Return to the Hot Topics Forum

 o
Update on gun control

Posted by dublinbay z6 KS (My Page) on
Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 5:30

No one knows yet exactly what Vice-president Biden and his group will recommend on gun control measures, but their thinking seems to closely parallel ideas that a number of us on HT have also proffered.

According to the linked news report below, VP Biden is finding strong support among a variety of groups he is meeting with for the following:

1. banning assault weapons
2. banning high-capacity ammunition magazines
3. tightening background checks

I see nothing unreasonable there.

Among other things, the White House may issue executive orders to do the following:

a. make gun-trafficking a felony
b. get the Justice Department to prosecute people caught lying on gun background-check forms
c. order federal agencies to send data to the National Gun Background Check Database.

Those sound like sensible measures to me, although executive orders can easily be undone by the stroke of the next president's pen. Myself, I'd prefer those measures were passed directly by congressional action, which would be harder to un-do in the future, but given our "just say no" Republican representatives, it would probably take forever to get such legislation passed--so executive orders will do in the meantime, as far as I'm concerned.

The NRA refuses to support these sensible measures even though a number of them have broad support from its membership. For instance, NRA membership approval of tightening gun checks is in the 70% range, but the NRA leaders still won't support anything VP Biden is probably going to propose.

Fox News claims such executive orders are unconstitutional since they are not directly linked to congressional legislation, although Fox News admits that George Bush signed executive orders to ban assault rifles by linking them to the 1968 bill on gun control (I'm not sure of the name of that act), but for some reason Fox News thinks it would be wrong for President Obama to do the same thing. Don't ask me to explain that distinction--made no sense to me either. It's constitutional when G. Bush did it, but would be unconstitutional if Obama did it--uh huh!

Biden is meeting with all kinds of groups ranging from hunter groups to major gun retailers like Wal-mart to gun control groups and others. The NRA refused to officially participate but did send its lobbyist--to lobby for guns for everyone and to maintain the 40 percent of gun sales that are made without background checks, I presume?

None of this will be a magical solution to all the gun problems in our country, but I heartily endorse VP Biden's words:
". . . we are not going to get caught up in the notion that unless we can do everything, we're going to do nothing," Biden said. "It's critically important we act."

Pres. Obama will supposedly make some proposals on guns in his upcoming State of the Union Address in a week or so, I'm glad to report.

Kate

Here is a link that might be useful: Biden says consensus emerging


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Update on gun control

It seems that the time has finally come, again...


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by batya Israel north 8-9-10 (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 6:13

Wait, you mean weapon trafficking isn't a federal offense? Even over state lines? Huh?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Wait, you mean weapon trafficking isn't a federal offense? Even over state lines? Huh?

that bears repeating


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Does that mean we may no longer participate in weapons trafficking to assist rebels and drug cartels with regime changes?

I see nothing unreasonable in the preliminary discussions. Yet.

Meanwhile....

In Ohio, there was a young man arrested for illegal possession of a firearm. He was released pending a hearing. Two days later he shot and killed one teen girl and wounded another. Akron, OH.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I see the NRA tried to hijack the meeting. They came with their own agenda and when they couldn't force it onto Vice President Biden, they took their guns and left, in a huff.

Good riddance to them.

These recommendations will be a good step in the right direction.

I think that, at the local level, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and "we, the people" need to take gun crimes seriously, not trivialize them. Anyone arrested with a gun or even attempting a crime with a gun should HAVE to stay in jail, no exceptions.

Of course, sometime in the future, in the night, the black helicopters will come and men will confiscate all the guns.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link


 o
RE: Update on gun control

All the shooters in the last few massacres would have passed background checks. Not that we shouldn't have them or enforce them...

New York City had the lowest murder rate in decades. I think regulating access to guns more stringently will help keep them out of dangerous hands. Look at the firearm death rates by states. Does anyone know the gun laws in the top 20 states?

What does "A well regulated militia" mean? Doesn't that suggest supervision over who obtains guns?

I hope alot more thought goes into this, as opposed to the thought put into removing shoes during security checks and banning liquids on planes after the shoe-bomber.

Also, President Bush is a white conservative Christian and therefore not a threat to our nation. Also he was born in the US. That's why lots of what he did was OK.

Here is a link that might be useful: Death rate by firearms


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Also, President Bush is a white conservative Christian and therefore not a threat to our nation. Also he was born in the US. That's why lots of what he did was OK.

Question: Why doesn't someone have enough courage to prosecute him? That's more troubling to me.

Have you asked yourself that question?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 8:19

.. if you scroll to the bottom of the page of the following link you can see the CEO in full temper tantrum mode. So glad this is a responsible gun owner and thankful to God he is not my neighbor.

and part of what he says is...(yep he put it on video and posted it online)

"Tactical Response CEO James Yeager has a temper tantrum and concludes with ""Im not f&$!*ng putting up with this. Im not letting my country be ruled by a dictator. Im not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, Im going to start killing people."

Here is a link that might be useful: CEO unhinged


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I think we are better off if our country only permits controlled killing. Wars and Drones.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

One can only hope...

"Tactical Response CEO James Yeager has a temper tantrum and concludes with ""Im not f&$!*ng putting up with this. Im not letting my country be ruled by a dictator. Im not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, Im going to start killing people."

Somewhere in another thread a comparison was made with Afghanistan. Methinks it's apt. Perfectly clear who are the US's taleban.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I see the NRA tried to hijack the meeting. They came with their own agenda and when they couldn't force it onto Vice President Biden, they took their guns and left, in a huff.
Good riddance to them.

I wasn't watching the news at the time, but I heard that news coverage of Biden's meeting was interrupted by the news of the California school shooting.

I'm sorry if anyone takes this the wrong way, and maybe I am channelling youngquinn here but, doesn't that set off all the neon signs and warning lights for you people?

Honestly, and this is for people on the pro-gun side of the fence like Bill, you've been trying the easy access to guns route for a while now and it's just not getting any better. In fact, it's getting worse and worse and worse. At what point do you acknowledge it isn't working and maybe you should try a new route? After kids in high schools are dying? Oh wait, that's already happening. After people watching a movie get shot to pieces? Oh wait...that's happened too... how about after a class full of kindergarteners gets killed? OH WAIT...That's happened too... Can you understand why Australians and Canadians and Europeans are looking from the outside and asking what it's going to take before you guys take a new direction?

And don't give me the "Guns are necessary when you live rurally" argument. I've lived in areas where you had to drive the equivalent of across a couple of American states before you even got to town... and people didn't need to arm themselves.

And the idea that high powered weapons and high capacity magazines are needed for target shooting? I think some people have a skewed idea of what constitutes a "want" and a "need". You can use a BB gun to shoot targets. Or try a slingshot, those are pretty fun.

If you feel you have a need to train yourself for survival, try bowhunting. When the end of the world comes, bullets will eventually be used up and bowhunting skills will come in more useful anyway.

Sorry about the rant but seriously... things went past crazy some time ago and we're now firmly planted in "What the hell is wrong with the water you people are drinking?" territory.

When will it stop?


 o
RE: Update on gun control


 o
RE: Update on gun control

New York City had the lowest murder rate in decades.

Elly, why not look at ALL homicides? Dead is dead, no matter WHAT the weapon, right? My point being that you get rid of the guns, something else will be used, and the linked chart (from the wsame site as you used) bears that out. All of the Sudden, New York, Illinois, and California don't look quite so good.

Here is a link that might be useful: ALL homicides


 o
RE: Update on gun control

As for nothing unreasonable, it all depends on their definition of what constitutes an assault weapon. The weapon used for assault yesterday was a standard sporting shotgun, but in that instance, it was an assault weapon.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 9:17

Nice try HG, but the supporters will support and repeat and regurgitate till the rest of us have "cold dead hands" ... what's a few kids and/or citizens when "oh look over there is a war and or drone". Don't you get it yet? Americans LOVE VIOLENCE AND DEATH and if you don't like it, well like the CEO SAID he will just start KILLING PEOPLE. You see what we have to deal with? There is no room for rational when you are OUTSCREAMED !!

Another anecdote from Ohio ... three people were stopped in downtown with guns, all stolen from "responsible gun owner's homes".

And the beat goes on...


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I awoke to the below video this morning. Really?

Here is a link that might be useful: NRA idiot


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 9:19

Ummm Rob I posted that in this thread just above ... he is a CEO :)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Sorry I missed it! What a loon! (him, not me)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I'm all for banning assault weapons, can't see a need for them except for the military, registration and background cks sure. But guns have been around for hundreds of years. I would be more interested in knowing why someone walks into a school, a movie theater, a mall, and starts killing people. What makes them want to? Why now? Is it because of guns? Not likely, there was a time when almost everyone had guns. There is something very troubling going on in our society and we need to find out what it is and fix it.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I wrote above that Biden was finding lots of popular support for "tightening gun checks." This morning on TV I'm hearing more specific language being used: "universal gun checks."

That works for me. Check EVERYBODY buying a gun.

Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe (MSNBC) this morning had a long monologue/editorial on how the Republican Party--already being left in the dust by their outdated positions on birth control and other issues we all argued over during the electoral season--are becoming more and more out of step with --seriously falling behind-- the American voters and may well become dinosaurs if they add gun-nutter language to their agenda.

Good point, Joe.

Scarborough also noted that the Supreme Court--in the words of the ultra-conservative justice (I think it was Scalia he mentioned)--has already declared two key points:

1. No one is coming to get your guns. That would be a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

2. No way are assault rifles covered under the 2nd Amendment. Your gun for self-protection or hunting is, but not the big ones that can slaughter a room full of kindergartners in just a couple seconds.

Joe was very emphatic that Supreme Court Justice Scalia (am I spelling that right?) has declared there are no grey areas on those two points.

On the subject of which weapons will be declared "assault weapons" I do not know what they have in mind. We will just have to wait and hear what V.P. Biden and Pres. Obama will propose on that.

Kate


 o
This is a "responsible" gun-owner?

I just looked at the link a couple of you posted to the video featuring CEO Yeager. I'm printing his words (mostly uncensored) here--to make sure everyone understands what I mean by a "gun-nutter."

In the words of CEO Yeager--who makes his living selling guns:
"Vice President Biden is asking the president to bypass Congress and use executive privilege -- executive order to ban assault rifles and to impose stricter gun control.... Fluck that! I'm telling you that if that happens, it's going to spark a civil war, and I'll be glad to fire the first shot."

He closed with more threats: "I'm not flucking putting up with this. I'm not letting my country be ruled by a dictator. I'm not letting anybody take my guns! If it goes one inch further, I'm going to start killing people."

Crazy talk! Unfortunately, there are many out there who talk just like him--and they aren't all named Rush Limbaugh!

Kate


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"I would be more interested in knowing why someone walks into a school, a movie theater, a mall, and starts killing people. What makes them want to? Why now? Is it because of guns? Not likely, there was a time when almost everyone had guns. There is something very troubling going on in our society and we need to find out what it is and fix it."

I have a pretty strong opinion that might provide you with some insight MrsK. I'm convinced that it's the 24 hour newsfeed phenomenon. Think about it. At Columbine 2 kids shoot up their school and their faces and names are plastered all over the media. They were famous. They may not have been around to see it, but it didn't really matter, they left a legacy so to speak. Someone just needs to say the word "Columbine" and everyone knows what happened there. The next guy who's pissed off at the world sees this and thinks "wow, what a way to go out!" and he goes out, shoots up the next place, and the cycle continues. We live in a society obsessed with celebrity and these days you don't have to do something good or have an ounce of talent to get it (look at Honey Boo Boo for God's sake). The media is rewarding these killers every time another shooting happens. Stop reporting their names, stop showing their faces, stop giving them the attention they're looking for. These people don't deserve to leave legacies.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

That guy is very, very scary! I am very worried that one of these gun nutters will do something extreme. I'm betting that security has been increased for VP Biden and his family as well as the President and his family.

If I were a fierce defender of the second amendment I'd be culling out these nutbars. They do the argument for safe and responsible gun ownership no favour.

No one in a civil society requires a gun or rifle that can kill many, many people in seconds....NOBODY! .....and I don't give a tinkers d@mn what the correct name is.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I don't know how one could enforce back ground checks for all gun purchases. Say if I wanted to sell my deer rifle to cousin Joe for $300.

And none of this addresses the enormous amount of stolen guns out there, which is the source for most guns used in crimes. I don't know how you could legislate safe keeping. IOW, you can't fix stupid. Last week, our local paper reported two separate instances of guns stolen out of vehicles - the owners had left them in the cars overnight......"Gee, I forgot to bring it inside"

And then there are the small kids finding guns and shooting themselves or others. Mandate Trigger locks? Safes? Of course the NRA fought that one before.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

My son (who is pro-gun in the sense of target-shooting--and he doesn't need an assault rifle to do it) thinks that gun owners should be held responsible for their guns that are stolen or misused or harm someone. His idea of "responsbile" is jail-time or HUGH fines. So if that little kid in your family plays with the gun you left out on the bedside table and harms himself, you go to jail! If your gun is easily available and thus gets stolen and someone robs the convenient store with it (but no one is harmed), you pay a BIG fine for negligence/carelessness--misdemeanors having lower fines, felonies having high fines.

David, didn't you have some proposal about requiring insurance for gun-owners to cover "expenses" when they get misused--or something like that?

I don't know if V.P. Biden is considering these kinds of options, but there are probably any number of things we could try if we are really serious about doing something about gun violence.

Kate


 o
RE: Update on gun control

CEO* James Yeager will be on the Ed Show tonight on MSNBC.

(*The CEO of a Tennessee company that specializes in weapons and tactical training. An "entrepreneur" - hey man, got any jobs?)

The deity of your choice - or something - spare us!


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I think mandatory gun owners' insurance is an idea worth exploring. You can already insure your guns against theft, why not liability?

And the premiums would go down if they were safely stored.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I am all in for banning over 25 round mags and we all know assault weapons are already banned. I can also agree to insta check on all guns exchanged at gun show,. but bot at private sales from the home. There are many things I can agree on.
Of course the NRA did NOT try to hijack anything, but Biden wasnt interested in hearing much from the NRA, duh!
Most modern sporting weapons are hardly assault weapons, quite far from that actually.those who harp the loudest on the matter usually are the most ignorant. I mean, a 1 1/2 inch match barrel on an AR platform which uses .308 ammo and has a 8 x 32 $2000 scope with a 50mm objective lens is hardley usable as an assualt weapon! Some education of what is being written about might be cool. The AR platform is the most popular rifle type today for good reason. This isnt the 19th century any longer. They lend themselves to all sorts of practical shooting sports such as 3 gun competion, military/civilian marksanship events, hunting, and games as well as casual plinkin. They are demonized by the ignorant who just want to ban something. Yep, there are those who do collect militaria, and those idiots who parade around in military garb and like to look lie some swat team creep. I gotta say tho, they seem kinda harmless anyhow. Whats the plan ban any weapon which has the same operation as an AR platform? I mean, that would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 and more hunting weapons and targhet guns.
I would never consider insuring any weapon other than an antique worth several thousands of $$s. Its nobody business knowing what Ihave unless I make it known.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

??????CEO of a Tennessee company???????? So? And the shooting that started all of this was in the sleepy so well thought of town in Connecticut. So well thought of, a Tennesseean moved there. And their child was killed. I wish Avielle's dad (my coworker) had never left here. What in the blazes does where that lunatic has chosen to live have to do with anything? There were more injured students in California and Akron, OH. So that makes this a US problem. Let's stay focued on the true issue and keep out of the state slandering. For someone who is so even keel, surely you can stop the red/blue state inane conversation into which this is denigrating.

Universal back ground checks, no more assalt weapons, and it's for the entire US. Lunatics live throughout the states, unfortunately.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

So, I noticed most here love to use the term "assault weapon," and make a strong case for banning them.

However, do any of you actually have any idea how to define that? Should we even trust the government to come up with the terminology?

Anyone here could assault anyone else with anything...seriously, let me here it.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I would never consider insuring any weapon other than an antique worth several thousands of $$s. Its nobody business knowing what Ihave unless I make it known.

I do not understand this logic. People have car insurance, home insurance. There is no talk of secrecy about owning a home or car. Why would anyone be embarrassed that they have a gun. I say embarrassed because it seems to be something people want to own but keep it a secret,

I do no think fines will work, there would probably be to many incidents that the gun probably had more value than anything they have. I think jail time would be more effective. Any crime resulting from the gun jail time should be imposed according to the crime committed.

I would even be ok with giving the criminal a little time off their sentence for revealing where he got the gun. That way people that do not register their gun can be prosecuted. There will always be DNA or fingerprints on the gun from the owner.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 12:38

Yeager is the CEO of a TN company that sells firearms ... and this is slamming the state how Rob?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Rob - honestly, I think you've gotten way too defensive about the state thing. Now nobody can even mention the state if it's your state, or a red state? All duluth did was say what the guy does and where his company is located.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Yes, rob, really; especially if you believe everybody's got to be somewhere. Please explain how a mere statement of fact is a slam against your state and, by inference, anyone who lives there.

I suppose next time someone mentions bats**t crazy Michele Bachmann, I'll take it as put down of the state where I happen to reside. Much ado...


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Regulating gun shops and gun sales and registration of weapons and owners is a key to keeping guns out of the hands of those who intend to use them for crime.
And we need Federal regulation, not just State or local because criminals will travel where they need to go or do what they have to to get weapons. We have to make that more difficult for them to do . Chuck's Gun Shop just outside Chicago's City limits, has sold hundreds of weapons to those who later committed crimes on Chicago streets.

Here is a link that might be useful: Gun purchasers and criminals easily subvert Chicago gun laws

This post was edited by heri_cles on Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 12:58


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Regulating gun shops and gun sales and registration of weapons and owners is a key to keeping guns out of the hands of those who intend to use them for crime.

Better figure out a way to start reading people's minds then....unfortunately there isn't a background check in the world that can see into the future.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Better figure out a way to start reading people's minds then....unfortunately there isn't a background check in the world that can see into the future.

Right, so don't do one on anyone. 'Cause, you know, the background check might miss a crazy person that is hiding it, or becomes crazy later. Therefore, don't do any background checks.

This is the logic the NRA spews and then wonders why they are not liked.

---------------------------------------------
All the shooters in the last few massacres would have passed background checks. Not that we shouldn't have them or enforce them...

I thought that the Sandy Hook shooter tried to buy a gun but couldn't? And stole his mom's guns. Do I have that wrong?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Just pointing out the logical fallacy that a background check will be able to tell if someone might commit a crime. Quite the absurd statement. And if you want to do background checks that might show someone possibly will commit a crime, then why don't we throw due process out the window completely.

Hell, why don't we just determine a specific age, let's say 12, and then you go through a series of tests. If those tests determine you might be crazy, we'll just lock you up the rest of your life. There...problem solved.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Well if this isnt a case for American exceptionalism then I dont know what is-Other countries have gotten a good handle on this problem. If they can do it so can we or just call this experiment over and join Canada and do what they do.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I agree with you, jill. That was my understanding also.

Kate


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Better figure out a way to start reading people's minds then....unfortunately there isn't a background check in the world that can see into the future.

Did you bother reading the article I linked to? It does not really deal with background checks but rather, it raises some of the issues that confront gun dealers concerning straw purchasers. It is a difficult problem but ignoring it is not going to solve it.
The NRA and gun rights people are simply aligning themselves with illegal gun purchasers, gang bangers, lunatics and mass murderers if they are fighting for the status quo.
We have to take some action to slow the gun violence and stop the killing.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

join Canada and do what they do.

Honestly, you can do better than Canadian laws. Try Australia or the UK. They have a better record than we do concerning gun violence and gun control.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

jill,

Tell me why it's necessary to point out which state and/or their political affiliation? I may back off, but at this time, it seems to come up, only from the "other end", and always as a jab. I am open to the inside scoop, but I doubt it will change my opinion. Slim to none. Anymore than it'll change the other's to denigrate the South. And I will not back down from the jabs until they end. Enough. There are plenty of problems to go around and to say it's all the South's fault, well, is faulty reasoning. Get off our backs. Guess I'm just fed up with it, but it's passive aggressive way of getting to the heart of why "they" think "we" are not the same. When, in fact, we totally are!


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 14:02

Rob in this case you over-reacted to a simple statement of where this CEO does business .. not saying the jabs do not happen on here, but it seems to me that it is pretty much one small group (both sides) that spend time here poking each other.

The "fact" is this loon (your words) is a businessman from TN ... if they had said Ohio, I would not have go all "up in arms".


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Photobucket


 o
RE: Update on gun control

and to say it's all the South's fault, well, is faulty reasoning. Get off our backs.

I blame it on the Jack Daniels. See, it IS all your fault!

(I kid, Rob, I kid!)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

No mom. You're making my point. What does it matter where he is incorporated? You don't want see my point, because you think it's ok. You are complicit. Someday you may see it, but I doubt it. Tell me why and I may obtain an understanding why it was stated, but as it stands, I will not agree. It was not necessary for any reason whatsoever. None.

Maybe we need MORE Jack Daniels (which is sold in a dry county, ironic aint it?)!

This post was edited by rob333 on Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 14:16


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 14:18

Because I think it is ok?

Because I am complicit?

Well Rob I sure cannot tell you what to believe, all I can do is disagree ... if that is what you believe about me, have at it.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

You really are an Obama hater, aren't you brushwork?

How about the Hagel nomination? Any comment from you on Obama selecting a Republican who wants to cut the military and is against intervention and wants us to get out of Afghanistan sooner that the current plan?
Silence from you on that.

No, you're just an Obama hater and to be honest, I find that picture to be disturbing. It reminds me of what happened in Dallas in 1963. I think it would be prudent for you to edit your post and remove that picture.

This post was edited by heri_cles on Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 14:24


 o
RE: Update on gun control

so you can't tell me why. ok. You've really proven my point. The whole thing could've been done without the jab. It stands.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Embarrased to own guns? Hardly. But id be embarrase d to make some post here which havent a clue of what they are talking about.
No, I wont insure my guns because I would have to tell the wrong people what they are, their serial nos, blah, blah. That opens the door to too many other problems. I mean, look at what public info has done to a creepy newspaper in NY.
None of this really matters anyhow. The chances that any new crap works is so minor its a joke. The chance that the majority of gun owners will comply is a joke. This country is becomiong a joke. Look is is pres, that about says it all.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Gun culture is particularly strong in the south in general and in the midwest in general.

To state that is not a slam against any region but just a statement of fact.

If you choose to read any reference to the south (or Republicans, for that matter) as a slam, that is your right--but posters are NOT going to quit referring to the East, the West, the south, the upper midwest, etc. Feel insulted everytime they do that, but that does not mean they were, in reality, trying to put you and your down. Only in your head is that true. Expect to be uptight in life, however, if you insist on reading insults into material that wasn't intended as an insult.

Myself, I'd save my energy and outrage for when I truly was insulted by someone--and that is NOT every time they refer to my region or my political party.

Kate


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 15:12

so you can't tell me why. ok. You've really proven my point. The whole thing could've been done without the jab. It stands.

....read your own link, it clearly states that the "loon" (again your terminology) resides and does business in the state of Tennessee.

His video, again at your link, he says he is in Tennessee, so no I don't "get it" Rob explain to me why it is okay for you to post a link clearly stating where this "loon" lives or did you only read the headlines "NRA" and thought they were fair game?

I am outta this conversation, cause I see it will now headed to the rabbit hole.

Peace out ..


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I thought that the Sandy Hook shooter tried to buy a gun but couldn't? And stole his mom's guns. Do I have that wrong?

That was errant information. ATF checked a couple of days after the shooting and could find no evidence that Lanza ever tried to buy a gun from any gun shop.

Try Australia or the UK. They have a better record than we do concerning gun violence

yeah-- instead of using guns, they use other weapons, and in ALL of the European Union, England has the worst violent crime record.

Here is a link that might be useful: Don't know why I'm posting this- no one will watch, but oh well


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Bill the reason I do not look at the links because it is the same argument.

It is starting to sound like when my daughter would say but.....Jane is doing it and it is okay. I don;t care what Jane is doing. I am not Jane's Mother and Jane does not live here.

Why is it so hard to understand that the goal is not to take everybody's gun. No one thinks if every gun is gone that we will suddenly love everybody and nobody will ever get hurt or die again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

State Suspends Handgun Carry Permit Of Tactical Response CEO

The state of Tennessee has suspended the concealed handgun carry permit of James Yeager, CEO of Tactical Response,

Here is a link that might be useful: Handgun


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Bill the reason I do not look at the links because it is the same argument.

So why should I look at any links from the gun control side for the same reason? If you were to watch the video, you'd see a direct contradiction of information given here with sources (and the source is NOT the NRA or other 2nd amendment orgnaization)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Let's get to the heart of the matter.

James Yeager, CEO of Tactical Response . . . recently said he would "start killing people" should President Obama take executive action on gun control. . . .

State officials explained they revoked [his gun] permit because of Yeager's "material likelihood of risk of harm to the public" . . . .

"The number one priority for our department is to ensure the public's safety," wrote Commissioner Bill Gibbons. "Mr. Yeager's comments were irresponsible, dangerous, and deserved our immediate attention. Due to our concern, as well as that of law enforcement, his handgun permit was suspended immediately. . . .

Mr. Yeager is also the CEO of Tactical Response, a firearms and tactical training school in Camden. He is not a Department of Safety and Homeland Security certified instructor, nor is his school department certified.

Way to go, Tennessee! (And that is not an insult directed at Tennessee, Rob. It is a compliment!)

Kate


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"If you wish the sympathy of the broad masses, you must tell them the crudest and most stupid things."

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolph Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Mrs, I am pretty sure that your quote did not come from Hitler, or half the quotes attributed to him for that matter. Google your quote and pretty much all of the sites are doubting the quote or disproving it.

Here is a link that might be useful: info


 o
RE: Update on gun control

My goodness here comes Hitler.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Actually frank, your link had nothing to do with the quote I posted. Your link was about Hitler banning guns. His quote never mentioned banning them.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

MsK, the quote was debunked in 2000.

Do a search on Google.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Marquest, I hate to say it, but I've seen many relevant quotes from him. Just as I have from Jefferson, Washington, James Madison, Sam Adams, Patrick Henry, etc..


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Mrs, it is the second and third paragraphs. I am not sure what you are reading.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I did nancy and you are right. Jews didn't need to register guns, they were banned from owning them. And yet he did say this.

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so."


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Nice try, MsK.

Here's the ole' cut and paste to refute your comments.

I've seen this quote pop up many times, from political discussions to gun shows, where a friend told me he'd found it emblazoned on signs. I don't think anybody knows the origin of it, but several have tracked it back and found it to be completely false.

The talk.politics.guns FAQ (http://rkba.org/research/rkba.faq), which is pro-gun, includes a number of such false quotes in its "Pious Frauds" section and, to its credit, refutes them. The discussion there is based in large part on research done by Clayton Cramer for his book, Firing Back (currently out of print). Cramer is also a gun supporter, making his work in this area highly credible--and creditable.

The FAQ entry, which is duplicated in the archive of urbanlegends.com (http://www.urbanlegends. com/politics/hitler_gun_control.html), notes the main problems with the supposed quote. First, the quote itself has changed over the years. Some versions start by saying, "This year will go down in history!" Others say, "1935 will go down in history!" (The former still has a 1935 date attached as a supposed reference.) That, in and of itself, doesn't prove anything, but it's a warning sign. [There's lots more at the link.]


 o
RE: Update on gun control

My question to you is, why are you using Hitler quotes to prove this point. The above quote is just silly. It says that I am not supposed to give people that I have just conquered guns. That seems pretty basic.

In this comparison, who are the conquered people?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Not feeling conquered yet frank? We can start with the Patriot Act and move forward.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I am feeling pretty lively still.

As far as the Patriot Act goes, I still have all of my guns.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

And then there's always NDAA, the Anti-Protest Tresspass Bill, as well as other executive actions Obama's taken that go against the Constitution, like fact that President Obama has asserted and exercised the power to target U.S. citizens for execution-by-CIA without a shred of due process and far from any battlefield.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link-- Outed by Scott Pelley


 o
RE: Update on gun control

The Anti-Protest Tresspass Bill, or HR 347, does not sound quite as awful when it is checked out.

Here is a link that might be useful: snopes


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Sure. ANY of the bills that cost you rights granted to you, and then guaranteed by the Constitution can sound logical. Our right to free speech should ALWAYS be suspended any time the president is present. Our right to due process, shouldn't exist if the president thinks it in the best interest of the country that we be killed. And so on.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

It was an update of an existing law passed 399-3 in the HOR. Where was the outrage of the existing law before Obama signed this version?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Had I known about it, the outrage would've been there, just as it was when Bush originally passed the Patriot Act, and then again when Obama renewed it.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 20:54

"had I known about it"

I am not laughing, no really I am not :)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Well, I wasn't even born when it was originally passed.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

hey OM-- stuff it. Unlike you, I don't know it all.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 21:20

Still not laughing :)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by bboy USDA 8 Sunset 5 WA (My Page) on
    Fri, Jan 11, 13 at 23:30

>stuff it<

Now there's a compelling argument.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

yeah, can't forget my favorite mosquito.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I watched it, Bill. You are right - it wasn't the NRA, it was something called 'Fox'.

How could I possibly refute such a famously unbiased and truthful source?

On the EU - every country has different reporting methods: This from even a right-wing, hang 'em and lynch 'em organisation (Uturn UK)
However, police records are compiled differently in different countries and Eurostat does not attempt to analyse the differences. The figures are not directly comparable, but they show such a stark difference that not all of this can be illusory. The combined effects of the 1998 and 2002 changes in compiling violent crime statistics will roughly have doubled the apparent UK violent crime rate, purely through using different methods of recording.

I'd agree that the Brits are a violent race - always have been. Just not so deadly since we disarmed ourselves.

I don't set England up as an example - but America does, all over the world, and there are aspects of American culture that it is not advisable for other nations to emulate.

Best wishes
Jon


 o
RE: Update on gun control

well I'm laughing!

so true Jon , and also true about Australia "just not so deadly since we disarmed ourselves"


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"we disarmed ourselves" !! huh? from those Ive spoken to, the citzens were disarmed unvoluntarily? But hey, thyats Australia, not the United states where we are ci9tizens and not subjects.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

fancifowl...get with world history. Australians are not subjects anymore than Americans are.

They are a democracy , it was the people who wanted the guns laws passed. Not every country has the same preoccupation with guns based on some sort of anti government paranoia that many Americans seem to have.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"from those Ive spoken to, the citzens were disarmed unvoluntarily?"

I must have missed the civil war and massive demonstrations.


 o
His permit to carry was revoked

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 11:14

This is good.

The head of firearms training company who took to YouTube and Facebook this week to threaten a murderous response to any attempt on the Obama administration's part to "ban assault rifles and impose stricter gun control" has had his handgun carry permit suspended by the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security for presenting "material likelihood of risk of harm to the public."

James Yeager, CEO of Tactical Response, appeared in a video this Wednesday, in which he seemed pretty damn sincere about his intention to "start killing people" over gun control.

In its statement concerning the rescinding of Yeager's handgun permit, the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security said Yeager's comments "were irresponsible, dangerous, and deserved our immediate attention."

"The number one priority for our department is to ensure the public's safety," writes Commissioner Bill Gibbons.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I don't set England up as an example - but America does

no, your Shawn Hannity wannabe piece of garbage Piers Morgan does-- on a daily basis. I can link you to atleast 6 different interviews where it's ALL he does. PLEASE take him back.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

When Obama was elected in 2008, there was such a rush by the paranoid gun crowd to buy up guns and -above all, ammunition - that the stores were cleaned out for over a year. Everybody was hoarding what they had. I drive by the shooting range pretty often, and normally there are a couple of guys out there during the week, weekends a dozen or so. During the Great Obamaz-Gonna-Take-Our-Guns-Fear-Campaign: nobody. For months.

And then finally, after a couple of years, ammo came back at about 2X-3X what it was before, and people started to shoot again.

This time around, people are buying up all the military-style assault rifles and large capacity magazines, the price now 2X 3X what they were prior to massacring the children. Two million back ground checks since the slaughter. Which, if you think about it, isn't that much in proportion to the population.

Now with Obamaz-Gonna-Take-Our-Guns-Fear-Campaign II, its the same people, making sure they have as many assault-style weapons and extended magazines they can afford.

So if they'll ban the weapons and high capacity magazines, the people who bought all these up will horde them very, very carefully. And they won't be out in circulation.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

The first time, the reason it stopped was that Obama saw he was pissing off his own constituency, and so stopped his anti 2nd amendment bolster during his first campaign. Alot of people still didn't trust that he wouldn't still try to do something about it, and that's why once elected, many started hoarding guns and ammo. Once they say that his own constituency would keep him in line (so he could be re-elected), people began to relax. Now, he's shown this to be true-- all he was waiting for was the reelection. Hell, he hasn't even been reinaugurated yet, and he's already threatening an executive order if he doesn't get his way through Congress. He's got nothing to worry about any more, with respect to keeping the majority happy, so he's going to do whatever he damn well pleases.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I got a picture on Facebook today of Ronald Reagan on the street two seconds before he was shot. There are ten people surrounding him , eight have guns. Hmmmm? Explain that gun nuts? These are trained shooters, and you want to arm teachers?

I think all rabid gun people should find their own island to live on ,and then they can pack to their little heart's content and worship their god, guns. .


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 12:05

It has become a religion, hasn't it.

That's too bad, for all of us, because zealots are the most dangerous adherents in any religion, and there are a lot of zealots in this one.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Right. 3 PEOPLE got shot, as opposed to 26.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

If you're talking about the Reagan assassination attempt - a total of 4 PEOPLE were shot.

But a President aside, how does this number (as opposed to 26) become somehow less terrible? This type of event so often reduced to a "but, it was only" really gives me pause.

I'm sorry, but one is too many. NONE would be ideal.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 12:41

Bill, one is too many.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Granted, mom. Unfortunately, the only way you do that is to erradicate ALL weapons, and there are just too damn many trees to get rid of clubs. You WILL NOT STOP someone intent on doing harm to others. The best you can do is keep it to a minimum, which they did. I don't know about from your perspective, but as tragic as it still would've been, 4 deaths (sorry-- my mistake before) in Newtown would've been a DAMN site better than 26! (Keeping in mind this wasn't MY example)

how does this number (as opposed to 26) become somehow less terrible?

Come on. You're going to tell me that one outcome isn't better than the other???? I didn't say less tragic. I said better.

I think all rabid gun people should find their own island to live on ,and then they can pack to their little heart's content and worship their god, guns.

God help you if that were to happen. Look at Chicago-- 500 gun murders last year.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

PLEASE take him back.

Never! Why do you think he went to America? Nobody would employ him here!


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"The best you can do is keep it to a minimum, which they did"

They didn't shoot him if I remember right. They just tackled him.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Bill...26 people weren't shot because there weren't 26 people there. Only a handful. Our president was almost killed , secret service guys were shot ,and James Brady was brain-shot and damaged for life. As I said only ten people were there and eight had guns and were trained shooters. And Hinkley wasn't even shot, he was tackled , so there goes YOUR theory of arming everyone in this country.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Exaggeration. But of course, this is to be expected. ONE secret serviceman was shot, as well as Brady and a DC cop.

here-- you all want researchable fact? Watch this video. it's made by someone who has no political affiliation, and he shows you WHERE to find his source on the FBI crime stats web page.

Here is a link that might be useful: REAL fact


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 13:26

I think all rabid gun people should find their own island to live on ,and then they can pack to their little heart's content and worship their god, guns.

God help you if that were to happen. Look at Chicago-- 500 gun murders last year.

So, Bill, you don't actually want to live someplace where EVERYONE has a gun, because there are too many shootings?

Hmm....seems a bit two-faced to me. I guess you feel safer in a community where lots of people don't have guns, but you still want to have many guns.

I can assure you, the people who commit these murders probably don't own a gun, and probably don't even have one most of the time. I doubt they could buy them legally. They steal or borrow a gun when they "need" one. Confiscating their guns is probably NBD, they'll just get another one when they "need" it.

The NRA thinks we should ALL have guns, so there you go, Bill.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

The first time, the reason it stopped was that Obama saw he was pissing off his own constituency, and so stopped his anti 2nd amendment bolster during his first campaign. Alot of people still didn't trust that he wouldn't still try to do something about it, and that's why once elected, many started hoarding guns and ammo. Once they say that his own constituency would keep him in line (so he could be re-elected), people began to relax. Now, he's shown this to be true-- all he was waiting for was the reelection. Hell, he hasn't even been reinaugurated yet, and he's already threatening an executive order if he doesn't get his way through Congress. He's got nothing to worry about any more, with respect to keeping the majority happy, so he's going to do whatever he damn well pleases.

Well, I see it differently, but admittedly, I don't run around in the same gun circles you do. It seems to me that President Obama has stated pretty clearly that he agrees to the right to bear arms, but has two issues - the flood of cheap handguns murdering people in urban areas, and the proliferation of military-style weapons and large capacity magazines.

Which is a view shared by an awful lot of people.

As for executive order, I don't know what he can do, except maybe shift more money into enforcement of existing laws or something like that.

And I'll hit on a myth - what do you think he can do by executive order? Demand that all guns be confiscated, or what?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

No, Mom-- I REFUSE to live in a place where it's illegal to own a gun, as in Chicago.

I can assure you, the people who commit these murders probably don't own a gun, and probably don't even have one most of the time. I doubt they could buy them legally. They steal or borrow a gun when they "need" one. Confiscating their guns is probably NBD, they'll just get another one when they "need" it.

Thank you very much. I couldn't have said it any better. That's EXACTLY the point 2nd amendment advocates have been trying to get across. You WILL NOT STOP illegal guns. The ONLY thing you will do is take away the law abiding public's chance to defend themselves.

Here is a link that might be useful: Gun Free Zones


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Well, I see it differently, but admittedly, I don't run around in the same gun circles you do. It seems to me that President Obama has stated pretty clearly that he agrees to the right to bear arms

David-- this article was just literally brought to my attention. My response was that if necessary, I could bring up a dozen or more links (saved on my old laptop) to articles about everything from his days as a "community organizer" right up to his presidential campaign, where he very succinctly said that he was against guns. at all.

Here is a link that might be useful: Obama fights to prosecute man for defending his own home from intruder


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 14:02

But if there weren't so many guns, especially legal ones, there wouldn't be so many guns to steal. Because there are so many guns, they are cheap, and easy to get, so the "bad guys" get them, even good guys can get them illegally, then they can become bad guys .

If there were fewer guns, they wouldn't be cheap and easy to get, - the market drives the price, after all. Petty criminals couldn't afford them, the 15 year old angry with his girlfriend couldn't get one, etc, etc, so there probably wouldn't be 500 murders.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

So, I exaggerate, Bill, when I misspoke about TWO secret service guys being shot? My bad. I'm going by memory ..one COP, one secret service guy, the PRESIDENT( Which you forgot to mention) and Brady who had a brain shot. Excuuuuuse me. Still totally four of the ten people there. Still, comment on that. Eight out of ten people trained to use them had guns and YET this guy shot four of them very nearly killing the President. Explain THAT if you think teachers should be armed. You guys have lost your minds.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Didn't see a "2" anywhere in your post. Like I said, once again, to be expected.

here-- try this one on for size, from Lew Rockwell:

The best way to depict what's going on in America is through a letter from the head of the Sinaloa Drug Cartel, to President Obama.

In case people are ready to assume this letter is real, it isn't, but the spirit of it is very true and very real:

Dear President Obama,

Let me begin by saying that you can count on us to support your efforts in disarming American citizens in any way we can.

The Fast and Furious operation backfired a bit in this regard, but I'm glad to see it hasn't stopped you.

As you know, we are making inroads on US soil. We've set up significant operations in the Southwest, one area where armed citizens can be a bit of trouble to us, especially if they own land we cross or are adjacent to.

We view their disarming with a positive attitude. I would say your basic gun-grabbing strategy is primarily aimed at the American West. The border states need to be cleaned out. The fewer people there who have guns (particularly those with high-capacity clips), the easier it is for us.

But since our drug trafficking lines take in most of America, wherever citizens aren't armed we're generally in better shape.

I'm pleasantly surprised that media in your country haven't pressed you to name the areas where most gun violence is taking place. After all, if your objective is to reduce that violence, you would think a campaign directed at gangs in inner cities would rank number one on your to-do list.

Those areas and those gangs do subcontracting work for us (and other Mexican cartels). Leaving them in place is a priority for us. So congratulations on being able to skirt this tricky issue. Your cojones are, indeed, huge.

Please pass along my thanks to Brian Williams, Scott Pelley, and Diane Sawyer. I assume they are in your pocket and carrying your message. Undoubtedly, they are also refraining from bringing up the gang issue. Whenever I speak with the president of Mexico, I point out your masterly and deft control of media as a model we should emulate.

Now to the real reason I'm writing. In Chicago, your crime stronghold, one of our people is on trial. This is a sensitive matter, as you know.

The defendant, Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla, wants to expose our arrangement. This must not happen. So far, your DEA and CIA have managed to gain trial delays.

Niebla and his lawyers are ready to offer documents that show the Sinaloa has US federal permission to ship tons of drugs into Chicago, and from there to other distribution points in the US.

Niebla will reveal this deal was made so that Sinaloa would provide valuable information on our rival cartels to the DEA and the FBI.

Therefore, Niebla will point out that he has special immunity from prosecution. That was part of the deal for high-ranking Sinaloa members.

Fortunately, his trial hasn't been played up in the American press. Again, well done. Coverage has been stifled. It's stayed on the back burner, and the CIA and DEA are claiming no such immunity deal exists for Niebla.

But at the same time, the CIA has been making motions in court to have documents excluded from the trial on the basis of National Security.

This is a gross tip-off to our deal, and it doesn't sit well with me. It's awkward. I'm sure you agree, Mr. President.

The last thing we need here is exposure, especially while you're pushing forward your gun-grabbing program.

Sinaloa has members and agents and sub-contractors operating all over the US, and naturally these people are armed. They not only sell drugs, they shoot people. We can't control everything they do.

They get into intramural squabbles and use their weapons to settle disagreements. Bodies pile up. Sometimes, innocent people are killed.

Our subcontractors commit unrelated crimes that have nothing to do with drugs. They rob, they steal, they shoot, they kill.

If it comes out that Sinaloa and all its component parts, operating within US borders, are contributing mightily to high gun-violence statistics---

And if it comes out that Sinaloa has a special arrangement to do business in the US without fear of disruption---

Your gun-grabbing program and our operations will both be in dire jeopardy.

And the blow-up in the press will be catastrophic for both of us.

You and I understand this is just business, but other people don't see it that way.

Therefore, Mr. President, I'm stating, in the strongest terms possible, that the Niebla trial in Chicago has to be shut down, one way or another.

Either a quiet plea deal has to be struck, or we will be forced to do something drastic. Soon.

If I'm reading you right, and I believe I am, your gun-grabbing program is just one step in an Operation Chaos aimed at destabilizing your country.

In the past, we have contributed to that agenda, and we continue to do so. We don't pretend to understand this whole game at its higher levels, but to us that doesn't matter. We're in business to make money and sell product.

We support you.

And we expect you to support us.

Congratulations on achieving a second term in office. Please pass along my regards to President Bush, his father, and President Clinton.

By the way, in case you weren't briefed on the specifics of the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings, I want to state, unequivocally, that no Sinaloa member provided professional services in those operations, which were obviously aimed at provoking a successful follow-up gun-control program.

Yours truly,
XXXXXX
CEO, Sinaloa

Here is a link that might be useful: Lew Rockwell


 o
RE: Update on gun control

WOW, Bill, I was not aware of that.

I am passing that article on to a lot of people--which is something I just don't do often at all.

But this is important.

I think of the woman who was hiding from the intruder last week, with her two small children, and her husband had just taken her to the shooting range the week or so before to teach her how to protect herself.

I shudder to think what would have happened when the intruder found them if she had no weapon and was dependant only on her begging for mercy for her children and herself.

Instead, he found an armed woman willing and able to protect her children and herself.

The intruder already proved he cared nothing about any occupants in the house, only himself.

As has been pointed out by Mom, by Bill, and as I've said repeatedly--the criminals will ALWAYS have guns and not abide by "gun laws."

Gun laws only work with people who obey the law.

BTW, very interesting that David Gregory will not be prosecuted for flagrantly violating gun laws in Washington, D.C.

I guess guns laws are only for the expendable fly over country citizens, but a perfectly acceptable
"necessary evil" to protect President Obama, his wife and his children.

Mmm MMM MMM


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I think men may have lost the power to protect themselves without a gun.

As Mom said...........
I think all rabid gun people should find their own island to live on ,and then they can pack to their little heart's content and worship their god, guns.

Bill's response is....
God help you if that were to happen. Look at Chicago-- 500 gun murders last year.

If the guns are gone then there is an opinion that without a gun you are unable to protect yourself.

The culture of the only protection that a man can accomplish as protection is a gun. I do not have any proof but from the news reports it is usually due to a argument, or disagreement when they pull out the gun.

Before the gun explosion there was a lot of hand to hand physical attacks. I do not think seeing this panic of the gun control that men feel they have the physical power to do battle.

Both of the men that P. Morgan interviewed appeared to me to be men that were in a panic. Those were men that were aware that they were unable to protect themselves without the gun.

Without the gun I could walk up to them and B%tch slap them and the fight would be won. If you go back and watch both guys you see both looked physically unable to beat a woman hand to hand. Watching Alex Jones there was no doubt he could not catch you if you slapped him and ran.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"I am passing that article on to a lot of people--which is something I just don't do often at all."

I thought that is what all Conservatives were trained to do. Pass on emails, facebook quotes, etc.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

many guns does not = cheap. There are NO cheap guns.
There will be no executive order gun bans, cant do it. And, none will pass congress. That doesnt mean he cant d damage to the law abiding gun owners, too bad they all cant do some damage to the cri9minals. They dont need legislation or an exec order to prosicute criminals to the fullest not to expand studies of the mentally troubled. not to educate people about firearms safety. But, we do know the end goal and that IS to get rid of all guns. Thats not paranoia, its what they have ALL said at one time or another.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 14:24

Here it is again But, we do know the end goal and that IS to get rid of all guns

LOL

People who spout this nonsense have drunk too much of the NRA Kool-Aid.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Demi how long do you suppose that President Obama AND his wife and daughters would live without that protection? He would be dead before I hit transmit!

No matter how many times it is said....there are those who refuse to hear.

I don't hear the majority say ban guns for personal safety and hunting. It's the controls on who buys them and limits on the types of weapons that is the debate....not protecting your Presidents from the wackos in your country and abroad.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Posted by frank_il z5Illinois (My Page) on
Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 14:16

"I am passing that article on to a lot of people--which is something I just don't do often at all."

I thought that is what all Conservatives were trained to do. Pass on emails, facebook quotes, etc.

*

You obviously don't know much about conservatives.

I am not trained by anyone.

I think it is important that people know what a hypocrite Barack Obama is and that is why I am passing on the article.

Your comment indicates a need to insult people that hold different opinions than you.

That is intolerance.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

It was a joke (and I thought an obvious one). Get a grip.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Still didn't answer my question, Bill. Four people shot, eight out of ten people were armed to shoot to protect the President and yet no one did. They tackled the shooter.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Instead, he found an armed woman willing and able to protect her children and herself.

And if Obama had his way, this woman would be arrested for shooting that intruder.

Those were men that were aware that they were unable to protect themselves without the gun.

Marquest, you have a weapon. Why? Let me ask you-- would you be willing to face down some piece of human garbage with a firearm if you were unarmed? You making that argument is no different than Feinstein calling for everyone else's guns, except the one that she carries herself.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Posted by frank_il z5Illinois (My Page) on
Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 14:27

It was a joke (and I thought an obvious one). Get a grip.

*

My grip is fine.

I am going this week to practice it at the shooting range next week.

That is not a joke.


(Frank, I'll take your comment as sincere that it was a "joke."

It's difficult to tell). ;)


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Lily-- Sorry-- I'm not privvy to SS training. I would venture to guess, though, that they're trained to take a would-be assassin alive if possible. Are you suggesting that it be part of the high school curriculum so that everyone has that same training with respect to achieving that end? Maybe we should ALL travel in armed groups so that we could do the same thing?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Posted by marquest z5 PA (My Page) on Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 14:16

"I think men may have lost the power to protect themselves without a gun....Without the gun I could walk up to them and B%tch slap them and the fight would be won. If you go back and watch both guys you see both looked physically unable to beat a woman hand to hand. Watching Alex Jones there was no doubt he could not catch you if you slapped him and ran."

Begs the question: is it men she despises or guns?

No matter.

----------------
"I am passing that article on to a lot of people--which is something I just don't do often at all."

Me too. And I don't pass things on either. I know just the people...and like Demi, I'll do it because it's a free country and "inquiring minds (or not) need to know."


 o
RE: Update on gun control

The "Lew Rockwell" letter was so obviously trumped up I can't believe anyone would actually put any stock in it. Sounds more like something from The Onion.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"And if Obama had his way, this woman would be arrested for shooting that intruder. "

BULL...absolute and total BULL!


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"The "Lew Rockwell" letter was so obviously trumped up I can't believe anyone would actually put any stock in it. Sounds more like something from The Onion"

LOL, Pidge. I feel that way about the world news some days--all networks.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

well mom, it may be you just dont pay attention. There have been many who have stated they would ban all guns. feinsten has said it several times, the list goes on. If they dont mean it, why have they made that statement.I5ts pretty obvious why gun owners think that the banning of one particular color or shape or function will lead to others. Its how they work.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 17:04

In case people are ready to assume this letter is real, it isn't, but the spirit of it is very true and very real

Lew Rockwell .. not surprised, I find most of the libetarian/right wing sites to be all news of doom and gloom all day long which really seems to appeal to the paranoid members of society. Actually I find them depressing, which is why I stopped visiting those sites.

But if you want the latest and greatest on the Mayan apocalypse and prepping then that is where you want to go ... and the whole economic collapse and socialist prez.

As a matter of fact isn't that why Ms. Lanza was hoarding supplies and guns?

"no one knows the time or day"


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Marquest, you have a weapon. Why? Let me ask you-- would you be willing to face down some piece of human garbage with a firearm if you were unarmed? You making that argument is no different than Feinstein calling for everyone else's guns, except the one that she carries herself.

Bill my argument is

1. I am not paranoid enough to think that they want everyone disarmed. I will leave that to the fearful. I am too reality base to be a puppet. I have the gun in my homes as protection but not my only protection.

2. Did you see Alex Jones? The man was getting out of breath just yelling. He could not do battle unless he had a gun.

3. I have shared two incidents in other post during my travel that I was as equal at protecting myself without a gun. Twenty plus years on the road in strange cities and yes including Chicago and I am still alive. I did not need a gun to live.

The gun fear speeches that are being made do not scare me.

Also, I was approached by a man with a gun and he told me to get in the car. I replied "NO" He continued to try to get me in the car we struggled he limped back to his car as I was running away. I was scared but the fear worked for me.

So as I said fear of losing a gun is not my biggest fear in life. Nor do I feel I will not survive if it was taken away.

My father the policeman made sure I can protect myself and the gun is not the only thing that will keep you safe. It is not my god.

Bill what are you going to do if you do not have your gun? Do you take a bath with your gun?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I'm just guessing here, but I'll bet that Lanza woman was a right wing survivalist wacko, just like her son. Didn't work out so well for her, did it? Her enemy was within.

These loud mouth gun freaks should know that the more they scream and shut the loonier they look, and it's turning reasonable people away.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I understood the woman enjoyed the shooting sports, maybe thats why she had them? Its hardly hoarding to have mutiple types.
Danged if I dont agree. Those loud mouthed freaks do no one any good. But I would bet they are harmless except for their hot breath. I know a few and they do a lot of barking but dont have the junk to do much more.
I would also bet that most gun nuts, such as myself, dont have guns for protection, or to put down an govt out of control. They just like guns, like to shoot and appreciate the history and workmanship of qua;lity arms. My wife and I shot around 200 rounds today sighting in a couple of new pistols getting ready to work out on some reactive targets. Of course we do have a couple defensive weapons, a shotgun and a handgun.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

1. I am not paranoid enough to think that they want everyone disarmed. I will leave that to the fearful.

Paranoid, huh? Check the link below. And that's just one.

2. Did you see Alex Jones? The man was getting out of breath just yelling. He could not do battle unless he had a gun.

Alex Jones is a loony toon that was invited on for just that reason-- to make ALL gun owners look bad, and for those who really believe that, open your mouths and say BAAA.

Bill what are you going to do if you do not have your gun?

Whatever I can. Like I've said time and time again, guns aren't the only weapon. Nor are they the only weapon I'm good with. But they are the ultimate personal weapon, and as long as I CAN carry, I will.

Do you take a bath with your gun?

I let Ducky hold it while I scrub my back.

yeah, I can act just as much of a moron as you can.

These loud mouth gun freaks should know that the more they scream and shut the loonier they look, and it's turning reasonable people away.

Works for the anti gun FREAKS, too. Of course, there are no reasonable people there. These are the ones who want to go out and buy legal assault weapons and take target practice on gun freaks. Something that if any pro-gun person were to say, they'd be immediately slapped in jail. You people are really showing yourselves as the absolute loons that you really are. Lily.

Lew Rockwell .. not surprised

When you can't attack the message, attack the messenger. OM, you really HAVE been reading the handbook lately, haven't you!

Here is a link that might be useful: Mr and Mrs American, turn your guns in


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 19:31

I guess I could say the same to you Bill, but I wont.

FF actually the gun owners I know who are, GASP liberals, also have a gun for home protection, but I never hear them going on about putting down a government out of control so on that you and I seem to agree.

I have said repeatedly I have no problem with people owning guns, it is the rest of the paranoid conspiracy crap that turns me off.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I have said repeatedly I have no problem with people owning guns, it is the rest of the paranoid conspiracy crap that turns me off.

the reason you hear it at times like these is because as the cliche goes,

"The beauty of the 2nd amendment is that it's not needed, until someone tries to take it away."


 o
RE: Update on gun control

 o
RE: Update on gun control

This petition is on the White House website. Who started the petition, and why is it directed to the White House instead of individual congressmen?

Do you have this information, Art?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"Anyone 13 or older can create or sign a petition on WhiteHouse.gov."

Here is a link that might be useful: We the People Frequently Asked Questions


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I dont think these on line petitions amount to didley. WRITE YER CONGRESSPERSON/SENATOR. Then sen them an email, then call on the phone.

Just picked up a duelin post, one side is red , other is blue!!

I think this thread is lost? Isnt it just silly that we even talk about this ?? Nuthins gonna change.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"Posted by pidge z6PA (My Page) on Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 15:13

The "Lew Rockwell" letter was so obviously trumped up I can't believe anyone would actually put any stock in it. Sounds more like something from The Onion."

Demi, Just wondering if, when you decided to pass the Rockwell letter on, did you include the 2nd sentence?

"In case people are ready to assume this letter is real, it isn't, but the spirit of it is very true and very real:"


 o
RE: Update on gun control

JMC, you know better than to ask that. You should know by now that if there is one thing Demi has plenty of, it's scruples.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

"You should know by now that if there is one thing Demi has plenty of, it's scruples."

You know this because you are lifelong friends, right?


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Just wondering if, when you decided to pass the Rockwell letter on, did you include the 2nd sentence?

"In case people are ready to assume this letter is real, it isn't, but the spirit of it is very true and very real:"

If that letter were to be in the spirit of true and very real, the drug cartels would be thanking the U.S. government for the antiquated drug laws that allow their obscene profits for drug trafficking.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Posted by jmc01 (My Page) on
Sun, Jan 13, 13 at 0:18

Demi, Just wondering if, when you decided to pass the Rockwell letter on, did you include the 2nd sentence?

*

I don't know anything about the "Lew Rockwell" letter and that was not the article to which I was referring.

So no, I did not pass on anything in this "Lew Rockwell" letter and in fact did not read that later link Bill posted.

As I have said repeatedly, I'm not eager to read someone else's OPINION about someone.


THIS is the factual article (at the bottom) posted by Bill in a link which I said I was going to forward--it is concerning Barack Obama's efforts to support the prosecution of someone protecting their family:

Posted by bill_vincent Central Maine (billvincent@hotmail.com) on
Sat, Jan 12, 13 at 13:54

Well, I see it differently, but admittedly, I don't run around in the same gun circles you do. It seems to me that President Obama has stated pretty clearly that he agrees to the right to bear arms

David-- this article was just literally brought to my attention. My response was that if necessary, I could bring up a dozen or more links (saved on my old laptop) to articles about everything from his days as a "community organizer" right up to his presidential campaign, where he very succinctly said that he was against guns. at all.

Here is a link that might be useful: Obama fights to prosecute man for defending his own home from intruder.


 o
Maine - support for guns and limits on guns

Even in Bill's home state - a reasonable response to gun control

Mainers are more likely to own guns than most Americans, but they're also more supportive of increasing restrictions, such as banning semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines, according to a Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram poll...

The Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram poll found that 79 percent of Mainers support some restrictions on owning guns, and 61 percent support banning high-capacity ammunition clips that can hold more than 10 bullets.

Slightly more than half of Mainers -- 51 percent -- support banning semi-automatic guns, which automatically reload when the trigger is pulled. Nationally, 44 percent of Americans support such a ban, according to a Pew Research poll conducted after the Sandy Hook shootings.

Mainers are fiercely protective of their gun rights -- only 5 percent want to outlaw guns, according to the poll. Yet most Mainers view military-style weapons as being impractical for hunting and home protection, he said.

"Here, people take pride in their guns and have had guns in their families for generations," Bahr said. "They don't want an all-out ban, but they want some reasonable restrictions."

A third of Mainers say the shooting has made them more likely to support stricter gun control laws, the poll found, and 79 percent of Mainers support some restrictions on owning guns.

And we know, despite the rhetoric, that NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT OUTLAWING GUNS.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Maybe those Mainetrs dont waterfowl hunt with semi auto shotguns, nor do the use these guns for upland birding. So what. Milluions of hunters use semi auot type guns for lots of hunting. Also many more millions use them for target shooting, varmint hunting and several other shooting sports. Maybe Mainers are just stupid?? Over 1/2 of all guns sold use the auto loading feature, only since around 1920 tho. So, they shpould bring all of their auto loaders to plaxces where they are appreciated and valued.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

No nationwide registration for guns or back ground checks for individual sales and sales by un-licensed "collectors" at gun shows.

But support nation-wide registration for people who have, had, may-have-had, mental illness at some point in their lives so they can't buy guns from Federally Licensed dealers, but ok if they buy them from "collectors" at gun shows\ w/o a back ground check.

Un-licensed gun show "collectors";


 o
RE: Update on gun control

I do believe that all wepons sold at gun shows should be insta checked, but not privbate sales. The larger gun shows attract hundreds of people all at 1 time and these days the action is fast paced. I used to do gun shows but didnt much care for the environment at most, especially near the larger cities. I did many shows where I actually only offered my collection for viewing. When I 1st started gun shows, thats what I thought they were about! duh.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Even in Bill's home state - a reasonable response to gun control

Let me take this one at a time, keeping in mind that Soros himself might as well write the PPH (and not just with respect to gun control). The article isn't totally wrong.

The Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram poll found that 79 percent of Mainers support some restrictions on owning guns, and 61 percent support banning high-capacity ammunition clips that can hold more than 10 bullets.

I would include myself in that 79%. As for hi cap mags, I'd increase it to anything over 20, only because many of the handguns available now have a standard capacity of 15-17 rounds. Although I don't agree with it, I can understand the reasoning behind getting rid of the 30, 50, and 100 round magazines.

Slightly more than half of Mainers -- 51 percent -- support banning semi-automatic guns, which automatically reload when the trigger is pulled.

There's a reason the PPH found that stat. This paper is based in the biggest liberal bastion in the state, and it's so slanted (for me to read the PPH would be like one of you watching Fox News) that no one else is interested. And that slant is showing hardcore in this "survey". When you stop and think that well over half of the hunting rifles and shotguns in this state are semiautomatic, I'm extremely skeptical that more than half this state would be in favor of an outright ban on semi-auto firearms. Also, 90% of all pistols and revolvers would then be banned. You can bet there's no way this state would be in favor of this. Of course, this then calls the validity of the whole survey into question. Next.

Nationally, 44 percent of Americans support such a ban, according to a Pew Research poll conducted after the Sandy Hook shootings.

Of course, the next question is how many of those surveyed, knew what they were answering? Hell, even the people writing the damn legislation don't know what they're talking about half the time!! They know the proper buzzwords to use, pound them home, and call it good. How many times have you heard, even in this forum, semi auto firearms equated with full auto machine guns? "Yeah, you can fire 6 rounds per second"-- HORSE CRAP. I OWNED an AR-15, and more than once, when I took it to the sand pit, I tried to see how fast I could get it to fire, and even without aiming-- just keeping the barrel in a safe direction, I couldn't work the trigger that fast! But this is the kind of garbage these people are hearing and then based on that, answering this survey.

Yet most Mainers view military-style weapons as being impractical for hunting and home protection, he said.

Hunting, maybe. But not home protection. I know more people who have AR's, AK's, and even semi auto Uzi's for home protection. I know this, because I've tried to talk them out of it, that it was overkill. I'm in the minority in agreeing with that survey question, and that includes business owners, and town leaders.

"Here, people take pride in their guns and have had guns in their families for generations," Bahr said. "They don't want an all-out ban, but they want some reasonable restrictions."

Agreed. The problem comes in defining "reasonable restrictions.

A third of Mainers say the shooting has made them more likely to support stricter gun control laws, the poll found, and 79 percent of Mainers support some restrictions on owning guns.

Agreed on the second part. The shooting only served to galvanize BOTH sides of this equation.

And we know, despite the rhetoric, that NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT OUTLAWING GUNS.

What Rhetoric?? Mom, I just posted a video of Feinstein herself saying if she could get the votes, she'd call for a complete outright ban. "Mr. and Mrs America, turn in your guns!" Obama's no different. Nor is McCarthy (although with Sen. McCarthy, though I still disagree with her, I understand why her point of view is what it is). Harry Reid-- another hypocrite. He's also said he'd be in favor of an outright ban..... although he has a CCP and carries a weapon himself.

So don't say no one. They may not be talking OPENLY about it. Tht's not to say they're not talking about it.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Don't be surprised if you see that last post reprinted. I just sent it to the editor as a response to the article.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Bill, for every Feinstien out there, lets not forget NRA hardliners who fought so hard against making machine guns illegal. As well as trigger locks, and any, ANY, restrictions on carrying guns anywhere at any time. And then there are those to the right of the NRA, who insist that mandatory training for concealed carry is an infringement on the 2nd amendment, and in fact any non-criminal/non crazy should get a license just by asking for one - See Arizona.

This morning the Washington Post has an article about the evolution of the NRA and how it went from a hunting/gun safety/sporting organization into the extreme pro-2nd amendment lobbying group that it is today.

The article is somewhat slanted, but those bits are easy to spot and ignore, the facts they present are still facts. Its worth a read, I was unaware of the 'takeover' by the hardliners in Cincinnati.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Because some people admit that they would outlaw all guns if they could does NOT mean they are proposing that such a bill be passed. As you noted, Feinstein said "if she could" but she accepts that she cannot. She is simply being HONEST about her own feelings. Surely you do not object to HONESTY now, do you? Well, HONESTLY, she is NOT describing the legislation she is pushing.

NO ONE IS PROPOSING TO BAN ALL GUNS -- even though they may wish there were enough support to actually do it. So quit attacking ban-all-guns strawmen--that's a made-up fight--just trying to distract from the issues that Congress and the White House will be addressing in the upcoming weeks.

Let's talk instead about the serious proposals that are actually being considered. Sounds to me, bill, that you agree with a number of them (although not very enthusiastically, I guess). So I don't understand why you are taking such a strong stance opposing those who are proposing restrictions you don't really strongly object to.

Kate


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sun, Jan 13, 13 at 12:51

fancifowl I don't think Bill is stupid. Or anyone else in Maine.

This post was edited by momj47 on Sun, Jan 13, 13 at 12:57


 o
RE: Update on gun control

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sun, Jan 13, 13 at 12:55

Bill, it won't happen. NO ONE IS GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS. Not Diane Feinstein. Not even President Obama.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

lets not forget NRA hardliners who fought so hard against making machine guns illegal. As well as trigger locks, and any, ANY, restrictions on carrying guns anywhere at any time.

And I'm one of em.... with the exception of the fully auto weapons-- the REAL assault rifles.

and in fact any non-criminal/non crazy should get a license just by asking for one - See Arizona.

Wrong. they want EVERYONE (no exceptions) to have the right. I've had arguments with those types, every bit as passionate as I have in here. Those people are off the wall. You think I'M unbending? You ain't seen nothin.

This morning the Washington Post has an article about the evolution of the NRA and how it went from a hunting/gun safety/sporting organization into the extreme pro-2nd amendment lobbying group that it is today.

This is not news to me. It's the reason that until just recently, I refused to renew my membership.

Because some people admit that they would outlaw all guns if they could does NOT mean they are proposing that such a bill be passed. As you noted, Feinstein said "if she could" but she accepts that she cannot.

Kate, yes, I do appreciate honesty. That doesn't mean I'm going to give in on my own beliefs because she told the truth. it means I appreciate the fact that she's straight forward (or atleast WAS), so that I can deal with her in a like manner. If these people are given the LEAST bit of encouragement, this bill she has now will pass..... as step one, toward the ultimate goal of complete erradication of all LEGAL firearms, and that, I won't stand for.

ban-all-guns strawmen--that's a made-up fight

Not it's not. Not even a little bit. This one time, I wish I were wrong.

So I don't understand why you are taking such a strong stance opposing those who are proposing restrictions you don't really strongly object to.

because there are several that I DO object to, and very strenuously. Things like all firearms now considered to be "assault weapons" under the new bill, would now have to be registered under the National Firearms Act-- the same bill that regulates fully automatic weapons-- and would be considered as such, including files being kept on each owner to include fingerprints, mugshots, etc.. Each weapon (and keep in mind, this would go WAY past the list of specified weapons because of a couple of catch-all phrases in the bill) would be subject to a 200.00 per year tax to be paid to the ATF at the beginning of each tax year. It would be called "registration renewal" under the new bill. The weapons would NOT BE transferrable-- not even to an FFL holder. The owner would have to keep that weapon until such time that he deemed it not WORTH keeping, or until his death, at which time it would have to be forfeited to the ATF, through local police departments. It couldn't even be willed to heirs.

THis would include ALL semi auto firearms-- rifles, shotguns, almost all handguns, and for all intents and purposes, except for single shot firearms, all would be banned. I WILL NOT accept anything even CLOSE to this. THAT'S why I'm fighting so strenuously against this.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

Bill, it won't happen. NO ONE IS GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS. Not Diane Feinstein. Not even President Obama.

I'm reminded of heri telling me time after time that Obama wasn't pro gun control that it was all in my head, that I was going off the nut scale just for worrying about it.

I called it for the last four years, and I'm calling this now. I was right then, and I'm right now.


 o
RE: Update on gun control

YQ-- this bud's for you

Here is a link that might be useful: Austrailia's gun control AIN'T WORKIN


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: This thread has reached the upper limit for the number follow-ups allowed (150). If you would like to continue this discussion, please begin a new thread using the form on the main forum page.


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here