Gerard A. Mullen | Seven Days | Vermont's Independent Voice

Gerard A. Mullen 
Member since Mar 2, 2015


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Gun Control Supporters Concede Defeat on Background Checks

I got curious a couple of years ago about these mass shootings. They have been increasing in frequency over the past 30 years. If you go online and type in "Mass killings/drugs" you will find that there seems to be a correlation between the prescribing of anti-depressant drugs and these shootings. Of course there are learned sounding counter arguments. We saw that with tobacco, we are seeing it with climate change. And we will see it with these drugs too. But there is a correlation and nobody is investigating it. Maybe instead of controlling guns, we should just ban Ridilin. There is a rare side effect in about one in every thousand, of delusions, aggression and violence with this entire class of anti-depressant drugs.

Another thing to check out. Go online and type in "Police/duty to protect individuals." You will find case after case, including a decision by the U.S. Supreme court, that says that police have no duty to protect individuals. Police protect society. The last attempted home invasion we had here in our house in Bolton VT, in 2007, it took -state police an hour to get here after three calls! Meanwhile the four out-of-state punks were drivin off by a loud dog and an M-1898 Mauser that was fully loaded and operational. But my son said that a 30 round magazine would have felt a lot better than the five-round mag of the Mauser.

For the benefit of the anti-gun crowd, a Mauser is a rifle designed for shooting mice. It is 8 mm. That means that it is eight millimeters long. Oh, and that bridge in Crown point....I'll sell it for $10.

6 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Gerard A. Mullen on 03/02/2015 at 2:56 PM

Re: “Gun Control Supporters Concede Defeat on Background Checks

Has nobody studied history? Probably not as the history texts have been made so boring. But if you do, you will find that Republics have a short lifespan. Few of them last more than about 250 years. The founding fathers knew this. (The Texas Textbook committee didn't censor text books back then) and they put the second amendment into the bill of Rights with that bit of information in mind.
Has anyone noticed that the Supreme court, in a 5 to 4 decision a couple of years ago decided that Corporations can put as much money as they want into political races? Well so can I, so I guess that makes the poor corporations equal to me. (And if you believe that, I've got a bridge at Crown Point I'll sell you cheap.) Is it conceivable that a group of corporations with interlocking directorates might be able to buy enough congressmen and even a president, who would pass laws totally favorable to corporations? Is it possible that such a government might become destructive of the rights of Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness? Would the people have any rights under such circumstances?
We'd still have the right to vote, but both parties might well be bought out so it wouldn't make any difference. The forms would stay the same. Caesar Augustus didn't change the forms of the old Republic. He was just Consul-for-life, and was a bit more equal than anybody else.
The right to bear arms is a continual threat to would-be usurpers of power. If the people are disarmed, they can be subjugated more easily by would-be oligarchs.

5 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Gerard A. Mullen on 03/02/2015 at 2:31 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Keep up with us Seven Days a week!

Sign up for our fun and informative
newsletters:

All content © 2017 Da Capo Publishing, Inc. 255 So. Champlain St. Ste. 5, Burlington, VT 05401
Website powered by Foundation