David in Ma. says:
January 13, 2011 at 10:17 am
The fed’s must think they are close t disarming the law abiding citizen because they are now talking limiting speech..
How could obama get elected when only 40 percent of the people are on some form of welfare and most of them don’t vote…..was there an acorn present? Ya think?

Congress has to investigate his being qualified or not, if not jail him, if he is impeach him, obama and his gang is destroting America!
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
David ,,,,,Liberal haven’t figured out yet and most likely never will that if we allow the fox to run the hen house we will wind-up with a lot of carcasses……….

45caliber,

Way to go.I am with you on that one.Great post.

http://www.a-human-right.com/guncontrol.html · Cached page

That’s an interesting page on the rights of minorities to defend themselves. (blacks,gays,Jews,women who are raped). It puts equality in perspective since everyone should have the right to protect themselves. Since a half a dozen comments on this site (in the past) have said they want to eliminate liberals then I think it behooves them to get out there and arm themselves also. If only conservatives have guns guess who will get eliminated?

I have no problem at all with all these minority groups being armed – including the liberals. The more that are armed, the less the criminals will want to cause problems.

Remember the “Saturday night specials”? Those were low-cost guns that the libs wanted to get rid of. Not because they were unsafe but because the poor could afford them. Many of the fees, taxes, etc. today are meant to do the same thing. As usual, it is okay for the rich to have things and have the protection but not the common people.

eddie47d writes:
“If only conservatives have guns guess who will get eliminated?”

It is not the conservatives that you should fear it is the elite when they come to throw the “useful idiots” under the bus.

Right now it’s the “conservatives”making the threats against liberals who are the threat.The elites are so shadowy it’s hard to pick them out. Depends on the political season and who is making hay about them.

“Right now it’s the “conservatives”making the threats against liberals who are the threat.”

eddie, now if I read it right, conservatives are threatening the liberals who are the threat???

Don’t confuse anybody…I’m sure you have proof of the liberal threats that are being threatened by conservatives…can you give us some verifiable examples of conservatives making threats and who the liberal threats are so I won’t continue to be so confused.

By the way, I know this is off subject, but who is on first?

Jeff –

eddie47d says:
“Right now it’s the “conservatives”making the threats against liberals who are the threat.”

Eddie gets it At least he gets that liberals are the threat. All conservatives are doing is warning the “threat” Much as the Gadsden flag is a warning to the threat of their time.

Peace accords are laws and once signed hundreds to thousands of people are no longer dying. So in most cases laws do keep opposing people in line.(cooling down period). Yes, there are exception but most laws make normal folks think twice.

“Yes, there are exception but most laws make normal folks think twice.”

The operative words here are “most” and “normal folks”. That does not include nut cases or anyone else intent on causing any kind of mayhem.

I guess we could go lawless and see how that works.

Or enforce the laws of the land. That would necessitate our throwing out all laws that infringe on the right of the people to individually keep and bear arms. I think I would prefer that solution to the anarchy Eddie47d suggested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY Just cause Eddie47d likes this one so much.

eddie47d writes:
“Peace accords are laws”

No supporting evidence. I looked. Since peace accords are NOT laws your answer is incorrect.

eddie47d writes: “So in most cases laws do keep opposing people in line.(cooling down period).”

Cooling down period doesn’t. Killers get their guns in the black market or in advance. Law abiding citizens being stalked have to wait. 3+ days of terror while the stalker can stalk the prey unafraid.

If cooling down periods were real than you would only have to have them till you buy your first gun. After that they are meaningless.

Spin away all you want.

Is that the best counter argument you have today Eddie47d? If so I accept the win. Thanks.

Correct. And there is also one that will allow bolt-actions to fire automatically.

45caliber,
Unfortunatly some bleeding heart will term him mentally ill and get him sent to a nice comfy hospital!!!

David:

You are correct. It seemed that someone sued the police from not protecting them. The Supreme Court ruled that protection was not one of the responsibilities of the police.

True. Yet most if not all departments use “to serve and PROTECT” (my emphasis)as their motto

Yes. It is a motto, not a guarantee. Here is some light reading on the subject.

http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

Here is another source of armed defense

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/

Loughner WAS a law abiding citizen.

really? I thought he lied on a gun application. I thought he had several incidents w/law officals?

That just proves Anyone can buy a weapon.

He did have several incidences with the law. I don’t know if any were felonies. And perhaps whomever was checking the aps that day in probably some governmental office was too busy doing other things than the work they were paid to do. Who knows. Do we know if he really bought the gun or did a friend or someone else. We really don’t know that much about him other than what was gleaned on the Net before it was quickly removed.

Nothing sufficient to trip a red flag.

Which is why we really do need to get troubled folks some help.

At what point do you think intervention might have been proper?

Rob

Apparently not, he didn’t threaten anyone so the police could not be called in. Though he was apparently tossed from the campus he attended because he said frightening things and would not be allowed back till he got a mental health exam. No one could force him to get one. Though now, that he did attack he will. It’s a fine line we walk with our personal freedoms. Who decides when one of us is required to get mental health evaluations?

Libertytrain writes:
“Who decides when one of us is required to get mental health evaluations?”

We assigned that power to the courts but we also found that it is way to easy to abuse that power. Better we be armed and dangerous (Violent enough for you Robert?) So that if someone does “loose it” we can quickly neutralize the threat. Then we can evaluate his/her mental health.

Libertytrain,
There is the problem. Who among us has the right to determine who is sick and who is merely eccentric?? Is the little guy that walks down the street and touches each meter cause he is compulsive really sick? How about the guy that is a stand up citizen and goes to work each day faithfully doing his job and just snaps?? Psychology is a practice, not a science!! It’s VERY failable!

teresa, I agree, my God, we can turn a pencil into a weapon if need be__

Really Angel… a pencil to kill someone! Wow, who would have thunk it? Does anyone else remember a movie where some action hero killed his Master with a pencil while visiting him in prison? I’ll trip across that one again some day and I’ll remember it. It was a pretty good movie.

BTW, neither he (fictional), nor I (real) would need your god to turn a pencil into a weapon.

Rob

RS__Still laughing Pharoah…..

Robert Smith says:
“BTW, neither he (fictional), nor I (real) would need your god to turn a pencil into a weapon. ”

Of course not. Your creator already gave you the smarts to use a pencil for defense or offense. Your creator hardly needs to redo good work.

Bitter libertarian,

You forgot to mention Road Rage.

In VA it was road rage on Rt. 7 near Columbia Pike, near where the old drive-in used to be, that a punk got out of his car and shot a Naval Officer… Or was it the other way around? Memory ain’t as good as it used to be.

Rob

Gun control is a favored way of politicians since it doesn’t take any money from the government to make the law and it makes at least some of the voters think you are worried about crime.

So, 45… What about going for a few social programs that might stop some of the nut jobs?

Rob

I tried but they won’t let me shoot them.

Robert Smith writes:
“So, 45… What about going for a few social programs that might stop some of the nut jobs?”

As long as you don’t take a gun to OUR heads and force us to pay for them, I am ok with you creating a few social programs.

Vicki,
you have just commited a liberal sin!!! Never ask them to take from THEIR pocket to start a program, only from others!!

@JoeH. I’m so bad

Dang, Jeff did you just have a brain fart!

…another brilliant contribution…

…and follows a question with an exclamation point…SLMAO!

45__yeah, The Liberals are like bad pennies, they just keep turning up.

And you just can’t not take a shot at all those little heads, can you Angel?

Rob

Robert Smith, I hear laughter Pharaoh….

And look at the mistake that was!

A little touchy about the truth Caliber?

Nope. Just pointing out that it was a failed action. The war was okay; pulling out was wrong at that time. Just like it’s wrong in the Mid-East now.

Keep the violence going, eh 45?

When is the right time to quit a war that won’t be won?

Oh! Oh! Oh! Call on ME, I KNOW!

Don’t get into it. That’s the answer. Don’t fall for the lies.

Rob

What war? Vietnam was a “police action”

That Professor should have been fired.

I agree – but too many today agree with him.

eddie47d,

Unfortunately that is true,most news medias do mold public opinion.I like to see a news source that would report the facts,just the facts.

I agree. I would too.

coal miner,
not only do they mold public opinion, they manufacture the news. There was an inbedded reporter in a unit in Iraq that put a couple of the troops up to asking the questions HE wanted answers to and when he didn’t get the answers he wanted, he bent and twisted the story to what he wanted!

My first wife’s cousin second removed from the dog catcher down the street once saw on TV giant ants attacking itsy bitsy litte cities on a TV. Yup, it was on TV so it had to be true…

Next time you cite a source could you be a little less anectdotal? Making stuff up isn’t really an argument.

I know some fine journalists and news directors and your efforts to belittle them are obviously born of ignorance.

Rob

robert,
and your efforts to build them up is born of BLIND ignorance!!

The liberals are. That’s why they want to ban all guns in civilian hands. They aren’t really worried about crime; they want to make sure they themselves are safe. In fact Feinstein, who carries, stated that once guns were banned she needed to keep hers. After all, there were people who didn’t like her.

No politician should be physically threatened or even physically threatened in print. Castaway has made more than a few threats on this site so what do you think his ultimate intentions are? How many times would I have to say I like cheeseburgers before you believe me? Once should be enough,right? Most have said Loughner was mentally unstable and they should have seen the signs. I say Castaway is mentally unstable with his continuous threats and should be committed or denied the right to own a weapon. If we let the Castaways speak their “mind” and make threats then there really isn’t much we can do about the Loughners now is there?

No politician should be physically threatened or even physically threatened in print.
**********************************************
Tell me Eddie….do you feel WE have the same rights??????
Just whos agenda ARE YOU REALLY supporting????

Who’s killing are you supporting??

eddie:

Are you saying that all the libs who insisted that Bush should have been shot, hanged, etc. were WRONG????

I merely asked you….Do you feel that WE have the same rights, or do you feel congress or politicians are somehow subject to special rules? As fas as supporting killings, you eddie really are here to merely provoke people and nothing more I fear. If I do support any killing it would be any attempt on bodily harm or death to me or any of my loved ones.

45caliber, why do you spoil it for eddie. Don’t you know he wants to restrict everyones 1st Amendement rights, freedom of expression.

Caliber; Yes they were wrong. If we are a nation of laws then he could have been impeached or censored. You know innocent until proven guilty.

Teresa; I believe you were provoking me on your original comment so I responded accordingly.Now let’s move on.

Mad Dog Jeff; Nobodies muzzling anybodies 1st amendments rights.You of coarse could use a good muzzling or just plain stop lying.

eddie47d. always quick to accuse someone of lying but short on proof unless, of course, you feel your word carries more weight than facts. Again I say…and it does gets tiring waiting for your proof…PROVE IT! You can’t, so say something silly and then run and hide…again.

I’m not taking away your 1st amendment rights and you express yourself quite often. So you need more proof about your phony lying accusations.

eddie47d, the truth shall set you free…try it, you might like it…

Remember when Tedd’s guards got caught at a N.Y. airport with full autos?

Rob

Besides that there is no longer a toy in the happy meal.

David in Ma – I think that’s only in San Francisco http://www.happymeal.com/en_US/

Dan,

I am a proud gun owner.

Throughout history violence has plagued the human race. Since ancient times the strong have preyed on the weak and the meek. We have passed laws to protect society, but the violence continues. Laws attempt to change human behavior, but laws are not able to change human nature. Laws are not enough to protect people from aggression. We must allow people the means to protect themselves. Protection is a major reason that about half of all Americans own a firearm.

You are right … for once.

Coal claims: “Protection is a major reason that about half of all Americans own a firearm.”

That was original theory of why I got mine. Then I got into the social and competition side and I found that I enjoyed a whole bunch. For about 10 years I was at matches many summer weekends and ranges in the winter within 100 mi. of D.C.

Rob

Coal Miner and I find common ground.

Vicki,
As much as it pains me, I too have to admit that he and I have found common ground, as well!!

With a miner, wouldn’t it be common underground?

Robert, there is no evidence of anyone firing a weapon but Loughner. It was stated that one gentleman in the crowd was carrying a concealed weapon, but he never used it. When Loughner was reloading, someone hit him over the head with one of the folding chairs there, and two men, one a retired Colonel, wrestled Loughner to the ground.

James, according to a story, with pictures, in a British newspaper (London Daily News), Loughner tried to change magazines. A grandmother next to him grabbed the magazine. While he was trying to get it away from her, three others, two elderly, jumped on him too. All four of them sat on him until the police showed up … late as usual.

never mind. the thought just went pfeeeet. sorry

Almost. According to her, in a phone interview, he was tackled just as he pulled out the fresh clip and he dropped it as he hit the ground. She and he both reached for it at the same time, both got hold of it. They played tug-of-war, she won. (Mind you, he was by now in the process of being put in a choke-hold and arm-lock at the time, so he may have been distracted.) Then the 220 lb. armed citizen took his hand off his weapon and piled on, and it was definitely over.

Well, not quite. They still had to wait five minutes or so for the police to show up and save the day.

One of the people who tackeled him was carrying but did not use it.

The man w/the concealed weapon was walking out of the store when the gunman was already being tackled, he then released his hand from his own weapon and jumped on top of the guy along side the others.

Correct Theresa. Just a few seconds earlier and he might have saved lives (well, he did help, in fact by helping hold Loughner down). In an interview he explained that he was hand on weapon, safety off, ready to shoot to kill, but encountered a “gun down,” situation by the time he got there, and saw no need to draw his weapon.

An armed, evidently weapons trained, responsible citizen. Quite the opposite of what gun opponents would have us believe, than in such a situation, more guns in the crowd would have resulted in a bloodbath of innocent bystanders shot. It already WAS a bloodbath of innocent bystanders shot.

Consider another scenario. That armed citizen definitely WOULD have saved lives had the elderly people who tackled Loughner been unable to hold him down, because Jared Lee WAS in the process of reloading. Another 30 round magazine, in fact. Had they failed to hold him (the courage and presence of mind of which I applaud, it was a helluva risk to them personally), AND had there not been a trained, armed citizen newly arrived on the scene, then there unquestionably would have been a MUCH higher body count.

Speaking of presence of mind, why the hell didn’t Giffords have the presence of mind to ask for a Tucson City police or Pima County deputy detail for her hour-and-a-half Safeway parking lot town meeting? What are she and her constituents paying their taxes for? One patrol car, one officer, is this too much to ask? Even Sheriff Dupnik should have figured that out for himself, it’s not like her event was spur-of-the-moment.

And for those who claim that Loughner’s motivations were anti-government or political, or fueled by talk show rhetoric? I would point out that he was crazy. You don’t randomly gun down a nine-year-old child because Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity got you riled up. Or because Sarah Palin put gunsights on a phosphordot map on her website.

These often insufferable individuals and many more rile many of us up, but it’s not like we imagine dog voices or get stuck in mind-loop of Meno’s Paradox (Google it: Meno was on his favorite reading list). Jared Lee Loughner, because of psych-drugs, or schizophrenia, or MK-Ultra style mind control, or all the above, for whatever reason, it can certainly be said: The man was crazy.

All the rest of this 1st and 2nd Amendment jazz is just political and media opportunism. Loughner could have driven a pickup truck into the crowd, done just as much damage, and we’d still be arguing whether it was accidental (he had an epileptic fit or something), or he did it on purpose.

Would everyone then be discussing whether crazies should be allowed the keys to a motor vehicle?

Teresa and Average Joe;I’d like to see a live interview on Joe Zamudio for he is the one who had the concealed carry weapon (9mm). A reporter did interview him and he said he had pulled out his gun and originally “pointed at the guy who had took the gun away from Loughnor” and told him to “drop it,drop it or I’ll shoot” He realized he was going to shoot the wrong person and stopped his action. He said “He felt real lucky he did not pull the trigger”. Hardly a testament for having a concealed weapon if he almost shot shot an innocent person. He then jumped in and held Loughnor down. To take it further and this is my opinion. What would have stopped a cop or someone else from shooting at Zamudio thinking he was the second shooter?

Robert, I did watch the interview w/the guy that had his hand on the concealed weapon! He said he came out of the store, He NEVER said he pointed it at ANYONE! He said he said he already saw them on the ground when he heard them cry gun, thats when he grabbed for his, but released when he saw the guys on ground. He NEVER said anything about pointing to ANYONE! YOU LIE!

I haven’t found an interview with the CCW holder yet but I did find this from the “unarmed woman who tackled” the shooter. Turns out that as we should have known the actual events were a little different. Just as heroic but not quite as we were led to believe by those liberals who told us how useless CCW was in this and previous threads.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4490514/exclusive-woman-helped-subdue-shooting-suspect/?playlist_id=87937

That is true restraint. If he had missed and hit a bystander… It was the huge clip that would have thrown me off too. If I saw a way to control things without shooting I would too.

Rob

AHH, Go Pound Sand Robert, and waste your time on someone who’ll beliEve your shyt, CUZ YA GOT THE WRONG CHICK HERE FOR THAT!__I know where the rights came from, You and your freakin mindless ILK are the reason, we’re in this friggin mess in the first place. Your too damned full of yourselves to bow to a GOD you can’t see, so “you” your atheist followers make up your own rules and think they’re better than GODS__AGAIN, GO POUND SAND !!!

I agree, Angel. I would much prefer to believe in God and learn after I die there isn’t one as these athiests insist, than to not believe in God and find out there is one after I die. But they want their heaven on earth by insisting that everyone else MUST do things their way.

And all those doctors that were shot? The only ones I’m aware of are the abortion doctors – and there haven’t been too many of them shot either. Why should I give up my rights to defend myseld and my family to possibly save the lives of half a dozen people over thirty years or so?

45caliber, your right George Tiller the baby killer was the most recent that I remember._-I stand by the old saying, “that if you live by the sword, you’ll die by the sword”!

Thanks for another example of right wing violence, 45.

I knew you would come through.

Rob

Rob:

I have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.

All I did was mention that the only doctors I knew about who were shot were the very few abortion doctors. If there are more, I don’t know it. And I’m very much against ANY law that restricts my freedom due to have a dozen deaths over thirty years or more.

How christian of you angel: ” who’ll beliEve your shyt,”

From your lips to whatever part of your god’s anataomy you wish to contact. I believe the usual place is to his ear, but your milage may vary from the sound of your language.

BTW, did you know that there is a roumor that your god raped a teenager, Marry, without her permission to have his special son (himself?… your christanity really gets confusing) Jesus? Joe was such a mench to marry her even though she wasn’t carrying his child. Joe should be sainted.

Rob

While I don’t know what a roumor is, I do know that there is something twisted in the way you need to twist.

St. Joseph is sainted and a Saint.

Robert,

where did you get the one brain cell that you have? Out of a Cracker Jack Box? Your lack of intelligent analysis is further proof to my argument that there needs to be a license required to have a brain.

RS, _ROFLMAO__My God is accused of rape, huh?__Hmm_ In all honestly Robert, if that statement wasn’t so damned ridiculously retarded, I’d probably go off on a rant.__But this will suffice_Oh ye, with no eyes to see and no ears to hear. Your nothing a paid sensationalist to conjur up reaction from the opposition.__Next victim….lol–what a howl__Do you hear laughter Pharoah???

Robert Smith writes:
“BTW, did you know that there is a roumor that your god raped a teenager, Marry, without her permission to have his special son (himself?… your christanity really gets confusing) Jesus?”

How do you know she didn’t give her permission? You really should stop listening to just rumors. Christianity is not at all confusing. Believing in it or not maybe but the rules are simple and easy to follow

More people die by the hands of doctors than guns every yr. and thats a fact.

Bath tubs, I heard Bath tubs….more people die in bath tubs.

Teresa is right. Doctors do kill more than guns. As I was told when I became an engineer, though, lawyers have their mistakes locked up out of sight and doctors bury their mistakes. Engineer mistakes stand for fifty years where people can see them.

Abortion doctors kill more children than handguns do.

Actually the term “children” isn’t universal before birth. Not everyone subscribes to your brutal god’s teachings, or at least the red meat servers who proclaim to spread his word.

Rob

Rob, Just because you don’t believe in my “Brutal Gods” ( your words) teachings doesn’t make those”children” any less dead. You’re the one who condones unborn baby slaughter, so who’s the brutal one? Your reference to “red meat servers” is only stated to start a fight and is just lame.

Robert Smith says:
“Actually the term “children” isn’t universal before birth. Not everyone subscribes to your brutal god’s teachings…”

Our “brutal” god isn’t telling us to suck out the brains of children thus murdering them. The red meat servers who do that appear to bow to some other entity.

Hey Robert,
Why don’t you just go write another support check!!! you had your fun, now you gotta pay!!!

The odds of being killed by a Doctor are about 8 times greater than being killed by a handgun.

Swimming pools as well.

Robert Smith says:
“Angel says: “God gave us that right, the God-wanna-bes in Washington are doing all they can to take them away.”

Robert: “What a diaper load.”

Non Sequitur. Looks like an ad hominem attack directed at the statement rather than the poster.

Robert: “Your god has nothing to do with gun ownership.”

Your creator gave you life and free will. You have a duty to protect those gifts from aggressors. Your creator gave you the smarts to make and own guns. Her creator gave her the same gifts and duties and smarts. Your assertion is in error.

The non sequitur about violence was deleted.

I beg to differ; all our rights come from God, and one of the rights we have is our preexisting, God given right to own the firearms of our choice and to use them to defend our families. This is the right that is enshrined in the 2nd. Amendment to our U.S. Constitution. Our Founding Fathers felt it was important enough that they made it number 2 out of 10, in our Bill of Rights. Any so called “right” bestowed upon us by the government, can also be taken away.

Jag writes:
“Any so called “right” bestowed upon us by the government, can also be taken away.”

Such a “right” would correctly be called a privilege.

Yes Loughner would have done the killings no matter who else had a gun. He left a suicide note and had no intention of coming out alive. Israeli police officials with automatic weapons have been blown up so being armed doesn’t make anyone safer.Someone hell bent on killing someone will get the job done no matter how many guns he has pointed at him. The killer will always have the drop on everyone else so stop with all the macho talk.

But if others there had been armed and willing to use their own guns, he certainly wouldn’t have shot so many people, now would he?

Not necessarily. It was mentioned that someone had a concealed weapon and never used it.May not have made one bit of difference.

eddie:

If you noticed I said “…willing to use it”. Some people simply aren’t willing to harm another person, even if that person is blazing away at them. Fortunately, I’m not one of them.

More violent talk from 45.

Such fine examples.

Rob

eddie says: “May not have made one bit of difference.”

In this case it didn’t. However in the “American Rifelman” there is a page full each month of folks who have been saved by their own firearms.

The key is that it is an issue of freedom.

You want to keep abortion legal… They want to keep guns legal. You want pot, they want your soul dedicated to their god.

Tell them you will keep your soul, let them keep their guns, point out their stupid rules about pot while they keep the much more toxic alcohol legal…

But then they won’t ever let go of your soul so why bother?

Rob

eddie47d writes:
“The killer will always have the drop on everyone else so stop with all the macho talk.”

The sad thing is Eddie and a lot of others believe this. Even though I have sent eddie links to training that would allow him to be able to neutralize (That violent enough for you Robert?) a threat even when that threat has “the drop” on you.

http://www.frontsight.com/courses/defensive-handgun-training-course.asp

Oh and mention to Dr Piazza your doubts about being able to stop someone who has the drop on you. I’m sure the Doctor can help.

Vicki, very good. Frontsight has become the ultimate training facility in the world. Dr. Piazza has thr public, politicians, security, police and military coming in for training from around the world. Next time I go to Vegas I’mm stopping in for a look see.

45caliber,
you remind me of the movie “Code of Silence”. in it two thugs walk into a cop bar and yell “this is a hold-up!” all of a sudden they have about 40 pistols and a shotgun pointed at them!!!

Gotta love Hollywood!

That is exactly what would, in fact, happen, Ed. No, the guy wouldn’t be dead…yet. He’d now have a choice. Because most trained, armed, responsible people surrounding him would at least give him that.

Nope, it’s not Hollywood, Ed. BTW, do you carry, Ed?

You may have that right, depending on where you live. But, I hope you don’t carry, Ed. Because guns don’t kill people, and bullets don’t kill people, and even people don’t generally kill people. Situations kill people. May you never find yourself in one.

You strike me as the sort who might create one, by not knowing what to do. Given the situation. You strike me as the idiot who believes guns shouldn’t exist, and so jumps up yelling and gets himself and a lot of people hurt or killed. In a gun situation.

The problem as I see it, many people think because someone is carrying, they’re ipso facto in a “gun situation.” Nope, a “gun situation” is where someone draws with obvious intent to utilize (like they pulled the starter cord on a chainsaw).

Now you have a “gun situation.”

Mainstream media, pundits and politicans, would have you confuse possession with intent to utilize. If these equated, one-half of the Swiss population would be dead long ago.

Clarence: I know you are being paid to stir up trouble here but we don’t need it. Go back to Huffington and tell your boss that we simply ignore you.

CLARENCE SWINNEY, it’s time for your med’s, report to sick bay!

And what “As a last Resort” were the Founding Fathers referring to?
The most important cited reason for not infringing the right to bare arms…
C’Mon…
It had to do with a “tyrannical Government”…

A “Tyrannical Government” is defined by it’s actions against the will of the People… And obviously, even looking at our 2nd Amendment Rights is Against our will…

Clarence. unless you are under 16 years of age you are in the militia whether you like it or not.

That is not what it says, Clarence. It says: “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.” (I have removed the extraneous commas which lawyers so love to argue over, older historical copies didn’t have them, so this is what the original Founding Fathers signed off on, not that the added commas make much of a difference.)

Even at first glance, this could (I believe should, particularly in the context of when it was penned, and what the colonies had just been through in the face of British Army control of the populace) be interpreted as: SINCE there will be a need for a well regulated armed force in our midst, THEREFORE the individual must NOT be disarmed.

Being as the “shot heard ’round the world,” the one which signified the final straw and the beginning of our fight for independence from tyrannical rule WAS IN DEFENSE OF OUR STORE OF GUNS, powder, and shot, any interpretation of the Second Amendment which includes disarming American citizens becomes nonsensical.

Furthermore, the argument that the Second Amendment should ONLY hold true when citizens are threatened with tyranny, and hence we may by law be deprived of our otherwise inalienable right to possess the means of personal defense, is in and of itself specious. To deprive us of our right to own the wherewithal to ensure the security of ourselves, homes and families, is in and of itself, tyranny.

Look up the definition of “circular logic” in any Logic 101 textbook. You cannot logically argue that gun ownership should be made illegal because there is no threat of tyranny necessitating said ownership, while performing an act of tyranny by confiscating our guns. Get it, Clarence?

Or do you require that in single syllables? Okay, I’ll give it a try:

LESS GUNS = MORE CRIME; MORE GUNS = LESS CRIME. (This means crimes of all sorts, such as theft, rape, death, and bad laws which tend to do harm to our rights.)

I think that about sums it up in syllables even you can understand, Clarence.

Until modern science convinces me that the government is possessed of some way to “magic away” every gun in existence, SIMULTANEOUSLY, I’ll keep mine, thanks anyway for your concern.

Hey Clarence,

How’s come you are willing to deny some Americans their second ammendment rights yet I’ll bet you demand abortion rights, maybe access to some recreational drugs besides the Christian one, alcohol, and maybe some other things.

Try this on for size…

Go pro-choice on anything that doesn’t impact another born person, of which there is little doubt or debate about their humanity.

You respect their rights, they should respect yours.

MOF, around here I’ve found nothing but intollerance for pot, abortion, and several red meat issues, but they still claim their guns, presumably to keep you from enjoying what you want. After all, there ain’t been any christian doctors killed for NOT doing abortions.

Rob

As usual, Bobby, you change the subject. Check me out, here…this was about gun rights, no? Not abortion?

Clarence, where are all of your statistics? Is your comment strictly based on your emotional instability where guns are concerned?

Give a gun to each person in the United States – desiring to lawfully carry it for self defense, collecting or the shooting sports including hunting. This person must be a law abiding citizen (no criminal record, age 21 , no mental history, you know…responsible). Make sure he/she knows how to use it for self defense (proper training). You’ll see violent crime drop substantially.

Here’s the obvious: If you’re a criminal – do you break into a house where a little old lady will shoot you or where a helpless victim is easy prey? If you’re a criminal – do you care anything about the law? Obviously not! Isn’t it naive to believe criminals will follow gun control laws? Why should criminals carry guns while law-abiding citizens are prohibited? Why add more gun control laws when criminals clearly ignore existing gun control laws?

Jesus, where do you get all this sanity? Why display it here? JeffH, this is not an actual discussion. It’s a forum for the reaffirmation of deeply held beliefs based on one of two things: (1) The rational desire for personal and familial survival (neighbors would be good, too), (2) The less sane belief that your elected Big Brother has your better interests at heart and in mind.

It’s clear upon which side you stand. Thanks. No, I mean it. Just watch out for possible incoming. There are crazies about.

CLARENCE SWINNEY says:
“secomd amendment-”In order to Maintain a Militia” you freaks can kill children”.

Ad hominem attack. Debate win to the Conservatives.

clarence,
even your omnipotent supreme court has agreed with our interpretation and said that the right to own and carry is a right that will not be abridged!! We have a God given right to own and carry and if you don’t like those conditions then move to Chicago!!! ‘Course don’t cry if your loved ones get murdered or your belongings are stolen!! Remember, when seconds count, the cops are just minutes away!!!

JoeH, where I live the cops could be from a few days, to a week or more away, or sometimes not at all. they’re cutting out the Fed. Rangers too, there’s only one in my area and he’s retiring next week, no next in line. the closes one is 80 miles.

Sounds like you have a job opportunity there, Al. I’d say, why don’t you go for it, impact the unemployment rate. With you as law-enforcement, I just might want to move up there and say how do, get away from all these gun-toting crazies down in southern New Mexico slaughtering each other all the time. Oh, you missed it on the news?

Yup, they allowed us guns, so we jest set to killin’ down here, fast as we could shoot. Thet’s whut heppins when you give us rednecks guns.

Murder and mayhem. Everwhur. Safest place I’ve ever lived.

Joe H. says:
“clarence,
even your omnipotent supreme court has agreed with our interpretation and said that the right to own and carry is a right that will not be abridged!!”

Ummmmm… I don’t think the Supreme Court has ruled on the “shall not be infringed” part yet. They DID rule that the right is an INDIVIDUAL right and I think they ruled that it is a restriction on the states as well as the e federal government.

They hinted that “reasonable” restrictions might be allowed but as I remember the decision it did not say that the right will not be abriged or infringed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062802134.html

Warning to Liberals. Don’t go to the above link. There is a link there to a video of a rally where most everyone was carrying a pistol or rifle. Sadly for the liberal dogma no one was shot at the rally that day. No one was even mugged or attacked.

Swinney, you are one sick twisted puppy.

Hey lkar: “How about review mental health policy at the federal, state, and local level?”

That is actually a great idea. It certainly would have saved lives in VA.

But what about tracking such folks? I’ll bet there are a few around here who will be upset at that.

What about paying for ther diagnosis and meds if necessary? Considering the viceral opposition to universal health care around here that ain’t gonna fly either.

Rob

Robert, although I do not agree w/most of your ideas, this is an excellent one. You hit the nail on the head. The officials are going after the wrong things here. This is an attack on Our rights when they clearly need to be going after the real issues here. Our country suffers greatly from mental illness. I have noticed a great increase in mental disorders due to medications. (at least that is what my mother was diagnosed with) This was a tragedy and instead of going after our rights, go after the school systems who failed, the mental facilities, the law enforcement who failed to get this man help…

How do you tell which are doing it right.

Who will pay for it?

Rob

Robert, as much as you would like to push this health care on everyone else it is not the solution. Even You will not survive what’s coming w/the new health care. Only the Elite will survive the NWO Robert, we are nothing and the sooner you realize that the better. WE have already paid 10x’s fold. Go to the pharmacetucial industries for starters.

Teresa,

I can tell you from experience that there is not a whole lot anyone can do about a person that is mentally disturbed (in Florida) unless they agree to go for help. You have to go to a judge and have them Baker acted and that is not easy. My son was married to a woman that not only has a mental problem but is also a alcoholic. She is lucid enough most of the time that you would swear she was fine. However you have to know her and be around her a lot to catch the things that she mostly keeps hidden. She has threatened my life and my sons life many times. He finally had to have her committed on one occasion but it only lasted over the weekend because when they discovered they had no insurance they turned her loose! There was no looking for another place to put her till she recieved the help she needed, it was just turn her loose to go out and do it all over again. I could go into all sick and sordid things this woman has said and done but it would no change anything. The main problem here is there needs to be a way to get these people the help they need even if their families can’t afford it. That is a place where the government could step in and help but they don’t. How many lives would have been saved if there was a way to afford that kind of help for the poor. We are so afraid to step on someone’s rights that we do nothing and then inocent people die. When that happens we jump to blame every one and every thing. A gun was used so we should ban all guns, a knife was used so we should ban all knives and it goes on and on. There seems to be no common sense in dealing with these things! Does anyone realize that if a person wants a gun they will get a gun, if they want explosives they will get explosives, and if they want a knife they will get one or even a chain saw, for crying out loud. Banning these things doesn’t stop the problem. The problem is a deranged mind that needs help. It is time to address the real problem and not go laying blame on inaniment objects that can do nothing until someone uses them. Fix the mind so it doesn’t go off uncontrolled and you will fix the problem.

If you put that power into the hands of the government, the power to decide who’s crazy and who’s not, half of us here would end up institutionalized.

Rob: The easiest way?

That’s simple. Do it as they used to do it. Someone like Loughner would have been put into an institution and kept there for his own safety and the safety of the people in society in general.

Hey 45, I can’t disagree except to ask: Who decides who is going to be locked up?

Who is going to pay for it?

BTW, this is ONE guy that comes along every couple of years. Who else should be locked up and how do you find the “one?”

Rob

I think Rob has a very serious point we should be listening to, here, .45cal. Increase the power of the PTB to determine who is “insane” and should therefore be locked up, and some of the first people they’ll be coming after are half the people on this thread. Probably one of either you or me first. Maybe Al Sieber. Perhaps a coordinated round-up of the dangerously insane.

Stop them at your doorstep with your 1911, they’ll say: “See? We told you!”

(Anyone comes to my door, wants my name? I’m going to announce loud and clear: “CLARENCE SWINNEY!” I suggest you do the same.)

I say, do it like in the Old West, where there were no asylums. As we’ve both suggested here and there, let ‘em all have guns and rather than let God sort ‘em out, let the people do it, as should have happened up front with Loughner. Just looking the situation over, had everyone else been armed, probably would have knocked a little sense into him. But…that’s not gonna happen.

Why? Because most people are stupid and lazy. Sorry, it’s staring us in the face. That is our biggest threat to weapons ownership actually, not frightened politicians, who are very few in number. Frightened people–sheeple–want a Big Brother, or Nanny, or Daddy Warbucks to do their thinking and work for them. Look what it takes to carry a gun:

1. Cost of acquisition. They’d rather spend those dollars on Cheetos and beer or cosmetics, rather than assure their basic security first.

2. Learning. Stupid and lazy people are inherently unwilling to do the work required to acquire the knowledge of how to handle and care for a weapon. (“Whaaaat? I have to LEARN how to use it, then how to CLEAN it? I don’t do cleaning. And I have enough civic responsibilities now, and I pay taxes. That should cover protection.”

3. Responsibility. Most people would rather pay taxes, yea verily walk through the valley of death, etc…and hope someone else will be the meanest bastard in valley for them.

4. Fear. Facing up to the responsibilities of gun ownership requires facing up to the possibility of finding yourself in a situation where you’ll need one (certainly wish you had one). People who feel they’ve been protected all their lives (paid their taxes, didn’t they?) cannot adjust to adrenaline, having experienced fear as a more spread out, underlying, nagging thing, rather than a sudden rush. They will not even confront the statistical fact that when the bad guys smash in the door or open up on a crowd of cowering people or grab them by the neck in an alley and start ripping their clothes off, speed dial to 911 will merely tell the “authorities” where to find the body.

My loose-knit community is 30 miles from the nearest constabulary, 20 to 40 minutes response time with luck, therefore my neighbors possess, without doubt, more firepower than the police forces of the entirety of the two nearest towns.

I say rightly so. And if a crazy in our midst were to act up with a gun, he knows exactly what would happen. Someone would blow the sick idiot out of his or her socks. Too bad, shyte happens.

Well Rob, I’m sure you know, use any emergency to take away more of our freedoms!! That is the Liberal Watchword!!! The two freedoms under almost daily attack is Gun ownership and freedom of speech. There are more people killed by far each year from pharmecuticals, than guns in any country of the world!!! over 100,000 a year die from their prescriptions….let’s outlaw them!! it would make far more sense!!!

And while you’re at it, outlaw cancer, the common cold, and death. That’ll do it. Let’s propose a bill! “Vote for me again! I sponsored the No More Sniffles bill!”

Damn, will people ever wake up?

Why not ban the automobile, they kill more people than most anything else. To me, gun control is being able to put 3 rounds in the bulls eye within 7 seconds of presentation, and if I were a violent person I could use a hammer or a knife or a ball bat or a car for a tool to get the job done. Banning guns would only put us in a position to be vulnerable to those who don’t believe in law and order in the first place. A gun in a properly trained hand is better than 10 cops on the phone, and having one available and not needing it is much better than not having one when it is needed.

There is an excellent way to solve this type of problem.

Simply require ALL adults to carry a weapon. I seriously doubt that Loughner or any other nut would even consider pulling a gun in this type of situation when he KNOWS that every other person standing there has one too.

I all for that.

What about situations like “suicide by cop?” Just act crazy and let the neighbors knock ‘em off.

That doesn’t sound like pro-life to me.

Rob

It would however be Darwinian evolution that the left so seems to love.

That would be too simple .45. It would not only fit with all the police and federal statistics, even international statististics, which UNIVERSALLY show that more gun-control equals more violent crime, fewer gun-control laws ALWAYS result in less such crime, but it would actually SOLVE the problem.

By what stretch of anyone’s deluded imagination do they think politicians want to actually solve problems? Problems are what give them a platform to get them elected. The drug problem, the poverty problem, the education problem, the race problem, the teen sex problem, the homosexual problem, the religion in schools problem, the obesity problem, the CO2 problem, the medical care problem, the insurance problem, the unsafe foods problem… There seems to be no end to problems which Big Government gets itself elected to tax us for solving for us.

Not that we asked them to, but what do WE know? We’re just ignorant subjects who keep causing all these problems.

By any measure, there’s a corollary to the clear statistics showing that more gun-control equals more violent crime: The bigger government gets, the more problems we have for them to “solve” for us. (On our dime, of course.)

And your solution for health control is “Let ‘em die.”

Unless they can pay, of course.

And when all the wealth gets transfered to all the corrupt healt care companies then what will you do?

Rob

Robert Smith says:
“And your solution for health control is “Let ‘em die.”
Unless they can pay, of course.”

And your solution is to put a gun to MY head to make ME pay for them? Nice guy. How about YOU pay for them.

Robert Smith: “And when all the wealth gets transfered to all the corrupt healt care companies then what will you do?”

Stop being a victim Rob. Start your own Health Care Company that is not corrupt cause you own it. Americans are an honest lot and will come to you because you are not corrupt.

Oops. Government regulations. Bummer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sSg0xjzIec

Average Joe, I agree with you and .45 also, and Rob, their gonna kill us anyways, no matter what we do. you need to read at least some of Obama’s health care bill.

Hey, Robert?

“Robert Smith says:
January 13, 2011 at 1:35 pm
And your solution for health control is “Let ‘em die.”

Unless they can pay, of course.

And when all the wealth gets transfered to all the corrupt healt care companies then what will you do?

Rob”

Well, obviously I, here, did not say anything of the kind, but at the risk of starting off sounding like one of our useless, clueless politicians? This is a complex issue.

So, let’s simplify.

To begin with, you know what makes it so complex? It’s a web of layered lies. Health care is actually sick care. Most of what makes people sick? Diet, and health care. Who controls diet and healthcare? The federal government in the form of the FDA. Which is funded by Big Agri and Big Pharma, feeding us expensive deadly foods and expensive deadly drugs to counteract the deadly food and drugs which make us expensively sick (that is not oversimplification, it’s a comprehensive conclusion).

So, you’re talking about sick care, not health care. That cuts through some chaff. Funded by Big Government in a circle jerk of pain and death, which is one of the most lucrative shell games on the planet. At the higher levels there are those who would love to see most of us useless eaters dead (Kissinger said that). We peons, we’re inherently dangerous organisms sucking life out of the economy and the planet (and who set that up?).

On the second-up tier, minion level, you have those who just want the money from us (unaware that on the next higher level, They CREATE the fiat monopoly money, it’s little more than a tool for them, a means to control the minions–God forbid the peons should get their hands on enough actual wealth to fend for themselves, with seeds, land, water, tools, and…whoah, weapons). They get this notion in their heads they are “free” and, damn it all! Here we go again.

Folks, currently we’re touch football, you and me, most expecting our coaches and referrees (elected politicians and the known establishment) to make everyone play by the agreed upon rules. “Play ball!” But nice.

The people generally screwing us over are the college boys, creaming us on the field, better trained for tackle, bigger, stronger, better protected, better financed, with the referees in their sweaty pockets. A no-win situation for the common man, forced by law to play “touch” only while getting smashed flat.

The ones creaming THEM (stomping among the collegiates) on the field at will, are the Pros. On steroids, with mucho-dinero contracts so big it’s not really about the money. It’s about control, and ownership of the field. And that’s about as far as we can see from down here, us touch junior-high footballers, required by law to play by the rules.

Are there higher levels? Who, one might imagine, owns the owners?

Don’t be silly, we’ve seen about as far as They can go. Everything’s up to date in Kansas City. How could there be any more Higher-Ups?

Right, Bobert, you just go right on thinkin’. Wondering, “Who are these guys?” Until it’s too late for you or anyone to find out.

Big government busies themselves with creating most of these problems so they’ll have something to talk about and justify their plush positions and distract the public from noticing what they are really working for, socialism. They are truly ‘Weapons of Mass Distraction!’ It wouldn’t surprise me if the government was paying the terrorists to cause events in order to scare the sheeple into compliance with their NWO program. Socialism doesn’t work because they will eventually run out of other peoples money; it has been tried before, and always failed. The socialists always attack their political enemies by being offensive and smearing those who disagree with them. If they keep repeating their lies long enough they will become accepted as the truth. If they win, we will all work for the government elites, with no incentive to better ourselves, or work harder to get ahead. That’s not a pleasant picture in my book.

45caliber (1911 is my choice too!!)

“…Simply require ALL adults to carry a weapon. I seriously doubt that Loughner or any other nut would even consider pulling a gun…”
I am not a shrink but I have a common sense idea that Loughner would have followed through with his plans irrispective of who was armed around him. His, like most others committing this type hanus crime, are dilusional statements from a twisted mind.

Your idea has merit only if we require defense training to go along with the armed carry requirement. Loughner would have squeezed off maybe one or two rounds before he was brought down by a trained bystander.

Isreal has NO gun laws, yet one of the lowest civilian crime rates in the free world. Isreal requires training of all citizens which keeps any would-be idiots at bay.

URW says: “Isreal has NO gun laws, yet one of the lowest civilian crime rates in the free world. Isreal requires training of all citizens which keeps any would-be idiots at bay.”

I understnd that Switzerland has a similar system.

Rob

We used to have training of all citizens in the US too. Crime rates were lower then. Go Figure.

Thanks URW. We should treat guns exactly as we do cars. If you can afford one, have been trained in the use of one, and can pass the written and proficiency exams, welcome the grown up world of carrying a gun.

One key difference between cars and guns, though. You screw up, you may not just get a fine or a hike in your insurance rates, or community service. The community might, in fact, be having a service for you.

Average Joe Patriot says:
“One key difference between cars and guns, though. You screw up, you may not just get a fine or a hike in your insurance rates, or community service. The community might, in fact, be having a service for you.”

Quite right. You are MUCH more likely to be killed by someone (including yourself) screwing up their handling of a car than of a gun.

This is the totals for the 8 years combined from 2000-2007
———————————————————–
2000 – 2007, All Races, Both Sexes
All Ages
1 344,636 Unintentional MV Traffic
2 165,787 Unintentional Poisoning
3 143,744 Unintentional Fall
4 52,159 Unintentional Unspecified
5 45,999 Unintentional Suffocation
6 27,428 Unintentional Drowning
7 26,826 Unintentional Fire/burn
8 12,902 Unintentional Natural/ Environment
9 11,345 Unintentional Other Land Transport
10 11,323 Unintentional Other Spec., classifiable
11 10,129 Unintentional Other Transport
12 9,184 Unintentional Pedestrian, Other
13 8,204 Unintentional Other Spec., NECN
14 6,987 Unintentional Struck by or Against
15 5,763 Unintentional Firearm
16 5,565 Unintentional Machinery
17 1,695 Unintentional Pedal cyclist, Other
18 816 Unintentional Cut/pierce
19 90 Unintentional Overexertion
———————————————————-
you can duplicate this info at
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html#Advanced%20Options

I agree. If all those persons who are willing to carry concealed will just do so and learn to safely use and fire their arms much of the current unfounded fear would be found to be unwarranted. Our legislators would have protection from the people they are sworn to serve without additional burden upon the taxpayers. Of course, being concealed, no one would know if any or all persons present were armed and that IS a good thing. Should this rule be applied to ALL states and to DC, as well, we would ALL be safer (and freer).

If our legislators don’t like the above idea and think they need special protections then let them pay for it themselves, not burden the taxpayer, or they should resign and find a profession more suitable to their sensibilities.

It is unfortunate that the act of one irrational individual has been politicized in the manner that it has, with the “left” blaming the “right” and the “right” blaming the “left” and the “anti-gunners” desperately grabbing at the incident to support their own agenda. And the anti-free-speechers going after the “conservatives” when it is the “commie/socialists” who are the absolute worst of the lot. It now appears the the “Arizona shooter” was, according to one who had been his friend, not involved in politics, didn’t even watch the news, wasn’t of the “left” or “right”. He was just a “sick” individual.

BigIron writes:
“If all those persons who are willing to carry concealed will just do so and learn to safely use and fire their arms much of the current unfounded fear would be found to be unwarranted.”

Where the willing have been allowed to they have already proven the fears to be unwarranted. http://www.davekopel.com/2a/lawrev/shallissue.htm

Students in public, private and home schools, should have a two year requirement of civics. One of those years should be devoted to the study of the Constitution. They also should have a two year study in marksmanship. That way there would be 300 million Americans with expert marksmanship skills and experts on the constitution. This would solve so many problems in itself, including the 1 in a million nut that decides to pull a gun or any other weapon and use it with bad intentions.

Okie, quit it. You’re making too much sense. Get back into your time machine and go back to the late 1700′s or early 1800′s, where you apparently came from.

He can’t He was sent here from the past to save the future. It is, unfortunately, a one way trip.

Ikar,

Exceelent thoughts but impractical for the government to try and weed out mentally ill prospective gun owners as we have many wack-jobs within our 370 million population.

If laws remove the ability for one of these monsters to use a gun, they’ll just switch to a different weapon. Passenger jets killed over 3,000 in Manhatten on 09/11/2001 … not one shot was fired. Nitogen enriched fertilizer killed 168 people in Oaklahoma City on 04/19/1995 … again not one shot was fired. Had Loughner parked his Glock and used his truck as the weapon, he would have killed and injured far more than what was realized in Tuscan on 01/08/2011.

Why was there far less anti-gun rhetoric following the Fort Hood shooting as there is today. Over twice as many people were killed & injured at Fort Hood as were in Tuscan?

Can anyone explain why some of toughest ant-gun laws in the world found in Mexico do not stop daily mass murders?

Why is it Britian has a higher murder rate by firarms per capita than the U.S., yet their laws for well over 10 years have abolished private citizen ownership?

Do we even try and answer the age old question of illegal drugs and how well the laws to eliminate said drugs has not worked? Criminals will always be able to lay their hands on drugs, same is happening to guns and hi-cap magazines. Only the law abiding will adhere to any legislation…which does nothing for public safety.

jolly…best I ever heard!!!!!

and that is Not sarcasm!

very well written…great points…drugs are illegal and look at all the drugs in America.

ALL guns by Federal law have to be sold with the same paperwork, etc. Where you are in the US doesn’t make any difference.

The main difference in AZ is that people are allowed to carry openly without a permit. That is probably what you are thinking about. But as one friend commented to me once after he visited there, “It was startling to see the guns – but then I realized that any criminal would have to be an idiot to attempt anything with those around. I felt safer there than I do here.”

45, you are correct. To put it another way Arizona has the most lax STATE laws concerning guns and the carrying of them but they must still follow ALL federal law concerning firearms.

It also means that anyone can buy as many weapons as they want and sell them to someone else. The majority of guns found in Mexico are traced to Arizona so you do the math. 34,564 dead on that side of the border and it was 26,000 just 2 years ago. Praise the Lord for loose gun laws.

eddie47d, tell the truth…majority of guns found in Mexico are traced to Arizona…That, my friend, is a fabrication of mass proportions.

Why the Lies About Guns Going to Mexico?
by Rep. Tom Tancredo 04/30/2009
A spokesman for the ATFE, Matt Allen, has now “clarified” the number and admitted that only 17% of the weapons found at crime scenes in Mexico have been traced to the U.S.

It is obvious that Obama’s teams at the Justice Department and the State Department are exploiting the violence in Mexico to justify more restrictions on gun ownership by Americans. The Obama crew’s hostility to the Second Amendment has been clear for months. This may be yet another example of Rahm Emanuel’s maxim: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

Mexico needs to face its own demons, beginning with the corruption within its law enforcement agencies and at its ports of entry. The U.S. can help in many ways, such as enhancing our own border security. But adding more restrictions on the ownership of guns by law-abiding Americans will not help Mexico.
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=12434

I live in Ariz. and everyone I know carries, nobody cares or questions it, it’s no big deal. we look out for each other, even the cops. they respect our rights. we have to abide by the Fed. laws, but the “Gun” shows are different because most don’t ask for ID,but they tell me the Feds. are around so watch out, which piss people off like eddie47 who insists that all the illegal firearms come from Ariz. which is a ignorant statement considering that the “Drug Cartels” have enough money to buy any weapon they want, from any Arms Dealer they want worldwide. a good part of the weapons come from deserting Mexican Military who joined the Cartels for the money. if we let them disarm us we deserve what we get.

Also if you believe that eddie47, you would tell your president to secure our borders. do you live in N.Y., N.J., Delaware,or Cuba?

No change there in the 4 border states and Arizona is the top dog in gun sales to Mexico. Tom Tancredo loves to exaggerate himself and will play politics to achieve his anti-immigration stance. You have to come up with someone who is more believable.

eddie47d, more believable that you? Easy. Keep that head buried, it’s only sand that’s in your ears.

Again…provide some proof that Tancredo is a liar…I suppose the ATF is lying also. Matter of fact if you can back up your claim, I’ll crush it…but I won’t hold my breath waiting.

Kristen Rand, the Legislative Director of the Violence Policy Center, repeated the unsubstantiated claim that 90% of guns seized from the cartels come from the U.S., blamed America’s gun laws and called for BATFE to use the broadest possible interpretation of the “sporting purposes” test to ban a much larger class of semi-auto rifles.

But the BATFE has only stated that 90% of the guns traced are from America. BATFE only “traces a fraction of the guns seized”; those firearms are not selected randomly, but are likely selected because they are the guns most likely to have come from the U.S. Trace data reveals nothing about the large number of guns that are not traced.

Senator Dianne Feinstein used this forum to express her long opposition to American gun owners’ rights. During her remarks, she repeated the claim that 90% of seized guns come from America, and also stated that there are over 2,000 guns smuggled into Mexico from the U.S. each day.

Feinstein even tried to elicit support for that number from a representative from the BATFE. But when he responded that the number was much lower, most likely in the hundreds, Senator Feinstein was clearly unhappy that he would not endorse her anti-gun soundbite.

Additionally, three representatives of U.S. law enforcement, one each from BATFE, Drug Enforcement Agency, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, made it clear that the increase in violence in Mexico is being misinterpreted by the media and politicians.

The claim that “90 percent” of Mexican “crime guns” originate in the U.S. is false. It does not relate to all firearms the Mexicans have seized from the cartels, but only to guns that the Mexicans have asked the BATFE to trace. As the Government Accountability Office has explained, “In 2008, of the almost 30,000 firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only around 7,200, or approximately a quarter, were submitted to [BATFE] for tracing.” The 6,700 guns that BATFE traced to the U.S. accounted for about 90 percent of the 7,200 guns that BATFE traced, but only 22 percent of all firearms seized by the Mexican government
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5181

eddie is sure hooked on this lie. This is the 4th or 5th time I have seen him blown out of the water over it and he still posts this manure.

The Weapons of Mass Distraction (government) are not too worried about the guns going into Mexico. What they are after is voters, and that is why they are super lax on immigration control. The Dimocrats are the party of giving, and giving, and more giving. All the illegals are given benefits even US Citizens don’t get, so they will always vote for the party of giving. Why would they bite the hand that feeds them? That is how the Dimocrats win elections, by illegal voters, community organizers, and SEIC fixed voting machines. These illegals are not really immigrants, they are felons; immigrants come in through proper channels without breaking the law and adjust to our laws and culture, and become productive US Citizens. All the illegals coming in are not Mexicans either. We are allowing radical Muslims in also, to set up their sleeper cells. This Tsunami of human flesh is going to do irreparable damage to this country if we don’t get this hole plugged up.

The truth is, most of the guns siezed are M-16′s. M-16′s are not sold by Arizona dealers or any other state dealer. They are supplied by our Federal govt to the Mexican govt. The army is on the take with the cartels. Members of the Mexican army play both sides of the fence. They steal the M-16′s our govt provides and sells them to the cartel. The politicians don’t tell us that. Also when feinstein stated 2,000 guns are being smuggled every day over the border, I would like to know where she is getting this outlandish fabrication. If that were true, that means we are catching them. The other thing is, this is not about crime. It is about govt control of the people. period. It is obvious that where there is gun control, there is way more crime. Where there is no gun control, there is less crime.

I’m trained and licensed to carry concealed in several states, including AZ. I travel there, have family in Tucson, in fact. It’s gotten so I hesitate to go anywhere I’m NOT allowed to carry. Perhaps I’ve simply gotten cautious in my old age.

Regarding AZ’s lax gun laws, you have a pro-2nd Amendment congresswoman doing a meet-and-greet in a Safeway parking lot in wild-and-wooly ol’ Tucson (apparently failing to notify the local constabulary of said event, who knows why). Two or three dozen of her constituents show up. Where in the hell were all the guns? Any one of which could have stopped this classically-troubled Jewish-nerd whack-job cold before he managed to empty 30 rounds into the crowd? Where were the guns? Just one hip pocket or purse derringer would have done the trick at the ranges involved. Where was that armed citizen? Where was THAT gun, the one that would have made all the difference?

Now we have politicians and pundits like Ed Shultz calling for fewer guns in the hands of the populace (most of these people would prefer to see NO guns in the hands of the populace, few dare say it). They want a 1000 ft. gun-free zone around all federal political events. But they want stricter controls because a tragic shooting occurred in which there clearly were not ENOUGH guns in the hands of the populace.

Explain this to me like I’m six.

“Jewish-nerd whack-job cold before he managed to empty 30 rounds into the crowd?”

Not true, Joe.

Quit making stuff up.

Rob

What, you feel the “nerd” part was gratuitous? Who else would list Alice in Wonderland and Meno, both, on his preferred reading list?

You unfairly demean all us “nerds” by your derogatory association with this character. He was indeed a “sick” individual but I would not call him a “nerd” at all; he was just “isolated” from society and that is not a very good thing because it makes it difficult to recognize that he IS “sick”. I don’t know the number of shots fired but the standard Glock 9mm mags only hold about 17rds or less, not 30rds; however, an extended mag holding 30rds is available.

BigIron: You’re correct, I assume (don’t own one of those 1911s, respect them), but an extended Browning mag is exactly what he had and used, according to victims and witnesses, and reportedly is what he was trying to reload with–yet another 30-round mag. And is also just what our fearful leaders are trying, again, to push a ban on, large cap weapons. In fact, several are pushing for a ban on ALL semi-autos (which, as you and most of us know, the MSM and pols apparently insist on mistakenly calling “automatic weapons,” like Russian-designed AKs, Uzis and Thompsons).

But, I was being facetious in my earlier post. Robert Smith was possibly attacking my use of the term “Jewish-nerd.” We certainly can all agree Loughner was a “whack-job.” Smith was also very possibly, tentatively, putting his toe in the anti-Semitism pool, perhaps to see who jumped on board. Or rather on me. The usual crap.

Fact is, although I don’t initially hail from the Eastern seaboard, I’ve lived and worked there, and the “Jewish-nerd among Goys” is such a commonly accepted stereotype that they write whole books about it, make movies, etc. Latest case in point: “The Social Network.” It’s about a nerdy Jewish kid at Harvard, who makes a billion inventing Facebook. The whole characterization key to the book, the movie, the plot, is that the kid is a nerdy Jewish kid. The movie got an 8.2 out of ten stars on IMDB.com, hence I feel I should be allowed to reference this tired but ever popular meme about the Jewish nerd kid. No, too anti-Semitic? Well…the book was by Ben Mezrich, the screenplay by Aaron Sorkin, director was David Fincher, stars Jesse Eisenberg playing Mark Zuckerman, and it was produced and financed by…but, you get it.

Robert Smith claims I’m making this up but, I don’t have to, it’s all over the Internet.

There are several problems I have with this. One is that he told me I was making stuff up. Actually, no. I’m plagiarizing from the Internet where this info/speculation is all over the place. That Giffords is Jewish is on TV. That Loughner is or may be Jewish (the lineage confers maternally, his mother’s reportedly Jewish), or that such info/speculation even exists in the known universe? Dead silence from “our” MSM (who’ve tied him to everything from right wing patriot militia leanings to liberal pot-enraged violence and running stop signs–sheesh). Except in Mother Jones who said his best friend described him as Jewish, mother’s side. But, Jews commit heinous financial crimes, not mayhem. Right? Can’t speculate on THAT on Zionist-owned TV, the sole news source of so many naysayers here.

I’m willing to bet Robert Smith would not have tried to call me on anything here, had the perp’s name been Abu Hassan and I called him a raghead whack-job.

A couple more reasons I’m an unlikely target for accusations of anti-Semiticism (aside from the fact that all Arabs are actual Semites, few Jews are):

Abu Hassan (whoever he is, I wish him well) IS Semitic.

Most Jews are not.

I’m part Jew, from my English grandmother but I’m guessing Khazarian, which legitimately and maternally, I suppose makes me as much or more a Jew as Obama is Negroid. Or am I not allowed to say that nowadays, either? Africa is the only continent in the world we all get to identify by…skin color? Absurd.

So. Much in the same way our double standards make it okay to use the “N” word, but ONLY if you’re a black American? I am (not only classifiable as a nerd, which I have so been and proud of it), I’m “allowed” to say Jew-nerd. I don’t say it often (you’ve read it here first), but when it applies, screw it, it does indeed apply. You can’t make this stuff up.

Loughnerd was apparently a closed-up whack-job waiting to happen. If he’d been denied a gun, like he was denied admission into the army, he might as easily have stolen a cement truck and done worse damage.

And the pols and the pundits seem to love him for it. And all you’re going to get from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, et al, is the Mein Kampf-Communist Manifesto side because, most likely, the truth would set you…freaky.

I’m done now. I feel better.

Someone has been lying for years. Who?

On one hand media owners say they can influence people to buy products. An entire industry is based upon that notion. Billions of dollars change hands for advertizing to influence people.

Then the likes of Rush etc. say their blatherings doin’t influence people.

Who is lying?

Rob

A few years ago Mush Dimbaugh said: “That media watch group FAIR studied 4,000 hours of my transcripts and found jsut 45 little errors”

I got the report

45 Try over 10,000 LIES(intent To Deceive)
This was before he became a crazed druggie.

When Mush had a 30 min TV program I taped while off whuppin up on Tiger. I reviwed each day. I never once watched 30 minutes I could not locate one usually several lies. The last time he was on TV the first four things he said were “blatant” lies.

He has mastered Techniques of Deception like Karl Goebbels Rove.

Don’t you have something better to do? Like take a nap!

Al Franken covered Rush well.

Rob

RS, Al Franken’s seat was bought and paid for by SOROS!__still laughing Pharaoh…..

Everybody, Rob. Everybody is lying. You’ve now crossed over into the new world. Terra incognita, the twilight zone. You’ve stepped in…politics. Wipe your feet before going into anyplace respectable, now.

why don’t you compare D.C.gun laws and gun deaths to Tucson’s gun laws and gun deaths

OR, New York OR Chicago….very restrictive and very crime ridden.
Definately proves the saying that when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns…….
Think about this: If your going to commit a crime would you really give a chit if you break a gun law in the process?
Besides that most criminals actually believe they will not get caught!
So, the law abiding citizen gets the shaft!

Carole:

I don’t know where you are getting your stories from but it sure isn’t here – or any media I know about. Possibly Huffington or KOS?

In any case, this shooter was a flaming liberal. He was upset at Gifford because he had asked a stupid question that she didn’t understand and couldn’t answer. Read some of Loughner’s posts and you can see why. No one can understand those. So he was influenced by the radio conservatives? The conservative GOP members are resigning in fear? I hardly think so.

45 asks: “So he was influenced by the radio conservatives?”

The billion dollar media empires are built on advertizing that influences people to buy things.

The extreme right claims it doesn’t influence people.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Rob

I don’t listen to them and I’m conservative. He was a flaming liberal. Why should he want to listen to them and be influenced by them?

A 1000 foot buffer, don’t be absurd; if that’s the best the “turkey” can come up with then let him resign and find a profession more in keeping with their sensibilities. They could pass a law allowing ALL persons to carry concealed in ALL states and DC and start carrying. Even if he didn’t personally choose to carry there would then likely be others in the crowd to protect him. The taxpayers should not carry any additional burden for the protection of legislators; if they feel the need for protection let them pay for their own from their own funds, not the public’s.

Carole, where did you get that info. on Ariz.? Alaska, Ariz., Vermont, all have the same laws, what’s wrong with our right to protect ourselves?

Who? Which newly elected officials are resigning? Name names. Officials all over the world are targets. they know this. If these people are afraid, then they don’t deserve the office they were elected to anyway. When you are a politician, you automatically become more of a target. WE ARE ALL TARGETS. Crime is rampant. Why. Because of left wing laws coddeling criminals. The govt wants the crime. They want us to be sheep. It has nothing to do with crime. It has to do with Govt power over the people. Rember Hitler, Stalin, etc.

Yes, and add to that the no carry near schools, govt. buildings, bar rooms, 500 feet of a house, 300 feet of a road, etc., etc.,etc. kinda cuts down where one could actually carry a firearm.

Heck, if you buy one you may not be able to legally take it home if the politicians keep going with their nonsense.

I still cannot figure out why politicians cannot understand what SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED means!

I have a better idea, everybody carry openly and dare some punk, insane or not, to draw down—–

There’s that violence thing from the right again.

Rob

Actually the violence was from the punk. The right was being nice by warning the punk that they are not sheep.

Been there, dunnit. Won. Without having to pull.

Been in worse.

No one has ever been hurt. They understand they’ve been fortunate.

That last was in reference to: “I have a better idea, everybody carry openly and dare some punk, insane or not, to draw down—–”

I’m on board widdat, friend. Frankly, I don’t want to have to play Batman for every slob sister who can’t handle his or her own confrontations. I’ll do it. You’ll do it. When there’s no cop around. But why should this be OUR job.

Learn to take care of yourselves again, folks. Learn and confront, learn TO confront. Our nation’s populace used to do this as a matter of course.

What the hell happened to you all? (Not most here, just some, here.)

45caliber says:
January 13, 2011 at 9:37 am
What is even funnier to me is that the 1000 ft. mark is only 333 yards or so. And I hunt at distances further than that. Any good rifle shot can easily be outside that distance and still hit accurately. Not that anyone would.

It is illegal to shoot people like Loughner did – but he did it anyway. Does some politician seriously believe that a prospective murderer is going to worry about breaking the law by carrying a hidden weapon within that distance?*****************
*****************************
45caliber,,,,,It’s just another ploy to slowly but surely try to disarm the citizens,,,,’Anyone with a bit of wit would realize that any good snapper could take their target out from a much further distance if they wanted to.

Mick:

It’s like the 1000 foot clearance around a school yard that was shot down by the SCOTUS. If a politician is walking down a street, everyone on that street (and several other streets around the policitian) would be in violation of the law by having a gun in their houses. Even if you didn’t live near the politician. It would make it manditory that every citizen would have to have some way of knowing where the politician was at all times and then take their guns and run the other way if he came close.

45caliber

You’re right,,,It’s a pure shame that the people working for us are actually working against us by trying to take the rights that made America so great from us and little by little they’re doing it by any mean at their disposition even if it means using tragedies….Talk about morally deprived.

Oh, I see. Instead of being ‘want to be” heroes, we should be unarmed victims. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Ridiculous. Many of us never even step out the door unarmed. I’ve carried, legally, on and off for decades, depending on the laws of whatever state I lived in. If it’s legal for me to carry, I carry. So I don’t forget anything on my long trip into down, I have what I call my 4Ws mantra the moment I pick up my car keys: wallet, wad (money), wireless (cellphone), weapon. Keys=Wallet, wad, wireless, weapon.

Most of us have had the experience of getting all the way to the store and realizing we forgot our wallet or cash, or getting all the way to work and discovering we left our cell phone at the house. If you’re legal to own and carry a handgun, imagine your chagrin if you walked into a shooting situation and…oops, sorry. Not today thank you. I left my gun at home.

What earthly good will a handgun do you in your home if you don’t happen to in your home when trouble strikes? I would venture a guess that several people in the Safeway last Saturday had guns…in their homes.

eddie47d… You must not be a supporter of concealed carry? I support it. I haven’t got the handgun I want yet, but I will eventually. I will then apply for my concealed/carry permit. You can be anywhere and have a whacko threaten you or your family. We have already seen it happen in churches! Schools! Colleges! Why shouldn’t we be able to protect ourselves?

“The only reason anyone would take a weapon to a political rally or even a football game would be to do harm.” Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about and I’m quite sure you have all kinds of back-up to substantiate your brash comment.

eddie is the same guy that said the NRA, GOA and the 2nd Amendement Foundations use “intimidation” tactics on their members and political candidates to influrnce the outcome of elections. Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me…eddie.

Facts are facts Jeff, not toys for you to play with.

eddie…then stop playing and post some real facts, not your imaginary kind.

As I said Jeff I’ve read the same magazines you have so I know what get’s said.

Eddie, facts are indeed facts. NOT toys for you to play with, any more than are handguns). ALL statistics (and my personal experience over three and a half decades) indicate that a citizen carrying a weapon is by far safer than one who is not, yet by far more suspect. Still, a society carrying is safer than one which is not.*

You can’t back up from the facts, but you can concede your position, sir.

DC, Chicago, wherever we’ve seen reversals in draconian anti-gun laws, we’ve seen dramatic reversals in the violent crime rate. Refute it with proofs and references, or puleeze won’t you idiots shut the f-word up? Facts, statistics, open debate.

*If you saw a print of President Jefferson conversing with a barefoot youngster with a squirrel gun on his shoulder in the streets of our future capitol, you’d think it quaint, folksy. But that used to really happen. People could just walk up to and talk with their leaders.

Nowadays, old Thom Jeff would be rushed away into a helicopter by insistent bodyguards, the surrounded kid would be threatened at gunpoint from numerous directions and shackled, his gun confiscated, everyone he ever knew interrogated, he would be incarcerated and grilled and psychologically plumbed down to his wet dreams, lawyers would arrive in droves, and it would be on national news for weeks.

“How did you FEEL when you saw your child arrested on television?”

What’s happened to us? What’s happened to our country?

What, one wonders, are they keeping from us, now that we’re so free?

GOA serves several purposes; sending out email alerts to gun rights activists, supporting laws that roll back gun control, supporting candidates that have a history of supporting gun rights, defending gun owners that have been railroaded by gun hating judges and juries that don’t know what their rights are, and the do not negotiate away our gun rights like the NRA, which I belonged to for years.

Eddie47d writes:
“The only reason anyone would take a weapon to a political rally or even a football game would be to do harm.”

Since I am the weapon your comment makes no sense. Perhaps you were referring to one of the tools I would use to defend the people there from an attacker. There is your 2nd reason and it is the only LAWFUL reason of the 2.

Don’t be playing mind games with me sweetie it won’t work.

What mind?

Exactly right, Vicki. YOU ARE THE WEAPON.

Which makes it interesting to answer truthfully when asked if I have any weapons in the car and I am standing outside the car . I answered no unless he considered a 3 cell maglite to be a weapon thus answering truthfully and acknowledging his probable poor training on what constitutes a weapon at the same time.

Does this guy really think that if a 1,000 foot law, or large magazine law were in effect it would stop him? He planned this for years. Evidently this man has never dealt with a criminal face to face. They care nothing about laws. Their attitude is to break them. All the bleeding hearts need to take criminals into their homes. In about a few hours they will be begging for these people to be removed. If he had no access to a gun, he would have figured out how to make a bomb and just drive it in. More killed. Remember Australia? They made guns illegal and, guess what, VIOLENT crime went up hundreds of percent.Including murder.

I have a simple solution. Let’s outlaw every other tool that kills MORE than guns first. Knives kill more people every year than guns. Cars kill more people, alcohol kills more people, drugs kill more people. Doctors, yes Doctors kill more people a year than guns in this country. Oh yes, I forgot. POLITICIANS kill more people every year than all the rest put together. So let’s get rid of all these problems first. Then work on the guns. Why is it liberals have no common sense???????????

Dogma-Free says “No guns = no more shooting deaths.” I suppose you think the cops will stop a shooting by a criminal before it can happen or that violent crims have not dropped dramatically since the assaul weapons ban expired. Letting law-abiding citizens carry guns reduces the rate at which criminals are carrying guns… Criminals tend to avoid activities that are risky to them. Hey Dog, tell me how to stop the bad guys who don’t comply with the no guns rules? Now lets see, whats wrong with that message?

Albany, Georgia: Pistol-packin’ manager answers robber with hot lead
From WALB of January 6, 2011:
A woman known for carrying the notorious Taurus Judge had occasion to use it when two armed men attacked her. The woman was beginning work Thursday morning at a mobile home park office when the men accosted her. The attacker’s bullet grazed her, but she is confident the shotgun blast from her handgun struck the man. Authorities are looking for the suspects.

Miami Springs, Florida: Man shoots attacking dog
From WSVN of January 8, 2011:
An armed citizen came to the rescue of a woman and her dog on Friday. The woman was walking her Dalmatian when another dog broke loose and attacked her. A nearby neighbor heard the screams, grabbed a handgun and ran to the rescue. When he saw the dog biting the woman’s arm, he shot and killed the attacking dog.

Charleston, West Virginia: Woman says she shot man in self defense
From the Charleston Gazette of January 7, 2011:
A woman arrived to pick up her mother after her mother reported having a fight with her boyfriend. Upon arrival, the boyfriend became angry and struggled with the daughter. The woman stated the man was choking her on the ground when she saw a gun on the floor and used it to shoot her attacker. The woman was not arrested.

Liberty City, Florida: City Survey Crew Opens Fire on Would-Be Robbers
From NBC-Miami of January 11, 2011:

A group of armed thieves attempted to steal equipment from a Habitat for Humanity survey crew. They didn’t realize one of them was armed. One of the surveyors confronted the group, exchanging shots with the thieves and striking one in the leg. The property was recovered.

Pensacola, Florida: Robbery Victim Fatally Shoots His Attacker
From WKRG of January 10, 2011:

Three armed robbers approached a man on the streets of Pensacola, demanding money. The would-be victim drew a concealed handgun and fired, killing one of the robbers. The other two were apprehended by police and charged with the murder of their comrade. If a person committing a felony is killed, current law allows for charging the accomplice with the death.

http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/

Good post and link JeffH, but you’re waisting your time with eddie.

Al, I know, but never a waste to correct his mis-information.

Good point Jeff, never thought of it that way.

The bed wetting Liberal News media doesn’t report the many many episodes of people defending their own lives with a gun…it doesn’t suit their agenda.

Dogma-Free says:
“No guns = no more shooting deaths.
And who said math was hard…?”

Math may not be hard but critical thinking appears to be.
No guns != no more deaths. No guns = FEWER people able to prevent deaths from any attacker.

you know, for someone who claims to be “Dogma-Free” he sure has a dogma laden agenda to push.

The primary function of the US Govt is to protect its citizens. Not educate them. If we were involved in a 3rd world war, where the enemy was on our soil, which is becoming a real possiblity in the near future. Do you really think that school would be in session? The reason we have never been invaded is because we DO have guns and ammo. Also what the newsmedia doesn’t report are the automatic weapons,hand grenades, rocket launchers, cash, bullet proof vests, para military uniforms, coming into the USA FROM MEXICO that were siezed. That would be a hush hush subject that doesn’t go along with liberal news.