[TheRealThing]

If you can prove that Barack Obama wants to "end gun ownership" in America...eh, never mind, you can't.

If you can prove that jihadists represent the totality of a worldwide religion any more than Randall Terry, Terry Nichols and that ilk...eh, never mind, you can't.
Now, what was the rest of the tripe you were yammering about?

Prior to the time he actually did it, you, Seger, me, nobody could have proven the terrorist at the airport in Istanbul, really was about to pull the ripcord on that suicide vest he was wearing either. But put to the test, he did. What your asking by way of proof is absurd. Just as it is absurd to suggest Bill and Loretta spoke only of grandchildren and golf when the two were on board her private jet with federal agents providing a secure perimeter. No I can't prove it in the way you demand, but how big a moron do you really want to become in order to keep granting cover to those with goal posts on wheels?

It's not tripe to say we still had to go kick Germany's butt even though all Germans were not Nazi's either.

We'll try again: are you suggesting that the United States go to war with Islam? Because I think that is what the jihadis objectivize. That CNN show where the guy's son was murdered, so now he objectifies hunting bad guys? I suspect that is the appropriate strategy for battling ISIS.

You're a moving target and you'd have to know that. You started out saying we can't make any judgments about the likely success of tighter gun control laws by comparing the already much tighter restrictions in Chi-town to the rest of the country, any more you said, than we can say jihadis represent all of Islam. Now, I'm not saying I follow that comparison logic but that's what you said.

So, I said okay if we're going there you can't make the argument stand on it's own in historical terms, just look at pre WW2 Germany and the rise of the Nazi's. Then you ducked into even more cover by slurving what I said into something about ISIS, which is at least connected.

But back to tacks. All Obama wants to talk about with regard to our defense of terrorism is more gun control through tighter regulation, which regardless of what the apologists are saying, would include some form of confiscation for the suspected or suggested newly redefined as to whom the illegal gun possessors would be. How do we know this? Because as was pointed out, the record clearly demonstrates tighter laws don't do a thing to reduce gun violence. And then there is this, reasonable folks know a dude sporting an explosive vest ain't makin no fashion statement. And I know Obama and the Dems in Congress want to limit guns, and just as sure as that vest will blow up, gun control will include some sort of gun roundup.