published Friday, January 17th, 2014

Another Day

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

104
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
facyspacy said...

My cartoon looks similar.... Except my pen says, " dollars paid in taxes." For unhealthy people's medical insurance, people in syria, welfare recipients, and michelle obamas birthday.

January 17, 2014 at 12:18 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Yeah. When I hear the libby's plan for getting the gangs to give up THEIR guns...........

January 17, 2014 at 1:52 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Warning: Ignore claims that 3.9 million people signed up for Medicaid because of Obamacare

Another big lie from the Obama regime.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/01/16/warning-ignore-claims-that-3-9-million-people-signed-up-for-medicaid-because-of-obamacare/

January 17, 2014 at 2:02 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Putting Gun Death Statistics in Perspective.

Gangs Remain Key un-addressed Problem in Gun Debate

"To hear gun control advocates speak, one would be led to believe that gun violence is a widespread problem whereby the mere existence of a gun is as much a problem as the person who intends to wield it. But the reality is that gun homicides are overwhelmingly tied to gang violence. In fact, a staggering 80% of gun homicides are gang-related. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), gang homicides accounted for roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun murders in both 2010 and 2011. That means that there were just 2,200 non gang-related firearm murders in both years in a country of over 300 million people and 250 million guns."

Clay needs to get a clue.

January 17, 2014 at 2:09 a.m.
facyspacy said...
     "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." As the great Obama said, come up with a better idea and i will listen

January 17, 2014 at 2:40 a.m.
fairmon said...

What gun control law will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies? Why do the cities with the strictest gun control laws have the highest gun related deaths?

The number of deaths or serious injuries prevented by guns other than gang on gang is most likely much higher than the number of deaths or serious injuries caused by guns.

Gun control should remain a state issue and initiatives require a vote by citizens to become a state law or rejected by people in a state.

Some people would like to see a wholesale ban on all guns. Some would prefer ownership and gun safety training at age 21 or older with a thorough background check. An owner should be accountable for any crime or injury involving their gun. An irresponsible owner is the cause of an event involving the use of a gun by someone other than the owner and the owner should be accountable. The penalty for illegal possession or a crime committed with a gun should be severe.

January 17, 2014 at 3:08 a.m.
MasterBlaster said...

How will one of these gun worshippers react when one of their kids or grand kids gets blown to bits by some loon with an assault rifle? Chlorine for the gene pool?

January 17, 2014 at 3:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, a Florida congresswoman, plans to hold at least two Christie-focused news conferences in cities where Christie is set to appear.

Ms. credibility herself. It would be a wise move to be sure her every word is recorded since she has a history of misspeaking and distortion.

January 17, 2014 at 3:18 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Answer this....How do suppose we get the gang bangers to give up their guns?????

Either answer that or stop your freakin' bitching!!

January 17, 2014 at 3:18 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

32'000 gun related deaths a year

60% are suicides

3% are accidental

34% make up the remainder.

80% of the remainder(34%) are gang related.

That's 8,900 out of 11,100 gun related murders are gang related.

That means that there were just 2,200 non gang-related firearm murders in a country of over 300 million people and 250 million guns.

So your "loons" blaster, are but a miniscule segment of society.

And hardly a reason to eradicate a constitutional amendment.

January 17, 2014 at 3:39 a.m.
joepulitzer said...

MASTER, if they are with them, they will wish they had one too. Or at least a goody guy nearby. Tell us, old wise one, how do you keep guns away from the bad guys? Eliminate the black market? Yeah, right! The hour is too late for strict gun control.

January 17, 2014 at 6:20 a.m.

The question will always remain: how does taking guns away from law abiding citizens prevent criminals from having guns? Stupid, stupid, liberals. Criminals don't care about the law, that's why they're called criminals. Stupid, manipulative liberals, like Bennett, try and lump everything together in one big category, try to equate law abiding gun owners with gang bangers.

They won't admit that 100 % of terrorists are Muslim men, so they gloss over Muslim men at airports, and heavily scrutinize old white ladies and children in wheel chairs. 100% of knockout game thugs are black, but they try and suppress that fact. They're afraid to label illegal aliens as illegal even though they enter the country illegally.

January 17, 2014 at 6:56 a.m.

And we're also supposed to believe BO isn't a dictator even though he threatens to do the very things dictators do. BO would love to write an executive order taking the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

January 17, 2014 at 6:59 a.m.
conservative said...

The TFP put poor Mr. Cook's picture on the front page in the hopes people will read him.

Mr. Cook is against guns, against cheap energy, against conservatives, against home schooling, against school sports, against Bible reading and prayer in school, against Biblical morals, against creationism, against school discipline, against commonsense.

You think that might be reason not many read him.

Yes, I have read him, just not lately.

The trouble is I could spend hours refuting him and have.

His lack of positive comments and comments in general tells me others know his MO as well.

January 17, 2014 at 7:21 a.m.
caddy said...

Same old tired argument: Guns kill people.

So let's take them from law abiding citizens.

Stupid

January 17, 2014 at 7:29 a.m.
LibDem said...

Do you gun nuts realize you're just arguing among yourselves? TOES02800's attention wandered after his first post. Do you need a guy with attention disorder wandering about with a gun?

January 17, 2014 at 7:40 a.m.
conservative said...

Remember when the scam of "climatologists" was a coming ice age?

On this day in history: Cold Sunday, 1982

"On 17th January 1982 much of the United States experienced the coldest temperatures since records began. A high pressure system of Arctic proportions formed over the Canadian province of Saskatchewan where recent snowfall had left the land with no way to retain its heat. Consequently temperatures plummeted creating a mass of cold air that moved south across the US on what became known as "Cold Sunday.""

"Meteorologists measured record low temperatures the length of the country. These included temperatures of −27°F (−33°C) in Chicago, −26°F (−32°C) in Milwaukee, −5°F (−21°C) in Washington, DC and −2°F (−19°C) in Birmingham, Alabama. The lowest temperature of −52°F (−47°C) was recorded near Tower, Minnesota."

http://modernhistorian.blogspot.com/2009/01/on-this-day-in-history-cold-sunday-1982.html

January 17, 2014 at 7:45 a.m.
LibDem said...

conservative wasn't able to stay on subject beyond one post. Lead poisoning?

(conservative, have you come up with anything good to say about the kingdom of your god yet? I'm still waiting for the sales pitch. Surely you can think of something?)

zableedofisterix said: "Stupid, stupid, liberals.", "Stupid, manipulative liberals...". Do you really need this angry guy driving around with a gun?

January 17, 2014 at 8:05 a.m.
limric said...

Zableedofisterix,

Other than ” Stupid, stupid, liberals” I’m not clear on what your 6:56 a.m. post is trying to convey. Just who is ‘they’ in your second paragraph; ” Stupid, stupid, liberals”? The tenor of which is really quite dishonest.

Is your post a really metaphor for, Whitey is being oppressed?

I understand Clay’s message. He makes a good point and I don’t see anything overly judgmental in it.

You'd have to agree though, there are a lot of (as the pen says) “U.S. Gun Deaths.”

January 17, 2014 at 8:10 a.m.
conservative said...

Mr. Owebama has spurred record gun sales surpassing even Bill Clinton.

January 17, 2014 at 8:22 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

And your point is what, Mr.Conservative?

January 17, 2014 at 8:27 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Not about guns. About control.

January 17, 2014 at 8:37 a.m.
wallyworld said...

And the science expert, conservative, has the usual climate deniers end of the argument. You know, conservative, there are other people on this planet than those you live amongst.

The heat wave currently blasting southern Australia comes after the country experienced its hottest year on record in 2013, according to the Bureau of Meteorology. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology forecasts maximum temperatures in Melbourne of 44 degrees Celsius (111 degrees Fahrenheit) for Thursday and Friday.

January 17, 2014 at 8:41 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

PlainTruth said... ”Not about guns. About control.”

Hmm. By that measure one could almost argue that Obama is working FOR the gun industry.

I'm sure many people (millions?) in other countries would agree also.

January 17, 2014 at 8:50 a.m.
AgentX said...

People die from drunk drivers. People die from drugs. People die from exposure in hot or cold. And yes, people die from being shot.
It becomes difficult to determine the "crazies" sometimes. It's easier to look back and say, "well, he was always acting a little odd..." So how do you regulate things like that? How do you keep old people that can't see from driving?
Criminals will always look for an advantage over the rest of us. A firearm, in the proper hands, helps level the playing field. For instance: A large man follows a small woman into a parking garage with the intent of mugging her. She realizes something isn't right and has her firearm handy. She turns with gun in hand and confronts her would-be attacker. Suddenly, he doesn't have the advantage. In this case, his size means nothing. Something like this helps with the gun advocates. So what about guns in the wrong hands? An innocent bystander gets gunned down during some shootout between rival gangs. Now this helps with the anti-gun groups.
But much of the time, the gun deaths are by the criminals using the firearms in illegal ways. Again, they look for the advantage over others and think that having that gun in their pant's waste makes them tough. Unfortunately, we hear about the tragic instances more than the times when a gun was used properly and helped stop a criminal. That just isn't the type of news they want to run on the front page. It doesn't stir enough emotion. I've read where a permit holder stopped a burglar from robbing his neighbors house and held the robber at gun point until the police arrived. That was local, but good luck finding the story. Did you read about the kid that tried to use a taser on a random guy that was waiting at a bus stop for his daughter coming home from school? The thug tried to take the guy down in a version of "knock out", but the taser didn't go off, after repeatedly hitting the victim in the side. Thinking he had been stabbed, the victim drew his firearm and shot the attacker, in the butt, twice.
Since we will never get the guns from the criminals, I think we should start with enforcing the laws we have, or make the punishment stricter. We should provide more education on proper gun handling and safety to gun owners.
There is much that can be done without going to one extreme or the other. But like the horrible stories the press decides to run on the front page, it just wouldn't stir up enough stuff.

January 17, 2014 at 9:35 a.m.
Maximus said...

My Smith and Wesson stock is doing just fine thank you. As Ralphie stated in the movie "The Christmas Story" .........." Lucky I got a compass in the stock of my Peace Maker". Again, Clay Bennett has to be so so unhappy living in Red State Republican TN where our guns are always loaded and the Bible is by our side. Mr. Bennett stop your misery, Vermont is calling your name.

Gotta go, taking my AR 15 to the range today. FUN!

January 17, 2014 at 9:49 a.m.
fairmon said...

Gun control would probably be about as successful as the wars on drugs and poverty. These two have made some criminals wealthy as prohibition did when selling alcoholic beverages was illegal. It is legal to have a reasonable tax on consumer discretionary items like guns.

You want more of something then recognize and reward it. You want less of something penalize or tax it. Watch the availability of quality healthcare begin to drop next year as taxes and premiums go up.

January 17, 2014 at 9:51 a.m.
inquiringmind said...

Toes why are you worried about "gang bangers?" I suspect you live quite aways from a gang banger.

I have yet to read a story in the TFP wherein someone used a gun for a constructive purpose outside hunting. As the event in the Florida movie theater shows, as the events in Chattanooga and N. GA show, you can't trust having a law enforcement background or signs prohibiting guns in an establishment to provide sane respect for the deadly nature of a gun. You certainly can't trust gun education or common sense to provide a basis for rational behavior with a gun. You can trust anger, immaturity, blood lust and insanity for improper use of a gun.

If you want to own and use a gun, join a gun club and leave your weapon there, the military, or buy a large acreage in the country where you can plink to your heart's content. The whole idea of "a firearm in the proper hands" is ludicrous and contrary to the evidence of experience, and wishful thinking all evidenced by the comment, "...guns always loaded and a Bible by our side." If you can't afford the acreage, don't like the risk of serving your country, or can't afford membership in a gun club, too bad, many of us never get to do everything we want to do.

And fairmon, there are good examples of successful gun control in free countries. We could do like the Swiss and really make it painful for improper use.

AX, The way we keep people from driving who can't see is regular licensing exams and family members who keep them from being behind the wheel. In Japan, for example, the fine for a person riding in a car with a drunk driver is about $30,000, far more than the fine to the driver. Laws can make the public a little safer without damaging rights. It should be the same with guns. The fine for someone using your weapon in a crime ought to be so painful you will be sure that weapon is locked up tight when not in use. Let's do our part to make the world a little more civilized than regress to the wild west. :-)

January 17, 2014 at 10:11 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^^^ I say regress to the wild west. :)

January 17, 2014 at 10:32 a.m.
alprova said...

pt wrote: "Not about guns. About control."

Actually, the subject is about gun DEATHS. I see nothing stated or implied about gun control in Mr. Bennett's work.

You right wingers have decided to bring up the issue of gun CONTROL, for whatever reason.

Guilty minds often play tricks on themselves.

January 17, 2014 at 10:37 a.m.
alprova said...

facyspacy wrote: ""A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.""

Please remind everyone which "well regulated" militia group it is that you belong to?

"As the great Obama said, come up with a better idea and i will listen"

And to date, those ears only hear silence.

January 17, 2014 at 10:42 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Guilty, Alps? Of what?

January 17, 2014 at 10:42 a.m.
alprova said...

Toes02800 wrote: "Answer this....How do suppose we get the gang bangers to give up their guns?????"

Well, I for one, would be just fine with building prisons to lock away anyone for life and a day, who demonstrates that they cannot live among society in peace.

"Either answer that or stop your freakin' bitching!!"

Who's bitching but you right-wing cheerleaders? The very mention of anything related to guns seems to set your asses on fire.

January 17, 2014 at 10:46 a.m.
limric said...

Inquiringmind,

The general tone of your 10:11AM post (at least how I sense it) – without overtly saying it – is that you see a definite need for ‘gun control’. Is that a fair assessment? If so, what ”laws can make the public a little safer without damaging rights.”?

Additionally: Doesn’t the statement, ” Laws can make the public a little safer without damaging rights.”(using your second paragraph as a possible regulatory paradigm) contradict said statement?

To pre-empt the case for: ”The fine for someone using your weapon in a crime ought to be so painful etc.” Laws are already in place that addresses this very issue.

Alprova,

Tsk tsk, Are you purposefully leaving out the importance of the coma between - "the security of a free state" and "the right of the people."?

January 17, 2014 at 10:47 a.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "The trouble is I could spend hours refuting him and have."

Yep...I'll just bet you had him quaking in HIS bunny slippers, like you have me in mine.

January 17, 2014 at 10:48 a.m.
Walden said...

Yep, so the logical conclusion is to ban guns, right? Cuz, you know, if you do that, then there won't be any guns, so there won't be any gun crimes, right? Hmm, yeah right.

January 17, 2014 at 10:59 a.m.
conservative said...

Mr. Anthony Provancher:

It is for the benefit of others not just you and Mr. Cook.

You mistakenly think it is all about you.

January 17, 2014 at 11 a.m.
AgentX said...

conservative: Why do you use someone's name, in bold, when talking on this page? When you leave your own profile blank. Just curious.

January 17, 2014 at 11:22 a.m.
conservative said...

Omaha! Omaha!

January 17, 2014 at 11:42 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

President Obama doesn’t merely claim ignorance of the IRS’ targeting of politically conservative groups or the Department of Justice’s targeting of journalists: according to The New York Times, Obama was also ignorant of the extent of NSA surveillance. According to the Times, “aides said Mr. Obama was surprised to learn after leaks by Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, just how far the surveillance had gone.” David Plouffe, Obama’s advisor, said, “Things seem to have grown at the NSA. I think it was disturbing to most people, and I think he found it disturbing.” Too much material here. I just can't….

January 17, 2014 at 11:46 a.m.

I heard the NSA is stealing 200 million text messages a day. How's that going to play with younger voters.

January 17, 2014 at 11:49 a.m.
prairie_dog said...

Where's the anti-Republican message in this cartoon?

Nine out of ten people forced to get down on their knees at the point of a gun are the victims of declared Democrats. Where's that fun fact publicized?

January 17, 2014 at 12:20 p.m.
alprova said...

Limric wrote: "Tsk tsk, Are you purposefully leaving out the importance of the coma between - "the security of a free state" and "the right of the people."?..."

There have been many arguments about that particular line in the Constitution, none of which have been settled, and you and I most likely will not come to agreement about it either, but the importance of that comma seems to mean more to you than what standard English bears out.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

I'm sure you take it to refer to two separate and distinct circumstances, and I believe it to refer to just one.

I take it to mean that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is dependent on them being an active member of a State militia.

The comma does not separate those circumstances. If it were meant to portray two separate rights, don't you believe that it would have been more proper to have worded the sentence accordingly?

Allowing people a right to keep and bear arms is in no manner conducive with or reflective of any "well regulated" militia.

It's a free-for-all, with absolutely no regulations whatsoever.

Why do people forget about the word "regulated" when referring to gun rights?

If anything, I believe the word bolsters all arguments for gun regulations, because the very word appears in the most popular argument against the concept.

January 17, 2014 at 12:21 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "You mistakenly think it is all about you."

You mistakenly think what you write is taken seriously.

January 17, 2014 at 12:23 p.m.
nurseforjustice said...

Al said, "Actually, the subject is about gun DEATHS. I see nothing stated or implied about gun control in Mr. Bennett's work."

Al, on many other cartoons you seem to be happy to relay your interpretation of the meaning behind the cartoon. But today you want to ignore the IMPLICATION.

Why is that?

January 17, 2014 at 12:37 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Libdem. Can you do two things at one time? I know it must be hard to concentrate with your full time Obama worshiping job.

January 17, 2014 at 1:04 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

limric: no.

January 17, 2014 at 1:08 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

IQM says:

"Toes why are you worried about "gang bangers?" I suspect you live quite aways from a gang banger."

You really don't have a clue poor child.

Alpo says:

"Well, I for one, would be just fine with building prisons to lock away anyone for life and a day, who demonstrates that they cannot live among society in peace."

That's a tad bit Stalinst for a "compassionate" full blooded liberal such as yourself. Do you suppose we build these immense prisons in Siberia as well? Are you in favor of creating a Politburo too?

Watch your dress alpo, your pinko is showing!

January 17, 2014 at 1:18 p.m.
soakya said...

The supreme court has ruled the second amendment protects an individual right to posses a gun absent a militia.

You need to ask yourself who did the writers of the constitution fear that could endanger the security of a free state? Only one answer, the federal government. That is the purpose of the 2nd amendment just as the lady in the video said, the 2nd amendment was written to protect the right of the people against a tyrannical out of control government.

January 17, 2014 at 1:26 p.m.
gypsylady said...

Let's see, what is the unifying factor for almost all gun crimes?

The perpetrators are men. I think we'd be much better off if only women were allowed to own guns. From a purely statistical point of view.

January 17, 2014 at 1:28 p.m.
soakya said...

"Well, I for one, would be just fine with building prisons to lock away anyone for life and a day, who demonstrates that they cannot live among society in peace." -alprova

only a fool would say such a thing. be careful what you wish for. looking at your comments on this forum Al and you don't come across as to peaceful. So, why don't you just go turn yourself over.

January 17, 2014 at 1:30 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Yeah gypsylady, women don't need guns. They just drown their children.

January 17, 2014 at 1:35 p.m.
conservative said...

Mr. Anthony Provancher:

You wrote:

"You mistakenly think what you write is taken seriously."

Well, it is quite obvious that you do. Why else would you constantly strive to pick a fight with me?

You always lose, you then store up resentment toward me and then in your desperation you come out of the clear blue and lash out with your latest beginning with:

"Yep...I'll just bet you had him quaking in HIS bunny slippers, like you have me in mine"

January 17, 2014 at 1:36 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

White House Warning: "Do NOT Edit Photo of Obama Shooting a Gun!"

You gotta love it.

January 17, 2014 at 1:44 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^^^^^. Several stars

January 17, 2014 at 1:57 p.m.
jesse said...

CON MAN AT 1:36!!

Finally got something EXACTLY right!!AMAZING!!!LMAO!!!

January 17, 2014 at 1:58 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Nothing inaccurate about Bennett's cartoon; some thought it was about Gun Control, others thought about Benghazi, others about the NSA, some thought it was about Chris Christie, and you have Conservative who thinks David Cook drew the cartoon.

January 17, 2014 at 2:04 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

NSA report. Teflon Barry still leading from befind.

January 17, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
alprova said...

NFJ wrote: "Al, on many other cartoons you seem to be happy to relay your interpretation of the meaning behind the cartoon. But today you want to ignore the IMPLICATION. Why is that?"

I very seldom comment on the meaning of any cartoon. I join the conversation as it evolves, but this one I have commented on because the meaning of the cartoon has been horribly skewed, at least in my opinion.

As is always the case, conversations take twists and turns, but I see nothing at all in this to suggest the opinion of the artist.

Therefore, I call WHOA to that. Mr. Bennett raises the issues that we wade in on. I never presume to know the man's heart, and I find it ludicrous when others attempt to do it.

January 17, 2014 at 2:33 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

So Alps. You don't think toon-boy gives away a small inkling of his political leaning? Is that what you're saying?

January 17, 2014 at 2:41 p.m.
alprova said...

Soakya wrote: "only a fool would say such a thing. be careful what you wish for."

Well then, call me a fool, for all I care.

"looking at your comments on this forum Al and you don't come across as to peaceful."

It's a good thingo you don't work for me, because you couldn't sell a glass of water to a thirsty man.

"So, why don't you just go turn yourself over."

Why? Are you roasting me?

January 17, 2014 at 2:47 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "Well, it is quite obvious that you do. Why else would you constantly strive to pick a fight with me?"

Because you are so eager to fight, with very limited resources mind you, but you bite every single time.

"You always lose, you then store up resentment toward me and then in your desperation you come out of the clear blue and lash out..."

I have never lost a battle with you. You're just too stupid to see that but what you believe.

January 17, 2014 at 2:50 p.m.
jesse said...

AL, con mans mental resources are about on a par with your own!

Neither one of ya is 1/10 as smart as ya think you are!BUT ya make a good match "two idjits with opposing views "!Better than duck dynasty anyhow!!

ADVANCED MATHEMATICS at N.West Ga C.C,?git over it dude!

January 17, 2014 at 3:02 p.m.
conservative said...

Mr. Anthony Provancher:

Well Mr. Anthony Provancher, YOU are the one who attacks me every time.

You just make childish remarks Mr. Provancher, such as your latest, with no substance.

Look at the bright side Mr. Provancher, you like your words to be seen and so do I.

You just often get double exposure Mr. Anthony Provancher.

January 17, 2014 at 3:09 p.m.
alprova said...

pt wrote: "So Alps. You don't think toon-boy gives away a small inkling of his political leaning? Is that what you're saying?"

I'm stating that I never presume to know how anyone feels until they declare it. A cartoonist's job is to spark opinion. You and I provide those opinions, based on that spark.

The fact is that no one truly knows where Mr. Bennett stands on very many issues because his cartoons are not necessarily declarations of his opinions, but rather sparks of thought that could come out of thin air, for all anyone knows FOR SURE.

January 17, 2014 at 3:14 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: nothing worth reading.

It would be nice of you to post your given birth name, for then we could address each other on an equal plane.

But since your one of those who just loves to hide behind a computer monitor, I'm sure you'll just keep flapping those yellow wings and spew your anti-homosexual thoughts for years to come.

January 17, 2014 at 3:17 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo, your response would be astounding, if not so predictable.

January 17, 2014 at 3:26 p.m.
jesse said...

Con man wrote NOTHING worth reading! Absolutely a FACT!period!

NOW AL? When was the last time you posted something worth reading?

January 17, 2014 at 3:33 p.m.

How laughable to think Mr. Bennett's cartoons don't reflect his views. Ridiculous. That's like saying a columnist's views aren't apparent by what he writes. Everyone that posts their views on here are saying what they really believe. Somehow Bennett's views are a mystery? Keep believing that.

By the way, don't all of you know we should forget all the scandals and problems brought on, or fueled, by BO, and start thinking of all the ways we can celebrate MO's birthday? ABC News has listed at least 50.

January 17, 2014 at 3:38 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova said...

conservative wrote: nothing worth reading.

It would be nice of you to post your given birth name, for then we could address each other on an equal plane.

But since your one of those who just loves to hide behind a computer monitor, I'm sure you'll just keep flapping those yellow wings and spew your anti-homosexual thoughts for years to come. January 17, 2014 at 3:17 p.m

========

Mr. Anthony Provancher:

Hmm, I don't see where you gave your birth name Mr. Anthony Provancher, do you?

Who are you trying to fool?

Now, how often have I posted the word of God and HIS judgment on the gross sin of Homosexuality/sodomy?

Again these following words are the words of God on the matter, THEY ARE NOT MINE:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor HOMOSEXUALS, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-10

Your problem is really with God Mr. Provancher when you defend Homosexuality and sodomy

January 17, 2014 at 3:52 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Conservative, why spend so much time worrying about homosexuals and not the alcoholics or people that have sex? Why not a big spill about the people that run the paycheck advance places?

January 17, 2014 at 4:10 p.m.
conservative said...

Well consider this GaussianInteger:

I am not the one who brings it up first. I generally just respond to the person who brings it up first.

Look and see who brought it up first today GaussianInteger. You have now brought it up.

I never presume to dictate to others what they want to bring up. It is others who do that.

Now, you brought up homosexuals, alcoholics,people who have sex and paycheck advance.

Why can't you give your views on these topics you brought up? Surely you must have an opinion on them, after all you brought them up.

January 17, 2014 at 4:26 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

I asked a pretty easy question. A man that chooses to rewrite bible verses to fit his argument surely doesn't want to hear what I think.

January 17, 2014 at 4:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

inquiringmind said...

In Japan, for example, the fine for a person riding in a car with a drunk driver is about $30,000, far more than the fine to the driver.

You do post the funniest sh!t.

January 17, 2014 at 4:59 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

What's the problem with payday advance bidnesses?

January 17, 2014 at 5:06 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

inquiringmind said...

If you want to own and use a gun, join a gun club and leave your weapon there, the military, or buy a large acreage in the country where you can plink to your heart's content. The whole idea of "a firearm in the proper hands" is ludicrous and contrary to the evidence of experience, and wishful thinking all evidenced by the comment, "...guns always loaded and a Bible by our side." If you can't afford the acreage, don't like the risk of serving your country, or can't afford membership in a gun club, too bad, many of us never get to do everything we want to do.

So the poor that are not militarily eligible are SOL. What? ... No governmental relief program ... Rank firearm inequality if you ask me.

January 17, 2014 at 5:09 p.m.
conservative said...

GaussianInteger said...

I asked a pretty easy question. A man that chooses to rewrite bible verses to fit his argument surely doesn't want to hear what I think.

January 17, 2014 at 4:46 p.m.

=================================

That's a Lie!

I have rewritten no Bible verse.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor HOMOSEXUALS, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-10. NAS

January 17, 2014 at 5:10 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

Well, I for one, would be just fine with building prisons to lock away anyone for life and a day, who demonstrates that they cannot live among society in peace.

I wonder how long it would be that executions for cutting people off in traffic would be O.K. to you? Along with your call for the immediate death penalty for any misuse of a firearm you do seem to have a definite Fascist streak.

January 17, 2014 at 5:44 p.m.
jesse said...

When con man can get on here and post about homosexuality and sodomy and SIN and SH!T?It gives him a BONER and he has to go hide in the bathroom for an hour or so!!Then he comes out all full of RIGHTEOUSNESS and jumps right into Al's ass!!What clay needs to do is make a comic strip outta what goes on on here!!

January 17, 2014 at 6:36 p.m.
rick1 said...

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason,Co-author of the Second Amendment, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"An armed man is a citizen. A disarmed man is a subject." Anon.

"The right of the citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." - Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed...." Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.

January 17, 2014 at 8:14 p.m.
facyspacy said...

Al pro, i wont use your name in caps and bold. But i will ask you to expand on " gun deaths". There is just not that many. Someone posted earlier their stats, 2200 out of 317,000,000. Bennettes cartoon looks like he is counting a few twice.

January 17, 2014 at 8:36 p.m.
soakya said...

liberals think the constitution is a document which assures government has power when in fact it is a document that limits the government powers and empowers "the right of the people." of course they only think this when their man is in office, when a republican is sitting in the white house suddenly just like the media discovered its role with Christie liberals start screaming about tyrants and a out of control government. and of course that's what the republicans are doing now.

January 17, 2014 at 8:41 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

Any one who posts an argument that we need guns to protect ourself from the Federal Government, and attempts to invoke its constitution for protection is basically presenting an argument based in hypocrisy, or making a threat of insurrection. The FBI may wish to talk to you.

jt6 if you don't have the income you can't buy a car to drive, even if you can get the driver's license (you might be able to get a loaner, I guess). You may be qualified to obtain a liquor license but if you can't afford to get into business you are out of luck. If you can't afford an airplane or its rental, you may be able to find your way to a pilot's license but probably not find your way behind the joy stick. I am not sure why gun licensing should be any different.

The price of a license should bear some positive relationship to the risk of public harm. If it cost you $5,000 for a gun license, and allowing someone to steal or use your weapon to commit a felony with it has a, say, $50,000 fine and mandatory 5 yrs in jail time, you will be quite careful about how well you take care of it. But if you are a responsible gun owner, you have no fear of that consequence.

And the DUI law in Japan is pretty much the way I describe it.

January 17, 2014 at 8:49 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "Hmm, I don't see where you gave your birth name Mr. Anthony Provancher, do you? Who are you trying to fool?"

No one. I have a birth certificate to prove it.

"Now, how often have I posted the word of God and HIS judgment on the gross sin of Homosexuality/sodomy?"

That's EXACTLY the problem. You have never posted the word of GOD.

You have ALWAYS posted words, written by men who claim the authority to write on behalf of God. You REFUSE to see the difference.

Please post any sentence in the Bible regarding homosexuality that is a DIRECT quote from God and is not presented as the word of someone claiming to be empowered to write on God's behalf.

Do you know what how legal term "hearsay" is defined. The Bible is filled with hearsay, and you are guilty of presenting it as evidence that is easily dismissed because it does not come from God or his Son.

"Your problem is really with God Mr. Provancher when you defend Homosexuality and sodomy"

I live and let live. That is defending nothing. It's called minding my own business.

January 17, 2014 at 8:50 p.m.
alprova said...

facyspacy wrote: "Al pro, i wont use your name in caps and bold. But i will ask you to expand on " gun deaths". There is just not that many. Someone posted earlier their stats, 2200 out of 317,000,000. Bennettes cartoon looks like he is counting a few twice."

I have no idea where that figure came from, for it is totally false.

In 2010, the last year that a complete list was compiled, 31,076 Americans were killed in homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings.

This means that approximately 85 Americans died each day which means that approximately three Americans die due the discharging of a gun each hour.

73,505 Americans were treated in hospital emergency departments for non-fatal gunshot wounds in 2010.

January 17, 2014 at 8:59 p.m.
soakya said...

IQM, so why didn't congress throw the lady in the video in jail when she told them exactly what it meant directly to their face? I'll tell you why, because they really do understand the intention behind the second amendment. Democratic leaders understand their entire base has the intelligence of an 3 year old and can tell them anything and they will lap it up.

allowing someone to steal your gun!!! you liberals are insane.

January 17, 2014 at 9:01 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Libby's, so terrified of people they don't agree with having guns.

Take a Pamprin and deal with it.

January 17, 2014 at 9:05 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

You libby's sure like to tell people what they can and can't do. Do the pressures of being superior to everyone else make you feel guilty?

You know.. with that equality thing and all....

January 17, 2014 at 9:36 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

As I said, soakya, if you take care of your gun you don't have to worry. You gun can't get stolen if it is secured. How do you think guns get stolen, they have legs that let them walk away? Or you sell one to somebody that might be reckless? With the fine and jail time, you will be much,. much more careful about where you keep your gun and who you sell it to.

An the limitation of state power was established by the civil war, let's not regress.

I didn't watch the video, too much more important things to do, but if the "lady" insulted someone, that is no crime, except for being rude, and there seems to be a lot of that around here.

January 17, 2014 at 9:39 p.m.
alprova said...

toes02800 wrote: "Libby's, so terrified of people they don't agree with having guns."

Will you be so kind as to point out the person and the post they wrote that indicates that they have called for the removal of guns from law abiding citizens?

"Take a Pamprin and deal with it."

You're an expert in never dealing with facts. You make them up as you go.

January 17, 2014 at 9:43 p.m.
fairmon said...

Where are the solutions that will work? Banning guns means most in possession of a gun will be criminals with bad intentions. Doing nothing means nothing changes.

I repeat; An owner should be accountable for any crime or injury involving their gun. An irresponsible owner is the cause of an event involving the use of a gun by someone other than the owner, the owner should be accountable as if they were the perpetrator. The penalty for illegal possession or a crime committed with a gun should be severe. They are too lax if no one is injured or killed.

January 17, 2014 at 9:43 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Yeah, I just found out that the wild fires in L.A. were caused by global warming. Turned out that three homeless guys were freezing to death and lit a fire to keep warm, starting the blaze.

You can't make this sh!t up folks.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/16/us/california-fire/

January 17, 2014 at 9:46 p.m.
alprova said...

toes 02800 wrote: "You libby's sure like to tell people what they can and can't do."

I see, so I'm sure you disagree with your Republican leaders who desire to use the power of Government to prohibit abortion?

"Do the pressures of being superior to everyone else make you feel guilty?"

At least as guilty as Republicans and their cheerleaders who portray their own moral superiority to anyone who votes for Democrats or who believes that morality cannot be legislated.

"You know.. with that equality thing and all...."

Only a total pig would defend the defenseless exploitation of people for profit.

January 17, 2014 at 9:49 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Alpo. The KING of made up realities. Dr. fantasyland himself.

January 17, 2014 at 9:49 p.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "I repeat; An owner should be accountable for any crime or injury involving their gun. An irresponsible owner is the cause of an event involving the use of a gun by someone other than the owner, the owner should be accountable as if they were the perpetrator."

So by that, I would assume that you would be for the registration of all fireearms, and that they should be issued titles like motor vehicles are?

"The penalty for illegal possession or a crime committed with a gun should be severe. They are too lax if no one is injured or killed."

Death by firing squad should do it.

January 17, 2014 at 9:52 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Again alpo. No facts. Just blathering liberal talking points. Your moral high ground rests upon the right to kill children. So compassionate of you.

Take your Geritol and sip some Earl Grey. It's nap time.

January 17, 2014 at 9:55 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes02800 wrote: "Alpo. The KING of made up realities. Dr. fantasyland himself."

Atta boy Toes...

Never respond to the subject at hand, When cornered, lash out at your challenger with wild personal accusations. I'm sure it must be written in the Republican Party handbook.

January 17, 2014 at 9:55 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"Yeah, I just found out that the wild fires in L.A. were caused by global warming. Turned out that three homeless guys were freezing to death and lit a fire to keep warm, starting the blaze.

You can't make this sh!t up folks."

Toes, it's been over 80 degrees everyday this week in L.A. since Monday and all CA is in a severe drought. If you were going to use that your example of debunking "global warming", you picked the wrong state.

January 17, 2014 at 9:59 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes 02800 wrote: "Again alpo. No facts. Just blathering liberal talking points."

Really? I asked you to prove your assertion by pointing out one liberal who was calling for the disarming of law abiding citizens, and you couldn't rise to the challenge. So, is it a fact that there was no one in this forum who did what you accused us of doing, or not?

You offered a fact, and when proven incorrect, you lashed out at me like a child. Quite typical, I assure you.

"Your moral high ground rests upon the right to kill children. So compassionate of you."

Your claim was that only liberals are guilty of trying to tell people what they could and could not do. I refuted that quite well by illustrating that your statement was willfully false, and that Republicans/Conservatives are just as guilty of trying to use the power of Government to tell people what they could and could not do.

What else COULD you have offered in response? You make up your own facts as you go, and it's easy to prove.

"Take your Geritol and sip some Earl Grey. It's nap time."

Geritol is so...50's. I've graduated to something a bit better than snake oil to keep me healthy.

And yes, it is bed time, for some of us do work for a living, rather than to spend our days posting tripe online all day long.

January 17, 2014 at 10:04 p.m.
alprova said...

toes02800 wrote: "Yeah, I just found out that the wild fires in L.A. were caused by global warming. Turned out that three homeless guys were freezing to death and lit a fire to keep warm, starting the blaze."

You must have flunked Geography and Science, both. It is quite normal for temperatures to be tremendously different at times during daylight hours and during the night in desert locations and those with super dry climates.

It can be 100 degrees during the day and fall below freezing at night.

But then, you've probably lived in this area all your life.

January 17, 2014 at 10:10 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

too-o-o-o-o-o much yooz'guys, too-o-o much!

January 17, 2014 at 11:35 p.m.
soakya said...

You gun can't get stolen if it is secured. -IQM Can anything else not get stolen if its secured or does that only apply to guns?

"I repeat; An owner should be accountable for any crime or injury involving their gun. An irresponsible owner is the cause of an event involving the use of a gun by someone other than the owner, the owner should be accountable as if they were the perpetrator."Fairmon

I don't know who is nuttier. fairmon, IQM, or the blabbering liar.

January 17, 2014 at 11:41 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.