Guest list is getting pretty inbred again.

Please get the volume up.

It is impossible to hear Bil.

Can hear the person taking the video, loud and clear.

Thanks

During one of those storms, a Korean store owner fended off looters with an AR15. 2 or 3 or 4 looters with pistols would require an assault rifle with 100 round magazines for self defense.

Gun violence proves that the courts are not providing satisfactory dispute resolution to society. Everyone knows the courts are rotten. It would do more good to fix the courts (stop the judges with dirty tricks) than to make up more gun rules.

I used to watch the news and think - What can I do, now I think - What can I do

Here is my attempt:
(feel free to use any part of this to send to your congress member)

A letter to my Illinois Congressman - Aaron Schock (R)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr Schock,

I want you to know I have your career here in Peoria since your beginnings as a district 150 school board member. With as incredible as your success has been in our political system, I would like to believe that you have the good of your district at heart.

As a conservative I know you have passionate beliefs in how our leaders should govern. I urge you then to follow the example of fellow Republican Ronald Reagan who asked congress to tighten the legislation of assault weapons. These are not arms intended for self-defense. They are designed solely to kill quickly and in mass numbers.

I believe in the second amendment to our Constitution - that the right we have to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. This right however, needs to be balanced with the implied rights the Founding Fathers purposed for the American people.

If you or any of your colleague have any question regarding the purpose the Founding Fathers had when they established these laws, Consider these great words:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Thank you

Where is the link for Mayor Booker's gun buyback jewelry? I can hardly wait to own a piece and buy them for gifts.

Infringment on 2nd Ammendment gun rights? Huh?... but then the NRA says it's the video game industry that needs to be managed, well isn't that asking for an infringement on the 1st Ammendment right? hmmmmmm

Rachel, you called them trolls-we always

called them ginks. They are REAL GINKS!

Love your show, carry on....

I just wonder are there any Democrat Trolls. Democrats dont say anything to simply draw emotion. Of course not they are all perfect!!!!! Just damn. Y'all a piece of work.

Make sure you dont call the President a troll or you will be a racist. But you can make these statements about other...Hypocrites

In the immortal words of Walter Matthau in "The Survivors", the trolls are "professional s%#@ disturbers."

Would you please check into this and report on it? If true, it adds an amazing component to the 2nd amendment controversy: http://www.readability.com/read?url=http%3A//truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery

PS: I have a troll doll collection, so I loved the optics on you "troll" segment!

Rachel, you said that the trolls dont believe the lunacies they espouse. I truly think they do.

what does a latin and language expert say concerning the wording of the 2nd amendment?

professor copperrud is an acknowledged expert on laguage.

[Copperud:] "The words 'A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,' contrary to the interpretation cited in your letter of July 26, 1991, constitutes a present participle, rather than a clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying 'militia,' which is followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject 'the right', verb 'shall'). The to keep and bear arms is asserted as an essential for maintaining a militia. "In reply to your numbered questions:

[Schulman:] "(1) Can the sentence be interpreted to grant the right to keep and bear arms solely to 'a well-regulated militia'?"

[Copperud:] "(1) The sentence does not restrict the right to keep and bear arms, nor does it state or imply possession of the right elsewhere or by others than the people; it simply makes a positive statement with respect to a right of the people."

[Schulman:] "(2) Is 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms' granted by the words of the Second Amendment, or does the Second Amendment assume a preexisting right of the people to keep and bear arms, and merely state that such right 'shall not be infringed'?"

[Copperud:] "(2) The right is not granted by the amendment; its existence is assumed. The thrust of the sentence is that the right shall be preserved inviolate for the sake of ensuring a militia."

[Schulman:] "(3) Is the right of the people to keep and bear arms conditioned upon whether or not a well regulated militia, is, in fact necessary to the security of a free State, and if that condition is not existing, is the statement 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed' null and void?"

[Copperud:] "(3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as a requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence."

[Schulman:] "(4) Does the clause 'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,' grant a right to the government to place conditions on the 'right of the people to keep and bear arms,' or is such right deemed unconditional by the meaning of the entire sentence?"

[Copperud:] "(4) The right is assumed to exist and to be unconditional, as previously stated. It is invoked here specifically for the sake of the militia."

[Schulman:] "(5) Which of the following does the phrase 'well-regulated militia' mean: 'well-equipped', 'well-organized,' 'well-drilled,' 'well-educated,' or 'subject to regulations of a superior authority'?"

[Copperud:] "(5) The phrase means 'subject to regulations of a superior authority;' this accords with the desire of the writers for civilian control over the military."

schulman then asked question that used professor copperud's definition to include the private citizenry in the 2nd, but professor copperud had firmly stated that the 2nd was applicable for the militias.

"Prisoner of hope"

I find your continued platforming of a fraud like Cory Booker, whose faked acts of heroism, complete with press entourage in tow, have become an urban legend, to be alienating and you have lost a viewer...

I also find Rachel's pandering to weepery at the playing of the national anthem, and rationalizing the fake tears of John Boehner as appealing, to be amazingly inauthentic...

Call me when you get real, and less corporate, again....