Thursday, July 27, 2017 • Midnight Edition • "Comics: we give a crap!"

The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

Comics news, comic book reviews, feature articles about comics, interviews with comic creators, plus the greatest comic book and pop culture discussion in the Outhouse forums!


The Conservative Thread

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

User avatar


Silly French Man

Postby habitual » Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:28 pm


I'm just going to let Lobster, Jub and the host of others mock you from now on, good day sir.

User avatar


Wrasslin' Fan

Postby syxxpakk » Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:29 pm

Lionel, you are quite the poster sir.
User avatar


Silly French Man

Postby habitual » Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:29 pm

ReturnoftheMack wrote:The government stocking up on bullets is really important in their ability to take over the country just in case their nukes, tanks, jets, aircraft carriers, battleships, missiles, RPGs, drones, helicopters and artillery don't do the job.

The real market will be on tin foil hats.



Postby Nobama » Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:30 pm

Bravo on wholly backing down to my last post Hab. I said absolutely nothing in it that wasn't true and you've shown that when confronted with solid communication you've got nothing.

How about everyone else like Syxx, Lobster, Nieto and the rest adds something instead of just spouting off about how absurd my opinions are.

I've yet to see any legitimate response to this "irresponsible gun owner" BS being thrown about my way.

I think most of you are just pissed off to high hell there's a gun advocate on your board who isn't afraid to voice an you cower and resort to making yourselves feel better by ridicule.
User avatar


Wrasslin' Fan

Postby syxxpakk » Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:33 pm

I can assure you, it does not piss me off that you post here. Far from it, in fact.
User avatar


Regular-Sized Poster

Postby pastajoe » Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:19 pm

LobsterJ wrote:At some point there will be an Amendment passed to prohibit private gun ownership, so I don't think it was a stupid point.

Mississippi officially ratified the 13th amendment ending slavery just this month. So I wouldn't expect a change regarding gun ownership to happen for a long, long time, if ever. ... d-slavery/


Postby Nobama » Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:32 pm

I think the point was that somewhere someone has proposed confiscation legislation. I highly doubt it will be the last place in the country.
User avatar



Postby achilles » Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:33 pm

ReturnoftheMack wrote:The government stocking up on bullets is really important in their ability to take over the country just in case their nukes, tanks, jets, aircraft carriers, battleships, missiles, RPGs, drones, helicopters and artillery don't do the job.

Be fair, however ridiculous you think his suggestion, no one uses nukes, aircraft carriers and the like to subjugate their own civilian population. They do use rifles and handguns. Unless there's active civil war like in Syria and they don't care about international opinion. It was how the Soviet Union kept order, and East Germany.

But I'm kind of wondering why he hasn't posted anything about the law working it's way through some Washington state place, Olympia or something that would violate the Constitution by requiring police to inspect the homes of gun owners at least once a year.

The excuse being the no one read the bill, and no one wrote it either. Apparently it appeared out of thin air. Even liberals are rolling there eyes at that one.

Anyway, I'm sure he'll post a link and summary---probably five pages long... :wink:


Postby Nobama » Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:14 pm

Haven't posted it because I hadn't seen it yet.

I'll spare posting the entire article.

Someone put the proposed language in the bill. It didn't create itself. Just more proof that there are people that want these kinds of measures to exist. I don't see how it's absurd to post this stuff when it's out there. ... 17xml.html
User avatar


The Goddamn Bat-min

Postby nietoperz » Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:48 am

Just FYI, I said nothing about your actual opinions: not sure if you've noticed, but I tend not to debate politics or religion here. What amused me was your style of discourse, basically saying, "If you don't agree with this you're a moron!" This method is, of course, always guaranteed to create calm, measured debate...
User avatar

S.F. Jude Terror


Postby S.F. Jude Terror » Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:15 am

I applaud your efforts, Lionel Terror. Someone's got to do this, and I just don't have it in me anymore. Have you ever heard of Newsbusters?
User avatar

S.F. Jude Terror


Postby S.F. Jude Terror » Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:17 am

Here's an example: ... re-restric

I think you'll find this site very interesting.


Postby Nobama » Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:49 am

Me thinks the government might be overstepping their authority juuuuuuuuuuuust a bit on this one :smt011 ... ammunition

Written By Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D.

How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.

What if that letter also stated: “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”?

That makes is sound like something right from a documentary on a tyrannical dictatorship somewhere in the world. Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me. It is being sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes. In my capacity as Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) I have been contacted by some of these veterans and the stories I am getting are appalling.

The letter provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA. In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent. This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall “… be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…”

Obviously, the Department of Veterans Affairs can’t be bothered by such impediments as the Constitution, particularly since they are clearly pushing to fulfill one of Obama’s main goals, the disarming of the American people. Janet Napolitano has already warned law enforcement that some of the most dangerous among us are America’s heroes, our veterans, and now according to this letter from the VA they can be prohibited from buying or even possessing a firearm because of a physical or mental disability.

Think about it, the men and women who have laid their lives on the line to defend us and our Constitution are now having their own Constitutional rights denied. There are no clear criteria for the VA to declare a veteran incompetent. It can be the loss of a limb in combat, a head injury, a diagnosis of PTSD, or even a soldier just telling someone at the VA that he or she is depressed over the loss of a buddy in combat. In none of these situations has the person been found to be a danger to themselves or others. If that was the case than all of the Americans who have suffered from PTSD following the loss of a loved one or from being in a car accident would also have to be disqualified from owning firearms. It would also mean that everyone who has ever been depressed for any reason should be disarmed. In fact, many of the veterans being deprived of their rights have no idea why it is happening.

The answer seems to be it is simply because they are veterans. At the USJF we intend to find the truth by filing a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Veterans Affairs to force them to disclose the criteria they are using to place veterans on the background check list that keeps them from exercising their Second Amendment rights. Then we will take whatever legal steps are necessary to protect our American warriors.

The reality is that Obama will not get all of the gun control measures he wants through Congress, and they wouldn’t be enough for him anyway. He wants a totally disarmed America so there will be no resistance to his plans to rob us of our nation. That means we have to ask who will be next. If you are receiving a Social Security check will you get one of these letters? Will the government declare that you are incompetent because of your age and therefore banned from firearm ownership. It certainly fits in with the philosophy and plans of the Obama administration. It is also certain that our military veterans don’t deserve this and neither do any other Americans.


Postby Nobama » Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:46 am

How this isn't alarming to most people is astonishing to me. It just keeps getting more scary. It's a continual push for a domestic army while simultaneously trying to disarm the general populace.

Obama Department of Homeland Security Purchases 2,700 Light-Armored Tanks to Go With Their 1.6 Billion Bullet Stockpile ... stockpile/
User avatar


Not a Kardashian

Postby Thunderstorm » Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:52 pm

Lionel, people aren't going to give a damn about this until it affects them, or some Internet crusade that shares their biases addresses the issue. Even though it's in the news, absolutely true, confirmed directly from the source in question, it's going to be a conspiracy theory until it's brought up as a concern by someone in the media they trust.

Once the general public accepts that 'oh yeah that crazy shit IS going on' it's just 'oh well'. Part of this depends on who's in office. The most obvious example is war protests. All the protests and criticism stopped once Bush left office. So the anger at the mass murdering war for profit, and the deep compassion for the innocents killed was really nothing but anger that the opposing team was in office.

The Bilderberg Group is another. For at least a decade most people thought this was ridiculous, and even the very media that attended the meetings laughed at it. Now these same people talk about it like it's just a normal event.

People are stupid. For some reason, the general public believes that we live in a time where governments can't or won't try to gain more power and weaken the power of the people, despite all of recorded history saying something opposite.

Keep being the crazy person. You care more about the future being created for their children than they do. They care about their ideology created for them by the people who want to control them. It has always been this way, and it will never change.

leave a comment with facebook

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Draco x, FaceBook [Linkcheck], Rebirth NoctourneM, Vader and 81 guests