians want to disarm people out of an honest, if ill-conceived, belief it will make people safer. These, in my observation, tend to be the local and state level pols. Admix in a bit of scold and a good dose of mother/father-knows-best, and you get a legislating nightmare machine.

    Heaven save us from those who would save us from ourselves.

    • Boris, I suppose that’s possible, but I haven’t run into any. Can you name any examples?

      • None since I moved to New Mexico. Before that, via letters to local and state reps that they actually answered, and a town hall meeting where the state rep actually paused, thought, and said he’d have to think more on it. (And then changed his stated intent to vote.)

        At this point I don’t recall their names; and it’s possible they were just good at faking it.

        • I typically send letters to the candidates prior to elections asking for their views.
          One was a real winner, a candidate for state legislature. His reply was that he didn’t want to answer in writing but would be happy to answer on the phone. His excuse was that written answers tend to get distorted.

          My reaction was that if he can’t express himself in writing clearly enough to avoid that he wasn’t qualified for the job, and in any case the problem gets worse, not better, on the phone. My conclusion (which I didn’t mention back to him) is that he didn’t want to answer in writing because he was afraid to be on record.

          • It’s sad when jellyfish have more spine than a politician. Someone unwilling to take a stand on anything and act like a weathervane on a barn doesn’t qualify to serve in office. At least you know where you stand with a lamprey when it clamps onto you. A politician like the one you describe make a lamprey seem ethical and moral by comparison.

  2. Pretty obvious hypocrisy going on there. When armed BLM and Antifa burned the cores out of major and minor cities for months, it was just a summer of love. When a handful of armed protestors broke into the actual building where certifiable tyrants reside, it was a worse action than the French Revolution, A-bombing Hiroshima, and the Twin Towers combined.

    Politicians love to be disconnected from their constituents. When there’s a chance that the chickens may come home to roost, it frightens the beejeebers out of them. Armed chickens are the worst kind.

    • Politicians love to be disconnected from their constituents. When there’s a chance that the chickens may come home to roost, it frightens the beejeebers out of them.

      Tangentially-related, Oregon governor Kate Brown adjusted the “COVID risk levels” for Oregon counties. The counties in and around Portland got lowered, so businesses and restaurants there are allowed to open for Valentine’s Day weekend, albeit at reduced capacity. Marion County, not so much; we’re still at “Extreme” danger, and nothing is allowed to be open for in-house service.

      Now, the state as a whole has more than met the death rate and “cases per 7 days” requirements to re-open, and Portland is where most of the newer cases are localized. So why loosen their restrictions while leaving Marion County’s at the top?

      One: She’s a Portland-area Democrat; she will always give preference to her town.

      Two, more important: Marion County is where the capital city, Salem, is, and the legislature is in session. While it’s listed as an “Extreme” COVID risk, nothing is allowed to be open to the public, including the Capitol Building. The Democrats can shut We the People out of their business and cite “COVID danger” instead of the truth, which is they simply do not want to hear from us.

      Plus, by law, CHL holders are currently allowed to carry in the Capitol Building and on the grounds. (One of the bills under consideration is intended to change that.) They fear an armed populace and will pull any stunt to shut us out.

      You know a politician cannot be trusted with power, when they fear interactions with the most law-abiding of citizens.

  3. “That puts the politicians in a position to provide “protection” to those they decide are deserving.”

    Nice little family you’ve got there, be a shame if something bad happened to them.

  4. For some reason the use of identity politics over sex grates on me. Other than male and female. There’s nothing to discuss. Nature or nature’s god made you one or the other. Get over it.
    That being said, Samuel Colt making most people equal is a good thing. We should be able to separate on that issue alone. Check your imagination at the door.
    Are you human? OK then, you can defend yourself.
    Are you communist? OK, you need to die.
    Not sure? Then your to uninformed to be part of the discussion.
    And if your a guy that wears to-to’s and heels? Don’t be surprised if people mistrust your judgement on everything you say. Trust and respect for ones opinions are earned conditions. Flashing people will make you suspect. And anyone doing that, knows it. Just ask Dennis Rodman.
    LGBTQ, Do we include people that like sex with animals, and pedos, to? Why is that even part of the discussion?

  5. Wants to dismantle the Bill of Rights.
    Can’t we call that insurrectionist?
    Yes. Yes we can. Because it is.

    Once again (it never ends) we see the same mentality and tactics as used in the time of the height of the power of Rome (the Dark Ages), wherein the heretics had taken over and were calling the faithful “heretics”, we see the insurrectionists calling the American faithful “insurrectionists”.

    “Accuse others of what you do” – It’s their operative gospel.

    And if any of you understood that, then maybe, just maybe, you’ll understand what’s going to happen next, and so you won’t be too confused or blindsided.

    Also; don’t be confused by the Republican Party’s continued refusal (feigned inability) to address these insurrectionists appropriately.

  6. “Gun control is the position that a woman raped and strangled in an alley is somehow morally superior to one that shoots her attacker stone dead.”

    • Put another way, “Gun control is the position that a rapist/murderer’s life is more morally and socially valuable than his victim’s.”

      Or yet another way, “Gun control is the position that a rapist/murderer’s death-in-the-act is a worse tragedy than his victim’s.”

      Either way, what kind of human being would believe that?

      • The kind of “human” who is in the pay, or under the thumb, of professional criminals. As I understand it, Sullivan, the NY politician whose name was attached to one of the country’s first gun bans in NYC, was an example of such an individual.

Comments are closed.