• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

so what are the three branches of our government ?

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,230
Location
WA
Once again Schumer doesn't need any help proving his stupidity! How does this clown keep getting elected?:cuss:
Because his three braches lick the unions ass, who also work on the polling machines! :(
 
Last edited:

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
925
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
I remember him once saying something to the effect that:

Anyone who knows anything about concussion grenades knows that they dont have the ability to injure or kill anyone, and that they are relatively harmless.

He has a habit of opening his mouth about things he is completely ignorant about.
 

CenTex

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
276
Location
,,
Three branches of government?

Larry, Curly, and Moe.

Edit: Sorry, I see someone else has already come up with the right answer.

Actually, we owe Larry, Curly, and Moe an apology. They were truly funny and not known to be liars. Let's change the three branches names to Stalin, Mao, and Clinton...the 3 biggest liars of all time...until this buffoon from Kenya took over. These morons in Washington are not the least bit funny. They are sending this country into economic oblivion while stealing our freedoms and enslaving us all from their cradle to the grave welfare philosophy.
 
Last edited:

Tactical Trunk Monkey

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
12
Location
Stanwood, WA
Wow. I can't believe they actually aired that. This is why everything is going to hell in a handbasket. I know people are starting to wake up at a faster rate, but it still driving me nuts.:banghead::banghead::banghead:
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Anyone who knows anything about concussion grenades knows that they dont have the ability to injure or kill anyone, and that they are relatively harmless.

Both concussion grenades, and stun grenades (which I believe you were intending to refer to), are capable of causing injury, although it would require extreme proximity to the blast. Not to mention that flashbangs occasionally set houses on fire, which can be quite lethal.

And both of them are pretty much guaranteed to cause hearing damage (without protection), which is a underrated form of injury (I know it's cool for many who have destroyed their hearing, but I will not take kindly to any person who assaults and causes permanent damage to one of the five senses in the only body I have).

I mention this because of an incident where a cop threw a flashbang under some bleachers occupied by a bunch of kids, if I recall as some sort of demo of "how cool we are".

Generally, the incident drew the cop apologists out of the woodwork, most of whom argued that hearing loss doesn't count as an injury, and anybody who didn't think it was totally awesome to have a cop damage their hearing by setting off a flashbang, deserves hearing loss anyway for not appreciating how awesome it is for cops to flashbang kids, because, hey, flashbangs are "non-lethal".

I know it's off-topic, but I just felt like saying: it isn't cool to flashbang innocent people. I value my hearing much more than most folks seem to, and I'd ask for a little respect for that. I seek to reject assertions that flashbangs are an appropriate law enforcement tool for scenarios which have not yet developed as calling for escalated force.
 
Last edited:

markand

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
512
Location
VA
This ranks right up there with the congressman who was afraid the island would have too many people and "tip over"

Kid you not:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg

Got to hand it to the briefer. He kept a straight face. I couldn't have done that.

Congress moron: "My fear is that the whole island will become so overpopulated that it will tip over and capsize."

Briefer with straight face: "We don't anticipate that."
 

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
925
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
Both concussion grenades, and stun grenades (which I believe you were intending to refer to), are capable of causing injury, although it would require extreme proximity to the blast. Not to mention that flashbangs occasionally set houses on fire, which can be quite lethal.

And both of them are pretty much guaranteed to cause hearing damage (without protection), which is a underrated form of injury (I know it's cool for many who have destroyed their hearing, but I will not take kindly to any person who assaults and causes permanent damage to one of the five senses in the only body I have).

I mention this because of an incident where a cop threw a flashbang under some bleachers occupied by a bunch of kids, if I recall as some sort of demo of "how cool we are".

Generally, the incident drew the cop apologists out of the woodwork, most of whom argued that hearing loss doesn't count as an injury, and anybody who didn't think it was totally awesome to have a cop damage their hearing by setting off a flashbang, deserves hearing loss anyway for not appreciating how awesome it is for cops to flashbang kids, because, hey, flashbangs are "non-lethal".

I know it's off-topic, but I just felt like saying: it isn't cool to flashbang innocent people. I value my hearing much more than most folks seem to, and I'd ask for a little respect for that. I seek to reject assertions that flashbangs are an appropriate law enforcement tool for scenarios which have not yet developed as calling for escalated force.


I wasnt saying that Flash bangs are harmless. I know they can Injure. I was saying that I heard Charles Schumer say that they couldn't injure anyone. I was pointing out how absurd his statements are some times.

He made the comments during the Senate hearings on Waco.

The way you quoted my post, it looks like you are kind of putting his words in my mouth.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
I wasnt saying that Flash bangs are harmless. I know they can Injure. I was saying that I heard Charles Schumer say that they couldn't injure anyone. I was pointing out how absurd his statements are some times.

He made the comments during the Senate hearings on Waco.

The way you quoted my post, it looks like you are kind of putting his words in my mouth.

Sorry about that. I should have removed the bits which specify your user as the source of that quote. I know that Schumer was the source of that quote.

I was merely using your post as a spring board for elaboration on the extreme annoyance I experience when certain people claim stun grenades can't cause injury.
 
Last edited:
M

McX

Guest
hmmm, the three branches of government?;
the good, the bad, the ugly?
 
Top