On The Assembly Floor, New WI GOP Leader Has Carried A Glock
Waukesha, WI legislator Bill Kramer, replacing a GOP leader bumped up to a high-paying job at the State Public Service Commission, made headlines during State Capitol protests in 2012 by disclosing he was carrying a model 26 Glock semi-automatic handgun on the Assembly floor.
18 comments:
We could have had attorney Steven Schmuki as our representative. Instead, we have this clown.
No need for concealed carry now, is there?
Bill carrier his Glock during the civil unrest of the Act 10 days too, and it's constitutionally legal. Everyone should express their gratitude to Bill for exercising that right.
Hope he never has to defend himself with lethal force.
Get the Solidarity Singers to start showing up armed and we'll see how quickly concealed carry gets restricted in the Capitol.
Hope he never has to defend himself with lethal force.
yeah, because the Legislature is a hotbed of violence and lawbreaking.
Sheesh. Guns are not magic wands that solve any issue, except in children's imaginations.
Choose a nym, so you can be proud of your hateful spew. Or are you not proud of it?
Anon @ 11:43-
...or a couple of African Americans.
"...or a couple of African Americans."
That's a pretty racist stereotypical statement. More proof the left talks the talk.
When are you going to get over division of humans by race and skin color?
"I have a dream..." Still hallow words.
Solidarity singers don't believe in guns.
@Betsey
Schmuki hasn't run against him since 2006. It was Jones in 08, and Crumins in 2010.
Apparently you and your friends at the coffee shop need to get with the times and find out who is actually trying to become elected.
I'm going to call Kramer myself as I am pretty upset. Why would he carry a 9mm subcompact when Glock makes a .45 G30S?
The .45s have greater stopping power than any 9mm.
Shame, Shame, Shame on Kramer!
Looks like Zombie got caught being a hypocrite.
Shameful remarks from someone that claims others spew hate.
That's a pretty racist stereotypical statement. More proof the left talks the talk.
It's not racist because it mentions race. More proof, if anything, that those on the right don't understand what racism is, and thus can't ever tell when it's actually in play.
It's actually a historical reference to the way Saint Reagan jumped all over gun control in California when a couple of Black Panthers started exercising their constitutional right to openly carry.
THAT was racist. recognizing that it was racist, is not racism.
DO try to keep up, rather than continually demonstrating that you have very good reasons for hiding your froth behind the Anonymous Collective.
The .45s have greater stopping power than any 9mm.
I hope you feel better now. Did you wipe up after yourself, or use a sock?
Anon 6:39AM, you don't know history. Look up the Black Panthers and the legal response to them.
How would you feel if black activists carrying guns showed up en masse in the Capitol rotunda? Be honest.
Shameful remarks from someone that claims others spew hate.
Please explain exactly how my comment was racist.
Merely mentioning African Americans is not sufficient.
And it is not very shaming to be called out by someone who can't even muster the courage to generate a nym.
The day you quit calling out your fellow man by skin color, or race, or intentional stereotyping and race baiting, I'll believe you. Until then, I guess we'll wait another 50 years to see progress on behalf of Dr. King.
http://www.mattbors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/1021.png
The day you quit calling out your fellow man by skin color, or race, or intentional stereotyping and race baiting, I'll believe you.
I told you, the mere fact I mentioned African Americans does not make the comment racist.
http://www.mattbors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/1021.png
I never started calling anybody out by skin color or race. In fact, I pointed out an instance where the Most Holy Republican Reagan took ACTIONS that were racist.
...but I am interested. How will you tell the day when I STOP doing so? For instance, I did not do so today.
So you can start believing me today? Or are there some undefined number of days necessary before you will believe me? Ten? Fifty? Forever?
It's a logically meaningless statement. But kind of funny. Again, I see why you prefer to hide your silliness behind the Wall of Anonymity.
Post a Comment