Colorado State Senator Greg Brophy explains how laws which are supported by 91 and 62% of the public can also be unpopular...

It appears as if the Democratic Governor of Colorado - John Hickenlooper - is about to sign two gun control laws - one which would require background checks, even in the cases of private or online sales, and also one which would limit most ammunition magazines to 15 rounds.

What does the Republican Party have to say about these likely signings?

Colorado State Senator Greg Brophy responded with this:

"If he signs these bills, I have come to the conclusion that he's more interested in his national prospects than he is in his legacy here in Colorado. These are not moderate. These are extreme, and just really unpopular."

It appears that Mr. Brophy is celebrating his own personal opposite day.

How would you describe these gun control laws again, Mr. Brophy?

"...just really unpopular..."

That's what I thought I read. Well, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll, 92% of the American public believes in mandatory background checks, even for private or online sales of guns - this includes 91% support from those whom possess a gun in their households. With regard to the other law, the same poll shows 56% support for a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds.

A John Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health poll shows that 89% of Americans support mandatory background checks for all gun sales, and another 68% support banning the sale of large-capacity magazines.

So, averaging out these two reputable polling firms' numbers, 90.5% of the American public supports mandatory background checks on all gun sales and 62% support the banning the sale of large-capacity magazines. To put it another way, over 9 in 10 people support background checks and over 3 in 5 support the banning of large-capacity magazines.

Sorry, Mr. Brophy. My hearing and memory are failing me today. How would you describe these gun control laws again?

"...just really unpopular..."

Ah, yes, that's it. He's absolutely correct. When I think of laws that have the support of 91% and 62% of the American population, respectively, the first word that comes to mind when describing these laws is "unpopular."

Keeping in mind that Senator Brophy feels those two laws are unpopular, here now is a list of things I believe he would deem to be popular:

- Eating at Hooters on a first date

- Going to Iowa for a honeymoon

- Visiting the in-laws while sober

- Other people's kids (exception: Catholic priests)

- People whom speak in third-person when giving a speech

- Donald Trump hairpieces

- Broccoli

- The obese sporting a two-piece

- Anything which receives between 0 and 49% support from the American public

- The Republican Party

http://news.yahoo.com/colo-gun-restrictions-bring-political-124941354.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/americans-support-gun-con_b_2573812.html

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail/?ReleaseID=1847

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"

The Kind-Hearted Smart Aleck

Search This Blog