Gabby Giffords' gun control group expands with vets.

Just like the Military of today the pic is most likely misleading. 80% support and 20% combat arms. Many in support are stand up guys and many have seen and done things far and away from there "job" but then there are those that back in the day were far removed and washed the clothes just like today.

So I always take these photos with a grain of salt. He may be a hero but then he may have spent his year during the good days of the conflict washing clothes and partaking of the finest that Saigon had to offer. So 40 years later the man that spent 3-4 years in the military uses it to his and the MSM's benefit.

Just some thoughts. [Flower]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jerrymrc

Just like the Military of today the pic is most likely misleading. 80% support and 20% combat arms. Many in support are stand up guys and many have seen and done things far and away from there "job" but then there are those that back in the day were far removed and washed the clothes just like today.

So I always take these photos with a grain of salt. He may be a hero but then he may have spent his year during the good days of the conflict washing clothes and partaking of the finest that Saigon had to offer. So 40 years later the man that spent 3-4 years in the military uses it to his and the MSM's benefit.

Just some thoughts. [Flower]

---

There are also a SIGNIFICANTLY larger number of people who claim to be Vietnam vets then who could have possibly served in Vietnam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tor Larson

Dude needs to work on some cardio. When the zombies come the gun-less fatties will be eaten first.

---

Thank God I'm not gunless.....

Happy Veteran's Day. I see that to some of you, it only applies to vets that hold the same viewpoint you've got.

My ex's father was technically a Korean War vet though he never actually fought due to a training or something injury.. He was anti gun and belonged to Veterans for Peace and had bells rung at his funeral rather than the 21 gun salute. He was an ok guy, a little bit off. He was a big anti nuke protester in the 60s, 70s, 80s and my ex said that growing up as a kid she was sure the world was going to end in nuclear annihilation at any moment because he brought her to all of the protests.

I know that there are vets who have a wide range of political views. I was more upset that they used Veterans Day weekend for this announcement. Instead of letting it be a day to honor those who have worn the uniform and helped protect us all they use it to further their agenda, which many here (myself included) believe to be against the Constitution we all swore to protect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrey

Happy Veteran's Day. I see that to some of you, it only applies to vets that hold the same viewpoint you've got.

---

So his freedom of speech is more important than mine or someone else's on the forum who's expressing an opinion of what he's doing? Not sure I get that.

No one has said he shouldn't be able to do what he's doing. But if he's going to do/say something controversial he should expect some backlash. Freedom of speech is a two-way street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

So his freedom of speech is more important than mine or someone else's on the forum who's expressing an opinion of what he's doing? Not sure I get that.

No one has said he shouldn't be able to do what he's doing. But if he's going to do/say something controversial he should expect some backlash. Freedom of speech is a two-way street.

---

Not at all. I agree, he should be prepared for some hard questions and criticism. But instead of people disagreeing with his politics and stances with weapons, they instead make ad hominem attacks- doubting his service, suggesting that he was in supply, or suggesting he is a pedophile because he has a photo of a child that is clearly a family member? That's bullshit. That's the same tactics the liberals are pulling. The pedophile suggeston is especially repugnant and uncalled for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrey

Not at all. I agree, he should be prepared for some hard questions and criticism. But instead of people disagreeing with his politics and stances with weapons, they instead make ad hominem attacks- doubting his service, suggesting that he was in supply, or suggesting he is a pedophile because he has a photo of a child that is clearly a family member? That's bullshit. That's the same tactics the liberals are pulling. The pedophile suggeston is especially repugnant and uncalled for.

---

Meet Emily Alice Parker of Sandy Hook Fame
Attachment 36289

The pic of the "vet" came from a march in January, not Gabby's group.
http://chelseanow.com/2013/01/moms-a...-gun-violence/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrey

Not at all. I agree, he should be prepared for some hard questions and criticism. But instead of people disagreeing with his politics and stances with weapons, they instead make ad hominem attacks- doubting his service, suggesting that he was in supply, or suggesting he is a pedophile because he has a photo of a child that is clearly a family member? That's bullshit. That's the same tactics the liberals are pulling. The pedophile suggeston is especially repugnant and uncalled for.

---

OK. Fair enough.

Though I will say his entire argument is built on lies and sensationalism...especially with the sign, photos and words he's chosen to use. And the fact he's using the photo of a child killed by a madman in an attempt to vilify all gun owners/NRA members (note the NRA sticker on the sign) is just as repugnant to me. I'm no more guilty of any crimes against children using a gun than he most likely is guilty of what's been (most likely in jest) suggested here.