Gun Grabbers Blame The AR-15: Oops! No AR-15 Found, But They Hate Them Anyway

0 Shares
162289659

Gun barrels were still warm and smoking and blood was still flowing from the bullet wounds inflicted by Aaron Alexis at the Washington Navy Yard when the gun grabbers began calling once again for a ban on scary-looking guns. One problem: No scary-looking AR-15 was used in the shooting.

The guns recovered, according to CNN yesterday, were a Remington Model 870 shotgun and two handguns. The shotgun belonged to Alexis. There was no clear indication where the handguns came from. They “may” have come from base guards.

But that didn’t stop CNN, the rest of the mainstream media or other gun grabbers from pointing out (as they always do, truth be damned) that Alexis could have used one, if he’d chosen to, because anybody can buy one at any time without a background check and, well, AR-15s have been used before and, well, “Don’t they look scary?” And, after all, Adam Lanza and James Holmes and some other guys have used them to kill a bunch of people so President Barack Obama should just issue some executive orders and Congress had to get busy banning scary-looking guns, if not guns in general. And it all has to happen yesterday because, well, people are getting killed, but don’t look in the dumpster for the bodies of all the aborted babies because they don’t count anyway.

Never mind that guns are already banned in Washington, D.C., and on the grounds of the Navy Yard, which is why Alexis was able to kill 12 and injure 14 before he died. And never mind that he probably shouldn’t have been on the Navy Yard to begin with, given his previous run-ins with law enforcement and the fact that he was being treated for “a host of serious mental issues, including paranoia” and “had been hearing voices in his head.” And never mind that that means he was likely on some type of SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) medication, which is commonly prescribed for people suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which Alexis had previously claimed.

In fact, the mental disorder and medications (and possibly violent video games), not the weapon, seem to be the common denominators in mass shootings. Go here to see what I mean.

Meanwhile, the gun grabbers are in full shriek and attempting once again to disarm Americans even as Obama is wide open arming al-Qaida terrorists in Syria with the military variant of the same AR-15 — along with a lot of other weapons Americans can’t legally own, because Americans can’t be trusted with them.

But there’s no mention of looking into the pharmaceuticals Alexis, Lanza and Holmes, et al., were on. No MSM organization can be bothered by trivial details like that. Those are hard questions.

And there are never any questions about whether there’s a causal relationship between mass shooters and an obsession over violent video games. More hard questions.

And what about the second shooter? Why does there always seem to be a second shooter in these instances who disappears down the memory hole?

And why does it always seem The Associated Press or some other “news organization” has the story before it actually happens?

apscreenshot0917

These questions aren’t asked because these things don’t fit the narrative that gun grabbers are pushing. Nor does the fact that in the past 30 years, mass killings have accounted for less than .10 percent of all murders, according to the FBI. Even anti-gun Bloomberg had to admit that.

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Liberty One

    Did I read somewhere that there were also “drills” that were coducted a month earlier in response to a shooting at the Navy base?

  • vicki

    IF we were to actually honor the 2nd amendment and eliminate gun free zones these mass shootings would not be able to happen no matter what the state of mind of the shooter. The intended victims would deal with the problem.

    And as a plus, terrorist attacks like 9/11 would have ended like this:
    http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/64515.jpg

    • Nadzieja Batki

      The populace should arm itself and the government should not interfere unless it is afraid of its own people. The fines and taxes should be on the people who refuse to provide for their own protection.

      • vicki

        That is what the government is doing with obamacare so there is precedent :).

  • YourNameHere

    They may make less than 0.10% of the murders but they make up 90% of the stories.

    And it’s perception that counts to sheeples not facts. They cannot be bothered with facts, they have reality TV shows to deal with.

    Why is America so great? Because no one has been able to decipher the meaning of this word. But someone has. They have discovered it is a play on the words A-MIRACLE (which phonetically sounds like “America”.)

    It is proof that God gave America (A Miracle) to us. That is why we are and should be exceptional! America is a A-Miracle.

    • wally56

      America is evil,not a miracle!

      • Average_Joe56

        Hey wally, Delta is ready when you are…..feel free to move about….another country.

      • Mole Johnson

        I believe you are a threat to democracy, just like “Oweasel”

        • vicki

          I have no interest in a “tyranny of the majority” either. Btw America is a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

          • Vigilant

            Agreed, but sadly I can only use the past tense now.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Who told you that LIE that you lapped up like a dog laps up his own vomit?

      • vicki

        America is evil ….. to tyrants. The current administration is not representative of America. Well known tyrants seem to like it though.

      • Vis Fac

        Liberalism is evil not America Liberalism says it is OK to kill 1.2 million babies each year. Liberalism sanctions queers transvestites and lesbians and all their amoral behavior. Liberalism sanctions queer marriages indolence and sloth. This is not America this is liberal one dimensional idiot-ology!!!

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est
        Semper-Fi

      • Jana

        It was till people like you got a hold of her.

    • peter

      Are you serious? Who exactly is the someone that deciphered the word?
      Would that be John Kerry maybe?

      • YourNameHere

        The meaning came to me yesterday.

        It bothered me all my life that “America” could not be defined after reading about in a church material that identified who Manasseh and Ephraim was from the “tribes”.

        Not even the church could define it. Only that it may have come from an explorer named Amerigo Vespucci and recently someone said it is a South American word (I forgot what it was for) but I didn’t buy any of it.

        It did not make sense to me that if God gave us this country the name would have significance. And I think that is what the meaning is. A-Miracle!

        God-made, God-defined, God-given!

  • Alex

    Aaron Alexis—mentally deranged with a criminal record—the perfect member of our “Well-Regulated Militia”…

    • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston
    • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston
    • TheOriginalDaveH

      I think Liberal Progressives, who have shown themselves to be thieves and generally dishonest, should be disarmed. Not all mentally damaged people are malicious, but all Liberal Progressives are thieves.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      I think Liberal Progressives, who have shown themselves to be thieves and generally dishonest, should be disarmed. Not all mentally damaged people are malicious, but all Liberal Progressives are thieves.

      • vicki

        MOST mentally damaged people are not malicious, yet gun-grabbers would punish them too for the acts of a very few of their number.

        And since fear of inanimate objects is a mental disorder the actual number of mentally damaged people is likely FAR larger then the gun-grabbers realize.

    • justus brother

      Is that Alex Aaron Alexis or Aaron Alex Alexis? Just us wondering. (sigh)

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Apparently he is one of your own kind, Dem/Prog/Leftist, since he was not the perfect member of the well regulated militia because he could not or would not regulate himself.

  • TexRancher

    Those lying SOBs at WAPO didn’t miss a beat when they reported that Alexis used an AR-15 Assault Rifle. They lied first saying he used one and second by calling the AR-15 an ASSAULT Rifle because it is a semi-automatic version of the M-16 for sale to the civilian market and it was sanctioned by the federal government as such!
    The Gun-Hating LameStream media uses the term Assault specifically to inflame the public and by now, after such a long period of time, they know it and several other semi-automatics are NOT ASSAULT rifles.
    To listen to these socialist anti-2nd Amendment types, the Winchester 190 I bought for my son many years ago as a training weapon it an ASSAULT rifle because it is semi-automatic and holds more than ten rounds!
    Further, to legally buy and own a true ASSAULT rifle you must have a class III license.
    The “news media” has become Yellow Journalism at it’s worst and nothing more then the propaganda arm at the service of socialist/marxist bunch in government! Trouble is, the print media today doesn’t even make good toilet paper!

    • peter

      What the “news media” know about an assault rifle is highly dangerous in the first place. They probably would look at a Daisy BB gun as one. For those who would like to rid the world of guns please remember that guns do not kill anyone, it’s the people who do. If guns are not available the killings and murders will continue. How about car bombings and bombs in suitcases and hidden on a hijacker on aeroplanes etc.
      Prohibition never stopped folks from drinking anyways and all the rules in the world never prevented anything. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not covet etc.etc. Nobody takes any note of those laws so why should they take any note of the rules and laws made by the idiots who are ruining the Country anyway? The President has no regard for laws so?????????????????

      • TexRancher

        Look what happen in Australia after they enacted their total gun control: The homicides by firearms WENT UP!

      • Robbie

        Actually guns DO kill people. The mass murderer the other day blew away 12 Americans with a gun. Or did you miss that little detail?

        • vicki

          Apparently YOU missed the little detail. A mass murderer (a person) killed 12 Americans with a tool thus mis-USING the tool. Interesting that there are laws forbidding the mis-use of any tool in this way.

          That tool just happens to also be the best method for his victims to have defended themselves had they had one of their own with them.

          But thanks to President Clinton and a bunch of other politicians, they did not. :(

          Btw an experiment was run to see if guns could kill people. Here is the experiment and it’s result.

          http://personalliberty.com/2013/01/23/do-guns-kill-people-pistol-shotgun-assault-rifle-put-to-the-test/

          • Robbie

            We get the line about how guns don’t kill people – people kill people. But the sad fact remains that in all the recent mass shooting sprees the people doing the killing were using guns. We also know that people can murder other people using baseball bats, knives, or rocks. They can also try to strangle people. But the crucial fact – the beauty really – of guns is that guns can can kill a lot of people really fast. So let’s try to agree on the following new suggestion: People using guns kill lots of people really quickly. I think that aptly joins the two parts of the equation. You have called guns a “tool” which I feel is an attempt to be a bit misleading. It may be a tool but it’s not really a tool like a pencil sharpener or a can opener or a lawn sprinkler. A gun is a tool who’s ultimate purpose is to kill.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes:

            But the sad fact remains that in all the recent mass shooting sprees the people doing the killing were using guns.

            The really sad fact that remains is that in all the recent mass shooting sprees the people being shot (the victims) were NOT using guns because their government told them that it was a no no.

            END GUN FREE ZONES. Remember if it saves just one life…..

          • Robbie

            So best to arm everyone and place a guard at every door to every place where there are people. For god’s sake you can’t even protect military bases. Do you really think it’s feasable to protect every door to, say, every school or every day care or every train station or every movie theatre?

          • vicki

            False premise. We can protect places. We can use guards at every door too but it is sufficient to allow everyone in place to choose to be armed and dangerous as God and our forefathers intended.

            Btw how do you feel about the TSA plan to guard every train station and every shopping mall and every sporting event?

          • Robbie

            You write that “We can protect places.” That’s true. We can protect places but we can’t possibly protect all or even a small percentage of places. Easier to try to limit availability to high risk persons. How do I feel about the TSA plan (which happens to be the same plan as the NRA by the way)? I think it would be ineffectual but it would certainly eliminate the unemployment problem!

          • Vis Fac

            If people were allowed to be armed wherever they go there would be built in protection from the citizenry. Apparently this concept is difficult for you to grasp. My five year old grand daughter understands this concept and you being a supposed adult don’t? Man are toy pathetic.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • vicki

            You (vicki) write that “We can protect places.” That’s true. We can protect places but we can’t possible protect all or even a small percentage of places.

            Of course we can protect all the places. I even told you how. Allow “The People” to keep and bear arms just as our forefathers intended. That you refuse to accept the obvious truth of it does not give you the right to force me or us to live by your vision.

          • Robbie

            Simple background checks to weed out criminals or crazy people from having guns and/or a waiting periods of, say, a week before you can complete a gun purchase. If you can’t tolerate these minor safeguards then you certainly are an impatient person.

          • Jana

            No one disagrees with that Robbie. In fact this is already supposed to be in effect now, and I thought it was 10 days. I may be wrong on this though.

          • Robbie

            Many of the crazy right wingers and NRA types DO disagree. And people on this site with whom I’ve been debating. They want ZERO controls/safeguards/checks etc. ZERO. And how about in Iowa where a law was recently passed allowing the blind to buy and carry guns?

          • Jana

            I never heard about that. And, I do believe in the 10 day waiting period to be checked out. Actually I don’t know who on this site believes otherwise.

          • Jana

            That’s why if we allow those of us who know how to use a weapon for protection to carry, we could defend not only ourselves but cowards like you Robbie.

          • Vis Fac

            You know the Boston terrorists had the potential of killing thousands with two bombs. Anyone with basic knowledge of chemistry could have out done them People were lucky the bombers were inept bomb makers. I can make a bomb that can kill more people with household items easier than I can obtain a firearm to do the same job.

            The point I am making is the intent of the perpetrator. By your analogy there should be 300 Million plus murders because there are 300 million plus firearms all across America.

            I want to ask you if you know how many tools are used to kill people according to the FBI there were 1,888 Tools and 1,005 other objects Of the 8,583 gun related deaths a quarter were the result in Police shootings 6,115 involving hand guns and 323 using rifles shotguns and more than 3,000 using knives knives and other cutting instruments.

            Now compare these figures against planed parenthood’s sanctioned slaughter of 1,200,00,000 innocent children and you have nothing to harp on. These 1.2 Million preventable deaths are on you liberals’ hands ant you don’t even care. You and your fellow “baby killing liberals are nothing but HYPOCRITES.
            Go back to playing God with your abortions just don’t lecture me about your idea of keeping children (or anyone else for that matter) safe because your ideas have proven not to work worth a damn!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Vis Fac

            You know the Boston terrorists had the potential of killing thousands with two bombs. Anyone with basic knowledge of chemistry could have out done them People were lucky the bombers were inept bomb makers. I can make a bomb that can kill more people with household items easier than I can obtain a firearm to do the same job.

            The point I am making is the intent of the perpetrator. By your analogy there should be 300 Million plus murders because there are 300 million plus firearms all across America.

            I want to ask you if you know how many tools are used to kill people according to the FBI there were 1,888 Tools and 1,005 other objects Of the 8,583 gun related deaths a quarter were the result in Police shootings 6,115 involving hand guns and 323 using rifles shotguns and more than 3,000 using knives knives and other cutting instruments.

            Now compare these figures against planed parenthood’s sanctioned slaughter of 1,200,00,000 innocent children and you have nothing to harp on. These 1.2 Million preventable deaths are on you liberals’ hands ant you don’t even care. You and your fellow “baby killing liberals are nothing but HYPOCRITES.
            Go back to playing God with your abortions just don’t lecture me about your idea of keeping children (or anyone else for that matter) safe because your ideas have proven not to work worth a damn!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

        • Vis Fac

          I challenge you to prove your statement. I want you to place a gun on any table step away and demand that gun to get up, load, aim, and fire itself and kill someone WITHOUT any assistance.
          Basic physics dictate that any inanimate object is incapable of movement without outside stimuli facts you liberals chose to ignore.

          However if you wish to get technical in all reality gun’s don’t kill people their high speed projectiles (bullets) do.

          Morons like you are prime examples of the result of one dimensional idiot-ology. You continually perpetuate the inane dogma of liberalism. You refuse to accept true reality in favor of your own.

          You are so full of it your eyes are brown You have drunk too much liberal Kool-Aid and brainwashed to the point of losing all credibility.

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            You’re getting a bit silly at this point. Of course guns and bullets are inanimate. And of course it’s people USING guns that kill so many people so quickly. But to make guns seem as innocuous as, say, a tooth brush, is just plain silly. Guns are made to KILL. Don’t you get that? We’re simply not talking about tooth brushes here.

          • Vis Fac

            Robbie I am dead serious when I say you can be killed as easily with a tooth brush as you could with a firearm. Yes Guns are made to kill but a guns just happens to be the most effective attitude adjustment tool ever conceived. The presentation and the willingness to use this tool had saved many a life. Even though lame stream media is averse to reporting so.

            Apparently you feel this isn’t the case and the only thing you would make you feel safe would be the abolishment of firearms.

            Living like an ostrich is no life at all. I hope you feel warm and cozy with your liberal mantra. I would prefer to have my gun and not need it than to need my gun and not have it!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            So you can kill with a tooth brush just as easily as with a gun? I’m willing to bet that the loved ones of the 25 killed at Sandy Hook by GUNFIRE wish that the nut had armed himself only with a tooth brush.

          • vicki

            Would it make you feel any better if they had been pushed out a window?

          • Robbie

            Fewer would have died if the killer needed to use your suggested window method. While dragging one poor kid to the window the others could have made a run for it. But – to repeat for the tenth time – the killer used a GUN and – again to repeat – was able to blow away 25 in just seconds. Can you not admit that if you want to kill a lot of American patriots a gun is the easiest and fastest method. It easy to use and quick. You just keep pulling the trigger and if you’ve got a large magazine you don’t even need to pause and reload. For mass killing the gun is just a great choice – a no brainer really.

          • Vis Fac

            Hod I been there you can bet your life I would have stopped him. We marines run toward the gunfire not away from it.
            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            You are one brave person.

            Semper ubi, sub ubi.

          • Vis Fac

            About a thousand times more brave than you for sure. I served you choked and vegged out.

            I contributed to society while you took from everyone you could. I’m a doer you’re a slacker. I’m a realist you’re a one dimensional liberal I needn’t say anything more!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            You have no idea what you are talking about. You are an expert at jumping to conclusions – the wrong ones!

          • vicki

            You may have noticed that Robbie accuses you of being silly right around the time he claims we shouldn’t bother to protect anywhere.

          • Jana

            No Robbie, YOU are getting silly. People kill people. They use knives, they use cars, they use poison, they use guns, they use bats, and they use a multitude of different type of weapons, up to and including bombs. Yes, in prison, they even use tooth brushes to kill each other. So yes, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS BEING SILLY and looking ridiculous while you are looking silly.

          • Robbie

            Cars and tooth brushes and bats and knives have other primary uses. The primary use of guns is to KILL.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      The purpose of spreading the story that the shooter had and AR-15 is because that will be the only thing that non reasoning people will remember and that is exactly what is wanted.

    • Vis Fac

      The term “Assault Weapon” is a liberal media created scare tactic derived from the AR designation of the military. In actuality AR stands for Automatic Rifle.

      Any weapon (use your imagination) can be used to assault people and therefore can be classified as an assault weapon. My pen and pencil set keys and screwdrivers are potential assault weapons.

      The term “Assault Weapon” is a liberal media created scare tactic! Any semi-automatic rifle or handgun that has a detachable magazine according to liberal one dimensional idiot-ology is labeled as an ASSAULT WEAPON.

      ODUMBO writhing in his hate for firearms banned the repatriation of WWII era firearms because he is afraid of clip fed or bolt action rifles that are relics might fall into the hands of the American citizen.

      Surprise Mr. ODUMBO I have a few of those clip fed M-1 Garand rifles I keep for locked away from gun grabbers like you. I prefer the M1 over the AR platform as it is harder hitting and more accurate so I don’t need the 30 rounds DHS needs I have a few AR’s but the old reliable .30-06 is my favorite a close second is the .50 Beowulf on my AR platform.

      The media once held the politicians honest today In my assessment lame stream media lost all credibility when Walter Cronkite admitted to fabricating story’s so he could influence the outcome of the Vietnam war.

      The media is SUPPOSED to remain objective instead of subjective as it is today.hey are in the politicians pockets distributing liberal propaganda.

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

      .

  • mark

    The typo on the September 15 date of this AP story has already been debunked as a mix-up with the URL of another story that day in Ohio. But this is great fodder for the conspiracy theorists who ludicrously claim that both 9/11 (carried out by the Bush Administration not Al Qaeda) and Sandy Hook (an Obama administration plot) were U.S. government operations. What can you say about minds so twisted that they fall immediately and enthusiastically fall for these fabricated pipe dreams.

    http://beforeitsnews.com/strange/2013/09/ap-reported-navy-attack-yesterday-2451326.html

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Nice link, mark. But I have to ask — Did you listen to the whole video?
      Did you hear the part about gun murders being down by 49% since 1993? Did you hear the part about SSRI anti-depressants being used by 90% of the people who committed mass murders?
      Indeed, Mark, “What can you say about minds so twisted” that they rarely divulge such important information when bashing guns and trying to disarm the people?

      • Average_Joe56

        As with most liberal types, his attention span most likely lasted for one minute…tops. mark heard only the part he wanted to hear …and that was enough for him. If he had listened further, he would not have posted this link….at the very end… infowars.com was the original source. Woopsie!
        ;)

      • mark

        OK Dave, but no one is trying to disarm people. The Obama proposal called for reinstating the ban on the manufacture and sale to civilians – not the ownership of – assault-style weapons that already existed 1994-2004. During that period, no one’s assault gun weapons were taken away by the government: the manufacture and sale of such weapons for civilians was prohibited. The other of Obama’s measures were limits on the number of bullets in magazines, a ban on the manufacture and sale – not on the ownership of – armor-piercing bullets, and stricter background checks. By the way these assault-style weapons only comprise about 1% of all the guns owned by Americans. 99% would be totally unaffected by such a ban as they were 1994-2004. The government wasn’t planning on “grabbing guns” off anyone as all the right-wing “gun-grabber” phraseology claims. Bob Livingston uses this misleading term all the time, while at the same time, he complains about liberals using misleading terms against conservatives and libertarians.

        But as you know, Dave, during that period 1994-2004, all elections were cancelled in the United States, all churches, newspapers, media outlets, and the entire internet was shut down by the federal gov’t. All political parties and anti-goverment demonstrations were banned, and every Americans’ weapons were confiscated by the U.S. military. Because as we all know, if assault-style rifles are banned for manufacture and sale to ordinary Americans, we will lose all our Constitutional freedoms just as occurred during that 10 year absolute dictatorship in American 1994-2004.

        • Vis Fac

          Five words Mark – Diane Feinstein and Harry Reed If they had their way ALL firearms would be eliminated. ODUMBO despite his prevarications to the contrary would like to ban ALL firearms as well.

          The problem as Harry Reed says is “that pesky second amendment keeps getting in the way”

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • Jana

            That effeminate weak excuse of a man that is pretending to be President that resides in the White House that is led around by the nose by Valerie Jarrett. I am surprised that he doesn’t wear a pink shirt and tie and even a pink suit.
            Sorry but men who wear pink, well, my opinion of them is not very high. I know what they are right away.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Oh come on, mark, I know you’re not that ignorant. The goal of the Progressives is to disarm all the citizens. Then they can do as they please with us. Of course they couldn’t do that all at once or they would at the very least all get thrown out of office, like what happened in Colorado on September 10. So they must take baby-steps and along the way convince ignorant people that their measures will only harm a small percentage of people.

          And, if you think a 10-shot magazine would deter a purposeful killer, watch this man:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXVNypPUGto

          An assault weapon ban would not stop mass killers. A man with a single-shot shotgun, a pocket full of shells, and reasonable skills, could wreak havoc on an unprotected group of people.
          In fact, assault weapons are used in very few illegal shootings.
          http://gunowners.org/a032207.htm

          • Vis Fac

            The video shows a proficiency of a professional competitive shooter. Your “average criminal is about one quarter as fast still fast enough to wreck havoc.

            I like to compete at cowboy action shooting competitions and bowling pin matches. I have seen people with single action revolvers shoot and reload almost as fast as those with automatic pistols which can be scary to those who aren’t familiar with revolvers”

            The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” – Adolf Hitler

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

        • vicki
    • Daniel F. Melton

      The same sort of “mix up” that claimed the shooter had been armed with an AR15?

      • Robbie

        Does it really matter if it was an AR15? Aren’t those 12 Americans who got blown away just as dead?

        • Vis Fac

          It certainly does matter especially when we are constantly fed a load of BS not only by lame stream media but the government as well.

          Journalism was once the guardian of truth today they’re just another tool liberals use to further their agenda.

          “Believe none of what you read and half of what you see” – Benjamin Franklin

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            AR15 or not were those 12 Americans shot dead or not?

          • Vis Fac

            And several million babies each murdered by Planned Parenthood yet liberal one dimensional idiot-ology demands this fact be ignored and repressed.

            Why not mention all the people killed with autos or medical mistakes by doctors? Why because you agenda is focused on band aid solutions and blaming inanimate objects while shirking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            More silly talk. Medical mistakes are a far cry from premeditated mass gunplay. A person killed in an auto mishap is totally different than a killer mowing down 20 grade school children in their classroom. So please enough of these silly comments. Guns are made to KILL and they are used to KILL. And its curious that you show concern for a fetus that a woman may decide to abort for any number of reasons but little concern when a gunman blows away a classroom full of fetus’ that have been born.

          • Vis Fac

            Abortion is not a “medical mistake” it is nothing less than premeditated MURDER. The fact you and you fellow one dimensional liberals conveniently avoid.

            Auto related deaths as well as medical malpractice ARE other statistics you one dimensional liberals choose to ignore. These annual “preventable deaths” out gain all of the gun related death that occurs in a decade yet you only focus on gun related death.

            Speaking of being silly Guns as you say are made to kill OK Let me impart a little information to you . Had it not been for the gun you would not enjoy the right to make a fool of yourself on this thread. In fact you would be one of many subjects loyal to the Queen of England or be speaking Spanish and ruled by Spain’s Prime Minister or maybe having to speak German or Japanese The truth is Guns let us become independent and keep us free you would have us be subjects of a tyrannical government.

            You are severely misguided by liberal one dimensional idiot-ology and deserve none of what you enjoy from this nation. Since you have not earned or fought for what you have it is easy for you to give it away as it means nothing to you.

            Remember this once you lose or give something away you will NEVER regain it; especially your liberties guaranteed bu OUR Constitution Think about that next time you want to spout off with more of your nonsense!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi.

          • Robbie

            Funnily enough I actually am a loyal subject of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth. And it rally isn’t all that horrible!

          • Vis Fac

            That depends upon what side of the pond you’re on! If you are an English subject you have no business commenting on US policy. I certainly wouldn’t pry into your affairs I could care less about England’s or anyone else’s politics.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            Actually I am Canadian. And I certainly will continue to contribute here. If you don’t like that you are free to skip over my comments. I will note that your attitude is typical of a certain segment of American society – that being a lack of interest in anything not American. Probably explains why America makes so many blunders overseas – lack of interest and knowledge about the rest of the world.

            Semper ubi, sub ubi

          • Jana

            What does ubi, sub ubi mean?

          • Robbie

            Semper is Latin for always. Ubi is Latin for wear. And sub – as you might imagine – means under (as in SUBmarine).

          • Jana

            wear submarine wear? hmm that doesn’t make sense to me. I know what Semper is. Marines say Semper Fi.
            Were you in the Navy?

          • Jana

            Robbie, it isn’t that funny.

          • Jana

            Sadly we have taught our young women it is alright to murder their unborn children. We have turned our young women into murderers.

          • Robbie

            A young woman is beaten and raped by a thug who sexually abuses her over a prolonged period. And if a pregnancy results YOU want to force the traumatized victim to carry the fetus and have to deal with the “father” for the next few decades? You are worse than the rapist himself.

          • Jana

            Robbie, most of the time these women that go out for abortions haven’t been raped. You liberals always use these if a woman is raped ploy.
            If a woman is raped she can go to the emergency room and get the date rape drug that very day.

          • Robbie

            So you agree that abortion is O.K. in the case of rape?

          • Jana

            If its done that very day. Don’t add or take away from my words.

        • Don 2

          Does it matter that this shooter was once again, another Democrat who went off the rails?

        • Daniel F. Melton

          Is it also relevant that those killed and injured were disarmed by fiat and had nothing with which to defend themselves once the cursory “security” at the front door had been breached?
          The remark about the AR15 was in response to the reflexive and uninformed screaming monkey demands by hoplophobes to ban that particular weapon, which in my opinion is nothing more than a complicated, delicate, oversexed .22 with accessories. A “Barbie” for gun aficionados. I prefer a real rifle. 30.06 / 7.62 x 63, which has about twice the range and three times the kinetic energy of the .223 / 5.56 x 45.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      The people that the news story wanted to reach, and it is Dems/Progs/Leftists like yourself, will only remember the initial story and not the retraction. What you are saying is that some editor was careless and derelict in verifying the stories that are published.

  • Anonymous

    WPTV channel 5 “news” in West Palm Beach, Florida was in FULL LIBERAL LYING MODE on Tuesday morning. Shouting from the rooftops how the shooter had used a “MILITARY STYLE ASSAULT WEAPON”. The newest updated buzzword of the gungrabbing Communist MSM. I don’t recall them posting a correction after it was PROVEN FALSE BY EVERYONE…..HMMMM, one would think that they had an agenda or something. How odd….

  • dan

    well…well…sputter…THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN an assault weapon !!!
    …meanwhile a weapon of mass disinformation remains in the hands of the media. i feel assaulted AND insulted.

    • Mole Johnson

      No AR? More progressive/commie hysteria.

    • Robbie

      Oh dear.

  • Warrior

    I’ve come up with the solution. Raise taxes!

  • TIME

    My Dear People,
    We are at the moment in TIME when you Must be 100% alert at all times, as the “Congress De Facto” of the Illegal Corporation known as the UNITED STATES, is working on the total removal of the 1st Amendment as you are reading this.
    Keep in mind that they also passed a bill that allows them to pass bills with a {{{48 hour turnaround}} thus preventing YOU from even knowing such a bill was even voted on let alone passed.
    All the “”TRACKS”” are in place now, there is nothing left but the end game, what’s coming will not be pretty _ That’s comes with a 100% grantee. The dollar is dead, and they can’t hold back this fact much longer. Also the reason they want to remove the 1st Amendment is so these Criminals can commit to GREATER WAR CRIMES as well commit to the Total Police State ~ with ZERO OBSTACLES, thus when all the states who are in such deep debt that they all fall into the whom ever will take them factor and take.
    All 401’K’s
    All IRA’s
    All Bank Accounts,
    All Stock Accounts,
    ALL Bank Safe Deposit BOX’S, can all be taken from you with out any issue.
    In plain words people, we are well in to the door way of HELL.
    This nation is at a free fall rate. Wake up the Illusion is over.
    Peace and Love Be with you. To you that believe _ Please Get straight with Jesus Christ NOW, You really don’t have long now.

    • TIME

      Dear People,
      Also how is it that this Navy Yard story was printed in the mass media a FULL day, as in full 24 hours ~~~ before it even happened?
      Peace and Love

    • Vis Fac

      Precisely why I have very little cash in th bank Just enough to cover any bills. I have converted all my fiat paper into “tangible” assets.

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

      • TIME

        Dear FR,
        WISE choice..
        Peace and Love.

  • Paul

    And the gun control crap continues! Politicians wants to attack law abiding citizens (the innocent) while criminal continues to get guns illegally (the guilty).

    Don’t fall for it, people. The main reason for our rights to bear arms is first and foremost so we can protect ourselves from government (yes, our own government). Secondly it is so we can protect ourselves and our property. Our government does not like that and will fight us until the end.

    • vicki

      Paul writes:

      Politicians wants to attack law abiding citizens (the innocent) while criminal continues to get guns illegally (the guilty).

      Let’s put a statistic to that. It is often reported that ~30,000 people a year are killed by people using guns. So that means that because
      ~0.01 PERCENT of the population mis-USES the tool, the politicians want to punish ALL of the ~315 MILLION Americans by infringing on their GOD given right to keep and bear arms.

      Tell the politicians that we are tired of it.

      ~300 MILLION Americans never shot ANYONE. Even by accident.

      STOP punishing the INNOCENT for the acts of a VERY VERY few.

      Stop it
      STOP IT NOW

  • Daniel F. Melton

    Poll question: How many of those victims who were shot by ANY of the mass murderers in recent memory would wish to have had their own weapon for self defense?
    Of course, we can only ask that question of those who survived…

  • Alan

    Gun grabbers never let facts get in the way of their agenda. This morning we learn that the shooter had serious mental problems that were reported to the navy by Newport, RI police, but nothing was done.

  • Vigilant

    “In fact, the mental disorder and medications (and possibly violent video games), not the weapon, seem to be the common denominators in mass shootings…But there’s no mention of looking into the pharmaceuticals Alexis, Lanza and Holmes, et al., were on. No MSM organization can be bothered by trivial details like that. Those are hard questions.”

    The conundrum here is that the hard core Libertarians would not want to deny drugs to anyone, and believe the war on drugs is nothing more than a money pit. Here’s a question for the Libertarians: do you back a war on prescription drugs (the fastest growing kind of drug abuse in America), illegal hard drugs (excluding marijuana), or do you believe that everyone is competent enough to know which drugs do not cause personality quirks that can result in violence against other people?

    Second question: if guns don’t kill people, people kill people (which I agree with), does that not call for keeping them out of the hands of five year old children (and those with equivalent mentality), the criminally insane (and all insane people for that matter), or do we not restrict their being owned by anyone, as people like Vicki seem to believe?

    • vicki

      I not only believe but it is the Supreme law of the land that the RIGHT of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear (possess and carry) arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Were we to honor that law then there would be VERY few mass shootings because the victims would neutralize the threat regardless of the mental state of the threat.

      As to your 5 year olds strawman, they are protected by their older family members which would include not letting them touch tools (and other things) the child is not ready for. When they ARE ready they need to be taught how to handle ANY tool and not just firearms.

      • Vis Fac

        Mine have and done so. Very good post Vicki. Too many irresponsible people refuse to learn safety protocol and as a result transfer that ideology to other things especially firearms. A fire arm is merely another tool as is a chain saw, knife, icepick or ax we all know people have been murdered with these items as well yet they aren’t considered as deadly weapons.

        Having been trained in combat and having to use tat training I can assert that anything can be used as a weapon the more innocuous the easier it is to use. I could do great damage with a simple pen or pencil ant yet those are allowed in public no one realized what can be done with ordinary objects (the game of clue just popped up rope candle stick wrench etc.)

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est
        Semper-Fi

        • vicki

          Having been trained in combat and having to use tat training I can
          assert that anything can be used as a weapon the more innocuous the
          easier it is to use.

          One of my teachers pointed out to me that “I” am the weapon. Those things are merely tools of convenience.

      • Vigilant

        Sorry,but no one answered my question regarding drugs and only Vicki answered the second question (in the manner I expected she would). She crushes her own argument by saying children should not “touch tools (and other things) the child is not ready for…” “Not ready for” or incompetent to handle/possess is the key. That’s precisely why there are laws proscribing alcohol and gun ownership prior to certain ages.

        The Second Amendment, as with the Constitution as a whole, was not intended to be observed or interpreted in anything other than common sense. Common sense (and the laws that were written thus) bars criminals, children and the mentally ill from ownership. Those laws are correct, and the vast majority of the people concur with those laws. The mere fact that those persons of ill will are able to sidestep the law is not a reason to repeal them.

        There are a lot of murders every year in this country where all kinds of weapons are used. Is that a reason to repeal the homicide laws?

        Either taking guns away from everyone, or allowing everyone to have guns, are both extreme positions, well outside the pale of common sense.

        If indeed “people kill people,” then the root cause to be addressed is people. Vicki offers nothing other than a narrow misinterpretation of the Constitution to allow everyone to have guns, and therefore renders the whole “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” sentence as meaningless. .

        • vicki

          Vigilant writes:

          She crushes her own argument by saying children should not “touch tools (and other things) the child is not ready for…” “Not ready for” or incompetent to handle/possess is the key. That’s precisely why there
          are laws proscribing alcohol and gun ownership prior to certain ages.

          It hardy crushes my point. However I notice that you are demanding that government be the nanny for special cases rather than all tools. Is that your version of “limited” government?

          For children it is the duty of the PARENTS to decide when the child is ready. For adults it is up to each. When and IF they mis-use a tool then they can be punished and there are laws in place for that purpose.

          So let us read together the 2nd Amendment.

          “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.”

          The people. Darn. the Constitution didn’t define that phrase any more then “natural born”. I hate it when they do that :) Guess they meant for us to use that common sense you mentioned. Perhaps we should look at how the 4th amendment is used to determine who “the people” are. So you are saying that people who can not buy alcohol nor guns do not have a right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects etc. How do you expect your children to react to this?

          My point is and remains that for a free people the POSSESSION (not mis-use) of anything created, grown, obtained without fraud or theft, can not be illegal.

          • Vigilant

            “So you are saying that people who can not buy alcohol nor guns do not have a right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects etc.”

            Good God, Vicki, don’t accuse ME of straw man arguments and then do the same thing! If that’s where your screwy logic leads you, then perhaps you need to go argue with someone of a lower IQ than I.

            “Guess they meant for us to use that common sense you mentioned.” You’re damned right I meant that. “Bout time you took the cue.

          • vicki

            You are the one claiming that “the people” means different things in the 4th amendment and the 2nd amendment.

          • Vigilant

            Au contraire. YOU are the one who put words in my mouth. Do you even know what a straw man argument is?

          • Jana

            Vigilant you are being the irresponsible one!.

          • Vigilant

            “My point remains that denying the possession of tools is to treat the people as children with the government being “nanny”.

            You’re damned right, there happen to be people in this country who are too mentally incompetent to be allowed possession of weapons. Unless you feel that the criminally insane have a natural law or Constitutional right to own them. If you believe that, then you have no right to be in a civilized society.

          • vicki

            As I have said before (and you have read the comments) those who MIS-USE a tool need to be punished (regardless of age or maturity). If they are criminally insane then they belong in JAIL or mental hospital. Both of which will drastically limit the damage they can do with whatever tools they acquire.

            Punishing the rest of the
            ~300 MILLION Americans who have never shot anyone is NOT the solution

            STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT for the acts of a very few.

            STOP IT
            STOP IT NOW

          • Vigilant

            “If they are criminally insane then they belong in JAIL or mental hospital.”

            But you say they are “people” within the meaning of the Constitution, so therefore they have a right to bear arms.

            You might want to review your comments before you argue against yourself.

          • Jana

            No she isn’t. You are twisting her words!

          • Vigilant

            Why don’t you ask Vicki yourself? Or how about we both ask her: Vicki, are you or are you not saying that the criminally insane are “People” within the meaning of the Constitutional right to bear arms?

        • vicki

          There are a lot of murders every year in this country where all kinds of
          weapons are used. Is that a reason to repeal the homicide laws?

          I thought I would address this comment separately.

          You talk of common sense and then make this comment.
          Why? Is it an attempt to hide an ad hominem? There is nothing in any of my point that says that we should repeal laws against the MIS-USE of tools. My point remains that denying the possession of tools is to treat the people as children with the government being “nanny”.

          Should this be your position then it is good for us to know.

        • Vis Fac

          You say “Either taking guns away from everyone, or allowing everyone to have guns, are both extreme positions, well outside the pale of common sense.

          What is your interpretation of common sense? Slapping the wrists of violent felons and telling them having a gun is s no no after letting them serve a quarter of their sentences?

          Common sense dictates that whenever fear of death enters a perpetrators mind the perpetrator does not act. Just the same as a burglar facing an alarm guard dog or other anti theft device deters them from entering a residence. If everyone were armed less crime is committed and statistics prove this a fact.

          You choose to rely on the police to protect you. but the sad truth is the police do not protect anyone but themselves often arriving in time to see the coroner cart your body to the morgue then fill out reports.

          I know if I were a criminal knowing I could or most certainly be shot dead I would choose a different occupation. That my friend is the definition of common sense!!!

          Just because you are afraid and or inept doesn’t mean that everyone else is.

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • Vigilant

            “Just because you are afraid and or inept doesn’t mean that everyone else is.”

            You can kiss my ass, sonny.

            I own guns, I fire guns, I spent 38 years in the service of my country and neither you nor anyone else is going to call me afraid or inept. I do not advocate gun confiscation or even registration, so don’t put words in my mouth, idiot!

          • Jana

            Well then why are you making yourself sound like you are afraid and inept??? You are the one doing it to yourself. My goodness!!

          • Vigilant

            You’re free with the insults but not forthcoming with explanations. Precisely in what way am I acting afraid and inept?

          • Jana

            Vigilant, reread what I said. You are making yourself SOUND like you are. I never said you are. In fact I believe you are a warrior. But you are trying to confuse and twist what Vicki said. If that is an insult then you have yourself to blame.

    • Vis Fac

      Answer to your first question Liberal one dimensional idiot-ology has taken any responsibility away from the individual and their indoctrination camps masquerading as public schools haven’t the desire nor the capability to instill said asset. Furthermore; Political Correctness has made the question moot.

      A for the second, liberals always decry responsibility yet they shoulder non. again political correctness dictates one solution complete banishment even though they know such a task is not feasible. The issue is “people control” a tenet adopted by the elite left and forced upon the masses via dumbing down from the aforementioned indoctrination camps.

      The wheel cannot be uninvented and technology cannot be eliminated. The fact that loonies and felons manage to obtain guns despite all the laws prohibiting such speaks volumes on any enacted gun control(people control) statute.

      Personally I feel safe when my five year old grand daughter has a pistol in her hands as I have taught her safety and how to properly load clean and shoot. She always tells me the guns are loaded and to be careful. The three year old is not mature enough to understand but by four she’ll know as well.

      I am with Vicki on this since existing laws do not result in keeping guns out of the hands of anyone AND you cannot eliminate them (or the technology to make one) the only recourse is to allow everyone to have them knowing you have a better chance to deter or stop mayhem in its tracks. If a criminal or someone who is unstable knows people are armed the less likely he/she will act.

      Case in point: each and every mass shooting took place in a liberally mandated “safe gun free zone”. Did these “safe gun free zones provide safety to those who were murdered? Did the perpetrators stop and say “wait, this is a gun free zone so I had best not enter with my gun”?

      The ONLY thing these liberal “safe gun free zones” create is an environment friendly to murderers for he/she/they know there isn’t anyone who can stop them. Another reason is criminals don’t care about ANY law especially any gun law, that is the definition of a criminal

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

    • TML

      Vigilant says, “The conundrum here is that the hard core Libertarians would not want to deny drugs to anyone, and believe the war on drugs is nothing more than a money pit. Here’s a question for the Libertarians: do you back a war on prescription drugs (the fastest growing kind of drug abuse in America), illegal hard drugs (excluding marijuana), or do you believe that everyone is competent enough to know which drugs do not cause personality quirks that can result in violence against other people?”

      That isn’t necessarily a “Libertarian” thing, I don’t think. Making drugs illegal, does in fact, make them even more dangerous, and actually aids underground markets and the crime that comes along with them. I think regulation, as opposed to absolute prohibition, is a better answer, so that dependency or abuse problems could be treated as a medical condition rather than a crime. Quite frankly, alcohol is as bad as methamphetamine in many ways. Better to decriminalize, rather than legalize. No ‘war’ on prescription drugs. It would be no more legal to wield a firearm under the influence as it is for alcohol.

      Vigilant says, “Second question: if guns don’t kill people, people kill people (which I agree with), does that not call for keeping them out of the hands of five year old children (and those with equivalent mentality), the criminally insane (and all insane people for that matter), or do we not restrict their being owned by anyone, as people like Vicki seem to believe?”

      Children owning guns isn’t that far fetched of an idea if they are trained to use them (I was 12 years old when I had my first rifle which stayed in my closet and had been shooting since I was 6 or 7 – and my grandpa grew up taking his to school. Interestingly enough, mass shooting seemed to be almost non-existent back then).

      Keeping guns out of the hands of drug addicts, those using prescription drugs, mentally unstable, criminally insane, etc… is the real dilemma. Of course, those with a history of mental illness and/or convicted felons of violent crime are already rightfully restricted from owning firearms (even the recent shooting, the guy was on the radar, so what in the system failed?) – the problem is how to actually enforce such laws. I don’t think we could ever fully keep guns out of the hands of the “insane”; sometimes nobody would even know if they are “insane” until they do something like shoot up a crowded area, and the enforcement necessary to attempt such a thing would be a grave infringement on the rights of law abiding citizens. (For example; is it ok for a doctor to ask you about your gun ownership in order to report you, if you are prescribed a SSDI? Do you lose your rights on that basis? Very dangerous IMHO)

      No, I think the real answer is to allow law-abiding citizens to arm and protect themselves from any spontaneous nut job who decides to shoot up a school, etc. (I am in favor of CCL’s with even greater mandatory training and would even support mandatory training in order to purchase a firearm for home use – nothing more dangerous than a gun owner who has never used their gun) and the removal of so called gun-free zones from schools and military bases (although it would of course remain the sole right of a business owner to restrict or prohibit carrying on their property).

      What is your take on this issue?

      • Vis Fac

        Funny you should mention your grandpa taking his gun to school; I remember our high school had a rifle and pistol team as well as the ROTC who had an armory full of rifles. No one made mention of this until the liberal establishment took over then presto guns magically became evil objects.

        The reason alcohol and tobacco (really serious drugs) are legal is because of revenue generated through taxes. Meth and other so called “control substances” which are anything but, do not generate tax revenue.

        Statutes addressing gun control are a double edged sword They create a data base on any new purchase so the government knows you have a gun and knows how and when to relieve you of said article and: through several restrictive applications generate mountains of revenue to but military gear for the local police so swarming and assaulting you relieving you of your firearms is easier and more efficient and safer for them.

        If we were to adhere to the constitution children cannot own firearms only persons of age are allowed that is 18 years and older. Therefore all other discussion is moot. The constitution does not address who can use firearms nor does it address hunting or self protection. Militia is the assemblage of persons of age who shall “keep and bear arms which shall not be infringed”. This sentence nullifies all gun control statutes making enforcement illegal.

        My grand children have all been trained in the use and safety of any firearm I own. It would be foolish to allow a child to handle a weapon that produces a heavy recoil. The smaller calibers .22LR 5.56 NATO and 6.5 MM Grendel all have minimum recoil and are well within the capability of a child.

        All my grandchildren who can hold clean load a firearm have been trained to do so. Those who have yet to be able to do these things need to wait until they are able.

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est
        Semper-Fi

  • IBCAMN

    still havn’t seen a single CCTV picture or video.don’t believe a thing yet till you see it with you’re own eye’s.wait till it is proven about this guy.why has all these events been happening at certain places?!these progressive liberals have been jumping the gun(no pun)on a lot of things,this is just another one!mental issues pointed out on these events-about the same time police officers tell law abiding citizens”i think you sre mentaly unstable” or”you’re having psychologicle problems”or putting people on a 72hr hold-and it goes along well with their need to get rid of guns(using mental issues)as a cornerstone of their arguement now!they think Americans can’t control themselves w/guns!it’s a pattern,open you’re eyes and look!NWO is coming at Americans from all sides!

    • mark

      “why has all these events been happening at certain places?!” Uh, I dunno maybe because all events – famous, not famous, ordinary, mundane, occur at certain places. Events by their very nature have to occur somewhere. Otherwise they’re not events, they didn’t happen. Wow.

      • vicki

        Well actually all these events do have a common reason for occurring at certain places.

        They all occur in GUN-FREE Zones.

        • Vis Fac

          More correctly “Criminal Safe Zones” This fact is wasted on one dimensional liberals for they believe that everyone respects the law and no one would DARE bring a gun to an area that bans them. Does the phrase “the check is in the mail sound familiar”? Liberal reality at its finest

          A bit of information to those of you who like to think liberal gun buy back programs are real and work. Liberal media likes to display the guns people trade in for a $200 gift cards most of which are in pristine condition and worth more then five of those gift cards. now and than they’ll show hacked up and sawed off weapons but the majority comes form private collections from the police and sheriffs department to make a good showing I know several police and sheriffs deputies who have “donated to the show”. So these gun buy back programs are BOGUS common sense dictates that a thug would never turn in the tools of their trade for a measly $200 gift card, However liberal lame stream media reports this to those gullible and or stupid enough to believe their BS

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

        • gi

          I heard on the news today that one of the mass murderers America has been subjected to recently actually by-passed one potential location because it was NOT a gun free zone. That says a lot. ( you may want to re-think that Latte at Starbucks due to the anti-gun activist CEO of that establishment. Gun carrying coffee drinkers are frowned upon.)

          • Robert Messmer

            Since when? I know that they don’t let their employee’s carry on the job (having dealt with the public for many years I understand why) but the last article I saw was that where it is legal they do allow the customers to do so. In fact not too awful long ago there was supposed to have been an “2nd Amendment Appreciation Day”.

        • native blood

          Very astute observation Vicki! Dayummmmm! You done blew Markus right outa the water! You go girl!!!!:-)))

  • Firstname Lastname

    The date on the AP article is an error in the database. Look at the URL a little closer and post that too. It was posted over a story about a fire in Ohio.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-mobile-home-fire-northeast-ohio-kills-children-20261523

    • vicki

      Your link has already been sanitized and bears no resemblance to the screen-capture in the OP. Many web site posting software programs autodate for the humans and the question would be who “forgot” to clean up that little detail before publishing.

      Most criminals are caught by the small details they miss.

    • Vis Fac

      What never ceases to amaze me is that lame stream media constantly changes the information reported on a minute by minute basis. It seems as though that was reported isn’t sensational or damaging enough so they need to “fine tune” their story to suit their agenda.

      Lame stream media lost all credibility when Walter Cronkite admitted to fabricating story’s so he could influence the outcome of the Vietnam war. The media is SUPPOSED to remain objective instead of subjective as it is today. The smoke had yet to clear before all the gun grabbers started their usual rhetoric.

      “Believe none of what you hear, and only half of what you see.”
      ― Benjamin Franklin

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

      • Firstname Lastname

        6 corporations own all of the broadcasting systems. Follow the money and you find the culprit.

        • Vis Fac

          Corporations do not own all the media and yes I agree follow the money (for what money is worth) I have no money for I exchanged my worthless script for tangible assets.

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • TIME

            Dear FR,
            FN LN is 100% correct in his statement that only 6 Corporation own the Mass Media. That’s all of public record that anyone can find.
            It’s also of Public record that the Rothschild’s own the AP, as well the UP, and UPI all of what are the base source of all media related issues.
            The Rothschild’s also own Goldman Sacks – and Reuters both again base of all media stories. Oh and they also own the Federal Reserve too!
            And lets not forget the IMF, oh and the Bank of London too..

            Thus all intel is from the mass media is little more than 100% total Bovine Waste material.
            Of what brings us to the point that all Mass media no matter who disseminates it –
            No one with an once of gray matter can ever make an Intelligent nor INFORMED thought about – other than its 100% total Bovine Waste material.
            But, hey its doing what it was invented to do, CONFOUND by way of utter worthless Bovine Waste material.
            Peace and Love

          • Vis Fac

            I don’t care I don’t regard any media as truthful. I have personal sources I contact if I want the truth.

            Believe none of what you read and half of what you see Benjamin Franklin

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

  • independent thinker

    In all the articles I have seen about this incident (and I admit I have not seen all of them) I have seen nothing about the death of Alexis that said more than the police/security killed him. As a result it looks like Alexis was assassinated as soon as the police/security located him.

    • Robbie

      There’s a guy wildly shooting people with a gun and when police arrive and stop his shooting rampage you call it an assassination? What’s the matter with you?

      • Vis Fac

        I can possibly shed a little light on that. Suppose just suppose all these shootings have a common thread. Given the fact the government is pushing for more strict gun laws AND the fact they love to take advantage of tragedy and parade victims in front of the media. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that the government is behind these mass murders.

        I an ashamed to admit I used to work for the government and know what they are capable of. It is not so far fetched that the current administration recruited mentally disturbed people drugged and brainwashed them into committing these heinous acts all in a timely manner to keep people focused and force their agenda upon the people. After all Holder was culpable in the Fast and Furious debacle so I wouldn’t put anything past ODUMBO’s administration

        I seem to recall the liberals’ chant of a conspiracy theory holding G.W. Bush culpable for the 9/11 attacks so what’s good for the goose is good for the gander!

        I don’t think I am too far off target here time will tell maybe a bit too late then what will it matter?

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est
        Semper-Fi

        • Robbie

          You are way over the top with this “theory”.

          • ibn isha

            You don’t know what our government, or any government, is capable of doing.

            How very conveniently the murder never lives to testify in court. This has been happening in our country as well as other countries for a very long time. Mass murderer is shot to death. President assassin is shot to death. Nobody knows the motive for murder or if another force was behind all this.

          • Robbie

            Actually if you just think back to a few days ago that Muslim shooter at Fort Hood was NOT “assassinated”. He went to trial and had every opportunity to spout off about whatever he wanted. Turns out he was upset about American policy in Afghanistan. But then you probably think he was paid off by the big bad government to say that. Also those snipers w few years ago were captured and tried as well. And a bunch of other plotters have been arrested, tried and sent to jail not only in the U.S. but in Canada as well. Never a hint that they were set up to do what they did (or wanted to do) by either government. Unless they lies and actually wanted to go to prison for the rest of their lives. Know what? I think your nuts. Sorry to blurt that out but frankly you’re talking nonsense.

          • Vis Fac

            I do know what the government is capable of Robbie only thinks he does. I worked for the government in ways I won’t discuss. Believe me or not I don’t care what Robbie and others of his ilk think I know people only know what the government wants them to know and what slips out from “rogue” sources. Why do you think the government is so quick to place labels and attempts massive cover ups if these weren’t true? Question everything! I do. People know about Kennedy’s assassination some have been silences others intimidated. Think about it.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Vis Fac

            Am I? We’ll see Wishful thinking on your part for sure. I question everything you should too!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            Do you think President Bush was responsible for 9/11?

          • native blood

            Who do you think was responsible for 911?

          • Robbie

            I know it was those 19 Arabs S.O.B.’s inspired by bin Laden. And if you recall it was the current President who saw to it that bin Laden was closed down and dumpted at sea.

          • native blood

            To my recollection, 14 were Saudi. Isn’t it strange we sought out retribution against Afghanistan and Iraq?

            Neither of them attacked or threatened to invade the US.

          • Robbie

            Bin Laden and his organization who directed the 9/11 attack were hiding in Afghanistan by the sympathetic Taliban government. Iraq was actually not related to 9/11. Iraq was in persistent and constant violation of various U.N. Resolutions which George Bush decided to finally enforce with, by the way, the help of many allies.

          • native blood

            Based on shaky and faulty intelligence. Bin Laden was allegedly captured (posthumously) by ST6 and Iraq is left with 200,000 dead with nothing to show for the entire campaign except to execute Saddam. So, why are we still there on their soil?

          • LastGasp

            Kind of like Syria, eh?

          • Vis Fac

            No US foreign policy in general. We go into a region plunder resources indenture the population and never leave. That is what was responsible I do however blame Clinton for not acting on any of the four opportunities he has to get Bin Laden. It might not have averted the attack on the WTC but who knows everyone is capable of having 20/20 hindsight.
            I can tell you this ODUMBO has ruined any credibility the US might have had Unlike Reagan who saw the need for a strong armed force and the willingness to back up his foreign policy ODUMBO like carted has decimated our military and their morale while eliminating the means to adequately protect our nation. What a CIC I say!!!
            ODUMBO’s foreign policy is dictated to him by the Muslim Brotherhood and Holder Kerry Putin or anyone else who has a microphone and a stage. His credibility is questioned by the informed relished by the ill informed and dependent. And of course lame stream media.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            Oh yeah Reagan backed up his policy with force? Like when all those Marines were blown to Kingdom Come in Lebanon and Reagan pulled out all forces that were still alive. Yes, I remember that so well. Very steadfast (NOT)! Mind you Regan did deal pretty strongly with the island of Grenada which you can find on a map if you have a maginifying glass.

          • Vis Fac

            Obviously you know nothing about the attack on the Marine Barracks in Lebanon so I will provide you with an education. I lost several good friends to those cowardly Jihadists.

            The Marine Expeditionary Force sent to Lebanon at the request of the Israeli government to be observational peace keepers.

            We as well as the Israelis new that Arabs were intent on self destruction and Reagan unlike those who followed realized our presence was a colossal waste of time. The area would eventually self destruct. He saw no further advantage of stationing peace keeping troops to a religion that was bound to implode. (a lesson lost on all who followed) and apparently you as well.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robbie

            It was you who claimed that Reagan backed up his foreign policy with force. I merely pointed out that a hasty pullout from Lebanon after a devastating attack on the Marines was not exactly consistent with that so-called policy.

          • Robert Messmer

            You really can’t blame people for thinking like that. Ever hear of Roswell, NM. Back in 1947, the public information officer from the Roswell Army Air Field released the story that they had captured a flying saucer. The story was “corrected” to say that it was a “weather balloon”. Fast forward forty-eight years to 1995 when the Air Force admitted that no, it wasn’t a weather balloon. It was, ready for this, most likely an atomic radiation detection balloon directed against the USSR. After almost five decades of lying about it being a weather balloon, the best story they could come up with was another balloon story. (No neither Bush Jr. nor Obama had anything to do with this government lie.)

            Besides we also have the evidence of the government exposing troops to atomic radiation without adequate protection. In fairness, it probably didn’t really know what was safe and what wasn’t safe. But then there is also the proven and admitted testing of LSD and other psychotropic drugs on subjects without their consent or even their knowledge.

            So yes there is basis to distrust anything the government says or does.

          • Robbie

            I don’t think much of anything stays secret in America for much more than 15 minutes these days.

          • Robbie

            I don’t think much of anything stays secret in America for much more than 15 minutes these days.

      • Don 2

        Another Democrat goes off the rails and once again, it took a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun.

        The U.S. military, trained in firearms use, is not trusted by the U.S. government to be armed on bases such as the Washington Navel Base or Fort Hood, providing an opportunity to stop the shooter sooner, rather than being defenseless until a good guy with a gun finally arrives on the scene to stop the bad guy with a gun.

        • Robbie

          But the U.S. government trusts police officers. Now why would that be?

          • Vis Fac

            Because they are on the government payroll receive military hardware and have an elitist attitude. Are you that enamored with the government as to not recognize this fact?
            How many times has lame stream media provided video of dozens of body armor clad goons (SWAT) armed with military grade weapons raiding and shooting up a private residence most often the residence was assaulted by mistake and no one says a word?
            Recently the LAPD shot two women and a man during the Christopher Dorner (who was black and liberal) manhunt no warning no warrant just shooting. The women were in a blue minivan the white man was in a pickup truck. And you want to have the police be the only one who is armed? I THINK NOT!!!!!

            “I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.” -WILLIAM RICE BURROUGHS

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Don 2

            So what? Look how many were helpless and reported to be “looking for something like a gun” to defend themselves, but they had nothing.
            -Give me one logical reason not to trust firearms trained U.S. military officers to carry a firearm while on base.

          • Vis Fac

            ODUMBO is afraid he would be “fragged” should he show up at any military base. For those who don’t know the term “frag”. It refers to the use of a fragmentation grenade to get rid of officers that seek glory and fame by placing their men in undue dangerous situations. Most officers hold their men’s safety as paramount at least that was my main concern when I was in combat!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Daniel F. Melton

            During at least one recent parade “o”boy attended, the bolts were reportedly removed from the unloaded ceremonial M1 rifles carried by the troops. There are also stories of administration officials having troops disarmed before speeches and photo ops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

          • Vis Fac

            Not surprised in the least little bit.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Robert Messmer

            Perhaps he was just insuring that he would not be an accidental victim of “work place violence”.

          • Don 2

            Yeah, I remember they lost a few 2nd. Lt’s. Nam.

          • Vis Fac

            Because of one of those butter bars I wound up receiving a battlefield commission to First LT I was able to keep the remaining 33 Marines of our Battalion alive for three days by evading two regiments of NVA and Chinese regulars.

            Mustered out as Captain as I knew I would never make field grade Too much of the enlisted man remained in my core.

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Daniel F. Melton

            All members of the armed forces should be carrying their issued weapons/sidearms while in uniform. They’re not waiters and butlers in ugly uniforms, they’re trained combat and support troops.

          • Don 2

            I agree Dan.

          • Robbie

            Hassan – the shooter at Fort Hood.

          • Jana

            Hassan, the shooter at Ft. Hood IS the reason trained U.S. Military Officers should carry a firearm while on base.

          • Don 2

            You failed the “logic” part of the question, as pointed out by Jana. I knew you would.

          • Daniel F. Melton

            Paycheck loyalty.

          • Robert Messmer

            Don’t know that I would go that far. The reports of the Federal raid on Chicken, Alaska while they claim that the State Police had reported “drug smuggling and human trafficing” in the bustling community of 17; the Alaskan State Police deny that they even knew of any problem much less told the Feds. It was obviously a training exercise for various para-military agencies. Even though Chicken appears on the map not to be close to any coast, and reports stated the only way in was by airstrip, for some reason the Coast Guard was included. Besides the federal government also trusts known terrorists enough to arm them.

        • Vis Fac

          Rather similar to all the other “safe gun free zone” massacres isn’t it. Liberals still cannot fathom why this keeps happening so their answer is more useless ineffective inane gun control legislation.

          The truth is the government fears the US Citizenry and is adamant in eliminating gun ownership of parity.

          “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” Thomas Jefferson

          The purpose of the Right to Bear Arms is to protect the People from tyranny in Government.” Thomas Jefferson

          “I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where
          the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.” -WILLIAM BURROUGHS

          “The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” -Alexander Hamilton

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

  • TML

    “And there are never any questions about whether there’s a causal relationship between mass shooters and an obsession over violent video games.”

    That sounds like something a ‘gun-grabbing’ liberal would assert. Kind of dangerous to think that way since it would immediately make half the country a suspect, just for playing violent video games.

  • native blood

    Don’t you just hate getting the prime time news that a white veteran male used a military style assault weapon on a military base….eh what? Huh? he wasn’t white?
    Oh you mean cuban again right?…No?? uh not an assault weapon? Uh what?
    he was not from the area either? But you say he was buddist? aren’t they supposed to be peaceful and complacent? Hey the news (fox and CNN) did not do a very accurate job reporting…wait…you say that they are not paid to report facts anymore?…hmmmmmmm well I feel better now:-(

  • John H. Holliday D.D.S.

    It is because the Founding Fathers had the good rational common sense to insist that the inviolate and inviolable Second Amendment is exclusively only the sacred domain and the absolute exclusive jurisdiction of only the common people, or We The People, meaning private individual U.S. Citizens and State Citizens that “shall not be infringed” as explained in very simple crystal clear language in the inviolate and inviolable Second Amendment, that during the last 200+ years, has prevented the United States Federal government “public servants” and any of the 50 State’s government “public servants” from becoming Anti-Constitution Treasonous Tyrannical government Totalitarian Dictators who intimidate, abuse, threaten, terrorize, control, subjugate and enslave their own BOSSES who the Constitution mandates and dictates are We The People. Unfortunately, now, the current United States Federal government “public servants” and many State government “public servants” are attempting to conspire to commit or in fact are committing the crimes of Treason, Armed Sedition and Dictatorial(especially by his Royal Majesty’s Presidential Imperial Executive Order Decrees) Totalitarian Tyranny against their own BOSSES, We The People, and enslave their own BOSSES, We The People, by first attempting to disarm their own BOSSES who are We The People. Sort of like how Totalitarian Communist and Marxist Tyrant Dictators enslave their own people by first disarming their own people.

  • TheSilverRanger

    In combination with the gun grabbers, I’m waiting for the other commies to start trying to ban violent video games as well.

    • Robert Messmer

      And even after Boston, no move to ban and/or confiscate pressure cookers. According to the news reports it has been known for a couple of years that pressure cookers are the preferred “weapon” of terrorist bombers. Not even a background check required, nor do you have to have a concealed carry permit for one.

      • TheSilverRanger

        Where are you going with this, exactly?