E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSLow expectations for NRA meeting with White House on guns … Obama’s two options on guns – incremental or bold, either one puts him in a box. … The U.S. is signaling it wants out of Afghanistan and using “zero option” as negotiating tactic with Karzai … With Afghanistan policy, cabinet picks, a confident Obama’s fully implement the “Obama Doctrine.” … 2016 watch: There are several governors/potential 2016 hopefuls giving State of the State addresses. What they say could lay the groundwork for 2016 bids … 2014 watch: A conservative group goes after McConnell, Strickland won’t run again for governor in Ohio.
*** Joe Biden’s gun violence listening sessions begin: Beginning today, Joe Biden begins the series of gatherings at the White House, aimed at trying to create some consensus on what to do about gun violence. These are the meetings President Obama promised would take place in the wake of Newtown, and these are the meetings that are designed to come up with recommendations in time for the president to push in his State of the Union. The most intriguing session could be tomorrow when gun groups, including the NRA, are represented at the White House. But let’s not get too optimistic about the NRA’s participation. This meeting may be for show, pure and simple. Both sides had to do it. The White House had to issue an invite to the NRA, and the NRA had to say yes, which the NRA says will indicate the seriousness with which they take this offer. The NRA is sending a representative (not LaPierre) to hear what the White House has to say, but it is just one of several gun-advocacy groups that will participate in this Biden guns summit.
The vice president returned to Washington Thursday and is scheduled to meet with victim groups and gun-safety organizations. The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd reports.
*** Not much common ground with the NRA: If there is any common ground between the NRA and the White House, it could be on the idea of mandating state participation in the mental-health database and stronger mental-health screenings. But nothing on gun restrictions themselves, not on clips either. As for today’s meeting, Biden meets with victims’ groups and gun-safety advocates. And he’s also expected to meet with representatives from the video game and entertainment industry, but those meetings have yet to be scheduled. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on TODAY said that despite New Jersey having some of the toughest gun laws in the country, that banning guns is not enough. “I’m willing to have that conversation,” Christie said of a federal ban on powerful, high-capacity weapons, “but you’ve got to deal with these other issues.”
Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images
Vice President Joe Biden stands on the steps of the Capitol as Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., nearly a year after suffering a major stroke, marks his return to the Senate by walking up the steps to the Senate door.
*** Two options on gun measures: The White House has a self-imposed deadline of the end of this month to come up with some tangible items. They can go one of two ways: (1) Incremental (magazines and mental-health screenings): This will show the White House trying to create proposals that can pass, but there will be a lot of disappointed people, or (2) Bolder (really pushing for reinstating the assault-weapons ban, mandatory background checks of all purchases, including private sales, a national gun ownership database): But the risk of the bold approach is that it can’t pass Congress. It’s a bit of a political box for the White House; they’d like to do something, and there is a chance to “do something,” but what is possible and what some gun-control advocates really want are not in the same ballpark.
The New Jersey governor talks with TODAY's Matt Lauer about the state of the Republican party, gun control, and his frustrations over the postponement of a vote on disaster aid for superstorm Sandy victims, saying, "people are suffering."
*** U.S. wants out of Afghanistan: Afghan President Hamid Karzai hits Washington this week. He will meet with the president at the White House Friday. Coinciding with that visit, White House national-security officials held a conference call yesterday, in which they said, per NBC’s Ali Weinberg, that leaving no troops at all in Afghanistan after the scheduled 2014 drawdown is a possibility. It’s clear President Obama wants as minimal a presence in Afghanistan post-2014 as possible (short of covert ops and special forces). The “zero option” is all about negotiating leverage with Karzai. (The range being talked about seriously is from 3,000 up to a high of 15,000, pushed by military types.) Yes, Karzai says publicly he wants the U.S. out of Afghanistan, but he really needs and wants more U.S. troops there for security. But clearly, this is not going to be a sustained nation-building effort.
*** ‘Obama Doctrine’ being fully implemented: The mercurial Obama Doctrine is now clear and being fully implemented with the president free of politics. In his first term, Obama was boxed in politically by the Pentagon and had a cabinet full of politically palatable holdovers (Gates, Petraeus) and a rival (Clinton). He probably regrets the Afghan surge but he can never say it, because soldiers died. Compare that to now – the U.S. on the verge of complete withdrawal from Afghanistan (minus covert/special ops) and a national-security team of Hagel, Brennan, and Kerry. The U.S. needs some presence in Afghanistan to launch attacks on al Qaeda, et al, but Obama policy will likely make it look more like how the U.S. operates in Pakistan and Yemen than George W. Bush’s Iraq and Afghanistan.
Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark. Joins The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd to talk about why he wanted to join Congress, and his colleagues should say "no" to Obama more often.
*** Governors to watch for 2016: While we still don’t know when the president is delivering his State of the Union, there are 50 “State of States” coming up. And there are a bunch we’ll be looking at delivered by potential 2016 hopefuls -- from Chris Christie in New Jersey (on the cover of Time, by the way, as “The Boss”) to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Bob McDonnell (R) in Virginia, Bobby Jindal (R) in Louisiana, and Martin O’Malley in Maryland. Christie, who delivered his yesterday, focused on Sandy and pragmatism (mildly rebuking his party on TODAY: “We’ve lost two elections in a row. The answer is no… we have to be thinking about doing something different.”) Cuomo, who delivers his today, will focus on guns and pushing for stricter limits on them. McDonnell, who also makes his “State of the Commonwealth” address tonight, unveiled his transportation funding plan, which remarkably called for the elimination of the gas tax. That’s traditionally been what’s funded transportation projects both statewide and at the federal level. But McDonnell also proposed making the source of transportation funding with higher sales taxes and other fees, including even a $100 annual fee on hybrid cars and alternative-fuel vehicles. For those governors thinking about running for president, these speeches could provide a baseline for what they’re platform might be.
*** Three-way race in Virginia? Speaking of Virginia, the governor’s race to replace McDonnell could get a little more interesting. Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who’d have a hard time winning a GOP primary against Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, is leaving the door wide open to an independent bid. “I have been tremendously encouraged,” Bolling told a local TV station, adding, “Unfortunately when the Republican Party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. That is not the right direction for the Republican Party.” He says he’ll make his decision on whether to enter this year’s race by mid-March. By the way, a Quinnipiac poll shows a statistically tied race between Cucinelli and Democrat Terry McAuliffe, with lots of undecideds. McAuliffe has the narrow 40%-39% edge. Bolling only gets 13% in a potential three-way with McAuliffe and Cucinelli both at 34%.
*** 2014 watch: Conservative group launches Internet ad against Mitch McConnell: “Whose side are you on? … Former Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland said yesterday he won’t run in a rematch against incumbent Republican John Kasich. … The Boston Globe digs into where Ed Markey, thinking about a run for the Senate, has gotten his money over the years. He was chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications, and “the communications and electronics industries have been Markey’s largest sources of campaign cash….”
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower
Leave a Comment:
The Tea Party is nearing death.
Rasmussen Reports this week found that views of the tea party at a new low. Only 8 percent of likely
voters considered themselves tea-party members, down from 24 percent in 2010. According to Rasmussen
(which tends to have a pro-Republican bias), unfavorable views of the movement topped favorable views, 49 percent to 30 percent. The tea party has dominated GOP party primaries and therefore the congressional Republican caucuses.
Remember this poll is done by Rasmussen - which tends to have a pro-Republican bias.
From the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution:
From the moron Dem Minority Leader in the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi:
“If were president, I'd use the 14th Amendment, which says that the debt of the United States will always be paid,” she told CBS "Face The Nation" on Sunday.
She is an idiot.
And so is anyone who agrees with her on this issue.
The first 13 words of the fourth section of the 14th “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law” would CLEARLY make her and any other lefty liberal moron’s 14th argument ridiculously stupid. Of course, lefty liberal policy positions have NEVER been stopped by the mere fact that they are “ridiculously stupid”. In fact, they generally rely on that quality to get low information voters to elect Democrats.
If Barry were to instruct Tax-Cheater Timmy to issue Treasury debt that exceeds the current law debt limit, ALL those securities would clearly NOT be “authorized by law”.
That means the debt would be illegal and unconstitutional, and not many prudent investors would be willing to buy it. (My guess is that the only buyers of dog-sh!t worthless paper like that would be union pension funds and public employee retirement systems. LMFAO!!!!!)
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution CLEARLY reserves the authority to issue US Treasury debt to the Congress:
As much as Barry and the lefty liberals would like to think they elected him King of the United States, he is only the President, and he is STUCK with complying with the US Constitution.
BTW, to all the lefty liberal morons that want to argue the debt ceiling is unconstitutional, you are wrong. The debt ceiling law is just a convenience to streamline America’s path to bankruptcy. Up until 1917, EVERY issuance of US Treasury debt was individually authorized by Congress, as required by the Constitution. When those borrowings became so numerous as to be a pain in the ass for Congress they instituted the debt ceiling as a substitute for passing individual bills for every US Treasury debt issuance. If you think the upcoming debt ceiling fight is going to be tough, imagine Barry having to go to Congress, hat in hand, to ask for permission for EVERY single US Treasury debt auction!!!!
Hey!!!!
That might be the way to restore America’s govt finances to fiscal sanity. Go for it lefty liberals!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Time to get our troops home from Afghanistan - ASAP.
According to reports, groups within the Obama administration are pushing to keep no more than a few thousand troops in Afghanistan after 2014, raising the prospect that the United States will be unable to keep its promise to fully train and equip Afghan security forces.
Some in the administration are pressing for a force that could be as small as 2,500, arguing that a light touch would be the most constructive way to cap the costly, unpopular war.
Those troop levels are significantly lower than what some senior military officials have advocated, arguing that a sudden disengagement could lead to the collapse of a frail state and the onset of a new civil war. The low number also is much lower than the 10,000-to-30,000 range discussed among NATO allies and some U.S. officials as recently as a year ago.
White House officials said (1/8) that they have not ruled out leaving no troops at all when the U.N. security mandate sanctioning the international coalition expires.
The United States has committed to prevent al-Qaeda from regaining a foothold in the country. Some senior military officials and analysts have pressed for a more robust force, arguing that a hasty disengagement would be reckless and could cause Afghanistan's security forces to crumble. The United States has invested $50 billion in training and equipping the Afghan army and police.
Determining the size of a possible post-2014 force is the first step to charting out the timeline for withdrawing the remaining 66,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Keeping troops there after 2014 would require a bilateral agreement stipulating the authority of the contingent and the legal protections its members would enjoy. Among the issues are whether the U.S. troops can conduct counterterrorism operations on their own and whether they would be immune from Afghan law.
The troop levels under serious consideration range from 2,500 to 6,000.
Liars? Trolls? Bigots? They come here, deflect from genuine issues, divert our attention from serious problems at best, and at worst they spread misinformation and disinformation that is frequently accepted as fact.
Too often, they rage about an issue that has no clear solution; issues that are not black and white. They have "facts". Well, no they don't. They have selected information that supports their unyielding position, but those "facts" don't give us the whole picture. The now missing Bill from Fairfax, and Roy Wilson are two examples of this. But if there's a truly odious icon of this behavior it is Joe from Albany. Consider what he brings. First-order deflection, diversion, and always a generous portion of hatred.
We hear about his diet. He dines on salmon, filet mignon, and washes it down with Sam Adams beer, a diet he imagines is preferred by the well-to-do. Joe can't tell us enough about his success. Yet, for someone who measures ALL success in money, he moves beyond rationality when he denigrates all things Obama and all things Democrat. His wealth, he tells us, has continued to increase during President Obama's term. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?
Here's the black and white example of his utterly ridiculous rants. The day following President Obama's re-election, the stock market, as measured by the Dow, dropped about 300 points. Oh, how he rejoiced. Here's a guy making money on the stock market - at least that's what he says - and he loves watching it drop. Maybe, he's selling short.
But, the day following that drop, the market rebounded. Well, according to our financial genius, that's called the "dead cat bounce", as in anything that drops is going to bounce back a teensy-weensy bit. Joe knows the market will drop further. More good news, right?
Fast forward to yesterday. The market closed higher than it did the day the President was re-elected. (I wonder if Joe covered his short positions.) That dead cat took one hell of a bounce. If one were to look at this in terms of physics, that dead cat had a coefficient of restitution greater than one. That is impossible in the real world. So Joe's dead cat analogy is, well, dead. Isn't that Hillaryous? HAHAHAHAHA!
Recently, we heard from another troll named Bobster. He seems to have run away from First Read after having been exposed as a blatant liar. However, he has gone elsewhere only to antagonize readers as a climate change denialist. Like Joe, he is filthy rich and must flaunt his two beachfront homes in Florida, his new truck, massive SUV, and his 600HP Corvette. He also has two huge boats.
They just can't help themselves. We can help them. We, as a nation, have serious problems to solve and believe it or not, while most of them must be solved by meeting them head-on, others can be eliminated by ignoring them. Yes, ignoring a problem can some times make them go away. That works for Bobster and Joe,.
Joe in Albany
From the moron Dem Minority Leader in the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi:
“If were president, I'd use the 14th Amendment, which says that the debt of the United States will always be paid,” she told CBS "Face The Nation" on Sunday.
She is an idiot.
Joe in Albany, your post is just like Republican Congress Critters; lower than a cockroach.
Only an idiot like you and FOX News would think the US should not pay its debt
Welcome to left wing loonytown right here on MSNBC. Let's make Pigotry the president.
Joe - keep it up, you really get under the skin of the man who knows so little about so much, David Walker.
LMFMO !!!!!!!!!!!!
LMFAO !!!!!!!!!!!!
We hear about his diet. He dines on salmon, filet mignon, and washes it down with Sam Adams beer, a diet he imagines is preferred by the well-to-do. Joe can't tell us enough about his success.
_______________________________________________
David Wanker: I find your OCD fascination with my posts Hillariously FUNNY!!!!!
Carry on.
Life is good.
Enjoy.
The next fight will be over the debt ceiling...again? Remember the lowering of US credit rating last time after the fight over debt ceiling (summer 2011?). Why does the party of NO want to hold the entire country hostage? But it's self-destruction for the GOP.
.
If the GOP doesn't plan to blink,
the entire party is going off the brink!!!
I wish for once Pig, you knew what the f you were talking about. Have you been on the ground in Kunar or Nangahar Province? Do you know the power of the Haqqani Network, its AQ affiliations or its eventual goals to put suicide bombers on US streets (the Times Square bomber was a test run)?
Have you ever left the continent or do you just rattle off whatever sounds good in your head or what liberal news networks tell you to think and say? Please get a life and stop posting here as if you actually know what you are talking about.
Notice the word games the left is playing here. Its no longer going to be called "gun control" it's "gun violence control."
This is the tactic used to muster public support and tarnish people who oppose their "anti gun violence" bills even though they will do nothing to address the problem with violence.
It's all about image with the left. They changed the war on terror to an over seas contingency operation. They changed terrorists to enemy combatants.
The call a law allowing women to sue their employers after a year off the job the "fair pay act" even though there is already a law requiring fair pay.
This as all about political gamesmanship. They are only out to score political points.
Joe in Albany,
Thank God, no one in the market place, pushes to be Crazy. Settle down and realize that the political fight over the debt ceiling will be won be President Obama. Period!
Bring on the debt ceiling debate …
Wash Post/ABC Poll (Jan 2 thru 6, 2013)
Approve of Fiscal Cliff negotiations:
Pres. Obama: 52%/37% [+15]
Pres. Obama & Congress: 45%/38% [+7]
John Boehner: 31%/51% [-20]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/polling/postabc-poll-fiscal-cliff-agreement-january/2013/01/08/f62b3e00-598a-11e2-b8b2-0d18a64c8dfa_page.html
Pres Obama's Job Approval (01/08/2013): 54% / 39% [+15]
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx
riley-1759556 (#1.9), what are you talking about?
My post about the troop level (#1.2) is based on a Washington Post report about the discussions going on inside Washington, none is my personal opinion - my intention is to inform, not to push my own agenda. Even if it's my personal opinion, you don't have to take offense. Do we have freedom of speech, or what?
*taps my fingers as I try to figure out if this thread is about Biden listening sessions on gun violence or if this is basically about EVERYTHING wrong in Washington* Regardless, common sense must be used. How folks handle daily life without it is baffling. Why are the same issues not being brought up now that Obama wants to raise the debt ceiling. As I recall a previous statement made by him, it is Un-Patriotic. Isn't it? Either way, NO ONE is Washington is working for We The People. I am talking about the hard working TAX PAYING (INCOME) American people!
You're spot on David, these trolls are best kept hidden, the ignore button is a great tool.
There is a small army of such ill informed cretins floating around the various blog sites, some are paid, some are just so angry at the world and all in it, that they have to keep spewing nonsense mixed with hate and their pay is the responses from irritated people who disagree with them.
There are other ways to respond to their nonsense, keep posting the truth based on research so reasonable people reading will hopefully further investigate for their own edification. If a response is needed, address it indirectly,
riley - don't you just love it when an idiot reveals exactly what you pointed out?
riley - pig, "do you just rattle off whatever sounds good in your head or whatever liberal news networks tell you what to think and say?"
pig - "my post is based on a Washington Post report"
I have to give that a Joe response -HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
JH - lotsanumbers:
Just going over some of your wonderful posts:
So, how was Phoenix? Hope you had a great time. Unfortunately, there's no one talking about a President Romney in this part of the country.
Oh, about that guy who knows so little........
There's little Joey still thinking he's funny. Hey Joey we're not laughing with you, we're laughing at you.
I Shot an Elephant in my Pajamas
From the article above:
From this writer’s perspective, you are looking at the Republican nominee in 2016.
Since hurricane Sandy, the Governor’s move towards the center is a calculated, intelligent and savvy move on his part, especially in a blue state surrounded by a bounty of blue state electoral votes.
I will be watching the Governor’s transformation over the next few years, and his comments and positions on guns, gay marriage, and health care are going to determine if he can get the “Reagan Democrats” to side with him.
Salud
* **
“One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I'll never know.”
Groucho Marx
Salud
Hey, JH-479998 (#1.17)
Hahahahahaha ....... plenty funny...
...and your point is ?????????????
Well Joe, good luck on purchasing future salmon steaks at only three times the price if the morons on your side @!$%# around with the debt ceiling. BTW, it will not happen as even most Republicans and their financial backers are a tad smarter than you.
Live the dream baby, I have a lobster party to cook up and a case of Chardonnay to chill.
David Walker - the man who knows so little about so much
I had a great time in Phoenix inspite of Obama winning the election. It would have been so much better to celebrate a new direction in this country but we'll have to wait until the next election and try again. I even purchased a real nice classic car while I was there. I figured I should spread my wealth around. I invested in something and helped the economy of Pheonix, gave a job to a trucking company to transport a vehicle for me, helped my state by paying taxes on my purchase (unlike a liberal John Kerry who would try to cheat on that). What have you done lately to help the economy? Besides pay your internet provider?
Joe - don't let blackcat scare you, I can get you Alaska sockeye anytime direct from the man who catches it.
Pigotry, nice post. Those "senior military" folks will always claim that just a little more time will do it....ala Vietnam. Well, "senior military", we've been in Afghanistan for 12 years; a little more time will not change the way things are. We have been leaving in an orderly manner. The US and its allies have given Afghanistan an additional four years since President Obama took office and refocused on the ball that Bush/Cheney took theirs eyes off to start another long and even worse, an unnecessary war. Afghanistan has been given a chance, what that country does with that opportunity is now their decision. Time to come home.
David W, enjoyed that post. Personally, I think our conservative friend Joe is a lot of talk but I dismiss 95% of what he says as wishful thinking and carefully filter the remaining 5%. If Albany Joe was as smart as he claims, then he would understand that if the US defaults on its debt because the GOPers refuse to raise the debt ceiling, then he can kiss his Wall Street wealth good bye. He may short his investments but that "dead cat" of a US default won't bounce. Who knows, maybe Joe can bury what's left of his money in his back yard under the grill where he can eat his salmon and drink his Sam Adams dreaming of what might have been.
Biden needs to get on a bus with Piers Morgan and drive to London!
Gun control is like prohibition. A bunch of silly people wanting to destroy something that they can't control. If the idiots who are wanting this get it done then it will just increase lawlessness and make decent people criminals. History repeats itself from idiots who do not know or understand it.
You loonies on the left. Do you have to try and be dumber then one another or is that just what happens when the entire party put together has the common sense of a rock?
5 reasons why America has a Republican problem
http://www.eclectablog.com/2013/01/5-reasons-why-america-has-a-republican-problem.html
There is an easy test of insanity.
Can you complete the sentence: "I need an assault weapon because . . . . . . ."?
If you had no trouble completing the sentence, the results are conclusive. You are I-N-S-A-N-E.
Of course, there are exceptions. You could be simply seditious or a terrorist. In either case, I'd suggest the judge send you to GITMO and lose the paperwork. If you are a member of the National Rats Association, then feel free to rage and foam at the mouth. Your fears, your anger, your rage are to be expected of the senile and early alzheimers victims.
David Walker
Ah, yes. We'll all miss Fairfax Bill's lectures on the proper interpretation of those skewed polls that covered up the big Romney win that was about to take place. After being proven so horribly wrong, Bill probably could go on to have a bright future with a highly paid job at the Heritage Foundation, just like Dick Cheney's torture advocate, David Addington, who got a cushy job there. And look what happened to Bill Kristol, who informed a C-SPAN audience in 2002 that the Iraq war would only last a couple months and who then went on to enjoy a brilliant career as a ridiculously wrong pundit, whose latest brilliant contribution was the prediction of a big Romney victory along with Dick Morris and Karl Rove. Kristol was awarded for his brilliance with high pay and frequent guest appearances on the Sunday talk shows. So maybe Fairfax Bill is now getting his wingnut welfare check, too, from the billionaires who finance the far-right clown show.
@David,
You point fingers and make fun of posters that don't agree with you, saying they're liars and using deception in their posts to deflect from the real problems....
...yet you get along fine with beverly, fiesty, pigotry and the rest of the libs here that make racist and homophobic comments about people. You go along with the left media saying gun control will solve all problems, obama will solve all problems, republicans (i.e. people who don't agree with you) are all evil.
All I'm seeing is hypocrisy at it's best.
JH-479998
What are you going to do, stick wings on it and point it in the direction of Albany? BTW, Joe is a mid-range price salmon guy ... better ask your guy for Coho ... he can't afford the Chinook.
So, according to David Walker and they other liberals on here if you do not fall in line with their views you are a troll. Can't be you have a different point of view, you are just not very smart and a troll. Pathetic!
poor davey jones is upset that people dont lap up his propaganda spew. Geniune issues, now that is a good one. Yeah Davey, you and the lefty proletariats talk so geniunely about the 'issues'. me me me me, genuine indeed
Gee, JH, I'd say that describes you to a "T" . . . .
Caesar Augustus,
Why do I get the feeling you put lifts in your shoes?
If we are willing to talk about low levels of troops in Afghanistan, where there are still some concentrations of our enemies, why are we not willing to discuss reducing the levels of troops located in Europe, Korea and Japan?
If the purpose of our military installations is to protect our interests, why do we feel the need to have multiple bases in parts of the world that offer no clear threat? Why do we need to mantain such a strong presence in Korea? Why can we not address our concerns in the Pacific with rotations of aircraft carriers or a few strategic bases? Why do we close US military bases, hurting local economies, yet spend so much on international locations?
I am strongly in favor of a highly-trained, well-equipped standing military that can quickly address any issues that arise throughout the world. I am confident we could achieve that goal by maintaining the same number of troops and domestic bases in conjunction with reducing foreign military installations.
GreatlyEntitled
Obama wants to raise the debt ceiling. As I recall a previous statement made by him, it is Un-Patriotic. Isn't it? Either way, NO ONE is Washington is working for We The People. I am talking about the hard working TAX PAYING (INCOME) American people!
GreatlyEntitled
Did you say that when GW Bush borrowed money from China to pay for the 2 wars?
While I'm not opposed to background checks (if you got nothing to hide, why care) and registration per say, banning weapons or confiscation (as mentioned by Gov. Cuomo in New York) is not the answer, in my humble opinion. Do we need to do something? Yes, but more laws may not be the answer. Tougher sentences for offenses with guns, education about guns, gang violence, the list could go on, should be were we take this.
I like the comparison to prohibition.
Dennis, thanks for the poll updates. Seems Boehner isn't doing very well; of course, walking away, washing his hands of his responsibilities and handing them to the Senate did not go unnoticed.
GBM, well said. The paid trolls aren't interesting in facts, they merely want to muddy the water and spread their fear and hate. They deserve nothing more than IGNORE.
Tomas, always enjoy your posts. The Groucho quote, perfect.
rukidding, you forgot, we have liquor laws which control the sale of it and to whom.
@Joe in Albany
The only moron here Joey is YOU. You couldn't find your pompous ass with an ass map and an extra pair of hands.
Take away the guns from the good guys and leave the ones that are in the bad guys. None of the killers were member of the NRA or register gun owner. Lefties use emotions but they are not not pragmatic. There is more harm from Hollywood, violent games, dysfunctional families , mental illness than NRA.
Oklahoma bomber kill 168 people without a gun.
Beverly 1.38
Of course I did. What is your point???
Besides that the SAME antics are continuing to go on and on. When does it stop? When do the problems ACTUALLY get addressed?
Biden ought to be talking to the hollywierdos who make it a point to produce the most violent and ruthless movies and television shows. I want to hear Looney Clooney say he'll do his part by NEVER playing a role in a movie who uses a gun or demonstrates any violence against others. These are the same people who believe an entire population should be disarmed but they share nor responsibility for the carnage? It's the movies and violent video games that these weirdos make MILLIONS on that depict such violent acts...raping women, killing cops, driving your vehicle into a crowded mall, blazing away with automatic weapons killing anyone and everyone...oh, but these are just movies and games...no harm done...
I call bullsh*t on the lefty's and the hollyweirdos!
rukidding47
you need to look up what "prohibition" is rukidding47. No one of importance is suggesting the legal act of prohibiting the manufacture, transportation and sale of guns. That's like saying drunk driving laws = prohibition.
JH, I have to agree with you.....Riley left the Pig stuck in the mud with that one! And the Pig didn't help by admitting his opinion is based on a Washington Post article! Too funnny. Watch much Ed Schultz too Pig?
The fact that when a nut job shoots a bunch of people, the debate is about gun control instead of mental health, shows exactly how retarded liberals are. What a useless bunch of idiots. Pathetic.
Caesar Augustus,
wishful thinking?
that isnt totally true Liquid Plumber, just look at Jack-off and Davey boy. Their smug is thick within FR.
@TNSEVOL, while I agree with your assessment and would love to see our troops home and off foreign soil, the conventional wisdom is keeping the troops in those locations make it easier to quickly respond to hot spots. Korea, for example, could erupt into fighting very easily as we have already seen and with our commitments to our Allies( sometimes I wonder), it makes sense to keep them there. The same for Japan. Now Germany, I personally think that is a cold war relic which needs further addressing, but knowing several military people who like the overseas duty (not the fighting but the posting), maybe keeping troops there is in our best interest.
And let's not forget Great Britain (air bases) and Italy (another Air base) and Rota Spain (used to be a naval base). The list goes on. Such as troops in Kuwait and Bahrain.
cantakenomore
another brilliant analogy: violent movies = real life psychos having access to AK47 and using them to kill others. Do you people even read what you write?
A violent movie will never kill anyone; an AR-15 will kill 20 children and 6 adults within minutes! AR-15 is a "logical" choice for anyone whose goal is to kill a lot of people in a short time because of their ability to rapidly fire multiple high-velocity rounds.
Show me an example of ONE MOVIE that killed 20 children and 6 adults.
hope its on tv so we can watch biden shoot of his mouth! bout all hes good at. wonder if hell bring his baretta to the meetings?
Actually, it's not.
A valid comparison would be drunk driving (illegal) vs. murder (also illegal)
A person can own a gun. A person can shoot their gun. A person can buy beer. A person can drink beer.
When you add beer to driving, it becomes illegal. Just like when you add people to shooting.
rukidding-
You MUST be kidding. Comparing prohibition, where we attempted to legislate morality, to gun control? Really? How many people would die if you misused a bottle of whiskey? Besides, we still control alcohol - there is a limit on who can buy it, when, and in what concentration; as well as laws against DUI and Public Intoxication.
I am NOT in favor of making guns illegal. I am a life-long shooter and hunter and served in the US Army. I am in favor of legislation that places some reasonable controls on what types of guns, ammo, and magazines are allowed to be manufactured and purchased.
Yes, this means only law enforcement and the military would have legal access to these types of armaments. Yes, criminals would still be able to get them.
It would also accomplish at least three positive things: criminals would have a tougher time acquiring these items, anyone found in possession or caught trying to acquire these types of items could be arrested before they shoot someone, and the supply would dwindle as gun manufacturers could no longer mass-produce them for the civilian market.
Guns do not kill people, people kill people, violent movies and violent games desesitize people with mental problems. All of the shooters were mentally ill, none of them pass a psychiatric test because they did not got the gun legally. The shooter in Connecticut try to purchase a gun , but he was denied. Gun control works but not for sick and criminals.
That was a racist comments. I have friends who speak Spanish and came legally to our country, get educated.
I don't see why a bold approach would put the "government in a box". Seems to me that it would put the congress in a box and shine a spot light on those that will NOT agree to some serious weapons-of-mass-destruction-gun-control. The people want stronger gun laws. No one wants their hunting rifless.
Think about it -
Understood.
My point is, I think it is time to re-think some of these "commitments". Is our commitment to Korea more important than reducing our debt? Do we slash Medicare & Social Security yet still maintain over 100 bases in Europe alone?
I am not sure this is the most current information, but the last time I researched it we had 73 bases of some type in Germany, 31 in Great Britain, 8 in Italy, 1 in Austria, 2 in Denmark, 1 in Greenland, 5 in the Netherlands. 6 in Norway, 13 in Portugal, 3 in Spain, 1 in Bulgaria, and 3 in Bosnia.
If we are being told it is time to make tough choices about taxes & spending, why not some tough choices on foreign policy and military spending?
"...also expected to meet with representatives from the video game and entertainment industry..."
======
Heard Christie this morning on Morning Joe saying game like Call of Duty etc aren't allowed in his home. I respect that decision as a fellow Parent, but I don't buy, hook line and sinker the notion that video game violence is as large a contributor what happens in America as is commonly implied.
For these mass murdering types that do not kill themselves in the wake of their terror, I've never seen reported about them that their method, techniques, tactics, motivation whatever was caused by and/or fueled from them playing a video game.
I play these games with my son, who is 12 all the time. In my household of 3 children, my son is the eldest, the only male and is the most sensitive one of the bunch. The boy breaks down in tears every time one of those animal shelter/cruelty commercials comes on. My point, my children know the difference between real pain and fake pain...between what is happening on tv in the form of a game vs what happens on the streets of this Country, not simply because I expect them just to 'know' it, but because we as Parents play an active role in instilling that understanding in them.
But on it's face to equivocate playing Black Ops with the ability to purchase a crap load of weapons and ammo at a gun show with the wink of an eye and a handshake as co-equal contributors to these kinds of tragedies is a bit much for me.
How is it that we can allegedly come down hard on the actions within a video game while continuing to give space and excuses to actual people while pursuing an argument that both are doing the same thing?
Guns are an ENABLER to violent acts. A video game at best is would be a motivator. But as stated previously, I have yet to see evidence presented that any murderer, especially those committed in this manner showing their actions were the result of PS3, XBox or Nintendo.
S*it people, I played Pitfall on Atari until my game no longer worked, but my arse isn't any more inclined to go to the jungle and swing on trees and jump over alligators b/c of it.
redvirginia
Guns do not kill people, people kill people, violent movies and violent games desesitize people with mental problems. All of the shooters were mentally ill, none of them pass a psychiatric test because they did not got the gun legally.
==================
You're proving the point...laws are working...the issue is availability of the weapons themselves.
To everyone:
Just a reminder: feisty, david walker, beverly, and pigotry are all the same poster. I checked their IP addresses and they are all are on the same PC. So keep this in mind as you read their nonsense.
wow BayLIE. i think you missed the entire point.. show me one example of a gun walking up and killing someone. The point is the hypocritical left that wants to adovacte banning guns yet these lefty liberal moron movie 'stars' continue to make their violent movies. You're right BayLIE, we all can't live in Fantasy Island with you. Just ask Chicago how their gun ban is working.. Dope
The common thread connecting all the recent shooters (Loughner, Holmes and Lanza) is that they all had mental illness and were taking drugs who's side-effects include developing mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.
So while we are focusing on guns we are ignoring the real culprit.
bayllie...
"Here's your sign..."
Really? You don't have to look far at all to see how many more people die from drunk driving than are shot every year. Try again.
I don't know about anyone else but my hope is if they start to crack down on mental health, these bozos with the NRA will be the first to be locked up, followed very shortly by the 2nd amendment loonies on this board.
Maybe when they are out of the way we can get some meaningful legislation on this issue.
Bobster...
ROTFLMAO!!! Makes me feel better there aren't that many who spew such lefty drivel!!! Only one who wants to hear themselves spew! HAHAHAHA
Haggisbingo.. So, what do you think gun control will accomplish? Will it be as effective as the war on drugs? lol Will it be as effective as proabition? lol Who will have weapons if it is illegal for law abiding citizens to have them? Why don't you read actual statistics on countries that allow their citizens to be armed vs. those that make them illegal, and you will see that you truly have no idea what youre asking for in any feeble attempt to prevent another mass shooting. Guns do not kill people, just like alcohol, or cars, or knives, or bats dont kill people. Evil people commit these crimes, and evil people will never adhere to any law that would prevent them from doing as they please. Those of us who own guns legally would NEVER use them to commit crimes. Did you know that in 2010 roughly 2 million crimes were averted due to the intended victim being armed? So, lets say 1% of those ended fatally had the gun owner not had a weapon, and you have 20k extra deaths a year thanks to your new gun violence control. 68% of inmates confess that they were influenced not to committ an intended crime because they knew or had reason to believe the victim was armed. Ya ll go right ahead and think what you are doing will make a positive difference, and you will quickly be reminded of the resourcefullness of the criminal mind, and the unflinching evil that drives it.
Spencer-399802
Let's look at morons like Jim Jordan (R-OH) who will not support closing the gun show loophole and refuses to make background checks for all purchases of assault rifles mandatory because “the second amendment is about freedom.”
At gun shows, the sellers are not required to have a federal firearms license, and private sellers are under no legal obligation to ask purchasers whether they are legally eligible to buy guns or to verify purchasers' legal status through background checks. I can walk in and buy a gun and you have no idea who I am or what criminal record I have.
So before you start diging into people's meantal health, you should worry that anyone and everyone (including terrorists) can purchase guns without a problem. Gun control laws and background checks (including mental health) are mutually inclusive but what you are going is putting the carriage BEFORE the horse.
Bobster? Seriously... do you expect ANYONE to believe that. I just do not understand how you believe that anyone would be that stupid.
Jody:
This is the straw man argument that these wingnuts make because they don't have any rational argument to back up their need to have assault weapons that can fire more than 30 rounds per second. Even a second-grader should be able to comprehend the difference between restrictions on SOME types of guns and a ban on ALL types of guns. But not your average wingnut.
I have said a lot of things lately that would lead you to think I am in the camp with the people saying to take guns from people. In reality, I think the country could use some tougher gun laws ( particularly in places like CO) but the only two things that are really going to make a difference are to solve the problem of unemployment and poverty, and making mental health care guaranteed for all who need it and to see to it that those who do need it get it.
The areas with the worst gun violence are the places where people aren't working. They aren't resorting to gun violence because they need money, but because they don't have anything to do that is worth doing. The are like kids who should be in school and are instead out getting into trouble.
As for the things like Sandy Hook and Aurora, they needed psychiatric treatment. Of course if they had any kind of gun laws in Colorado ( read: mental health requirements, permits to purchase guns, etc.) , the Aurora thing *may have been avoided.
Bayllie,
Lanza tried to buy a gun but was unable because of current laws. So instead he killed his mother and stole her guns. No gun control law or gun show loophole would prevent this from happening.
Time for a change to real reporting. MSN has turned into a propaganda board for the loons who re-elected the worst President this country has ever had to suffer through. As far as shootings go, looney ones, its simple you cannot turn this into an athiest country, deny our foundations in faith and expect to raise people with any respect for life or anything else. Simple! But apparently above the heads of hedenists.
The 2nd amendment needs to be repealed. It was written at a time when people could actually be called into military service on a moments notice. It was written when people needed guns in their homes for hunting and for protection. It was written when there were no high capacity clips, and no semi automatic assault weapons.
This 2013. We have no draft, and we have rules about who is eligible, and who is ineligible for military service. We also have police departments with sophisticated and rather expensive equipment to track down and catch criminals in the streets.
Fewer guns would mean fewer violent episodes like the ones we saw this past holiday season.
Saying that more guns is the answer to gun violence, is like saying that more liquor would stop DWI's.
Caesar Disgustus:
Just ask where those Chicago guns come from. They come mostly from the former Confederacy where they believe every criminal and terrorist has a right to buy their murder weapons at gun shows, no questions asked. ... Dope
For the following brilliant, insightful analysis of America's stratospheric murder rate compared to other industrialized* democracies**, we hav cantakenomore to thank. According to him, it's all because of
"the movies and violent video games that these weirdos make MILLIONS on that depict such violent acts...raping women, killing cops..."
The perspicacious observer will note that, although these same movies and video games are available in many other nations, including some that have had tremendously violent histories (Russia, Germany, Japan, Sweden and France spring readily to mind), mass killings appear to only be a problem in ONE country- by a simply astonishing coincidence, the only nation that has this perfect confluence of opportunity and method for mayhem.
Here in my soggy and dark corner of Paradise, there's been a smallish flap over drive-up coffee stands which feature scantily clad young ladies serving the stimulating beverages. Apparently there's one school of thought which holds that certain men, having been inflamed by the sight of a bare breast or shoulder, will be instantly transformed into lust- crazed monsters, throwing their morality to the winds and stalking any female they can lay their paws upon.
This kind of 'thinking' ignores the experience of our aforementioned European cousins, who are regularly treated to underdressed bodies on their TV shows, in mainstream news publications, and even on roadside billboards; yet have levels of sexual assault and domestic abuse that are a tiny fraction of what they are here.
So, cantakenomore and Mr. LaPierre, do give us the benefit of your incomparable wisdom: Which Constitutional guarantee shall we jettison? Would it suit you better if we shut down the First Amendment, the one that protects your freedom to spew idiocy and bloodlust in public? Or is it better that we modify the Second Amendment, which protects the ability of any twisted loner to commit mass murder in the most efficient way possible?
If the latter, why aren't we allowed to purchase BARs or Stingers? Surely the 2nd Amendment allows us to protect our homes against airborne intruders, and if a few random airliners get shot down as well, that's just too bad... right?
Your paranoid, imbecilic ranting is eagerly awaited. Peace!
Spencer-399802
you didn't do well on SATs, did you?
you remember the fill in the blank?
gun laws = prohibition
drunk driving laws = ???
WTF are you even talking about? how is any of that even relevant? gun control laws equal to prohibition as much as drunk driving laws equal to prohibiting anyone to drive!
Spencer-399802
Really? You don't have to look far at all to see how many more people die from drunk driving than are shot every year. Try again
========
Unless, I'm off here prohibition was instituted with the intent of ridding the Country completely from alcohol. Banning high-capacity magazines and military styled weapons, mandatory background checks including mental health checks is not ridding the Country of guns. False equivalent.
Pull that lens back just slightly more and take the angle of the '# of deaths that occur annually from ' argument you are presenting, just think for a second of how many different very powerful industries would need to have the hammer dropped on them is "# of deaths caused by' was the new barometer by which to judge something by...Pharma, Defense, Food, Tobacco
bobster - a total moron! And, you've proved it. I know at least three of the ones you lied about. See, when you have to lie like you continue to do, it shows how mentally ill you are. YOU don't own any guns do you?
To the morons talking about the Hollywood movies - those movies are shown in OTHER countries but they don't have mass killings so you clearly have NO point.
Joe in Albany, with every post your show how clueless you are but don't worry - JH will keep you company - clearly the two of your share the same very small brain cell.
We need stronger background checks; required training in order to be able to buy a gun; NO sales of assault weapons or large ammo clips; no private gun shows that don't have to meet the same background checks as stores; stronger mental health programs so we can hopefully identify many of these people before - not after - they strike.
riley - your ignorance is only overshadowed by your eagerness to post it for all to see!
Bev - What credibility do you have to talk about debt? You and your hero Obama and the Democratic utopia known as Illinois are a 100 BILLION in stolen pension debt. Over the weekend the Democrat genius Speaker Madigan and the Democratic Gov. Brady, do what Democrats do best. Kick the can down the road. So, what happens next when all the bought votes of the unions and welfare mothers and illegals, when those bribes starts slowing and the taxes continue to skyrocket because of all the money going to pay for the interest on the debt? Sounds familiar, sounds like Obama's using the Ill. blueprint for America!
Bill, perhaps YOU should be sent to Gitmo.
The 2nd amendment was never about hunting, or even home protection. It had everything to do with maintaining a well armed civilian population to keep the government in check and prevent a tyranny.
It is very frightening how you think that people that disagree with you should be imprisoned for life as a "TERRORIST". That is exactly what the Soviets and the Nazi's did. Does that make you proud???
You see, this is how a country is taken over:
1. Disarm the citizens "for their own good".
2. Consolidate the government-media complex to indoctrinate the people to the thinking of the ruling party.
3. Label anyone who disagrees with this indoctrination as a threat against the country and imprison them.
Folks like you are the ones who were voluntarily loaded into box cars and taken to camps. The way I see it, if you're helping that to happen, you deserve what you get!
Cars are well regulated for safety and their owners are also well regulated for safety.
Guns should be well regulated in the same manner.
Q22,
You hit the nail on the head. The Liberal Left is completely ignoring the elephant in the room, all the while blaming the potato chips for making them fat while they sit there watching NCIS on the boob-tube!
I applaud you. At least you understand what needs to be done in order to have the gun control you desire. Too many here think you can just ignore the 2nd Amendment. It is highly unlikely to be successful but at least it is an honest attempt.
Foxtroxki...
Just another looney liberal, I see. HAHAHA
It's ok libbie, I am a gun owner...have quite a few actually. But me and others like me are not the one you need to worry about.
Go ahead, give up your guns...I'll keep mine...now who's more safe?
Owning a car is not a right - it is a privilege. Owning a gun is a right - the same as free speech.
Liars? Trolls? Bigots? They come here, deflect from genuine issues, divert our attention from serious problems at best...
Let us not complain about Joe Albany and the now extinct Bill Fairfax, yes their views are definately not my own. However, they at least attempt to frame their argument, point out their "facts", beliefs and ideas. Many other posters since Romney's public thrashing at the polls have left as well. Apparently unable to deal with their loss, from JAS to NJNB to WCA they took their offerings elsewhere. Let us be truthful, without a variety of ideas and opinions these threads would be very monotonous.
Now we have the petulantly, vile posters like C. Augustus and others like him, too many to note, that bring nothing to the discussion. Posters who refuse to see any value in any idea or progressive opinion. On the other side, while appreciating the contributions of a great many of the liberal posters, too many refuse to take a critical stance on Obama.
Yellowdog...
And your contribution was most informative...
...another looney lib!
Q22
holy jeezus you are dense....in this case he had a mother who had a AR-15 so he didn't have to work hard at getting one. Even if he tried to buy one and couldn't and didn't have access to his mother's gun, all he had to do is attend a GUN SHOW and voila....20 kids + 6 adults dead.
so 3 points:
1. no civilian should own a semi-automatic weapons
2. there should be gun control laws uniform in all states so that people like Lanza (I wrote "like" since he didn't have to do it) don't have to plan a road trip to a gun show.
3. as long as you keep electing MORONS like Michele Bachmann who spoke highly of her pet AK-15: “My favorite gun is an AR-15 because you can be so accurate with it,” you will never fix this.
If only people would just agree with the left. Perhaps a re-education camp is in order.
Proud 2 B Liberal - no one is talking about disarming the people. We are talking about banning assault weapons and large ammo clips; doing good background checks; closing gunshow loopholes so that everyone has to do the background checks; improving mental health care. My brother is a hunter and has many handguns and rifles. But, he is the first to agree that assault weapons have no place in a civilized society.
cantakenomore - your avitar says everything about you - we REALLY have to make sure mental health care is better!
Joe - don't let blackcat scare you, I can get you Alaska sockeye anytime direct from the man who catches it.
_________________________________________
Thanks. I'm actually looking at booking a camping/RV trip to AK in August. It will include 2-4 salmon fishing charters, probably out of Vadez or Seward which will fill up my freezer for a year or so.
BCWC is a hoser from the Great White North. Even Bob and Doug McKenzie wouldn't give him the time of day. Eh?.
Q22
since when???????????? Is there a a special government agency that issues CAR SALES PERMIT to U.S. citizens prior to purchasing a car?
You should let people know this, Q22, because every single day a crime is committed by those buying cars without permisssion!
wow, Q22...your posts are getting better and better.
The LEFT doesnt give a rats a$$ about innocent lives!! This is why we, the tax payer, need to STOP funding this killing machine!! And the left want to ban weapons!!! How about banning "planned parenthood"! 333,964 ABORTIONS of the innocent!!
Planned Parenthood Sees Record High Abortions, Taxpayer Funding | LifeNews.com
www.lifenews.com
@ Pigotry
The Tea Party is nearing death?
30% of President Obamas first term voters bailed the second time around...I'd say its in full swing.
Besides arent you preparing more whoppers like "It's the futures problem now" (in regards to the deficit) or "The U.S. just needs to borrow or print more money to fix the economy."
Your credibility is dead.
A comedian once said that all you need to do to curb gun violence, is charge $5000 per bullit. He was not half wrong.
Yellowdog,
I going to disagree with you regarding C. Augustus. He or she would be more than willing to debate you on any subject. Its just hard to do so when you are on defense 24/7 here at first read. Sometimes it gets the best of you. I am glad CA and others come here with opposing views.
Keep an open mind. I have learned plenty since I started reading FR a few years ago. Its easy to go to a blog that is one sided, but what do you get out of it?
You got to give them props, this blog is pretty hostile toward conservatives.
Abortion too. Late term abortion kill babies, Obama favor a law to kill baby born in an abortion. Moron.
You are free to go to another country were guns are banned in their constitutions but tyrants rule.
Q22
one more point:
I know nothing is 100% and someone like Lanza will always find a way but if we go with your "why bother" way off thinking, let's repeal speeding laws, drunk driving laws, consumer laws, labor laws, etc. because they are not 100% effective either.
The status quo does not work. This country is #1 in gun ownership and #1 in gun violence - not something to be proud of.
So for anyone to suggest that we need MORE guns, and that teachers should carry guns, is just plain stupid.
Maybe someone here can answer this: we already have more guns per capita than any other nation on this planet, so why are we not the safest nation on this planet if according to the NRA and people like Rick Perry, we need more guns to be safer???
Bill-Austin
I need an "assault weapon" because I am active duty military and due to recent budget cuts, I am lucky to make it to the range once a year. Owning my own weapon allows me to maintain my proficiency at my job on my own time, since the government will no longer pay for it. I think we can all agree that me being more accurate when I shoot is a good thing. It's a skill you have to practice.
For the record, magazine capacity bans are not going to help. First, there are millions upon millions of 30 round magazines in circulation. Secondly, a reload of a magazine takes about a second, I can just as easily pack three 10 round magazines compared to one 30 round. High capacity magazines are good for when you're being shot at, whether it be by a soldier in a war or an intruder in your home. When you're shooting at unarmed people running away or hiding like in the recent shootings, you have all the time in the world to reload unless a good man with a gun is there to keep you from reloading.
"Liberals, it has been said, are generous with other peoples' money, except when it comes to questions of national survival when they prefer to be generous with other people's freedom and security." --American conservative author and commentator William F. Buckley Jr. (1925-2008)
SS -- Google "King Crimson" and you will see that cantakenomore's avatar is a cover of an album of a band with the same name. It was a good music and many artists from England contributed. Listen and you might enjoy it instead of jumping to conclusions.
Q22
Horse hockey.
The REAL culprit is GUNS.
Guns are machines made to kill.
Period.
Treat mental illnesses and take away the assult guns.
Too many guns and paranoid gun owners who think tyranny is around the corner are the problem.
Salud
Thanks Ben...
SeekingSanity...I see you are still in search, eh? The album cover simply depicts what I feel like after listening to the drivel from libbies like you.
cantakenomore - seeking sanity in the Republican party but as you and many on this site prove, there is asolutely NONE to be found. Your avitar is very indicative of your posts - totally insane! YOU post nothing but demented and delusional drivel every time you type!
REAL DATA:
According to FBI.gov statistics not those from a lobbying group who advocate policy.
Since 1992 Violent crime is down 50% the Murder rate is down 54%.
Why isn’t the Media reporting the considerable improvement in violent crime?
In 2011 of all the homicides committed by firearms, only 3.5% were committed with rifles and the AR15 is only a subset of the rifle group. Assault weapon ban should really help out here? LOL
In England where guns are banned:
Violent crime ratio per 100,000 = 1,361. This is 3 and half times that of the US.
This is simply about the government gaining more control over the populace. Not one of the Obama initiatives will significantly improve our safety.
Seeking...
It's okay libbie...I feel you are just as INSANE. You and FR, Beverly and Piggy deserve each other. See ya at the firing range...I really love to shoot my AR!!! LOL
I will go with any gun ban that is first applied to the Secret Service. Get the guns out of the Whitehouse and you can have some of mine.
Let's look at this logically. Innocent until proven guilty. There should be no reason for a gun owner to prove that they NEED a weapon. Those that want them taken away have the burden of proving why I, a law abiding citizen who has committed no crimes, should not have a firearm. My rights say I should be able to have an AR-15; it's on others to prove why I should not be allowed to. I see no reason why I should have to tell you why I NEED a car, or internet, or a plastic spork. If you want to take something away, it's on you to prove why I shouldn't have it. Don't condemn a large group of law abiding people for something they have the capability to do because of something a law-breaking individual did.
truetexan
why don't you start worrying about TX because your state is an embarrassment to the world:
1.2 million children have no health insurance in TX
40% of Texas mothers received little or no prenatal care and one in seven babies were born premature
25% of Texas children living in poverty
It makes TX a third world country equivalent.
why don't you start worry about the babies that ARE ALIVE?
Hypocrites!
Dude - that's nearly every weapon except shot guns - Semi-automatic just means you don't have to re-cock the gun for each shot. All handguns are semiautomatic and most rifles are too. Also - the totalitarian tone of that dictate is disturbing. How about No civilian car should be able to exceed 70 mile per hour or No person should be allowed to have more than 2 drinks per hour. It's an unthoughtful emotional response to a far deeper issue.
Name one rampage style shooter who got his weapon at a gun show. More damage has been done by Democrats selling guns to Mexican cartel thugs in order to "track them" after they kill a ATF agent. But you defend that program.
As long as we focus on guns instead of the mental health of the shooters we will have these events. Lanza, Holmes and Laughner were all mentally ill and on meds that can cause mania - which is much more responsible for them choosing this action than was their choice of weapons.
bayllie...
Hahaha...and where do you live, missy? I'll bet we can't find anything wrong with that place, can we, eh?? LOL
Liberals are so pathetically funny!
thetotas, I disagree to your claim that the people on this board are "hostile" to conservatives. Generally, when conservatives use facts and come to different conclusions based on facts, they are only approached with debate. The only time I see any hostility is when people either, distort facts, use them selectively, or in fact make up their own.
@Tomas -- Guns are weapons of defense and a right to all to choose to own or not.
@truetexan -- that's the annual report they wished wouldn't be published. The whole argument was framed incorrectly during the election -- and Romney and his team were to blame for not properly framing why our tax dollars shouldn't fund Planned Parenthood. It shouldn't have been about abortions or mammograms (which the organization just refers). The real argument is that Planned Parenthood has $1.2 billion in assets and does not need our tax dollars.
@Akeem -- You are not entirely correct. I could provide you a link to Sodahead where just about this time two years ago, the LibsRUs/Dew Drop Inn crowd that control this board and have a direct communication line to Mark -- one of the contributors -- were exposed as the hateful, hypocritical people they really are.
I am a 50 year old man who is pro gun and has enjoyed target shooting and gun sports for years. I am a level headed and peaceful person who votes and makes decisions using common sense, who believes strongly in our 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I live in Ohio with my wife and both my wife and I are concealed handgun permit holders.
The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms.
In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions officially establishing this interpretation. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
You can spin it anyway you choose but the fact is “People shoot guns, guns don't shoot people”. There has to be a person pulling the trigger. It’s not “gun violence” it’s “crimes of violence”. The anti-gun supporters view these crimes with guns as a “gun issue” when in reality it’s the criminal doing the crime, and breaking the law, not the gun. Criminals are the only threat to our safety.
I carry a handgun not to commit crimes, but to protect my life and my family from brutal, merciless criminal behavior. If I ever become a target, then I will be prepared to defend my life and not become a statistic or victim of crime. It’s my life or theirs, and I will choose mine and my family's everyday.
Proposed gun laws or bans will "never" have an effect on criminals like gang members, home invaders, carjackers, armed robbers, or murderers. This will only affect law abiding citizens. Once these laws are passed, criminals will have free reign to do as they please knowing that our gun rights have been heavily restricted or worse, taken away.
This is the reason unstable individuals and criminals choose places like schools because they are “gun free zones” They have no fear of retaliation and they know that the people inside the school have no way to defend themselves. Surely you can see that this is true?
For the very few criminals that try to buy guns at legitimate gun shops, the waiting period and background check works very well. But for the rest of the convicted criminals out there who get their guns by stealing them, or on the streets through black markets, these laws and bans don't accomplish anything.
After reading this, please think about the affects of supporting gun laws and bans. Also, please watch this video if you have not seen it. “Choose Your Own Crime Stats” An EXCELLENT video explaining the comparison between Britain and America's gun and violent crimes using both the FBI & UK government ACTUAL statistics.
Q22
you say that this happened because these people were mentally disturbed.
I say that these mentally disturbed people had access to AR-15
that is the difference between your point and my point.
how are you going to prevent the mentally disturbed from buying a gun when you allow private sales to be legal and without background checks? You can not have it both ways - you need to close the loopholes - otherwise, why bother?
Again I will use drunk driving as an example, you cannot say you ban drunk driving from bars but driving loaded from a private party is ok. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
So the liberals want to call for measures against 'gun violence'. Ok, take that phrase, remove 'gun' in any fashion, whether it be full or partial, and what word still remains? 'Violence' remains, failure to remove the violence in the human heart will result in it being manifested in other ways, regardless of object control measures. The UK gun ban has proven this out by its own statistics of much higher violent crime by methods other than guns. Take one thing away, and others will take its' place, humans are opportunistic and crafty creatures, they don't automatically turn into compliant pacifists the second a gun is removed from their access. They instead use the forced vulnerability of the other humans to commit even more crime against their neighbors. This also is proven by the UK statistics.
The fact still remains, that liberals cannot control the human heart nor the moment to moment decisions that people make, of course they would relish being able to do so if they could. It will not happen, ever. Controlling people by object control has been tried by so many regimes and nations throughout history and none have really solved the true problem, violence in relation to the human condition.
We sit waiting, to observe whether the people in our government will realize this concept, or go with the 'feel good' but worthless control measures, or, figure out a way to make the human condition a lot more conducive for people to want to control their actions, more laws not being the answer at all. We already have enough laws, we don't need more.
Joe in Albany quoted the 14th amendment, however coming to a conclusion opposite of what it actually says.
Like so many, I am not in the habit of reading the U.S. Constitution regularly, but since Joe brought attention to it, I can easily see what Al Sharpton was meaning a few days ago on his news show. They can't just hold out on the debt ceiling as blackmail. Pensions (Social Security) is constitutionally protected since it was made the law some years back. Obama would have the right to go over their heads.
Of course that same constitution says we have the right to bear arms...he can't go messing around with that either.
I do not have a copy of it in front of me, but I know in there is a clause about "public danger," where the president can override congress. Not raising the debt ceiling and such forms of blackmail could threaten national security. About a third of the population is on "entitlements." On these, people depend, millions of them. What would happen if they suddenly had "stop payment" because some tea party morons defaulted for blackmail reasons? Chaos. Violence. The president would have the excuse to suspend congress, bypassing them due to public danger. Public danger would be very real because in their great wisdom, the forefathers gave us the second amendment so those geezers who lost their social security checks could lock and load against a bad government.
It says also we can't fund insurrections against us. I guess that would mean that to give aid to countries that hate us and do terrorism is unconstitutional. So we should cut all foreign aid to these unfriendly nations.
Think about it.
We don't need talk, we need action to make it stop. Rewrite the 2nd Amendment so it applies to todays world and take the D--- guns out of the publics hands. Stop the slaughter under the guise of "We have to protect freedom!' We are just having neighbor killing neighbor, family member killing family member, slaughter at home, slaighter on the streets, in the colleges and universites, in the mvoie theaters and in the Malls.
"It is Congress's job to oversee economic policy, and the House's in particular. Regardless of whether it is 'good' policy or not, the House of Representatives is wholly within its rights to refuse to raise the debt ceiling if it so wishes. To submit that Congress has the right to raise the debt ceiling but that to refuse to do so would be 'a step too far' is to grant that Congress does not actually enjoy power over the issue at all, but is instead just a bystander armed with a rubber stamp. If this were true, it would undermine the American constitutional order, which is of course exactly what those making asinine (the platinum coin) or downright illegal (Fourteenth Amendment) suggestions wish to do. Their view is that this issue is just too important to leave to our system of government, so the president -- or anyone -- must step in and 'do the right thing.'" --columnist Charles C.W. Cooke
Akeem - Well said.
Theotas -
I have no problem discussing topics with conservatives. Ask Alan, NJ or even DingleB definately not liberal posters. When JAS1, NJNB, American 205 or WCA were here we would discuss topics, agree on some things, disagree on many others. They might have learned a new viewpoint, I might have considered where they were coming from. Posts at least between me and them were conducted in a civil fashion.
By way of this post I gladly offer to debate Augustus on any subject. However, I highly doubt that he can keep his cracks about liberals being to the left of Che.
The 2nd Amendment cearly starts with the words. "to form a Militia!" That does not mean all of us. We already have a National Guard that is a militis and it should stop there! Stop the sluaghter, stop the guns!
cantakenomore
Massachusetts - you know the state where Romney signed an assault weapon ban - of course that was when Romney was for it before he was against it.
there is plenty to complain about Massachusetts but quarter of the children living here not having access to the basic health insurance is not one of them.
Enough of the name calling. If thats all you have then shut the hell up. We need a Comprehensive Investigation into the MOOD ALTERING DRUGS that were being taken or recently taken by EVERY shooter in nearly every mass killing in America in recent years. We need a Total overhaul of our mental health industry. Adam Lanza's Doctor made a short video to explain what has happened.
YOU NEED TO WATCH THIS SHORT VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHlQlWhHg2c
@clwyd -- The SCOTUS does not agree with you and it is the final say.
canttakenomore - you show with every post what a blithering idiot you are. But, go ahead and continue to post - you're amusing - sad but amusing!
clwyd-2621393
And how do you propose we get all of these guns out of the public's hand? Are we going to dance around the 4th amendment while abolishing the 2nd?
Don't you think that forcibly disarming the populace would lead to more unfortunate events? I don't see a forcible or even voluntary disarm working.
Ben-636050
People say a lot of stuff that just ain't so. Buckley made a successful career out of it, just like Bill Kristol, Dick Morris, David Addington and a lot of other people who get paid the big bucks to always be wrong.
bayllie...
please stay there...
Seeking...just look in the mirror, pal
Repojam,
Firstt stop making rapid fire weapons, then have a turn them in campgain that has worked to 10's of thousands of guns out of the hands of the nuts and public coming up with excuses to use them, then do searchs and go through the registration lists. We can't be doing nothing! Finally, burn them all! You have to remember I've had an aunt killed by a nut neighbor in Arkansas who kept saying he needed guns to protect freedom! Right!
Repjam,
In the end anything will be worth it!
cantakenomore - again with the grade school taunts. But, don't worry, we know that's all you're of!
clwyd- good post but the gun nuts won't understand or care. Just stack the bodies higher as long as they can love their guns.
@Houston -- your generalizations are beneath you. As if there are not liberals equally as wrong. Would you listen to Margaret Thatcher?
"The problem with Socialism (Obama's and progressive's philosophies and world view) is eventually you run out of other people's money"
Or
"For every idealistic peacemaker willing to renounce his self-defence in favour of a weapons-free world, there is at least one warmaker (insert criminal) anxious to exploit the other’s good intentions."
Or
"Socialists (insert Progressives) cry “Power to the people”, and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean—power over people, power to the State."
Red Virginia, Guns don't kill people, BUT PEOPLE WITH GUNS DO KILL PEOPLE!!!!!! BTW, your right to have a gun DOES NOT SUPERSEDE someone elses right to live! Unfortunately the shooters mothers rights to have weapons took away those childrens right to live. She was an irresponsible person who let her son have access to those guns and actually encouraged him to use them. Apparently the NRA is failing big time on informing their members on the responsibilties of gun ownership. But the NRA will always feel that because of the 2nd Amendment they do not have to be responsible. I have yet to see the NRA go to anyone in person who has lost a loved one to gun fire and tell them how a persons 2nd Ammendment right supersedes their loved ones life. The members of the NRA are a bunch of cowards who hide behind their guns!
Guns don't kill people, bullits do.
The guns just make it a whole lot easier.
@Norskejente -- Too bad you don't (I assume) have that same passion in that because you have the right to abortion should not super cede the right of the innocent unborn to the right to be born, live and experience life. Hypocrite.
@Haggsbingo and the other f***ing morons that cannot understand basic logic or numbers. WTF is the assault weapons ban ACTUALLY going to do to save lives? Let me provide the wiki link for since you all seem to be so ignorant on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
Now is you ACTUALLY bothered to read it would see that an "assault rifle" is mainly cosmetic and DOES NOT change the functionality of the gun. A folding stock, pistol grip, bayonet mount, threaded barrel or flash sup., or a grenade launcher and having two or more of those features makes a semi-automatic w/ detachable box mag an "assault rifle", BUT it does not change the functionality of the gun. It still can shoot the same rounds and the same number of rounds just as fast. People could still buy semi-automatic rifles with detachable box mags during the "assault weapons" ban morons.
"We are going to make the roads safer by making all "sport" cars remove their spoilers, rims, ground effects, flashy paint, decals, aftermarket exhaust, etc., because kids think they are cool, but we are not going to change anything with the engines, they can have the same amount of torque/horsepower as before, go just as fast, and we are magically going to save lives..."
Over half of the gun deaths each year are suicides. Meaning people would have taken their life anyway in most of those cases regardless of if they had a gun or not.
If high capacity 100+ round drum mags are a problem when was the last one used in a mass shooting? Why do most shooters pick smaller 20 and 30 round mags depending on caliber? Maybe because they are more reliable? Put a tax on those if it makes you feel good, but it will not save lives. Most handguns do not hold over 20 rounds, yet look at the number of deaths they cause. Gee high capacity mags are really the problem...
How many lives are we going to save each year by banning ALL rifles? What is the maximum average? Less then 400 lives a year? Gee more people are killed by blunt objects (like clubs and hammers), personal weapons (hands, fist, feet, etc.), knives, and how could we forget about handguns...
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
Handguns account for 25+ times the amount of homicides per year as ALL rifles not just assault ones, yet "assault" rifles and "high capacity" mags are the problem. How many rounds does the average handgun hold? How fast can I change a mag regardless? Bad guys only come one at a time, I would never need to be able to shot more then one person/badguy at a time, and I never miss...
I would never want a rifle over a handgun...since a rifle is easier to shot accurately. I know let us force everyone to use handguns and increase the amount of bullets that MISS the target and can possibly kill "innocent" people...MORONS.
Semi-automatic rifles have only been around since 1885 and are not a "new" technology. The M-16/AR-15 is an old design (1956) and is not "new" either. I mean WTF I cannot own a fully automatic rifle that can shoot 600-900 rounds a minute or 10 times faster then my semi-automatic can without a expensive permit. I cannot own explosives without a permit, I cannot own an armed tank, I cannot own a RPG, I cannot buy a silencer unless I get it from a police officer. I think a bunch of us are ALREADY giving up a bunch of our rights just so your sorry ungrateful a$$es can feel "safe". Yet you ALWAYS want MORE. Sound just like a...
You have a much better chance of being struck by lightning or even winning the lotto then being involved in a "mass shooting". Talk about being f***ing paranoid. Here let me sell you this tin foil hat with wires connected to grounding plates for the lightning...
Could any of the recent shootings been done with a handgun or shotgun? How many people WOULD HAVE STILL DIED? How many cornered children could a person kill with a sword or machete that can dismember or decapitate in 8 minutes? Gee I would much rather get hacked to death then to be quickly put out of my misery...
How many lives, gas, and pollution could we save by lowering the speed limits to 55 mph which would reduce the amount of energy involved in each crash? Engineers are to thank for the lower amount of deaths over the years and are the main reason for the reduction, not drivers.
Why not propose something that will actually "work". How is the "war on drugs" going and what did making them illegal do? What did making alcohol illegal do? Who defeated the British army back up in the mountains of Pennsylvania/Maryland and who should you be thanking for your independence? I feel like I am talking to people about taxes again...morons.
Just a couple of thoughts here. First, regarding the "Obama Doctrine." The authors of the article are trying their best to sell the public on thinking that there is such a thing, but the public is well aware that the "Obama Doctrine" is really to tear America down and put in its place the Soviet Union. That way, equality will be there for all. Everyone will be equally poor, except those who are buds with the ruling class, then they will be more equal than others.
As for the gun debate, Ben, clwd clearly has problems reading. The first part of the 2nd Amendment is merely an introduction. The second part "the right the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." The first part "A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State" dictates nothing. It is an explanation for the second part. It is not a limitation. The solution the libs want is in the Constitution. They can seek to change the Constitution with a new amendment. But, as we all know, on issues of the Constitution, the libs are more often than not in the minority. Thus, undeterred by the Constitution, they push their issues forward as if the Constitution doesn't exist. As we've seen with Obamacare, the Supreme Court is not the best protector of the Constitution and our liberties. Only the people can take action to protect the Constitution and our rights. And that has to be done at the ballot box. And as we've seen, the same people who ignore the Constitution are the same people who could care less about the integrity of the ballot box. So, it is going to be a constant fight to maintain our freedoms and protect our form of government.
Guns don't kill people. People who make them freely accessible kill people.
So Republicans are fine with background checks at gun stores... but not at gun shows.
And they believe that background checks at a gun shows is the same thing as "banning all guns".
Can someone explain this Republican logic? How is requiring a background check, which is already required at some stores, the same thing as a complete "ban" of all guns?
Whitchrunner, that "introduction" is half the ammendment!
cantakenomore
wow, that's the best you can do? must be sad not to have anything intelligent to say as a rebuttal...But I don't blame you; it is impossible to justify the fact that 1.2 million of children have no access to health insurance and 25% live below poverty levels. But hey, the Republicans are not worry about that; they, instead, worry about people having access to birth control- that is so much more important to them.
Seeking...
hummm...a little scroll back through the posts show you have very little to say. Just the grade school taunts to anyone who disagrees with you. That's the problem with you liberals. You truly believe you are right. Guess what, pal...the SCOTUS agrees with US!!! Now, put that in your corn-cob pipe and smoke it!
bayllie...I could have said, please stay there because you are about as far from me as you can get. Also, us folks in red states want to keep you people where you are and far, far away from us!
Guns don't kill people, but Congressmen driving under the influence can. Guns don't kill people but the Administration sending our youth into War Zones to protect others lives can. Guns don't kill people but Crazies do, Criminals do, Suicidal People do, cops do, cigarettes do, speeding can, DUI's do, illegal drugs do, Cartels do, Vicious Dogs do, Venomous snakes do, boxing can, pneumonia can, infectious disease's do, AIDs do, etc.
So who is repaying me the thousands of dollars I've spent on semi automatic rifles that I've collected over the last 25 years? hm? nobody? didn't think so. not taking my guns, thanks :)
Bayllie...
I could have said...you people over there scare the hell out of us!
Repojam,
Saw the video - Lanza's doc is pretty out there but I agree with her about the psych drugs. They do have side-effects that include homicidal thoughts and manic behaviors. Funny that the liberals here say we should treat the mentally ill - that;s what they did with Lanza, Holmes and Loughner! It was the treatment that made them so dangerous.
Well, since Mr Nee is on Bidens Gun Commission, and has a son who was convicted of plotting a school shooting, perhaps he can tell us how his son planned to murder his fellow classmates?
Judge convicts ex-student in school plot
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/02/15/judge_convicts_ex_student_in_school_plot/
Since January 2005, Nee has been free on $20,000 cash bail.
He is currently a student at Bunker Hill Community College.
He served a 10-month sentence.
Robinson said Nee is currently working in construction and has not had any other arrests. She said he is appealing his conviction because he wants to clear his name
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/09/06/sjc_to_hear_marshfield_high_killing_plot_appeal/
More importantly, how did he get him off? I guess its all in WHO you know huh Joe?
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/2006/05/the-lost-boys-1/
Q22...
And let's not forget all the kids (mostly boys) who have been "treated"...uh, I mean, DRUGGED-UP for ADDHD in elementary school with Ritalin because they were a little antsy...
Very convenient means of control...but what do we produce in the process?
mguy - not sure where you get your supposed facts on background checks from, but last I heard, they were required as a federal law for the purchase of ALL handguns, rifles and shotguns (not counting the gun show loophole). Not just 'How is requiring a background check, which is already required at some stores' as you stated.
My husband and I just bought a pair of shotguns for plinking with, double barrel, no semi automatic anything, and we got checked. A year before that, he bought a target pistol..and got checked. So, mguy, stop the rabblerousing knee-jerk reacting and actually learn facts before blowing off your spout.
clwyd-2621393
Firstly, I want to state that I'm sorry for your loss.
As much as I do believe that something needs to be done, I am in favor of realistic solutions. Dancing around the 4th amendment to do away with the 2nd amendment is something that makes me see "slippery slope". If we trample one amendment to get rid of the other, what leaves the other amendments to be considered?
I don't see disarming the populace working either. Forcibly making them surrender their weapons will cause escalating levels of violence. What we have now is an unfortunate series of events from individuals with guns rather than gun owners as a whole. Turn the law against gun owners and it will quickly escalate.
We need reasonable legislation that both sides can agree on. "Do nothing" and "Disarm everyone" are two non-workable solutions which may end up with the same result. Much like immigration is often poorly enforced, disarming the populace would likely be poorly enforced.
So the question is what realistic solutions do we have? I can consent to no longer being able to purchase high capacity magazines. I won't agree with a semi-automatic arms ban because most guns that are sold are semi-automatic. I believe that in order for us to reach a serious comprehensive solution that benefits everyone and that the majority can get on board with, we have to look for realistic measures we can adopt. The "my way or the highway" approach from two different sides who are on complete and opposite ends of the spectrum.
Thank you for your reply.
trilca
That is what I am referring to. Every source I have read states that 40% of ALL gun sales are sold WITHOUT a background check, because they are sold at gun shows.
You still have not answered my question. If a background check is required at a store, why is requiring the SAME THING at a gun show equal to "banning all guns"?
If you are fine with background checks at stores, why are you vehemently against it at gun shows? That does not make any sense.
And how is asking this question a "rabblerousing knee-jerk reaction"? You don't even know my stance, I am just trying to understand YOUR logic. How is a background check a complete ban?
I will have you know, ADHD kids NEED medication to survive! Would you not treat a child with insulin for diabetes? Why would you want to deprive them of the ability to be able to concentrate and learn and more importantly stop disturbing other children who are also trying to learn?
@bayllie...I worry about the murder of the innocent. THAK GOD I live in TEXAS and not the arm pit massash1tsits. I DID spell that right didnt I?? Look at the loonies you people elect. YOUR state sucks.
FedUp...
The ones who truly need it, deserve it and should receive it. However, there is too much handed out like candy these days. When my boys were in school (elementary) @ 60% of the boys in their classes were on meds! I have a very hard time believing so many truly needed it. My neighbors kid was on the stuff...made him look and act like a frikkin' zombie!
It's used far too many times as a means of controlling behavior...but let's face it, most young boys are naturally hyper...in no need of "doggie downers"
bayllie............your simple minded misguided posts are rather humorous. Hope everything goes well for you in your simple little world!! Liberals.......................
You make a valid argument for banning incompetent doctors that treat symptoms by throwing the "drug of the day" at the patient rather than evaluating actual cause. Far too many "doctors" spend 5 minutes with a pateint then write a prescription. Obamacare will effectively decrease payments to doctors, increase their patient loads, decrease the incentive for the best and brightest to seek a medical degree.....
If you want to see improved treatment for mental health issues and a related decrease in violence (not just guns , but all kinds) Reject Obamas misguided liberal agenda for a socialist USA. The way Obama is headed, the governments hand picked
thugsprofessionals will EVALUATE your mental health and kick you into an internment camp for re-education if you don't meet the standards set by Obama himself. The Nazis after all interred those they considered unfit out of their sense of duty to improve the motherland. Just like many of the liberal sheep in the USA today, that are being led to the edge of a slippery slope regarding the freedom the USA has always held dear,Ben, no a 7-2 republican (NRA whore) supreme court disagreed with clwyd. That doesn't say much to the validity of their statement.
Truetexan, your state elected rick perry, a man with an IQ obviously below 100 and unfit for office.
The film is called "Living for 32" by Colin Goddard
Our resident Constitutional scholar from Albany is a step or two behind in the conversation about the debt ceiling. This may be due to a failure to read other parts of the Constitution.
Which branch of the U.S. government, one wonders, has the power to set tax rates and create spending programs? I'll give you a hint: it isn't the President. Another hint if you'd like. It isn't the courts.
So I wonder, then, what is good and wholesome and American about Congress setting revenue and spending at levels that create a need to borrow money, and then that same Congress telling the executive branch that it shall not borrow the money needed to pay for the programs Congress has passed?
If I instructed someone on my behalf to go and buy me a house and to get a mortgage in my name to pay for it, and then a week later I instructed my agent that he wasn't allowed to pay the mortgage, do you have any idea what would happen to me?
But enough of the analogy to personal finances. If Congress tells the world that the United States will not pay its debts, this won't be a good thing for anyone. Credit downgrade. Market freefall. Increased cost of borrowing. Sound like fun?
But this brings up another point that our resident Constitutional scholar from Albany overlooks. It's that word "debts." You see, if the President obeys the law and does things like purchasing fuel for active military vehicles, and buying penicillin and aspirin for VA and military hospitals, that creates debts.
If the debt ceiling isn't raised so that we can borrow money to pay those debts, then we run hard up against that pesky 14th Amendment again. Because under its terms, those debts must be paid.
Now, our resident Constitutional scholar may be right that the President can't borrow the money to pay those debts that, by law, he must pay.
Hmmmm. Where else might a President get U.S. dollars?
Think, think, think.
I think I'll go chew on a mint.
Think, think, think.
Patrick, Funny how MY state is doing pretty good in comparison to most other states AND having to fight your bozo of a prez. every step of the way. YOUR bozo has no clue of how to run a nation. BUT he knows everything aboutruining one!
Better quit yer bitchin' and git off yer asses RWNJ gun lovers... get out there and pay a premium price for your (still legal) arsenals! Because it's coming... wait and see, no more legal "high capacity" firearms, or assault rifles for you or for me! That being said, I have a Colt AR-15 in mint condition for sale...really!
Incidentally, the New York Times had a good article from July 2011 that surveyed the waterfront on the 14th Amendment and the debt ceiling.
nytimes dot com/2011/07/25/us/politics/25legal.html?_r=0
CLWYD-2621393 Wrote;
Nice try but that's incorrect. The constitution was written long before the National Guard was established. (National Guard=January 21, 1903. Bill of Rights, in effect December 15 1791) Nowhere in the 2nd amendment or the constitution for that matter does it in any way say, or imply. until such time as the National Guard is conseeved..., when the government has a better idea, or when CLYD-2621393 decides to puke what he doesn't know to the rest of the world. BTW The National Guard is run by the Federal Government meaning that, it can and will be used against ''YOU''. (See Slaughter at Kent University.)
Try You tube as well, they may have a video of it for you.
Militia:
If you look up militia, (DOJ) you will find that it includes ALL able bodied men, both military/ organized, and non military/ UNORGANIZED, including from the citizenry from 17 up. (Women too) .
The Second Amendment
There is no confusion as to its meaning as you imply. It means what it has always meant.
Well regulated means well supplied and trained. Obviously, you've never heard of the term "regulations" when used in reference to the daily ration of beans, coffee and salted pork that each soldier/ volunteer was to be allotted per day in accordance with army "regulations". When the "UNORGANIZED" militia is called into service, the federal government is required by "REGULATION" to feed, arm/ supply ammo, clothe and train them. Hence the term, "well regulated".
Yes it does!!
I think that the American people have awakened to the fact that our nation is being taken over by International socialists that not only want to disarm our people but replace our Republic with a Socialist Government. More and More I hear common folks talking about picking up their rifles and taking back, and restoring, our nation. Twenty years ago you never heard people talking like that. Combine the way people are talking with the fact that gun and ammo sales are higher than they have ever been and it seems to indicate that Revolution is one more ruby ridge, or one more Waco, away. Any attempt to take the second amendment rights away from the people would most probably also start a Revolutionary war.
Never before in the History of our nation has the US Government tried to control every aspect of our lives. Never before have we had cameras along our streets and drones in the air above us watching every move we make. Never before has the Government tried to dictate to us what we eat, or what we drink. Never before has our Federal Government taken land from our people illegally and not even pay them for the land. Never before has our Government allowed millions of illegal aliens to enter our nation, people we know nothing about, and allow even terrorists, foreign agents, and outlaws to enter our nation illegally across our borders and then protect them from being arrested and sent home. Never before has our government sold thousands upon thousands of guns illegally to drug cartels and then try to blame American gun owners for those guns and try to use that evil deed as an excuse to make laws infringing gun owners rights. Never before has trillions of dollars been taken from the American tax payers and used to "bail out" corrupt friends of the people in power. Never before has a President of the United States spent over 20 millions of tax payer dollars going on a vacation to Hawaii while millions of Americans have no jobs and can hardly afford to even eat. Never before in our history have Americans had to watch what they say on their own telephones or in their communications for fear they are being monotered by the Government and placed on some list that labels them domestic terrorists. Never before have Americans been so over taxed with Federal, State, County, and City taxes where hard working people pay most of everything they earn for one tax or another. Never before have thugs been allowed to stand at voting polls with clubs to intimidate voters. Never before have our elections been allowed to be stolen using corrupted technology that cant be traced instead of a voting system that has a true paper trail. Never before has the Government taken over our citizen's health care system when 90 percent of the people did not want the Government taking over health care. Never before has our Government of the people, for the people, and by the people not been of the people, for the people, and by the people, but is a government that will not even listen to the people. Never before have we lived under a government that is more like a Dictatatorship than a Constitutional Republic.
Is it any wonder our people are near to a Revolutionary war?
I see Haggis is back, still thinking that if he yells loud enough people will eventually agree with him.
Haggis your a POS. Anyone that would want to throw away a civil right, especially the right that gives you the means to throw off a tyrannical government deserves neither safety, freedom, or respect.
And if you think you have nothing to worry about from the government...heres something I got from another blog.. Straight from the horses mouth.
Heres a little bit of wisdom. After I left the military (1st
bravo co 2nd bn USMC recon) after the Gulf War I got a job with the Dept. of
Justice doing narcotics interdiction. Shortly afterwards I joined a tactical
team and hunted narco-terrorists before contracting for the DOD overseas
kicking in doors in Afghanistan again with DEA fast teams. I fear my government
more than I can ever explain to you. I have friends who are SEALS, US Marsalls
and Special Forces (1st and 5th group) and they will echo my sentitment. Know
why this is the case? Because we have seen and experienced governmental
transgressions both domestically and abroad all the way up the chain of command
to the executive branch that defy logic, morality and ethics. Please chew on
that because after youve seen what many of us have, its clear the 2nd
Amendments erosion is just the first step.
Bayllie
"Show me an example of ONE MOVIE that killed 20 children and 6 adults."
Not necessarily those exact numbers...but here's some interesting reading...
http://brainz.org/15-films-inspired-real-life-crimes/
LookingForward...
Very well said but unfortunately, on this vine, will fall mostly on deaf ears.
cantakenomore
don't worry, I like the fact that my state is top notch in education (unlike red states), higher income (unlike red states), higher % of adults with at least college degree (unlike red states), smaller % of households in poverty (unlike red states), and higher % of people with access to health insurance (unlike red states).
Be proud of your red states - your stats are just "amazing."
@lookingforward...take a look at how many states want OUT of the union. When the U.S. goes belly up like the old Soviet Union the same thing WILL happen. States splintering off into their own countries and nothing can be done about it. The soviets couldnt do anything about it no matter how much they wanted to and the same will be the case here. The libs either are to dumb to know this or dont care OR thats what they want, to destroy this nation. It's coming and I for one am HAPPY I live in Texas!
-usa1967-
you want to sound smart? Why don't you actually prove me wrong by actually supporting it with FACTS. Other than that, you sound like a 5th grader.
wb52
so this movies KILLED people? This is your smoking gun? Some article?
but fine, let's play your game. Here is an article about 15 deadliest companies (Smith and Wesson is one of them):
http://brainz.org/15-deadliest-us-corporations/
shut movies down, shut these corporations down as well.
Smith and Wesson Corp. never killed a damned person...
LookingForward
Really? The "American people" are waking up to that? All I have heard is people complaining about the extremists, like YOU, who are bat-sh** crazy... and how more moderate voices need to step up.
But, for sh**s and giggles, go ahead and post a link to the legislation that will completely "disarm our people". I have not seen a single bill, or even a single politician, discussing a complete ban on ALL guns. Yet, here you are, making that claim... so go ahead and provide us with the supporting evidence.
I won't hold my breath.
Oh... so you Republicans are going to start a revolution, huh?
Let me get this straight. YOUR party has voted to create the single largest military in the world. YOUR party has voted to spend billions and billions of dollars, making our military the most advanced force on the planet.
And now, after you have voted to create this military beast, you are going to grab your little walmart rifle and revolt?
You actually believe that your little assault rifle, purchased on sale from walmart, will put you on a level playing field with an army of Abram tanks, Apache helicopters, and drone strikes. HAhahahahahahaha
I pray... I am literally praying... that they air a live broadcast of your little revolution. I'll be sitting in my expensive house, with a big bowl of popcorn, laughing hysterically as I watch your family get blown the f*** up by a drone strike. The image of YOU standing outside, with your NASCAR jacket, an empty Coors light, and assault rifle, trying to shoot down a drone as it zero's in on you, would be f***ing hilarious. I would actually shell out the money for pay-per-view to watch that.
The reality is, YOUR party has created a military force too large and too powerful to be taken down by the very people who voted for it. And now you want to revolt against the monster you created, with a little walmart gun? Let me know how that works out for you.
The liberals will not let you legislate mental health issues and what you can and can't do when your mentally unstable. If they opened that up for discussion then it would lead to voting laws for the mentally unstable and there would go the majority of their base.
You can kill a few people with a gun but you can kill a nation with a stupid vote. The last election comes to mind as to prove my point.
mguy-478
After this sort of post, I hope I never see your name suggesting something is cruel or inhumane, or being upset with someone wishing ill upon others.
Dialogue like this continues to show how deep the divide is and how far apart we are from having us come together and have any sort of meaningful conversation.
mguy, read my post above. THAT IS exactly WHY YOU CANT HAVE OUR GUNS!!!! THAT day is coming. I didnt say I was looking forward to that day but its coming! The soviets couldnt stop it and neither will the socialist here. And you may not watch nascar (neither do I) or drink beer but you sip champain and watch formula 1 races dont ya? Elitist libs just amazzzze me with their high and mighty self serving ways.
Spelling correction in post # 1. 167; conseeved = conceived.
LookingfortheFutrue... Do you read what you write? If the majority of the people are so upset that they are leaning towards a Revoloution, as you call it, because of the current administration (seemed to be what you were implyiing). How was he elected by a majority? Oh, wait you are claiming the election was rigged... Seriously step back and read what you are saying.
The problem with some of you is you do not think critically. For instance you mention that the government wants to limit what you can eat, which I agree is a touch issue, but you never sit back and think why does the government want to do that? It is because people all over the country are becoming obese. There are people dying and get diabetes at an alarming rate. You do not think that is an issue? Maybe banning fatty foods is not the solution, but you think that is your government out to destroy you?
Then you wonder why it is hard for someone like me to have a conversation with you about the future of America. You are living in Fantasy Land.
truetexan
Again... show me one piece of legislation that proposes banning and confiscating ALL guns.
Just one. One simple piece of legislation that supports your claim. Come on, where is it.
What? You can't provide proof? Well that's because NO ONE IS GOING TO BAN ALL GUNS. It will not happen. You are paranoid and delusional. You live your life in fear... fear of something that DOES NOT EXIST.
But go ahead and revolt. Go ahead and take your little gun against an Abram tank. I could use a good laugh.
Truetexan said:
I am wondering if a breakup is immanent. I live in NY State, and I often wonder what it would do as a separate country? Would we join Canada? I met some people who said this. Texas could end up with Mexico. Personally, I'd rather be linked to Canada than Mexico. Or, perhaps both states would maintain independence...who knows. Perhaps certain clusters of states would form a country, like the entire northeast, for instance. Maybe the southern states would be the old CSA again in some form?
Of course, certain things make many hesitant to leave the union...like social security. All those federal benefits/entitlements. The states may not be able to replace those. If one third to one half of people depend on federal benefits, they may want to stay in the union. However, if the Tea party cuts all that stuff away, the union would become useless...just an expense. Who would want to be taxed by a federal entity that just bosses you around but pays you nothing? That is like needing potato bugs to grow potatoes. The federal government would be a parasite not a benefactor.
Repojam maybe Mguy went too far, and I will admit I laughed a lot at his response. I am sure he does not really wish harm to lookingforward. You have to realize what looking forward just said, that there is a revolution coming. He also speaks as if he will take part in that revolution. Responses like that cannot be taking seriously and it was recieved by a foolish response by Mguy. Before we sit here and call out Mguy for making a joke I think we should address the crazies like Looking forward...
Akeem, New Jersey
I'm sorry, but "just because they said something crazy maybe I should too" isn't an argument that works with me, nor is "but he started it" or "he poked me".
Were he to say it one time, it's easy to overlook. When he seriously hopes and prays and repeats that it becomes very difficult to take anything that can be suggested from that as anything but inflammatory, even if it is intended to be tongue in cheek.
Wishing for harm to come to another poster and their family is over the line to me no matter how ridiculous something they said is. If we keep speaking in hyperbole at what point can individuals expect to have an honest discussion?
I don't believe that he honestly wishes for harm to come to the other poster, but I do think it's time to seriously tone down the rhetoric if you are wishing for an actual discussion to take place.
Repojam
I am not "wishing" ill upon others. I am simply saying that when paranoid, delusional morons choose to do something so incredibly stupid that they end up getting killed... I feel no sympathy for them. They brought it on themselves.
So if a paranoid Republican decides to revolt against a military that HE helped create... and he takes a little gun against a tank, or drone, with some insane delusion of grandeur... I am going to laugh at the obvious result. He is making the decision to do so, so why should I feel sorry for him?
To clarify, I did not say that I "pray" he gets killed... just that they broadcast his "genius" decision to revolt.
Every logical, rational person knows that there will only be one outcome if a Republican "militia" (full of drunken NASCAR fans) tries to take on the US military... why should I feel sympathy toward the obvious result of their decision?
What you liberals dont understand is WE dont want or NEED a nanny state to whipe our butts or dry our tears every time something goes wrong. WE are big boys and big girls. You libs may not be but thats YOUR problem NOT ours! And mguy, have you not ever paid attention to NY. It was impossible to legaly own ANYTHING until the supreme court told them it was unconstitutional what they were doing. And chicago...what the hell do you think that punk of a mayer wants to do? You really dont pay much attention to whats going on outside of your little world do ya? And if you think a revolt CANT happen you dont pay ANY attention to what has happed around the world at all. Just a dribbling lib. You are the one providing the good laugh on here.
Empress...The federal gov. IS a parasite!
rukidding: Excellent point! It's also why there's no intelligence test required. Come to think of it, it explains why libs hate grades in schools and they certainly don't like divisions based on how smart people are. I suspect that the reasons for the rise in ADD among schoolchildren is that with today's education system being geared for the dumbest of students, the intelligent ones are bored out of their minds. My daughter-in-law showed me my granddaughter's grades a while ago and she was very concerned. I told her to set up an appointment with the teacher. This was done and I went with her. It's hard to explain the report card, but suffice it to say that there were no letter grades for subjects like English, Math, Reading, etc. The report divided things out and tried to explain whether the child was satisfactory or not in the various areas. She got "graded" in areas that they had not even addressed yet, which I suppose explains the not receiving a satisfactory in that area. The bottom line was that the teacher admitted that the report was confusing and that they don't use grades so that students wouldn't compare themselves and know where they stood regarding each other. I was incredulous. I pointed out that it doesn't say much for her, as the teacher, or the school if they can't put out a simple report card that gives a parent an idea of what the heck is going on. Plus, I asked her if she really thought the kids were dumb enough not to know who the smart students were and who the dumb students were. She just shrugged. Assuming this has been going on for a while, and it has since the 1960s, it's no wonder people are accepting socialism so readily. They are no longer being taught to think for themselves.
truetexan
Still waiting for that piece of evidence that supports your claim that a national ban of all guns will take place. Where is the legislation you are referring to?
Oh, I didn't say it "can't" happen... I just said that if it does, YOU will lose.
And are you really trying to compare the US military to the military of 3rd world countries around the world? Wow, how disrespectful.
And how was it possible that those revolting were successful? Because they had a certain military backing them up. Which country is going to back YOU up when you go against the US? Ya, good luck with that.
cantakenomore
do you actually read or do you just look at the pretty letters?
bayllie...
I'm done with you...now, go play in your sand box and keep your little libbie head buried!
truetexan
except when it comes to the federal welfare $ which red states so willingly take
cantakenomore
oh, come on. don't quit this easily - point out where I said that Smith and Wesson Corp actually killed people!
@ HaggisBingo
So "mental health screenings" for firearm ownership is codeword for doing nothing?
Then you are ok with no mental health screenings for firearm ownership and that's wrong.
Bad HaggisBingo, Bad.
MENTAL HEALTH SCREENINGS NOW BEFORE HAGGISBINGO GETS A FIREARM !
NOT ONE MORE HAGGISBINGO TYPE SHOOTER !
I agree with cantakenomore. Liberals are to stupid to understand anything and what you tell them you have to spell out everything to the smallist detail and even then they say, but, but but... So keep your liberal heads buried deep where the sun doesnt shine so you wont see it coming. PLEASE TEXAS SECEDE, PLEASE!!! You libs just have no idea!
Repojam,
First, thank you for your first comment as it isn't often that one gets anything polite or positive. However, you know my views are different from yours and yours from mine particlly becuse of our experiences.
@ Houston
Do you enjoy exaggerating much? First of all hardly anyone has 'assault weapons', which are military grade (fully automatic or can be selectively put in full auto mode).
1. True assault weapons are extremely expensive
2. They are very heavily regulated by the BATF & you have to jump through a ton of government hoops to get one including getting permission from the chief of police of your city or permission from your county sheriff.
What people own are semi-automatic AR-15s & the like. These guns do not fire 30 rounds per second. They fire 1 round each time the trigger is squeezed. No more, no less. This is the same rate of fire as any modern semi-automatic hunting rifle, semi-automatic handgun, semi-auto shotgun, or revolver has.
Even the real military assault rifles, like the M-16, which can be used in fully automatic mode can not fire 30 rounds per second.
On top of that even the military doesn't hardly ever use them in full-auto mode because accuracy is lost & they go through bullets too quickly. Not to mention the gun overheats very quickly if used in full-auto mode for extended periods.
Once again you exaggerate. Any licensed gun dealer with an FFL (Federal Firearms License) has to run a NICS background check whether they are selling guns at their gun store or from a table at a gun show.
What you are referring to is that some gun shows allow individuals to sell guns from their personal collections. Individuals are not required to conduct background checks.
The majority of people selling at gun shows are licensed dealers & they do run the required NICS background checks.
If you're going to make statements about guns at least get your facts straight.
@ clwyd
See my post above to Houston about so called rapid fire weapons.
Do you really think people are going to turn in their valuable & expensive guns at some lame buyback program for a $50 gift card? LOL What people turn in at those things are total junk. Or some old gun that a widow's husband had, which she doesn't have a use for.
No one in their right mind is going to turn in a $1,500 - $2,500 AR-15 for some lame $50 gift card. LOL
As for doing searches are you advocating door to door searches with cops kicking in front doors? Hello, this isn't WWII Nazi Germany. Besides there are 85+ million gun owners in the U.S. with an estimated 270 - 300 million guns. There aren't enough cops or military to go door to door to get them all. LOL
As for your registration lists, well, that is exactly why people are opposed to them because of people like you. You gun grabbers say "What's wrong with registering your guns if you don't have anything to hide?"
Well, people like you are what is wrong with registering guns because then people like you want to use those lists to confiscate all guns. Or the government will decide to tax the hell out of each gun you own. Screw that. Gun owners paid for the guns & paid sales tax on them when they first bought them.
Luckily, most states don't require guns to be registered, so your registration lists wouldn't get you very far anyway. If Obummer tries to impose some kind of nationwide registration list all you will do is turn tens of millions of people into criminals because they will refuse to register their guns.
None of your nonsense will stop one criminal or mentally ill person from going on a shooting spree.
Your odds of getting killed by a firearm (all types combined) in the U.S. is small fraction of 1%. You have a greater chance of getting struck by lightening.
And yet ANOTHER mentally disturbed son stabs and kills his mother today!
WHEN are they going to deal with MENTAL HEALTH????????????
http://cbs12.com/news/top-stories/stories/pbso-man-mental-issues-kills-mother-kitchen-steak-knife-argument-over-tv-show-4291.shtml?wap=0
This is insane. I-N-S-A-N-E. Why the hell is America always the last one to get the idea??? Why the @!$%# does America look so stupid in the eyes of the world??? Let me be on record by saying that gun ownership is NOT a right. You don't have the right to own an AR-15 Bushmaster or even a handgun; nobody does, or at least you shouldn't. The Second Amendment is not an immortal law designed to prevent the rise of a tyrannical government; it was a law designed to accommodate with contemporary society. Many Americans owned guns, mostly in rural and frontier lands, and they were among the most hesitant to give any power to a central government. Guns were more necessary back in the colonial days than they are now because back then Americans had a real enemy: Native Americans. And so most frontier citizens owned guns because of protection AND for food, as hunting was a major source of nourishment.
What I want America to realize is that we cannot prosper in the 21st century with an 18th century perspective of the world. Yes, guns are still necessary to enable households to defend themselves from thugs and outlaws, but we don't need one gun for every American. We also don't need self-proclaimed vigilantes armed to the teeth with automatic rifles and basements full of ammo roaming our streets OR living in our neighborhoods. America needs to get real and start realizing that guns are not a right; they are a responsibility. Just because you can own a gun doesn't mean you are entitled to it; you must be mentally competent and trained in using it. Guns are like cars; everybody has the right to try to own one, but nobody is automatically entitled to one. You have to prove your worth in order to get it. Face the facts: we are the deadliest nation IN THE WORLD; we have more deaths due to gun violence AND more guns per 100 people than ANY OTHER nation in the world. More guns does not equal more safety; if all of the people in the Aurora theater were armed and started firing at the shooter, we would have had another OK Corral and dozens more would be killed or wounded. The law should not assume that everyone who owns a gun can use it properly, just like it already doesn't assume that everyone who owns a car can drive it properly. And frankly, I don't give a rat's ass if you're afraid that the "International Socialists" or "New World Order" is gonna take away your rights if we strengthen gun regulations; you fail to realize that a majority of Americans who served in the American Revolution were shopkeepers, craftsmen, and farmers who didn't always know how to handle a gun in proper military fashion. I would rather risk the New World Order coming in and enslaving the United States (which is as likely as an elephant floating on water) than watch another news story on how some madman with a gun killed 20 innocent people and how the nation mourns while not having the balls to do something about it. Do those dead kids in Newtown Connecticut mean NOTHING to you bastards??? Because if you are arguing against reasonable gun control, you might as well be the guy who killed them.
Hey Yellowdoggy, you're absolutely right, when it comes to liberals I wont keep my comments about their Che loving dreams out. If you want to discuss anything from a Democrat stand point, thats a different story. I dont believe I have ever called you a liberal or a commie. The far lefties take offense to it because it is true, its the whole looking in the mirror thing. If this isnt you Yellow then I dont see where your beef is.
Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, New York City, Boston, Oakland, Los Angeles, Kansas City, Baltimore... a fair amount of population with one major problem in common? Urban decay. There are so many cases of homicide by gun, and mostly illegal guns, this type of gun violence I see, is not on the White House agenda, just assault rifles and large capacity magazines.
The solution is nothing the Democrats want. Demolish the zones of urban decay and don't replace structures. This will do two things. It will displace voting populations, but it will as well displace gang turf. It won't displace voting populations all that much, but it will affect census figures which translate into funds for these decaying municipalities, meaning funds for the local political corruption. Gang warfare is about money, money through drugs, or other activities such as prostitution. Gang payments are into political corruption schemes. The cities I mentioned would have tens of millions of people. Chicago had 500 homicides last year, Detroit over 400. Start adding up the homicide statistics of the major cities which give the Democratic Party it's voting base, and you can see that Democrats don't have gun violence solutions, or choose to ignore gang violence in order to preserve their voting blocks. They need the census figures so the federal money keeps rolling in, they could give a damn about the violence in the populated areas of urban decay, both residential and industrial.
Oneslackr,
Da! Where did you make up the fact that your chances of getting killed by lightening are the same or greater than being killed with a gun? Something like 11,000 people were murdered with guns last year. Not just killed, but murdered. Lightening took something like 200 lives. Get in touch with reality man!
freshiee,
You said it! Right on! Spot on! You hit the bulls eye! That a boy! That a girl!
Searching Sanity
88 yrs. Old woman, bring a "BB gun" to a Townhall , to prove how easy is to buy " assault weapons". Biden will ask executive powers to ban BB guns.
Hello haggisbingo, how about a gentleman's bet? I know that there will be a lot of bluster (kinda like your screaming posts) from the Administration but I'll bet you that after the dust settles from what is proposed to what actually gets instituted will not change a persons ability to get any size of magazine they want along side the AR15. Hell, Walmart will probably have a buy one get one free sale!
Is it a bet?
I'll tell you what, I'll let you give peace a chance but I'll cover you with my 2nd Amendment in case it doesn't work out!
The True Patriots know this isn't just about gun control, it's about neutering the population so that they can put everyone on their knees. We won't let that happen!
TrustVerify,
It is so sad that so many of you on the right fear the government you so often use as an excuse to protect!
Hello clwyd, there you go assuming, I'm not a conservative, I'm a political atheist I don't care what political religion one wants to attach themselves too. In our country we have a two headed one party system serving their masters the baksters/Wall Street and the Federal Reserve.
I know many people on both sides of the gun debate and I'm here to tell you those that want to ban guns aren't all progressives and those that don't want to ban guns aren't all conservatives.
P.S. Enjoy your slumber!
The conservative movement is still an elaborate moneymaking venture
By Alex Pareene
The conservative media movement exists primarily as a moneymaking venture. As Rick Perlstein explained in the Baffler, some of the largest conservative media organs are essentially massive email lists of suckers rented to snake oil salesmen. The con isn’t limited to a couple of newsletters and websites: The most prominent conservative organizations in the nation are primarily dedicated to separating conservatives from their money.
FreedomWorks, which is funded primarily by very rich people, solicits donations from non-rich conservative people. More than 80,000 people donated money to FreedomWorks in 2012, and it seems likely that only a small minority of those people were hedge fund millionaires. And what are people who donate to this grass-roots conservative organization funded mostly by a few very rich people getting for their hard-earned money? In addition to paying Dick Armey $400,000 a year for 20 years to stay away, FreedomWorks also apparently spent more than a million dollars paying Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh to say nice things about FreedomWorks, in order to convince listeners to send FreedomWorks money that FreedomWorks would then give to Limbaugh and Beck. It’s a pretty simple con. Beck, meanwhile, also has a subscriber-based media operation, in which people pay his company money for access to programs where Beck expresses opinions that he was paid to hold. He also spent years telling everyone to buy gold from a company that pays him and defrauds consumers.
As Armey admitted to Media Matters, FreedomWorks at this point essentially raises money for the sake of raising money. It exists to bilk “activists.” Armey at least has the courtesy to be embarrassed by this:
“If Limbaugh and Beck, if we were using those resources to recruit activists and inform activists and to encourage and enthuse activists, that’s one thing,” Armey explained. “If we are using these things to raise money; one, it’s a damned expensive way to raise money; and two, it makes raising money an end on to itself not an instrumental activity to support the foundation work that our organization does.”
This complete contempt for the audience is unique to the right-wing press — if the Huffington Post made its money selling snake oil, liberals would complain. The recent trickle of complaints about the major nonprofit money-making groups, like FreedomWorks and CrossroadsUSA, has come solely because those groups failed to win the election.
The problem this presents for the movement, beyond the threat of eventually bankrupting the people who give it power, is that the business of money-making, for consultants and media personalities and Herman Cains, is at this point getting in the way of the business of advancing conservative causes. The groups exert massive influence, and they only ever push the Republican Party to get more extreme. Apocalyptic hysteria is much more effective at getting people to open their wallets than reasonable commentary. There are a lot of people whose livelihoods depend on keeping lots of conservatives terrified and ill-informed. The groups that exist to raise funds raise more funds when they endorse the crazier candidate.
So even if you don’t particularly care that regular conservative Americans are constantly being scammed by their media apparatus, you should still worry about the influence of the scammers. The fact that there is a lot of money to be made in acting like Michele Bachmann is part of why the House seems poised to blow up the U.S. economy. The fact that conservatives have that much contempt for their own true believers neatly explains how they govern when they actually have power.
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/07/the_conservative_movement_is_still_an_elaborate_moneymaking_venture/
___________________________________________________________
Like Ol’ P.T. says there’s a sucker born every minute. We just seem to have a larger percentage of them here of late.
Personally I haven’t seen such a slick money making scam since Ol’ Jim and Tammy Fay were bilking Lil’ Old Widow Ladies out of their last Ten Dollars out of their Socialble Security Checks.
The Snake Oil may have changed a little but the Method of Selling it is Timeless.
IR:
I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you. When Rachel Maddow destroyed Dick Morris the other day, I thought she had hammered the only person in the whole wide world who was taking advantage of the mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals of the right wing.
Now, I find there's others. I'm shocked I tell you.
Mr. President please stand firm on a full withdrawal from Afgan. We've already spent to many lives and to much money on that worthless piece of dirt. Karzai is just another bandit always looking for a handout. The he!! with him and is ilk.
Don't like to wish my live away, but the sooner 2014 comes and we can vote out all the "NO BABIES" in the Repug Party, the better. What an absolute worthless Republican Congress. Throw them all out.
Independent Redneck Va.
some of the largest conservative media organs are essentially massive email lists of suckers rented to snake oil salesmen.
IR lets not forget that slime ball Dick Morris.
Paul Waldman takes another look at Dick Morris and his Super PAC, "an organization whose entire purpose is to raise money, and its expenditures involve raising money and finding new donors. And not, say, getting Mitt Romney elected."
"Perhaps there's a more innocent explanation for all this, but the way it looks is that 1) People (should we call them 'marks'?) donate money to Morris' super PAC; 2) he pays that money to Newsmax for 'fundraising'; then 3) Newsmax turns around and pays the money back to Morris, for access to his list of donors. Perhaps Newsmax takes a cut, or perhaps the list is their cut, because these people can then become marks for all kinds of future scams."
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/12/10/the_dick_morris_scam.html
IR:
As always well done. It's a part of what's becoming the Great American Tragedy and it is unfortunate that so many Americans are mislead by these people. I am unable to comprehend how so many people can believe the nonsense people like Beck, Rove, and Alex Jones spew.
All you accomplish by donating to a super pac is to make the top brass of the super pacs millionaires.
Oh, my utter disappointment. Following the footsteps of Dick Army, I shot an email off to Freedom Works advising them that for $8m dollars, I too would promise to pack a piece and stay silent on all matters related to enslaved lazy Freedom Works efforts. To bad and so sad for me, their form letter reply said they only pay off dick heads. Gosh darn it - apparently you have to mimic Joe Albany and Dick Army to make money off the Republican party, and be a complete and utter dick head.
IR.....thanks for posting this. I am coming to the conclusion, that conservatives are suffering from a little or in some cases a lot of mental health issues. Somewhere they missed out on the tolerance 'gene', they also appear to have been behind the door when the ability to discern good from evil was handed out and thus don't know the difference when to keep their words or their actions measured. Of course, nowadays, sitting anonymous at a keyboard or behind a wall of security of different kinds makes them seem very brave, and the fools that listen to them in their twisted minds think they are their friends.
As with the gun violence, these same kind of folks, do not appear to know when enough is enough and no one needs to have an assault rifle or a magazine with many bullets. Perhaps we need to think about offering more funds for mental health services.
The last election proved that we the average people can defeat these so called conservative super packs. However, let's not let up, because they have opened the doors to even more sinister factions of the so called conservative movement.
IR, I read your post. Now that you've cured insomnia maybe you can work on the cold next?
I don't know, maybe it's just me but I would rather the Whitehouse and congress actually fix our economy. For the well being of Americans this would be a far more beneficial use of their time. As for gun control, more people are killed every year by hammers.
When people are afraid they will spend hard earned money on very dumb things. There is always someone there waiting to make a profit on it. We saw the products for sale after 9/11 and there were people who spent a lot of money preparing for the end of the world in 2012. I do not see the fear many conservatives are experiencing going away any time soon, so these organizations will probably continue to see large profits.
Thanks Folks. These are just a few examples of what I feel are examples of misuse of funds. The NRA is another example. I don't think that the Majority of folks that donate to the NRA donates with the expectation that they would be as involved in far right politics as they have come to be. Now let me be clear I've never been a member of the NRA for somewhat different reasons. For further clarification I've never been a member of the Sierra Club either because at one time they supported organizations that put nails in trees thus injuring loggers. I think that the majority of us both left and right want to support organizations that unite us (or are at least benign) than organizations that divide us. It is a misuse of funds to me for folks to take folk's money for the express purpose of making money and fomenting fear between us to make it.
IR, excellent information; your added pearls of wisdom neatly sums it up.
Newt Gingrich is another snake oil salesman raising money to fund HIS personal endeavors; selling his books and alleged wisdom; at all his campaign stops, hawking not only his books but Callista's Ellis the Elephant with a campaign staffer forced to wear and elephant suit paid for with contributioins from supporters. Mike Huckabee, and others with their videos/CDs rewriting history ala the conservative view, another fine snake-oil seller. Sarah Palin and her PAC funded family vacations and paid for her speaking engagements, the speaking fees added to her personal income. Cain's campaign was all about selling his book.
What a pathetic piece of propaganda,Typical of the Progressive/communist /left/socialist Ownes Lamesteram media,We wouldn't expect anything less,Apparently you people belive your "news sources" don't get paid by anyone and are oh so balanced LMAO you people will look for needles in haystacks that are not there,go ahead keep you head in the Hay or perverbial sand. :)
So am I. Was it on her own show? Because once you take her out of her safe environment she is useless at arguing a position. I've seen her on MTP and Bill Maher where she was basically destroyed by her opponent and then sat in a huff, silently like a child at the grown-ups table.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/06/22/maher_maddow_deny_being_partisan_cant_name_republican_they_agree_with.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wj6RymfWTTM
Ster2: Are you one of those who wants to have unfetttered access to any weapons you want so that you can revolt against your legally and popularly elected government?
Alan: Agreeing with insane people is insane. I do not agree with you radical rightwingnuts either. You are insane.
SmallBizGirl - I believe we expect our President and Congress to be able to multi-task - so the economy, jobs, fixing the gun problem - all can be worked on at the same time.
And, if they didn't address it after the horrible massacre in Connecticut, if another such mass killing happened - and it will, everyone would be screaming about how they didn't do their job.
Ster2 - when you go off and spout the "communist/left/socialist" stupidity we know you are a blithering idiot who isn't worth reading!
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Independent Redneck. What a great post. I say we should stop buying anything made by the Koch Brothers. I did that a long time ago. I say hit them where they live. This takes me back to a time when Sears would almost force a Credit card on you. But If you were a day late on the payment, they would destroy your credit. That kind of practice landed them out of Business. K mart owns them now. You can't treat people like that. Koch's funded Dick Army to hijack the Tea party. He went in with armed guards and took the tea party over. I for one liked some of the things the tea party was saying. But when the Koch for president party took it over and the crazy's started coming out of the walls. Well like everything else in this country, it was corrupted.
IR, I feel compelled to sound a solitary note of dissent regarding the Huffington Post. You observed that "if the Huffington Post made its money selling snake oil, liberals would complain." Unfortunately, the HuffPO is doing exactly that, and far too few Liberals seem to be noticing it at all.
It took me a couple of months to catch on,but ever since the sale to AOL, the Huff has swerved in a distinctly and undeniably Murdochian direction. Their new role as an organ of the Forces of Darkness is all the more insidious because so many people still read it in the belief that they are a Progressive alternative to the lapdog corporate media, when in fact they are among the very worst offenders.
The quickest way to prove this for yourself is to try and post one of your typically insightful remarks to a HuffPo story. You, and any other Progressive poster who presents their point of view in a sane and literate manner, won't make it past the
censorsmoderators, but the right-wing trolls are given ample space to vomit out their toxic beliefs.A look at the front page will show more celebrity gossip than political fact. The President is consistently shown in the most unflattering light possible, in photos, captions, and headlines, while the vile and foul likes of Boehner or Cantor are described in slanted and cherry-picked ways to make them appear, if not statesmen- like, then at least not overtly idiotic (as any normal adult knows them to be).
The Huffington Post is a fifth- column wrong-wing propaganda rag, and it should be 'outed' and ignored by all people of good will, in order to hasten its demise.
Milk kit,
Wow you have conservatives or anyone who disagrees with you put in the box your Propagana news tells you,and that's okey,we only come to msnbc to see why your so ignorant in your thought process,and what lies and half truths this and your other propaganda news sources.
You know what is said about keeping your friends close......
You have a right (still) to read,listen to,watch,and donate to anybody you want, just as anyone who doesent like to be fed recycled BS for breakfast,lunch and dinner,Is still free to seek real news that isn't bought and paid for by the tyrannical left.
Fox The Huff Post stuff was just included in the body of the piece that I used to make my overall point. It just so happens I feel about the Huff Post about the same way that you do and that is why you will seldom see me using articles from them to make a point. The overall point is that left leaning sites have a tendency to foster more critical thinking than thes right leaning sites remains.
Which kills more Americans? Legal gun holders or the policies the Democrats use to destroy cities with?
geo - that would be gun owners! Next question, moron!
DATA:
According to FBI.gov statistics not those from a lobbying group who advocate policy.
Since 1992 Violent crime is down 50% the Murder rate is down 54%.
Why isn’t the Media reporting the considerable improvement in violent crime?
In 2011 of all the homicides committed by firearms, only 3.5% were committed with rifles and the AR15 is only a subset of the rifle group. Assault weapon ban should really help out here? LOL
In England where guns are banned:
Violent crime ratio per 100,000 = 1,361. This is 3 and half times that of the US.
This is simply about the government gaining more control over the populace. Not one of the Obama initiatives will significantly improve our safety.
Seeking Insanity - I think you made it. Why don't you, me, Bev, and Fiesty take a tour of Chicago's south and west side, all Democrat strongholds, and see what the Democrats have done to these once proud cities! Of the 450+gun murders in Chicago last year how many were with legal guns? What gun law would have prevented 1 of them? Democrats ruin cities and people FACT!
or the policies the Democrats use to destroy cities with?
Oh my, destroyed cities. Chicago, a wasteland; Los Angeles, uninhabitable; San Francisco, in tatters; New York, in shreds; Dallas, destroyed by Debbie.
Destroyed cities? Indeed!!
Geo. The question should be how many mass killers were on mood altering prescription drugs.
Obviously they could have simply plowed an SUV into a group of kids at 90mph and accomplished the same thing so whether guns or homemade explosives etc have a greater potential for harm is a stupid question.
I do think in the near future a mass killing with something other than a gun will happen. And it will more sensationalized than the latest massacre.
IR, thank you for the reassurance re: the HuffPo. I didn't think that publication's rightward slide would have evaded your notice, but it's discouraging to see how many of our Fellow Travellers still rely on it as a source of actual 'news'.
Peace, and please keep the wisdom coming.
RedDevPS - Nice try, you can come along if you wish, but make sure it's before dusk. Cities ruined in the Chicago land area by DEMOCRATS are Harvey, Ford Heights, Dolton, Chicago Heights, Robbins, East Chicago, River Oaks, Glenwood, South Holland, Gary, Blue Island, Humboldt Park, Englewood, Posen, Markum, Little Village, Hegewisch, Sauk Village, Calumet City. Etc.Etc. You really think LA is inhabitable?
Trevor - Completely agree. Obama would come out and talk tough, say he would do something about homemade explosives, maybe even shed a tear and release a photo of himself looking upset about it. Then he would, like he always does, make it someone elses responsibiltiy! The buck does not stop with him!
The real risk for Obama and Biden isn't political, it's safety. Was at a diner in the gun-lovin' South recently and overheard the good ole boys talking about how they hate "the Muslim" Obama, etc. These guys are in love with their guns because they believe it's time for the Confederacy to re-fight and win the Civil War. And because it makes them feel like their penises are bigger when they can use dogs, spotlights, ATVs, trucks, and high-powered rifles to kill Bambi.
Alan, NJ
Disagreeing with Republicans not simply because they are Republicans but because they are crazy is NOT partisan. If you and the wingnuts at Real Clear Politics can't understand that, it's your problem.
BTW: Maddow agrees with much of Chuck Hagel's views on foreign policy, but his nomination for Sec. of Defense has just come out six months after the article posted by the anonymous wingnut at RCP, so his name just didn't occur to her. The anonymous wingnut is wrong. And so are you. And this has nothing to do with Dick Morris being exposed as yet another clown on "wingnut welfare", as high-paying jobs for rightwing morons have been called.
Repojam,
Saw the video - Lanza's doc is pretty out there but I agree with her about the psych drugs. They do have side-effects that include homicidal thoughts and manic behaviors. Funny that the liberals here say we should treat the mentally ill - that;s what they did with Lanza, Holmes and Loughner! It was the treatment that made them so dangerous.
Geo - if you're afeared to step out of your trashy trailer, you have no one to blame but yourself. Millions of people manage to live in, visit, and enjoy the cities I mentioned.
The radical left has always embraced the notion of disarming the American people. After all, that's what socialists world wide aspire to, a disarmed and helpless more easily controllable population because they envision a world where only they have guns.
Accordingly, they will seek to promote their agenda on the heels of any tragedy claiming measures are needed to prevent future such tragedies when in reality the measures they want to enact will have little or nothing to do with preventing such tragedies or lowering the crime rate in general.
Their goal is a total disarmament of the American people, one step at a time. When one stops to analyze any gun restriction proposals from the left, they will see that it is only directed at the 99.9% law abiding gun owners and has nothing at all to do with preventing any crimes, except for some theoretical lip service to placate society's dullards.
They must act quickly before any facts, reason and logic can enter into the equation.
@ Seeking Sanity
And, if they didn't address it after the horrible massacre in Connecticut, if another such mass killing happened - and it will, everyone would be screaming about how they didn't do their job.
So when they do their job, and it happens again, then what are YOU going to say?
Groups within the Obama
administration are pushing to keep no more than a few thousand troops in
Afghanistan after 2014, raising the prospect that the United States will be
unable to keep its promise to fully train and equip Afghan security forces.
Some in the administration are
pressing for a force that could be as small as 2,500, arguing that a light
touch would be the most constructive way to cap the costly, unpopular war.
Those troop levels are significantly
lower than what some senior military officials have advocated, arguing that a
sudden disengagement could lead to the collapse of a frail state and the onset
of a new civil war. The low number also is much lower than the 10,000-to-30,000
range discussed among NATO allies and some U.S. officials as recently as a year
ago.
White House officials said (1/8) that
they have not ruled out leaving no troops at all when the U.N. security mandate
sanctioning the international coalition expires.
The United States has committed to prevent
al-Qaeda from regaining a foothold in the country. Some senior military
officials and analysts have pressed for a more robust force, arguing that a
hasty disengagement would be reckless and could cause Afghanistan’s security
forces to crumble. The United States has invested $50 billion in training and equipping the
Afghan army and police.
Determining the size of a possible
post-2014 force is the first step to charting out the timeline for withdrawing
the remaining 66,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Keeping troops there after
2014 would require a bilateral agreement stipulating the authority of the
contingent and the legal protections its members would enjoy. Among the issues
are whether the U.S. troops can conduct counterterrorism operations on their
own and whether they would be immune from Afghan law.
The troop levels under serious
consideration range from 2,500 to 6,000.
identical post, identical to #1.2.
sorry.
But good info is worth repeating?
If you ever post some good info we'll read it.
soazDan, if you ever post a comment that says something other than naybobbing, we won't put you on ignore.
Put me on ignore Jody. This site is to express one's opinions and occasionally I sink to the liberal level and post a few that apparently gets under their skin.
This is what needs to be done, I don't give a flying f*ck what Karzi may or may not want, until those bastards can stop turning their guns on the soldiers trying to HELP them, they can all take a long walk off a short dock.
soazDan, apparently you lack a sense of humor; that was a tongue-in-cheek remark. Sorry, but you don't get under my skin. You claim this site is to express ones opinion but the only opinion you express is to say nothing except the other person is wrong without providing any opposing view as to why you think that person wrong. So, in my view, that makes you a naybobber rather than an opinion poster. Post a real opinion and someone might discuss it.
Pig is just a poor item trying to make a living as a paid trool. Hope it pays taxes.
1stFitzWife - actually, for once I agree with you. I want all the troops home this year - not next. It is time we end this war.
Hey, MNJL170 #3.7
... unpaid troll.
I volunteer ............
Jody, haha! Fair enough! See post 6.12....Touche!
According to FBI.gov statistics not those from a lobbying group who advocate policy.
Since 1992 Violent crime is down 50% the Murder rate is down 54%.
Why isn’t the Media reporting the considerable improvement in violent crime?
In 2011 of all the homicides committed by firearms, only 3.5% were committed with rifles and the AR15 is only a subset of the rifle group. Assault weapon ban should really help out here? LOL
In England where guns are banned:
Violent crime ratio per 100,000 = 1,361. This is 3 and half times that of the US.
This is simply about the government gaining more control over the populace. Not one of the Obama initiatives will significantly improve our safety.
Yes, good information is worth repeating.
WHY DID YOU REPEAT IT THEN?????
Dave1bg,
Lets get some stastistics right here.
Murder rate: US 4.8/100,000, Canada 1.6/100,000, UK 1.2/100,000
The difference is caused by the American poor social safety net and the ease of access to guns.
Ed,
F_ck Canada and Europe. My ancestors left Europe to escape socialism. And thank God they did. Have you seen the shape Europe is in now because of socialsim? LMFAO!! Canada LOL! Europe LOLOL!!
Liberals. God love em!
Alex Jones...where do Conservatives find these guys?
"1776 WILL COMMENCE AGAIN IF YOU TRY TO TAKE OUR FIREARMS!!!"
Hmm...a guy who becomes totally unhinged like that is probably not the best spokesperson for his cause.
Jon Stewart summed it up best last night...
"No one is taking away all the guns...but now I get it. Now I see what is happening. So this is what it is, their paranoid fear of a possible dystopic future prevents us from addressing our actual dystopic present. We can’t even begin to address 30,000 gun deaths that are actually in reality happening in this country every year because a few of us must remain vigilant against the rise of imaginary Hitler."
PS - My history books always said that the Revolutionary War began in 1775.
The sad truth is any nut job can buy a gun at any gun show and no questions are asked.
Job1 do you really believe your bs, you lefties are pathetic
The truth is that Obama, the Congress and Biden are surrounded at all times by a heavily armed protection detail.
Maybe they could give up those guns first to show us they aren't total hypocrites.
Steve....really? Making any sense??
"Gun show loophole" - a term that was coined by people who oppose PRIVATE sales of guns between PRIVATE individuals, and has absolutely nothing to do with gun shows. Dealers at gun shows are required to follow the gun laws of the state that they are in. Media and liberals and "gun-grabbers" are hoping that you won't do your research, seems they were right. Less than 1%f criminally used guns are bought at gun shows. Not too much of a loophole, if you ask me.
Straw Man
It's a valid point. Why doesn't Obama give up his guns too if he's so interested in controlling what other people can have? he can be the first one to hand them in.
Infowars
Straw Man
Saw the show last night and thought it was incredibly intelligent and insightful. I can only hope that shows like this prove to be influential as well. The 1776 guy was scarier in real life than any yarns the gun fanatics have ever spun.
To td49: we may be pathetic, but we're in charge. But I do think it's funny that the righties complain that we post here on msnbc, a known liberal-leaning website. Honestly, we'd go over to Fox - but they don't allow posts.
The sad truth is any nut job can buy a gun at any gun show and no questions are asked.
@Job1, that is not the case in Virginia, where background checks are required before any sale at a gun show. I don't know about other states, but in Va. it is the law. So please check the facts before making a blanket statement. It helps when the facts are out there.
Red-2695269
That is a Bureau of Justice Statistic based on questioning felons who are renowned for their honesty! Now, where did the other 99% come from? The street black market come to mind, no?
In 2000, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) published the "Following the Gun" report. The ATF analyzed more than 1,530 trafficking investigations over a two-and-a-half-year period and found gun shows to be the second leading source of illegally diverted guns in the nation. "Straw purchasing was the most common channel in trafficking investigations."These investigations involved a total of 84,128 firearms that had been diverted from legal to illegal commerce. All told, the report identified more than 26,000 firearms that had been illegally trafficked through gun shows in 212 separate investigations. The report stated that: "A prior review of ATF gun show investigations shows that prohibited persons, such as convicted felons and juveniles, do personally buy firearms at gun shows and gun shows are sources of firearms that are trafficked to such prohibited persons. The gun show review found that firearms were diverted at and through gun shows by straw purchasers, unregulated private sellers, and licensed dealers. Felons were associated with selling or purchasing firearms in 46 percent of the gun show investigations. Firearms that were illegally diverted at or through gun shows were recovered in subsequent crimes, including homicide and robbery, in more than a third of the gun show investigations."
That nutjob who lost it on CNN over his guns is the perfect example of a person who should not own guns. He's a whack-a-do, the dangerous kind--paranoid, delutional, and angry.
Think about it-
Background checks are NOT required at a Virginia gun show if you are not a licensed gun dealer. You can be a "private" seller getting rid of your "personal" firearms and not have to perform a background check. You can rent a table to show off your "collection", then sell some of them to anyone without a background check. The only legal requirement caveat is you cannot "knowingly" sell to a felon.
The fact is only two states, Califormia and Rhode Island, require background checks for private sales.
I have a licensed gun dealer who works with me, he goes to frequent gun shows and complains about the sellers who have two tables: one with the guns they are selling as licensed gun dealers (complete with background checks), the other table has guns from their "private" collection that they can sell without a background check (at a higher price).
so, its ok for the government officials to have protection from whatever threat they face, but the average joe does not need it? the republican party is evil because they do not think the same as the left ? sorry all of you guys on the left pushing for your socialist one party government is way off base. you preach equality and compromise as long as it fits your way of thinking. interesting, you jump up and scream BAN THE GUNS, BAN THE GUNS, form a committee make another new law that does not do a damn thing to fix the problem and then stand there and say we did something ! hooray! and then Nancy Pelosi makes a commit.............................this woman is an idiot, there is no denying it, the noise that comes out of her mouth is a joke, you would think by now the left would keep her out of the public eye. the (handout) crowd may think you guys are really great but the rest of us are not buying the spin.
Da Noid
Great! Now ask yourself how many times have you been told you are wrong(well not in Boston). The American people have a pathetic knowledge and understanding of our history. Many facts are enough to cause a fuse to blow.
Better education, and not a glossed over version, would help solve much of the problem in this blog.
unbelievable -- it will be interesting to see what our left friends have to say about these gun violence proponents that appeared on CNN:
“I don’t care what the justification is that you’re allowed in this country to own a semi-automatic weapon – much less a handgun. But what do you need a semi-automatic weapon for? The only reason I think you’d need it is, Piers, challenge Alex Jones to a boxing match, show up with a semi-automatic that you got legally and pop him.”
The other guests laugh and say they’d like to see it. Without a doubt, this amounts to a veiled threat.
Earlier in the episode, another guest expressed hope that Alex Jones’ children would not be killed, which Jones’ says terrorized his children and family as they watched on from home.
kill roy: #4.15 doesn't make much sense either.
kilroy, I'm not in favor or making everyone give up their handguns or shotguns. I not in favor of you owning a Bushmaster. Sorry.
So, yes, it's a straw man argument...if you have to give up your Bushmaster the President should give up his Secret Service detail?
Straw Man
Da Noid
Bingo! I saw that too.
The uber wackos are dictating the argument.
Which reminds me of another saying,
"Help! The paranoids are after me"!!!
Salud
To the idiots posting that the President should give up his security protection - your stupidity is overwhelming. Every President has had security protections because of loons like you and many of the righties on this site who could not be trusted if the President was not protected.
Get another argument because that one is totally ridiculous and you know it. You wouldn't even suggest it if the President was Republican!
SeekingSanity, which Republican President was hypocritical enough to suggest what Obama is suggesting?
When a politician signs a gun ban, they themselves don't have to follow the law. Their personal security forces will always remain armed. Makes sense.
We trust an 18 year old with a FULL-automatic weapon as long as they are not in our own country..... but when they come home...... they cannot even own a SEMI-automatic rifle.......
Kind of like my own concealed carry..... passed all the background checks (local, state & federal).... passed the written exam.... passed the range test..... and I can carry in most places..... but can't carry in a bar, school, courthouse or any POSTED business...... Why? I've proven I am NOT a criminal.....
Nothing is stopping an ARMED criminal from entering the same business.....
Makes no sense to me............
pigtry, your little pun is wrong, kilroy, has absolutely nothing to do with with killing, you are WRONG about that look up kilroy history of. and stop guessing. my point is the president is entitled to a security detail in case he needs the protection, but the average joe, should not own a gun to stop someone from harming them? the cops will be there right? not soon enough, in most cases. the government will be there? buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa........yeah right......sure!
da noid, who said anything about a bushmaster? actually, im a more M4 or M14 type of guy but bushmasters are nice, and yeah, if the prez, can have guys with automatic weapons around him at all times for protection, then hell yes i should be able to have a semi automatic weapon to protect myself with. liberals, its the same ole thing. i want peace love,security and freedom, but i'm too educated and too high handed to actually fight for it, that's someone else s job , yep.
The NRA. The question the press should be asking every Congressional member is what is more important to them, their jobs as legislators or the lives of innocent people? The NRA only has the power if our legislators lack the courage to stand up to it and say "enough". The American people and most of NRA's members support sensible gun laws; they will have legislators' backs if those legislators have the courage to do what they know is right.
No one is talking about taking away all the guns. No one claims that sensible gun laws and better mental health access will prevent every gun-related death. But military-style weapons do not belong on the streets or in the hands of the public. They were develped for fighting wars.
AIG--Stupidity or Greed? How dare AIG even entertain the notion of suing the United States after the USA and the taxpayers saved their behinds? How dare AIG give Hank Greenberg, whom it fired as CEO in 2005 because of a scandal, the time of day? AIG would not exist today had it not been for the US government and the taxpayers. AIG's option in 2008 was accept and bargain the bailout which it did or close its doors and disappear into bankruptcy.
As a taxpayer, I hated the Wall Street bailout but I recognized that if all those financial institutions collapsed and failed at or about the same time, we would have fallen into a second Great Depression and climbing back out would have taken at least a decade to get our heads above water. The idea that AIG (and the other firms who have jumped on the sue the US bandwagon) would sue the USA because now they claim the terms were unfair. Really? Unfair? What was unfair was taxpayers having to bail out these greedy firms in the first place? Unfair was taxpayers bailing out the irresponsible behavior of these mega-giant financial institutions?
Jody:
Good stuff. There may be some very good news coming from AIG. The wonderful new Senator Elizabeth Warren not only gave AIG a richly-deserved public spanking, she spoke of the ongoing stealth bailout that rests on American taxpayers.
We may yet see some Wall Street prosecutions. I really, really, really want to see those bastards in prison.
Jody, I too am appalled at the actions of AIG. I have a simple solution for that. Put them and all their investors into receivership, seize their assets, and liquidate them.
David W, can't help thinking the GOP Senators who put anonyous holds on and blocked Elizabeth Warren's nomination to head the newly created consumer protection agency now wish they had voted yes. She now has a much bigger microphone and she's not afraid to use it. That and she sent the GOPer Scott Brown packing. I do take pleasure in the outcome.
RedDev, I'll second that idea.
Jody---I've been seeing ads on TV from AIG thanking the taxpayers for helping them out---now they are thinking about suing us? Really? I agree with you---I wasn't happy about the bailouts but we were in dire straits and innocent people would have been hurt even worse if the global economic collapse had been worse.
How sad that so few in Congress have the courage to stand up to the NRA. I'm afraid we will have to watch more massacres until people start saying "enough." If the events of Newtown weren't enough, I don't know what would be.
Jody: I thank you for the AIG alert. I am trapped for 5 years without penalty. Thank god for Senator Warren.
Jody, Iowa
The American people and most of NRA's members support sensible gun laws; they will have legislators' backs if those legislators have the courage to do what they know is right.
As a life member of the NRA, I would agree that we support "sensible" gun laws. We support prosecution to the full extent of the law for crimes committed with firearms (although this NEVER happens). We support firearm education and training for the proper safe use and handling of firearms. No member of the NRA supports the criminal use of firearms. The problem is common sense isn't brought to the table when discussing these issues. We talk about creating "gun free" zones, types of firearm restrictions, limits on ammo quantities and/or ammo licensing, high taxation, federal databases (which by the way, already exists through the backround check "NICS" system, every check has the firearm type and ser# included)etc, etc, etc. All of which do NOTHING to prevent a criminal from committing evil. The truth is, what you folks have labeled "assault weapons" have only been reported used in 3 out of all of these evil acts, and conveniently 3 were within the last 6 months. I'm not even sure that is accurate, the media and this government has proven over and over again that they will twist facts to support a narrative. But I'm supposed to trust them.
Enforce with HARSH penalties the laws we have on the books.
No one is talking about taking away all the guns. No one claims that sensible gun laws and better mental health access will prevent every gun-related death. But military-style weapons do not belong on the streets or in the hands of the public. They were develped for fighting wars.
Actually, yes....you are. The ultimate goal is to completely ban firearms, you know it and I know it. If an "assault ban" and/or "high capacity" ban passes (of which we already had and it did nothing) the acts of evil will still continue. You, the media, and our government will continue to push this narrative to the next level and the next ban through biased reporting and facts. Don't believe me? Just watch and listen to the evening news...digging for every piece of scare tactic information to keep this last tragedy alive, working the word "assault weapon" or "high capacity" into every story regardless of the truth.
You prove my point by jumping on this bandwagon with your "military style weapons of war" description, because its a scary sounding term that supports the narrative. All weapons, from a stone to firearms have been used as "weapons of war". Our founding fathers weren't stupid. They didn't elaborate on detailed wording on the 2nd Amendment, because they knew that technology would evolve. They knew that the "assault style, weapon of war" of their day would become obsolete. They knew there would be people like you and your politicians that would try to bend the amendment to suit your agendas. "
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Simple and clear, no "if this", or "only that". And before you start the "militia" crap, look up the full meaning of the word. Theres not a single member of the NRA that wouldn't be open to discuss "sensible" ideas to prevent criminals from committing crime or enforcing harsh penalties on those criminals. But thats not what you're bringing to the table. You want to incrementally destroy the 2nd Amendment, little by little. Because the new laws you pass now to add the existing laws you don't enforce, will never be enough.
What AIG is doing in unspeakable. When I first read it I did not even think it could be possibly be true. The right constantly complain about entitlement, I cannot think of a better definition given what AIG is doing. It is truly disgusting.
USApeb, you wrote:
No one knows that. It is nothing more than an article of faith/red herring of mindless gunners who have absolutely no proof supporting that ridiculous claptrap. There is not a true liberal in this country who would stand by and allow the wholesale confiscation of firearms.
I have generally been characterized as a liberal in these threads, and those who share my views are dead set against a ban on firearms ownership. Most of my like-minded friends own firearms.
You also wrote:
If the second amendment to the Constitution were simple and clear, cases concerning its interpretation would not still be finding their way to the Supreme Court more than 200 years after it was written.
Maybe you should remember.... when the 2nd Amendment was PASSED... the "weapons of war" were the very same flintlock rifles they fought to keep in the hands of the PEOPLE....
Texas fought to keep a small brass cannon that Mexico demanded be turned over.....
We told them the same thing then..... Come and TAKE it
David Walker
USApeb; "The ultimate goal is to completely ban firearms, you know it and I know it."
No one knows that. It is nothing more than an article of faith/red herring of mindless gunners who have absolutely no proof supporting that ridiculous claptrap. There is not a true liberal in this country who would stand by and allow the wholesale confiscation of firearms.
Only someone with their eyes closed and fingers stuck in their ears while spouting "LA LA LA LA LA LA" would believe that this administrations agenda hasn't been to go down this path from day one. Feinstein announed in this presidents 1st term that "we're working on it under the radar" This President stated when up for election the 1st time this wasn't his plan. I believe that it wasn't, for his 1st term. He showed great restraint and kept his eye on the prize (2nd term) so he could push his progressive dreams.
The President has acknowledged that Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, but it still doesn't work. He has referenced Chicago in explaining that "more needs to be done, in both Chicago and the rest of the nation". He has made it very clear what his agenda truly is. This being said, I stand by my statement.
I use my eyes, ears, and brain to collect information and form my own opinion based on ALL the facts, not just the ones that suit my agenda. The thing you folks can't seem to digest is that you keep passing legislation that doesn't address the problem, and when the latest law doesn't work, you claim "see, we need more". Quit enabling the criminal by disabling the law abiding citizen. This sick and evil individual broke over 50 laws to commit this heinous act, and your solution is to create more laws to add to that list.
Common sense? Bring some to the table, then we can talk. I'm not stating that all gun laws are bad, there are some that are helpful. No law abiding citizen advocates for the access to firearms for criminals. Talk about how we're going to make criminals pay for their actions rather than running them through the revolving door of our criminal justice system with a slap on the hands. Quit returning offenders to our society because we have to honor their rights more than the rights of the dead or traumitized victims they leave behind.
David Walker
If the second amendment to the Constitution were simple and clear, cases concerning its interpretation would not still be finding their way to the Supreme Court more than 200 years after it was written.
Being an opponent of the 2nd Amendment and fighting its clarity through the judicial system doesn't make its wording unclear. It just gives said opponent that will always try to dilute and/or overturn it an avenue to try, even after decisions have been made that are contrary to their ideology.
so once again joe is tagged to lead a task force. this time on gun control. i wonder if he has evolved his thinking from back in 2008 when he threatened obama:
From ABC:"I guarantee you Barack Obama ain't taking my shotguns, so don't buy that malarkey," Biden said Saturday at the United Mine Workers of America's annual fish fry in Castlewood, Virginia. "Don't buy that malarkey. They're going to start peddling that to you."
Biden told the crowd that he himself is a gun owner. "I got two," Biden said, "if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem. I like that little over and under, you know? I'm not bad with it. So give me a break. Give me a break."
Are we talking about shotguns here?
The President doesn't want to take the average sane persons guns. He and the the majority of the sensible people of the Nation want to stop this crazy violence, by weighting all options to stop this madness.
Bottom line, more machine guns on the street just doesn't do it. Only the Police and military should have these high power guns.
Wake up
obama wants to have every gun owner registered in a national database -- including shotgun owners that shoot skeet
...and Wayne LaPierre wants a national database of "lunatics". What's your point?
That should be fine with every law abiding citizen.
my point is, noid, that the left wants to control our lives in any way that it can.
and job -- not much of an argument is it? should we waive the right to remain silent? that should be fine with law abiding citizens too.
this is a very slippery slope. as long as obama controls things you will go along with it. but do remember, one day years or decades from now there will be a republican president that will exploit all of this stuff obama has set precedent upon.
No that's not fine with every law abiding citizen ... and BTW you cant not under any circumstances buy any firearm from any dealer at a gun show without a background check ..."ever" ... quit spreading this falsehood ...
We as a Nation will never see a Conservative Republican President.
...but when the right wants to outlaw all abortions is that not the same thing?
I have seen it first hand. A person can buy a gun without an ID at a gun show. It's as easy as buying a cup of coffee at the corner store. That is a fact that we recorded!
Job1
We as a Nation will never see a Conservative Republican President.
The further left Obama drifts the more likely we will in fact have a conservative republican president. As the left keeps pushing their radical agenda further Amercians will wake up and vote for conservative candidates. Sane Americans know liberal social policies are failures and we can't afford them. Start with LBJ's Great Society and move forward; nothing but one money pit after another and no success to show for it.
job --
unfortunately your silly comment about the presidency is just that, kind of like someone saying that a catholic could never get elected, or that an actor could never get elected, or that a sexual predator could never get elected or that a half-black man could never get elected, or that a woman could never get elected.
Job1 from my understanding that it state specific however being a military family and lived all over this country I have never not had a records check done at a gun show. However I asked my FFL dealer for clarification the loophole as I understand is private owners can rent a booth and sell firearms at these shows with no checks. I agree to changing that and eliminating the loophole, however as you already know I am very pro gun/second amendment and willing to listen to sensible solutions that don't involve punishing us folks who abide by the law.
LOL! Obama is a moderate republican, as opposed to you radical right wing nut jobs. He is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination.
noid - similar but different. there is little chance anything will change significantly with our current on-demand abortion laws with the recent election and court appointees.
there is a concerted effort underway by the controlling political party to impose new dictates (executive order) or laws (legislative process).
And you don't think you are not in some national data base now??? If you own an auto, you are in a national data bank, if you have ever been fingerprinted, and yes in the state of michigan in order to have a concealed weapons permit, you are fingerprinted and placed in a national database. What is wrong with a national database...if you are legal and not doing anything illegal, what are you afraid of.
pyro - your post is not true. There have been many shows on TV showing people walking in and buying guns at gun shows - no background check at all. And, private gun shows do it all the time. You should at least have some idea of the truth before you post.
yes, you would have to identify where all the gun owners live before you send troops to get those guns.
i would be ok with it if they ONLY went after assault weapons and high capacity magazines, but they will not stop there. they want a total gun ban and you ALL know it...
if they cant get a total ban, they will make it extremely expensive to buy any gun or ammo. extensive background checks and full mental health screenings cost money. a simple .22 rifle would cost thousands.
i use my guns to put food on the table, just as i use my truck to bring home firewood for heat. not everyone can afford to live like a politician.
i have owned guns all my life. have never killed anyone and was in a position where two young men broke in my house several years ago in the middle of the night. once the 12 gauge came out, my biggest concern was are they going to piss themselves and my floor.
if not for a gun, who knows what they would have done. my guns have feed us, kept us safe, and quite possibly saved our lives.
billybob, we're talking about restricting military-style assault weapons designed for war, designed to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. We're talking about limiting the size of magazine clips. No citizen needs a magazine drum. Twenty 6 and 7 year olds and six teachers were gunned down in a hale of rapid-fire bullets at close range by a crazed individual with one intention: to kill. General McChrystal yesterday said the same thing about assault weapons. No one is talking about banning pistols, little hand guns, rifles or shotguns.
The NRA is a group disguised as a club for sportsmen and hunters but it is a front funded by and for the gun and ammunition manufacturers whose intent is to sell as much product as possible no matter the human cost. Their advertisement method is marketing fear and using the 2nd Amendment to do it. Once upon a time, the NRA was founded to fight against machine guns on the streets ala Al Capone. The NRA fought for legislation to ban machine gun sales. Somewhere along the way, the NRA stopped being the good guys and instead became a front for the very businesses it once fought so hard against because they hated the death and violence; now the NRA embraces the death and violence and uses it as an excuse to sell more guns.
so jackie -- should this national db also include those that have received abortions? they are also legal.
Billybob says: "the left wants to control our lives in any way that it can."
... unlike the Right, who stand for FREEDOM! Huge corporations should be free to poison the air, water and soil that we all depend on to live. Billionaires should be free from paying taxes or obeying the law (and that goes double for their kids)! Makers of medication should be free from requirements to insure the safety and purity of their products. Sellers of food ought to be free of having to sell only products that don't kill children.
Republicans also believe in the State's freedom to regulate people's private sexual behaviour; the State's freedom to deny a woman access to birth control, basic health care, or free public education for the kids she must have; and they're staunch defenders of the State's right to imprison and steal the property of people who consume, grow, or sell a plant that was created by God Almighty.
That kind of freedom, billybob, you can keep. Tell me, sir, do you consider yourself to be one of those animals that are 'more equal than others'?
Obama is drifting towards the center. It is the Republicans and Tea Party who are falling off the right edge and skewing the whole country.
foxy -- you are clearly "out to lunch" is the nicest thing i can say.
have a nice day from an animal.
ignore is now on
Straw Man
billybob, you claim the left wants to control every part of our lives which is just not true. The purpose of government is to write laws which protect the general public and do so in accordance with the framework of the Constitution. Now would you care to explain why the right tries to control women's health choices, wants to ban contraception, and passes laws that put big, intrusive government in the bedrooms and doctors offices. Care to explain why the religious right wants to require everyone share their same religious beliefs whether it is their demand for prayer in school or teaching creationism. Care to explain why the right feels it should control who can marry and who cannot. Care to explain why the right is determined to force a rape victim who becomes pregant to have the child because the rapist has parental rights.
Why would we have this? That is an issue between a women and her doctor, and not a threat to the citizens of the United States.
Perhaps we should stop fighting the NRA over guns. Let's focus on controlling gun ammunition. The
Second Amendment says nothing about ammunition.
As passed by the Congress:
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
As I said, "We as a Nation will never see a Conservative Republican President." However, we will see a Republican such as Chris Christie as President. Remember he is not a bat crap crazy conservative.
billybob
So. No problem with this gun owner.
billybob-6210632:
You almost had me fooled. I thought that some of your posts had a valid point to them even if I didn't agree with you but now I see you for what you are. The idea that Obama himself is dictating everything and everyone puts you squarely in the nutjob category. It's really sad how many people think that one man makes these decisions. Education in this country has truly been a failure. Why do you people always want to categorize things like an old spaghetti western? The good guy, the villian, and the victims. You will now be ignored with all the other nutjobs. Sorry, I had hope for you.
These gubers will tell you a bald faced lie right to your face. It's called spreading disinformation.
The film is called "Living for 32" by Colin Goddard
Dead is dead..... whether it's a shotgun or an "assault-weapon"
@ jodi
LMAO @ all the assault weapons posts.
Let me ask you something. If I take my 1022 22 cal rifle and remove the stock wood stock and install a military type stock, with rubber grips, thats going to be just fine for you and all of the "we don't need assault weapons of any kind" folks?
On Sunday, 2 days after the CT shooting, an armed Mexican went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in
the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and
entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and
people in the theater started running and screaming. It's like the Aurora,
CO theater story, plus a restaurant!
Now aren't you wondering why this isn't a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting? The difference is that happy endings don't make tear-jerker news.
There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun
and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since
this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a
gun is a good person with a gun, the national media is treating it like it never
happened. Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal
next week. The national media is forfeiting their authority to present valid news
forcing the nation to get information from a more valid source -- internet.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Two-wounded-in-theater-shooting-4122668.php
What? She was able to stop a bad guy with her service revolver? She didn't need an automatic weapon with a large magazine?
AHHH..You convieniently left out the part where this "OFF Duty policewoman" was in fact working as an ON-DUTY armed security guard for this theater in the wake of the Aurora shootings.....She was not some untrained Rambo wannabe yahoo. Not some gun toting righteous citizen\NRA who just happened to be enjoying the movie as you wished to portray. Nice try....
So lets get your fantasy straight Steve. He shot his ex-wife, then started shooting at people in a theater but was shot four times before he could kill anyone. Now lets reflect on you fantasy story. First he did shoot his ex-wife, second why did't the deputy shoot him before he shot his ex-wife, third why would the people run into a theater instead of out in the open spaces where they would have a better chance of getting away, fourth he must have been a really bad shot if he didn't kill anyone in the theater. Moral of the story is, the reason the media didn't cover it is because it didn't happen. Steve if you're going to make up stories to try and prove a point, at least try to make them a little believable. You've been watching to much Fox News Steve. They also make up unbelievable stories and lie.
You unintentionally made my point for me. It was an off duty COP who shot the man. Let the cops and soldiers do their jobs--they are trained to carry and kill. Allow citizens to hold reasonable guns they need to hunt and defend themselves. I am tired of saying this over and over, but the guns nuts seem to be unable to hear anything over their screaming: MANY liberals and progressive own guns, and/or support private gun ownership. Fully, unequivocally support the right to own guns. The difference between us lies in the regulation: I want guns treated like cars. You want one, fine. Take some mandatory training, and prove you can handle your car/gun. Take an eye test to ensure you can drive/shoot well enough not to accidentally kill someone. If you are medically (physically or mentally) incapacitated to the point that your family members or your doctor do not think you should be driving/owning a gun, then the state can step in and re-evaluate your condition. You should not be able to buy a car/gun anywhere without registering it so we know it wasn't stolen and used to commit a crime. Guns/cars should be locked at all times when not in use. You don't need to drive a tank, and you don't need a large magazine for a gun. Reason needs to come into play. These are common sense measures and can be supported by both liberals and conservatives alike.
Doesn't matter if she was a cop or not. She had a gun and stopped the bad guy. You think only cops and military can shoot straight? Most of the psycho mass murderers can shoot straight enough to do the job can't they? I will match my marksmanship with weapons against anyones, but the point is that anyone with a gun who can stick up for (potential) murder victims gets a better outcome than a totally unarmed theater.
Why is it so important to some of you to defend mass murderers and assure them an unarmed scene to do their murdering in? Sane, law abiding people who own guns aren't committing mass murder.
Steve, you're right. Sane, law-abiding people who own guns aren't committing mass murder. Criminals are using the guns owned by law abiding citizens to commit mass murder, and there are simple, effective processes that can be implemented that would stop some of the problems (surely not all, but if any can be prevented it would be a good start).
Police officers know how to handle guns because they've been through extensive training. I trust an officer to handle a gun, even around my family. Not so for ordinary citizens. Requiring gun safety courses be mandatory for gun owners is a great place to start. I have taken two, both from the NRA, and they were worthwhile courses. No one should be able to buy a gun without being taught proper gun safety, storage safety, and common sense handling. I can't believe there are so many people against the idea that things can and absolutely need to be done to curb gun violence.
M0-681343...(#7.3)..." Moral of the story is, the reason the media didn't cover it is because it didn't happen. Steve if you're going to make up stories to try and prove a point, at least try to make them a little believable."
_______________________________________________
It's quite obvious that you didn't even bother clicking on the link Steve the dog man put at the bottom of his post, yet you still call him a liar....Here it is again :
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Two-wounded-in-theater-shooting-4122668.php
Now, as for your " second why did't the deputy shoot him before he shot his ex-wife,"
Ummm....because she was in the restaurant, not the theater where the off-duty cop was working as Security....( P.S....it was his ex-girlfriend, not ex-wife)
"Detective Louis Antu, spokesman for the Bexar County Sherriff's Office, said the shooting began at a nearby China Garden and “carried on into the theater.”
For your additional reading pleasure:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/14071-the-san-antonio-theater-shooting-the-media-ignored
Mo....You owe Steve an apology....That is if you can possibly admit that you are ever wrong. Have a nice day.
Steve-
So why do we spend so much time training our police officers and military then, if all it takes is an ability to shoot straight?
Most importantly, the police officer was trained too evaluate the situation and only discharge her weapon if it was feasible to do so without endangering others. She also knew the proper protocol when the on-duty officers showed up to avoid getting shot by them.
Suppose in this situation a "concealed carry" gunholder shot the "bad guy" - how would police officers or (God forbid) another "concealed carry" gunholder rushing into the theater know whether he was a "good guy with a gun" or a "bad guy with a gun"?
Steve the dog man
And the plot in your mind thickens like porridge.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/news_columnists/brian_chasnoff/article/Twisting-facts-cheapens-debate-on-gun-violence-4163064.php
blackcatwhitecat....(#7.9)...OK, so you posted a link to an editorial by a left-wing columnist that didn't like the take-away many people had from the original story....
Doesn't change the facts one bit....
Mike -
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The link is to an editorial at the same newspaper that reported the story, taking no position on the "take-away", merely having an issue with the inaccurate assessment that the "mainstream media" ignored the story and asking for the facts to be presented accurately.
Which you failed to do.
Thanks, Mike. Like talking to other people's dogs, isn't it? They all think the government should be armed to the teeth, and the citizens should be disarmed.
Oh, except the criminals and the crazy people. They have rights, and you can't take their guns away any more than you can take their illegal drugs away.
"Officer, I was minding my own business, and suddenly, a 12 ga. shotgun came walking up, and began shooting everything in sight at random!!!" - said no one ever. And if crack, heroin, and cocaine are so terrible, why aren't they against the law already? Oh yeah, they are. It's truly hard to fathom the idiocy this is liberalism...
Been shooting for almost 50 years..... never shot anything I didn't mean to shoot.....
Well said Jody......these Wall Street types really don't know when they're well off.
For AIG to even consider joining in a suit such as this, really underscores how greedy they are which is what led to the recession in the first place. Insensitive to so many suffering from the losses they caused, there is a selfishness about this that is breathtaking.
How dare they indeed, let's hope if it does go forward, it peels back the veil over their dealings and opens them up to prosecution and with any luck a well earned trip to jail.....for a long time.
Let Biden and Obama rattle their sabers all they want on gun violence. Gun control measures have not and never will work in this country. 300,000,000 privately owned firearms in the USA. Just a feel good measure to keep the LWNJs appeased.
Not many of us have the comprehensive heavily armed security details that Obama and Biden have. Maybe they would like to give up their guns first?
Watch out folks, we have a real deep, critical thinker on the loose. He is equating gun control to security detail. Whoa, or as implied by his moniker, I should say, heel Rover.
No thanks, they are trained law enforcement!
Trained to "enforce the laws" they are told by people like Hitler and other like them that get/got or are drunk with power...
So Job1, if I have more training than them can I keep my guns? Or do I need to join a law enforcement agency to be trusted to carry?
Trevor-
If you want the ability to respond to situations like law enforcement, then get the training.
You don't, they are the Secret Service. However, you should keep you guns because you are not the type of person that would shoot up a school.
I have a registered gun and a license to carry it. It should be that way for every gun.
Most of the psychotic mass murderers seem to be pretty good shots. I will put my marksmanship up with any security personnel. I have the right to own and carry guns, just like you and they do.
Reminds me of a joke I heard once:
(reporter): "Why do you think it's necessary to have a "concealed carry" license?"
(person): "Because a cop is too damn heavy to carry."
A burgler, armed or not, can force entry into YOUR home in approximately 30 seconds. If (and that's a big IF) you get a chance to call the police, it will take them a minimum of 3-5 minutes to arrive at your home. Question: How much damage can a criminal cause in approx. 3-1/2 minutes? Answer: Plenty. Certain people are called criminals for a reason people. Just as certain people are called "liberals" for a reason...
Sure looks like a lot of experts out there reading some of these posts Maybe most of them should run for office and straighten out the country. Wonder it the rich will have to give up their guns to the VP and the guncontrol.. Gun control people will be the only one with the weapons.
Amazes me how many firearms liberals really have available to them....
Thanks to First Read for recommending “What It Takes,” by the late Richard Ben Cramer. I borrowed it from the library last night, and finished it about midnight. (It's a big book, but I admit to skimming some pages, especially about the Secret Service, which bores me.)
The author really captured the gist of the personalities and events involved in the 1988 election season. It brought it all back to me - the sense of Bush SR as a "nice guy" who happily ran a brutal smear campaign against Dukakis. The feeling of Gary Hart as out of step with his generation of boomers, who had given up their libertine ways for middleaged wonkishness and punished him for his indiscretion. The author captured Dole's syntax to a "t," as well as his odd mixture of light and darkness. Even George W. made a telling appearance, giving you a sense in one short story what his issues as President would be. A good read, thanks for the recommendation.
You should also read Agenda 21,great scary read on the UN's plans for the world Agenda 21 is on their Web page.
Yes I do. Because I have seen it first hand. A person can buy a gun without an ID at a gun show. It's as easy as buying a cup of coffee at the corner store. That is a fact!
Job1
You are partly correct and that is the issue with gun shows that need to be cleaned up. I support the 2nd Admendment I have an FFL too I obey all ATF regulations but as liberals use the freedom of speech to hide behind a lot of BS they throw out people will hide behind the 2nd Admend.
If the gun shows allowed only FFL's to trade, sell and buy then people would need and ID and go thru a background check. If the gun shows and the cities shutdown the trunk dealers and the isle dealers then all guns would have the correct paperwork and background checks run. This is the only law that needs to be reworked no bans no grandstanding laws just one loophole foxed and we be headed the right way. As an FFL holder and other FFL holders would love to see this loop hole fixed.
Here in PA all sales get a background check. The only two places a firearm can be transfered legally is a dealers store and a registered gun show.
The biggest violaters are the cities with their gun buy backs. They are not done at a registered gun show or a dealers store, clearly in violation of the law. The no questions ask policy at these buy backs is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. You can kill someone today and get a few bucks for the murder weapon and get rid of evidence the next day.
JOB1, I dont know what state you are from but here in Indiana you must go through a background check at gun shows or auctions to purchase a gun.
Job1- Don't move to different threads with the same jibberish. It has been explained to you numorous time that the only way you can buy a gun with out a background check is through private sells. You have also been told the most if not all gun owners and FFL dealers would like to see that loophole closed, no wether or that that is personal choice or for more monitery gain is a mute issue, it is an agreed upon issue. Here in Colorado any purchase except for private sells HAS to go through a BACKGROUND CHECK. As, I am sure all other states require this as well. So please quite moving to different threads spreading the same BROAD HALF TRUTHS AND OUT RIGHT LIES that you need to feel important and sound like you know what you are talking about, because when we add up everything that you are saying, you clearly do not know what you are saying.
rhaid-
Partially true - private sales of handguns require a licensed dealer, rifles etc. do not require background check.
Gary- No background check required for the "private" sale of rifles, only handguns.
Again, only TWO states require a background check before a PRIVATE sale - California and Rhode Island.
Cobb-
One major problem with the existing gun laws regarding background checks & private sales is that in several states like AZ and VA a person can buy as many guns as they want, then sell them "privately" the minute they walk out the door without any legal repercussions. This facilitates the purchase and distribution of massive quantities of firearms without ANY background checks.
The NRA knows this, the gun manufacturers know this, and law enforcement knows this.
Gary, Job1, and others making the point about some states that require background checks and some that don't. That is the point of having a National law; all states, all gun shows, must play by the same rules. Right now people can go to VA or AZ and buy guns to avoid the more restrictive state laws in NY and NJ. Arizona has some of the laxest gun laws in the country and they wonder why the drug cartels and dealers are such a big problem there. In AZ, a person can go and legally buy a gun at a dealership, turn around in the parking lot and sell it to somebody else no questions asked. When one bothered to dig through the investigation, that's what a good deal of the fuss over Fast & Furious was about--the ATF and FBI was refused by court order time and again the authority to interfere with these gun buyers turning around and selling weapons to suspected drug cartel purchasers.
Cobb from Colorado,
I will post where I please. If you don't like it too bad.
TNSEVOL- Thanks for restating what I already said. The privates sells of firearms without a background check is a loophole that needs to be closed. I have sold a few of my personal bolt action rifles, when the person contacts me I get a name, address and DOB. I then go to the Sheriff's office and ask them to run a background to see if that person can legally own a gun, all I want is a yes or no. Once the gun is sold I inform the Sheriff's office of the sell. I also log the sell in my log book of guns that I own/owned and write in that individuals personal info for future reference in case something bad does happen.
Criminals & mentals are the problem..... REGISTER THEM........
And their guns.
The fact that the AR-15 platform rifle was located by police in the locked trunk of Mrs. Lanzas car and their were 4 hand guns located in the school continues to be suppressed. The hysteria regarding the use of a semi-automatic rifle is based a on a weapon that was not used in the crime. Why doesn't someone set the record straight?
Criminals obey gun control laws in the same manner politicians follw their oath of office
Why do they call them "Listening sessions?" It would be more appropriate to call them "Preaching sessions," as it is clear their minds are already made up and they're promoting an established agenda.
how many guffaws will those folks talking with biden have to suffer through?
Decidedly fewer than the guffaws you post here. Talk about suffering!!
I love the patriotically expressed comments on this matter, just love it. They see what really is going on here and that means there is still hope, and to all of you True Country Loving Patriots i have something that should catch your attention, and hopefully every other person out there, especially those mentally effected by these recent "random mass shootings".
As i have stated in past posts Adam Lanzas (Sandy Hook) father and James Holmes (Aurora Batman) Father were BOTH top minds for financial firms and were BOTH set to testify on the Giant LIBOR Scandal with compelling evidence on what REALLY happened, now for that part about catching your attention.
This gun battle has started over these two very significant events correct? Correct!
Now, this is very interesting and i WANT you to Research this and Prove Me Wrong.
On December 11 Google indexed the United Way website that offered condolences to the family's of Sandy Hook.
This is a full three days before the actual shooting that took place on December 14 2012. You can view the Google page hereand the United Way page here.
Below is a excerpt from the December 11 united Way page.
Now this should open your eyes to see that this was PLANNED. Its sick and wrong and sick and atrocious and disgusting and is Treasonous to the Rights of YOU the People.
Spread the word that The Gov. is kaput, it is no longer valid. If they are willing to do this to us to make s to WANT OURSELVES to be Disarmed, ask yourself why?
Its Done. The truth has "willed out" There is no hiding it now. We have been duped.
God Help Us All, Since we are too blind to help ourselves
GetMeOut, no, the gun violence prevention discussion today is a continuation from Columbine and all the other massacres. Judging from your post, and you are entitled to your opinion, I'd say you're the one who's been "duped". Your post is a conspiracy theory worthy of a Pulitzer prize for fiction.
"All the other massacres" Well, Sandy Hook is one of these "massacres" just FYI and it really started this mass discussion that is undeniably sweeping the Nation . And a theory is well, a theory, but since there is undeniable proof right there in those links that this site to make donations for the victims of this horrific shooting was set up BEFORE it happened then it is proof that they had knowledge beforehand that it would happen. So its not a theory, but thanks for the input. I understand its hard to come to face fact that this could be happening to us right now but just like many times in the past, our Gov is lying straight to our faces.
You just have been fooled into believing that, since deceptive governments have lied to people before in the past and committed great atrocities and that we "learned" about it in 12th grade history, by some naive thought, we could be exempt from these atrocities occurring right here right now.
Even now as the President is signing Executive orders that allow Indefinite Detention (NDAA Act) of American Citizens WITHOUT a trail or Anything (Which is, or should i say was your Constitutional Right) people are afraid to face the truth and just call it a "Conspiracy Theory" even though it is being opposed by Some congressmen and covered on "National News" sites. So much for a Theory
Im afraid that it will literally take people being shackled up and thrown in jail for no reason at all before they realize that "Hey, something might be wrong here!"
It all sounds like im some crazy conspirator thats a "whack job" but hey, they used to hang people that said the Earth wasnt flat too at one point in time in history.
This should show you what Obamass really thinks of the gun problem by putting a putz idiot like Biden to oversee this issue
Obama sends his nitwit lacky out to do his bidding on gun control. I'm glad this is going to happen in my life time so I can see the second revolution first hand. Yee Haw, let the games begin.
Right there next to you brother!
Ahh, so you are treasonous traitors who want you guns so you can revolt against our legally and popularly elected government. That is why you are against gun control laws.
I also own several guns, both long and short.
No milk kit,
If the gov tries to take away our 2nd Amendment,It is the gov and their followers that are the " treasonous traitors"And is exactly why our Founding Fathers gave the 2nd Amendment right after the first one,so I'd say they found it very important weather or not its a threat from outside our Country or right here.
Ster, read the second ammendment again. Especially the part that says "well regulated".
So why don't your turn in your guns? You voted for Obama. So don't be a hypocrite. Turn in your guns.
I won't because I didn't vote for him. His dismantling of the 2nd amendment will allow him to do away with the remainder of our rights. 100 million own legal guns. 99.999 percent of them are not criminals. Obama might turn 70% of them into criminals.
An army reservist was sentenced to prison because his gun malfunction at a firing range when he was looking to sell it. It fired 2 bullets with one pull of the trigger then it jammed. This happened 3 times after the person that was going to buy the gun had fired 800 rounds with out issue. They broke into the US Army Veteran/reservist's home (his wife and 3 children were there too) with sheriff, police, and ATF agents, treating him like a terrorist. They only needed to knock on his door. This is what our government has become. The ATF paid for testimony from the person he was going to sell the gun to, to get the conviction.
Why not turn in my guns? Because when you radical right wing nut jobs try to start a revolution I will go hunting you.
Miklkit,
Again, you have it backwards, liberal democrats will start the revolution you silly goose. Destroying the 2nd amendment will be the starting of a revolution and just because there could be more people against gun owners than there are gun owners it doesn't make them right. There were more people in England against the colonists in the colonies too but it didn't make it right. The sad part about this is the side you are defending all beit very large will come crashing down around you. Bang, Bang.... now lay down and twitch.
Is he listening to the cop in NJ who sleeps in his car while on duty or who leaves his gun in the open and it's stolen?
JOB1 - Machine guns are illegal, unless you get a license from the FBI. So your scare tactics is just a stupid as when Obama said the average person doesn't need an AK47. Auto fire weapons are illegal already banned.
So the high power gun the killer used at Sandy Brook Elementary is illegal? I don't think so. No one but the police or military should process them.
Job1,
I understand you have very little education about firearms so I will take it slow. The rifle used by the coward idiot in Newtown was a AR-15 semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round magazine. This rifle looks like a military issue rifle but is not fully automatic like the military version. Hunting rifles that are semi-automatic can shoot just as fast as the rifle used in Newtown but they don't have some of the tactical accoutrement's that the AR-15 has. Actually, the semi-auto hunting rifles have much larger calibers and are much more deadly, they just don't look like a military weapon. This is a ruse and if you understood this you would see how silly people sound when discussing this not knowing the difference. Removing Assault rifles from the market will do nothing on the surface but the ultimate goal is to remove all weapons, right? This is just a chip off the 2nd amendment block working towards disarming the population of the USA and it is seen as such. Nothing new here, same ole "guns kill people" rhetoric we have been hearing since guns were invented and will continue to hear until we discover Utopia.
The AR-15 and its variants fir the 5.56mm military round and have a long recoil spring in them to make fast firing more accurate. They were designed as military weapons only.
Robert - I understand you are not very smart when it comes to actual firearms or you are a lousy hunter. No self-respecting hunter would EVER use the bushmaker that the assailant in CT had. It is a semi-automatic assault weapon, pure and simple. If you have to use a gun that shoots quickly to go deer hunting - you're a p*s poor hunter and should never go hunting - unless it's with Dick Cheney!
Robert, well put. However, those like Job1 will never be able to understand simple facts like you just posted, they just don't want all the facts, they like the rant and rave platform they stand on. Its like the old saying
"Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up"
SS. You need to start reading posts, or have someone explain them to you prior to responding.
SeekingSanity- Anything is an assult weapon. I.E. baseball bat, car, knives anything. It is how one uses them. Hell my Red Ryder BB gun is an assult weapon. Trained boxers are considered an assult weapon. Please learn your terminology. Oh and if you can't even get the name of the gun that was used you probably shouldn't be talking on this subject until you are able know what you are talking about. It is a Bushmaster not a bushmaker. That word is for gardeners and women who don't trim.
Perhaps we should stop fighting the NRA over guns. Let's focus on controlling gun ammunition. The
Second Amendment says nothing about ammunition.
As passed by the Congress:
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
Sanity swings...and misses...angrily!
Okay, I've heard enough. I have a Semi-Automatic .300 Win Mag (I won in a raffle) and honestly, I don't like it that much. But I can tell you this for certain, I can cut fence posts down with the damn thing because it is so powerful. An AR-15 shooting .223 rounds at the same posts wouldn't get the job done all day.
Biden "sound bites" should be hilarious.
just like with voting asking them for an ID is Racist!
Strange that you said that about voting...seems Obama had to show ID to vote...
Stan he volunteered his ID as a joke,I watched the pathetic attempt at hilarity.
Ster if that was the case it was in bad taste...but who said he had taste
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Absolutely agreed.
It is not about the little children and it never has been. The Liberals have been hiding behind the “Children” just as a bank robber might hide behind a hostage. Consider this: The same people who are saying that we need more gun control “for the children” are the same ones who have been saying “we need the taxpayers to pay for abortions for anyone who wants one.” If it had been up to the Democrats, some of these children might never have reached childhood because they could have been aborted. You are crazy if you think the left cares a twit about the children.
The left has been trying to take away America’s Second Amendment for many years. First they will say it is only the machine guns and that it is to protect the children. Can anyone tell me of any child that has ever been killed by one of these guns they want to take away. The fact is, the laws we have in place now would have prevented what has happened in any of these school shootings if the bad guys had simply obeyed the laws that are in place. We have this little problem though: bad guys don’t obey the laws. That is why they call them the bad guys.
If stricter gun laws were the answer, there would be no shootings in Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York. There would not be any drug use violations because we have strict drug laws. No pedestrian would ever be hit by a car because the pedestrian would not walk when the law said “Don’t Walk” and a car would never go through a crosswalk when the law said “Stop.” No one would ever beat up their wife, or husband because we have laws against that. The fact is, if you take guns away from the good guys, only the bad guys will be left with guns. How do you think that will work out?
While the Conservatives have been mourning the deaths of the children killed in any of these schools, the liberals have been excited that there is another situation that just might help them take more freedom from the American citizens. You might be thinking, that is a terrible thing to say. I am thinking that is a terrible way for them to act. It was Rahm Emanuel—one of the President’s advisors—who said, “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” I can just hear the people in the White House saying, great news boss, we have a serious crisis in Connecticut that I think will help us do away the Second Amendment. Then they can start on the First or Tenth Amendment.
Just a little math test for the Liberals out there.
1: If there is a bad guy with a gun and he is 4 feet tall, and there is a good guy without a gun and he is 6 feet tall, who is the tallest?
A: They are the same height
B: The bad guy is taller because he has a gun.
C: It does not matter who is taller because the bad guy just shoot the good guy.
2: If you have a bad guy who has a gun and he is 6 1/2 feet tall, and you have a good guy who also has a gun and he is only 5 feet tall, who is the tallest?
A: They are the same height.
B: They are the same height because they both have a gun.
C. It does not matter because when the bad guy saw the good guy’s gun, he ran away.
3: If there is a bank with 5 cashiers, 1 manager, and 21 customers and none of the cashiers, manager, or customers have a gun because it is a “Gun Free Zone”, and a bad guy walks in with a gun and tells the cashiers to give him their money, how many might be killed?
A: None, because the bank manager explained that they didn’t have any guns.
B: 27 because the bank robber already knew no one in the bank had a gun.
C: 1, the bank robber, because he felt bad about what he was doing and shot himself.
4: If there is a bank with 5 cashiers, 1 manager, and 21 customers and some of the cashiers, the manager, and some of the customers have guns, and a bad guy walks in with a gun, and tells the cashiers to give him their money, how many might be killed?
A: None, because the robber didn’t see a “No Gun Zone” sign so he went to a different bank.
B: 27, because no one in the bank wanted to hurt the robber, because he must have a reason.
C. 1, the bank robber, because 1 manager, 3 cashiers, and 16 customers shot him.
Just something for our liberal friends out there to think about.
Did you know that if you take a gun, any gun, load it, cock it, and then just place it somewhere in public, it will not kill anyone? Did you also know that if you take a gun, any gun and hide it somewhere, make sure there are no bullets in it, and just leave it in its hiding place. If a bad guy found it he could use it to kill some one? But in either case, the gun was innocent.
In simple language, for our educated Liberal friends:
Cars do not kill people. Bad or careless drivers kill people with their car.
Bicycles do not kill people, people riding bikes, but not being careful enough, die.
Guns do not kill people, bad people kill people, sometimes using a gun
Superb.
MIKE7 All that time spent typying and no-one will listen to your words. Our Country has IDIOTS in Public Office and I am seriously thinking that we have even more of them accross the Country. This Country is DOOMED!!!...Why? Because we have people that have NO COMMON SENCE, people that live their lives in cities and have no idea what goes on outside of their little world. These are the same people that would come to GUN OWNERS to protect them if the $hit hit the fan. They have no clue and just open their collective mouths and spew crap. This reminds me of the Women that used to walk up and down the streets in the 1800's, beating their drums and screaming about liquor. It's true...we need better gun control as far as NOT LETTING THEM FALL IN THE HANDS OF MENTAL MIDGETS!!!. This is tyrning into a FEEDING FRENZIE, blood is in the water and people are getting on the band wagon, riding along and have no clue what their talking about....totally stupid, inept.
The Newtown massacre has permanently turned American public opinion against the gun nuts. Every shootup since drives that home. The ones that preceded Newtown are more magnified. The gun nuts know their grip on politics is over and they are losing their minds over it. Newtown was the final straw.
Well said sir! And I mean Mike7...
mike a nice job of reality.
The epidemic of gun violence in the USA is not a liberal versus conservative issue. How do I know ? According to the FBI statistics there were 12,664 murders inthe USA in2011. Of that number, 8583 were killed by firearms. Of those, how many were conservatives? Or it is only liberal who get gunned down ?
Of the 20+ school children assasinated in Conn, how many were from conservative familes ? ow many from Li beral families ?
Being so passionate about gun rights, know doubt aq fine conservative, noone needs to tell you about personal responsiblity. Are you willing to register all of your guns withthe federal government ? The entity that bestowed upon you, the right to bear arms ? If not, why not ? If you are not willing to b ear the responsiblity then why do you think you have the right to bear arms ?
No rights without responsiblity.
The "strick" gun laws fail because they are too laxed. No other reason.
Is it time to revise the constitution to remove the clause 'right to bear arms' or should it read 'right to bear arms for those willing to shoulder the responsiblity' ?
The Democratic party is the party of blaming others - and they apparently have no mirrors.
Let us begin the gun control process by removing assault weapons from the hands of all federal agents to include the Secret Service. I am sure that the President's safety will not be compromised if his body guards are armed only with revolvers and bolt action rifles, after all there has never been an actual attempt on his life and the Secret Service has never had to fire their weapons to protect him. Once all federal and state law enforcement officials have surrendered their semi-automatic duty weapons, we can talk. Lead by example. The military will also surrender all high capacity magazines, they will ONLY be used for overseas deployments and issued once the soldier is outside the United States.
Good idea. De-arm the military. What kind of a hater are you. You don't support our troops. What a pig.
Actually markinbecker I'm not a hater, I'm a former Army Ranger who was being facetious. I wear a Sig p226 everywhere I go and keep a Sig 556 rifle with 10 mags of XM855 in the trunk of my car at all times, accompanied by my level 4 IOTV body armor. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of our President and his liberal idiot followers.
If they want my guns, come and get them, I dare you!
I agree completely. If cops think assault rifles and high cap magazines don't make people safe, I defer. They can have mine, after they cough up theirs. Phucking hypocrites.
"An FBI review of all 2011 homicides for which data was available found that 67.8 percent of them involved firearms – 72.5 percent of which were handguns."
I'm with you "MolanLabe"! But let's not let something as trivial as FACTS get in the way of the arguement of the liberal left! Oh, and btw, like the moniker, "come and get them"!
67.8% adn 72.5%??? That number is skewed, kind of like, why is there such a high "percentage" of blacks in jail compared to whites?(ok, make your joke now) its not because there are more black criminals, its based on a smaller pool of people. From what I recall the statistics, there are more whites in jail than blacks but the black percentage in jail is higher. So as far as I am concerned, those stats are garbage! But I commend you on trying your liberal best to bend the truth!
I do believe there needs to be much tougher laws regarding gun purchases. But in the end, I think like most things the gov't wants to control, it will backfire. I do not know to fix it, but banning them is not the answer. Here's my take on why...
1) Texas which has very loose gun laws has a lower murder rate compared to that of Chicago, which has one of the toughest gun laws(so it's said but then again, they have a politician known as the "GodFather" if that tells you anything) and one of the highest if not highest murder rate. In Wash D.C. you are not allowed to own a gun and DC also has one of the highest crime rates! Explain that?
2) Most criminals do not obtain guns legally. So if citizens are banned from owning a gun and criminals can still access guns as they always have, imagine the degenerate who is thinking about breaking into a home and the only thing that might stop him is the thought of the homeowner having a gun! If that criminal knows the homeowner does not have a gun for sure because the law says he can't, I think crime is going to skyrocket!
3) It was the "Godfather" who said, never let a good crisis go to waste, the school shooting is used as a pawn to derail the 2nd amendment for all the wrong reasons! Here's an interesting note to the shootings and the mental stability of those shooters, Why is this the first we are hearing of this?
4) Liberals believe in pro-choice, so, if the women sees fit, she is allowed to abort the baby. Ok, I am pro choice also, so no issue there. However, how as a liberal can you be for pro-choice and ok with the murdering of an unborn baby and at the same time think rehabilitation of a harden criminal instead of capital punishment is the better option? Kill a harmless, defenseless baby, keep alive a harden criminal?
Part of the problem is that what use to be a quality reason for the Democratic party was their stance, however, as the years and decades have pasted, the democratic stance is only used in words, as today's liberals are way past left they cannot be considered liberals anymore, they are left wing extremists, communists, marxist without the best interest of this country! Like "whatever his real name is" in office who said the amendments are only a piece of paper. This is not someone that cares about this country! The problem grows larger as more and more people rather be sheep and still think today's liberals are just that liberal. Unfortunately, this is no longer the case.
And finally, alcohol and tobacco kill by the tens of thousands yearly, and have no benefits, only to kill you, yet, we seem ok with every story about a drunk driver killing someone. "oh what a shame" Never, "we need to stop this", how about a ban on alcohol. Or how about Tobacco? The gov't knows cigarette makers filled the cigs with garbage, harmful chemicals and yet, they are still allowed to sell these kill sticks.
If you against guns, I hope you are not a drinker or smoker? Cause people will get into a car and drive and possibly kill someone(there called accidents for a reason) and second hand smoke is just as bad if not worse than smoking itself. Although, in today's society, it has almost become ok, to go back on ones word and be hypocritical. It's the liberal way! So if you think guns need to be banned and you smoke or drink, think about the fact, your killing everyone around you with your smoke and if you drink and want to drive home, you could end up killing someone immediately instead of slowly! Pick your poison?
By the way, all you that voted and are in favor of Obamacare? How's your paycheck look? Some will get a nice surprise on the 15th. When you get your check and you see how much more was taken out, remember to multiply that by the number of checks you get and that will tell you how much you will be taxed monthly for Obamacare! LMFAO!!!!!
Also, if you think I'm a right wing freak, sorry, I don't follow either party as both are a joke. I follow common sense! Which for most is not so common!
US variety of strick gun laws fail because they are too laxed.
So you are OK with schools kids getting gunned down at school?
So you are OK with US representatives gunned down at shopping centers?
So you are OK with Firemen responding to calls, going in with the intention to possibly rescue people from the jaws of death gunned down by a thrill killer ?
Are you willing to shoulder some responsiblity to ensure your 'rights' given to you by our federal government ? Are you willing to register all of your weapons with the same federal government that gave you the right ? No ? Then why do you think you have the right ?
It is not "a rock and a hard place";
It is "his Liberal base of naive, whining, ninnies" and "the clearly enunciated Rights of the United States Constitution".
Ouch! Must have it one of many nerves on ms. agnes! But then again, this is the typical liberal m.o., when confronted with an arguement that doesn't align with the left...let the name calling begin!