Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Guns Didn’t Kill, Bureaucrats Did

June 28, 2012 by  

Guns Didn’t Kill, Bureaucrats Did
Who are the criminals behind the tragedies associated with Operation Fast and Furious?

Gun control advocate Representative Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) made a strong case for 2nd Amendment rights on Tuesday; it was, in fact, the same case that gun rights activists have been making for years.

According to The Hill, Hoyer unleashed the following diatribe on Capitol Hill reporters while discussing the death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, the man killed in 2010 by members of a Mexican drug cartel armed with weapons that “walked” into Mexico as part of the failed Fast and Furious initiative:

“The premise is that somehow letting these guns go across the border resulted in this tragic death,” Hoyer told reporters in the Capitol. “[But] people kill people, not guns, I’m told on a regular basis.

“And controlling guns — whether it’s assault weapons or others — would not solve the problem, I am told by some,” he added, referring to gun-reform critics. “So such legislation is not necessary because it is people who kill people. I hope you see the contradiction in the positions being taken.

“The fact of the matter is this life was tragically lost because there are some criminals on both sides of the border who facilitate violent criminal behavior,” Hoyer said.

In Hoyer’s view, Congressional Republicans’ focus on the guns that were used to kill Terry and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata is misplaced and the focus should be on the criminals that killed him. The Representative is right in noting that the men were killed by criminals.

Unfortunately for Hoyer, his careless remarks in trying to spin the Border Patrol agent’s death as a rebuttal to gun control critics come off as ill-informed at best and, at worst, downright insidious.

Perhaps Hoyer could have borrowed another familiar refrain that is used by 2nd Amendment advocates each time stricter and unConstitutional gun control laws are proposed: In many places, already existing gun regulations that keep firearms out of the hands of criminals without infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun advocates already exist.

And when guns do get into the hands of criminals, law enforcement authorities often come down hard on the people who run legitimate gun businesses.

  • In Randolph County, Ind., agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives raided the Federally licensed gun shop of Charles “Fred” Ludington in April of last year, because they believed he had committed record-keeping offenses. This April, Ludington was sentenced to serve four years in Federal prison for selling firearms to a convicted felon and an out-of-State resident. A judge also ordered him to forfeit the 4,276 firearms, nearly 600,000 rounds of ammunition and more than $159,000 in cash seized by ATF from his shop in April of 2011.
  • Paul Copeland, a Vietnam Veteran and Texas-based gun seller, was sentenced to prison time and two years of probation by a Federal court in 2010 for selling a gun to an undocumented alien, Hipolito Aviles, at the Texas Gun Show in Austin. The alien was not charged in the case.
  • A New Mexico family of gun sellers was arrested in August of last year, on charges of knowingly selling guns to Mexican smugglers and various other related charges. Rick Reese and his two sons Ryin and Remington have been in jail for nearly a year, denied bond because a judge found that they may be a flight risk or attempt to barricade themselves on their property, which has a well for water and solar power, in a Ruby Ridge-style standoff. Their charges involve about 30 guns. Find out more about the bizarre case against them here.

All of these individuals have been deemed criminals by the Federal government, and a simple Google search yields hundreds more stories just like these.

So if gun control advocates like Hoyer want people to focus less on the guns and more on the criminals in the case of Fast and Furious, Congressional Republicans on the House oversight committee should take note of the policies adopted by the likes of Bloomberg and the ATF. These policies have made criminals of people who have simply sold guns, often unwittingly, to individuals who wanted them for criminal purposes.

Evidence suggests that the Justice Department assisted in the illegal sales of more than 2,000 firearms, some of which were used in deadly crimes. Unfortunately, there has been no serious talk about holding the people who were responsible for this crime accountable in court, and the President is complicit in covering up damning evidence.

A thorough investigation holding the gun pushers within the Justice Department to the same standard as the above mentioned gun sellers, however, would likely result in arrests leading all the way to the Oval Office.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Guns Didn’t Kill, Bureaucrats Did”

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.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • MAP

    Despite the fact that virtually every problem that exists in our country can be traced to the corruption and incompetence of government, that government is responsible for the greatest atrocities in the history of the world , and that government is by its very nature oppressive, there are still those that naively believe government can be trusted to solve all our problems. There are those that believe utopia is a realistic goal of government, though such a belief belies the present world and the entire history of this world. They trust the government in power and control of everything, including our lives and fortunes. Further, these same wishful dreamers seek to strip the citizens’ right to guns, thus rendering the citizen defenseless against the tyranny and oppression common to every government in the real world. There is a name for such people. They are referred to as ‘liberals’; but more precisely they are known as ‘fools’.

    • http://None Sparky says

      you are dead right.the government is the problem Look all around you,forest fires.
      global warming all backed by the government with their nose deep into the problem
      even the torrential rains we have been getting in places where it has never happened
      before.The warming of this year is a good example of cleaning up the atmosphere.I could go on and on but you get the idea.

      • MAP

        Sparky, your comment makes little sense. I believe you are so far out into outer space there is no atmosphere present. Oxygen deprivation has robbed you of your senses.

      • Marten The Canadian Libertarian

        Sparky, you’re out of your med. go see your Dr (QUACK)

    • TruthWFree

      I agree with you, MAP. Unfortunately, these fools are growing in number as they feed at the government pig trough and they are voting. I’m afraid the country is lost and the Constitutionhas been dismantled. These fools will wake up when it is too late.

      • http://peresonallibertydigest.. gottaplenty

        How many lib fools have you known have enough sense to wake up?

    • John the Libertarian

      more precisely, the ‘liberals’, or ‘fools’ as you characterize them, might also be aptly named as ‘useful idiots’ to quote one of their heroes (vladimir iilich lenin)

    • Robert Smith

      What if the government had taken the guns away from the straw buyers?

      What screeching would have come from the NRA?

      Either way the extreme right isn’t happy.

      Do you have a better plan?


      • CZ52

        “What if the government had taken the guns away from the straw buyers?

        What screeching would have come from the NRA?”

        No Robert, if they were proven straw buyers the NRA would have applauded their arrest.

    • Viet Nam Vet 67-68

      Liberalism is another word for Communism!!

    • Larry K.

      just wanted to get this in……i’m beginning to think it might be a us gov. person who killed brian terry.

  • TIME

    This topic alone should open the eyes of anyone who still can’t get it, as in that you don’t have a Government you have a Corporation known as the US inc. That wanst to control your every move right down to what you can wear or eat.


    Ok lets review – if you have an Amendment thats quite clear in its “natural intent of use,” thats sustained by not only the Constitution but as well the DOI, – then there should never be any debate at all about its meaning / meanings.

    Its really quite obvious that the 2nd Amendment was written so as to remove {any as well all Persons or Government that trys to impinge or impede the either the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution.} A five year old understand it, I have asked so thats why I note that. Natural responce is; “Its so you get get the BAD GUYS.”
    Thats a Quote from a real five year old.

    Yet how many years now have the “Board of Directors” or CONgress to you that just refuse to open your eyes to what they really are – have been trying to take away your 2nd Rights?
    What 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, years?
    They have in fact have set standards on what was written way back when the 2nd Amendment was written that again {is so clear in its intent} that even a total moreoff can understand it, or better yet a Five year old!

    And yet this absurd battle of rhetoric continues for year after year, what a waste of TIME and energy, let alone TAX payer Money .

    I have said this before but will post it again for you all to use as intel;
    Guns per YEAR account for 30,000 deaths, of that number around 19,000 – Kill themself, I don’t think thats a Crime, let alone should it be used in this equation. {2010 – FBI Stats}

    Be that as it may, only about 11,000 people use guns in some real type of crime, but you also have to keep in mind the Self Protection factor thats also used in that number. again {FBI 2010 stats.}

    Yet per Month in just the 50 States – 200,000 “plus” people die from Legal Prescribed meds! Now when you add up the numners that equals, on the base side alone 2,400,000 people yes thats right thats {2.4 Million people per year,} { FDA stats 2010;} compaired with only around 11,000 on the Gun side , again 2010 FBI stats.

    So what one do you really think causes more deaths?

    What one should be a topic of interest on the Mass Media’s nightly news?
    What topic should the FDA, let alone Congress if they really are only interested in saving life be focused on?

    You tell me whats logical..

    Peace and Love

    • MidnightDStroyer

      Your mention of a correlation between suicide rates & gun accessibility? There is NO correlation.

      The statistics on suicide rates remain fairly steady in any given area where the stats were collected…REGARDLESS of the strictness or laxity of gun control. The common sense answer to this non-correlation is self evident: Anyone with a mind to suicide isn’t going to much care how they accomplish it, gun or no gun. There are no statistics to support any idea that intent to suicide motivates anyone to buy a gun just for that purpose.

      And yet, liberal idiots are trying to use this as another one of their straw-arguments for more gun control…Go figure. Leave it to a lib to think that fantasy overrules reality.

      • Katrael

        MidnightDStroyer, I worked for five years at a state mental facility and during those five years there were 3 successful suicides and this occurred in a place where they are familiar with the process. It only goes to show that a person who wishes to kill their self will do it no matter how much we try to prevent it. Taking guns away from people only means they will have to resort to a different tactic.

      • TIME

        Dear Midnight,

        Perhap you should re-read what I posted, as your post has nothing to do with anything other than to pander worthless CONfusing Rhetoric.

        One needs to use the same stats that these Criminals known as the United States Inc. use, thus use it back at them to display just how mindless thier argument’s are.

        Thus – the Point of the post I made – so even you can grasp it.

        {The Criminals who reside in the City State of the District of Columbia – who are noted as – “CONgress”} can create worthless rhetoric / BS – that scores of mindless sheep will follow without thinking about anything other than – BAD = GUN.
        Gun owner = BAD.
        Now make LAWS to {restrict these bad people from owning guns} keep us safe from these BAD GUN OWNERS.

        This is all within a CONtrol grid type of programing of farm animials to do as they are told by way of Propaganda thats based in 100%worthless rhetoric / BS – about Public safety.

        Just like seat belts, the facts are that seat belts save very few,
        yet its the Law {so buckel up all ye mindless sheep!” Or pay a Tribute to the Criminal orgination known as the US inc..

        In Plain words that even the brain dead can understand;
        If the public has no form of defence from the TYRANTS – then total control over the sheep will be as easy as pushing a 100 year old on a walker to the ground.

        The 2nd Amendment was placed into law to give the America Public the option of taking out a Criminal Gov when noted – become TYRANTS.

        So people, its your call, open your eyes and do what you have to do or suffer the ramifications.

        Peace and Love

      • Mike in MI

        Time, Midnight and Katrael -
        Let’s start a movement to send doctors with prescription drug pads south across the border to Mexico and Central America. At the 2.4 Mil./year drug death rate, medical care is a more efficient killer than the Zetas and their friends. Hell, that’s far more than the numbers of deaths in the Mideast wars. Jeez, that doesn’t even take into account the deaths from negligence, malpractice and other forms of medical mayhem.
        God Almighty…and people want free medical care more than they want their daily bread.

        On a different tack – It has always appeared to me that Brian Terry looks like he was a real sharp, savvy, no nonsense officer, Zapata too. I wonder if Officer Terry had figured out what was going on and had voiced his concerns. Gee, those in charge wouldn’t want to have their doings exposed.
        Of course, if Holder never turns over the docs we’ll never know. That’s the Chicago Way and a ghetto conman…

      • Robert Smith

        Suicide is a NON ARGUMENT. The numbers show that.

        “Consistent with this assessment, previous research has indicated that while gun ownership levels are consistently related to the rate of gun suicides, they are unrelated to total suicide rate (see Table 2). That is, where guns are common, people will more frequently use them to kill themselves, but this does not affect the total number of people who die. Apparently, gun availability affects only method choice, not the frequency of fatal outcomes.”
        That’s from:


      • Bud Tugly

        Time -
        Putting the issue of guns aside (in which I am in agreement with you), you are wrong about seat belts. Talk to anyone who works in an emergency room. Seat belts save numerous lives every year. Ever pick up the body of a dead kid who flew through a windshield because she had no seat belt on? I witnessed an accident and stopped to help. The collision wasn’t that bad but the little girl was shredded by the glass. The paramedics at the scene said her injuries would not have been severe if she had been in proper restraints.

        All entities are capable of good and evil. The government does some bad and some good. There are many laws that protect our citizens and many stupid ones that inhibit freedom or just don’t work. The government does have a responsibility to look after the welfare of our citizens. How and how much has been open to debate since 1776. It is unlikely that any consensus will be reached any time soon. We just have to respect the rights of our neighbors to have their own opinions.

        • Katrael

          Bud Tugly, and just what are those responsibilities to look after the welfare of our citizens do you think the government has? Is it cradle to grave stuff?

      • Robert Smith

        To a listener of Click & Clack who posted: “Seat belts save numerous lives every year.”

        The thing that convinced me to ALWAYS use seat belts was driving a big old Ford Galaxy with a bench seat. The seat belt kept me in place so I could continue to drive even after the car went sideways .

        Had I not been able to recover it was going to get really really ugly.


  • tim

    The vote is today, write youre congressman and demand they vote to get rid of eric holder!! Just look at his past, that is reason enough that he shouldn’t have gotten the job to begin with!!! Now his latest crimes being covered up by his accomplice only show the quilt!!! Obama and his race baiter al sharpton are in on the show now. Thier usual setup. Calling republicans racists to get the heat off holder and obama. How about the truth, wheres that at!!!! Where are the apologies to brian terry’s family and others for the guns they walked straight to the cartels!!!! What about the slander against honest gun shops that were being controlled by the atf!!! Hell, the whole thing came about after atf whistleblowers came out and told the truth. Since then it’s become a typical chicago style thug cover up!!!!!! Lets get to impeachment, NOW, NOT later!!!!!!

    • Nick Cz

      Tim. I cannot quite understand why Eric Holder has to be held in contempt. He has nothing to do with the situation. We have a number of straw purchasers (Many of them 18 with no money) walk in to Arizona gun shops and buy AK]-47′s and other assault weapons and then sell them to Mexican concerns (Criminals). The ATF is unable to arrest them or seize the weapons due to lax existing laws. Local District attourneys prevent the ATF from seizing the weapons.The weapons go south and therefor Eric Holder should be charged. Dahhhhhhh. It is a no brainer for me. People should not be able to buy assault weapons and resell them to criminals. Is that so difficult to understand. Does a law abiding citizen need an AK-47 to shoot ground hogs, have target practice, defend themselves or go hunting? But should a law abiding citizen be allowed and protected to buy weapons as a straw buyer and sell them to criminals? This is so partisan, and rediculous. The committee chaired by REP Issa is so rediculous. If he really wanted to find out who killed the border agent, then he ought to question the ATF and the agents involved and not Eric Holder. This is so rediculous, I cannot believe that this is happening. In reality, I think that all of the Congressional members that have been willing to undermine the health and well being of the USA should be arrested as traitors and hanged, instead of being paid to screw the country to try and get the GOP re-elected. What a sad state of affairs. regards Nick Cz

      • CZ52

        Nick are you totaly ignorant or an obama adminstration plant. In operation Fast and furious, the actions being discussed here, the BATF ordered the gun dealers to make the sales to known straw purchasers. BATF then made NO attempt to track those guns to their final destination. In fact when agents did try to track them they were ordered to let the guns go. In addition since the operation was kept secret from Mexico there was no way to track the firearms once they crossed the border.

      • CZ52

        “The ATF is unable to arrest them or seize the weapons due to lax existing laws.”

        Wrong. The BATF could arrest them as soon as they walked out the door of the gun store with the weapons and get convictions with no trouble.

        “Local District attourneys prevent the ATF from seizing the weapons.”

        Wrong again. Local District attorneys have no say over what the FEDERAL organization known as BATF does.

      • CZ52

        “Does a law abiding citizen need an AK-47 to shoot ground hogs, have target practice, defend themselves or go hunting?”

        It doesn’t matter if I need it or not. So long as it is not an assualt rifle I have the right to own one with no restrictions. If it is an assualt rifle I have the right to own it after I have filled out the proper paperwork, paid for the license, and passed the extensive background check.

      • CZ52

        ” If he really wanted to find out who killed the border agent, then he ought to question the ATF and the agents involved and not Eric Holder.”

        The question here isn’t who killed the agent it is known he was killed by drug cartel people. The question is how far up in this adminstration did the knowledge of the illegal abnomination known as Fast and Furious go, who conceived it, who gave final approval for its implementation, etc..

      • MontieR

        Do you live under a rock. The ATF ORDERED the gun shops to violate federal law and sell the weapons to the straw men. As far as the militia is concerned you need to re read
        the constitution it states there are TWO types of militia organised AND unorganized. And
        the national guard does NOT legally fall under EITHER description as it is part of the federal army.

      • CZ52

        MontieR further down Nick says he lives in Canada. That being the case he has absolutely no idea of what he is talking about.

      • Vicki

        CZ52 says:

        Nick Cz: “Does a law abiding citizen need an AK-47 to shoot ground hogs, have target practice, defend themselves or go hunting?”

        It doesn’t matter if I need it or not. So long as it is not an assualt rifle I have the right to own one with no restrictions. If it is an assualt rifle I have the right to own it after I have filled out the proper paperwork, paid for the license, and passed the extensive background check.

        Let us review. “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.”

        Now let us discuss the meaning of shall NOT be infringed.
        “proper paperwork, paid for the license, and passed the extensive background check”
        All look like infringements to me.

        “law abiding” – the people who are not a problem who have their right infringed upon by “proper paperwork” , “Licensing” and the cost thereof, long delays for the “extensive background check” and the cost thereof.

        “Criminals” – The people who ARE the problem and have no infringement on their right to keep and bear arms cause they ignore the “law”.

      • phideaux

        Vicki, while it should be the discussion isn’t about the properness of all the paperwork and “getting permission” it is about Micks total lack of knolwledge about US gun laws and operation F&F.

      • r.p.

        The ground hogs in my area are heavily armed AND they have reinforced bunkers. I need more than an AK47, I need some predator drones with bunker busters.

      • jorind

        #1 Nick are you daft?

        #2 Do you have a spell checker? If not, try a dictionary.

    • Nick Cz

      CZ. the problem with most Republican supporters is that you believe your politicians hook, line and sinker. It must mean that you lack the education to listen to some one and see that they are feeding you a pack of lies. If I was to score the Dems and the GOP as to the outrageous lies that comes out of their mouths, the GOP take the cake 10 to 1. The crap that comes out of their mouths is unbelievable. That they can find about half of America, that will believe them is even more unbelievable. No I can understand if you were one of the 1% of the wealthiest people in the USA. I know that supporting the GOP will ensure that your wealth and power will grow. But I cannot understand how the rest of the 49% buy into this, when it is hurting you and causing you harm. Now I have listened to Issa and his GOP committee members and their stories do not hold water. Here is a link to an in-depth article by an independent investigative reporter from Fortune magazine. Fortune is a right leaning publication for the wealthy.

      I would believe this reporter more than a politician in this election cycle. What this article says makes much more sense than the rhetoric that is coming out of the mouths of the desperate GOP members. Romney and the rest of the GOP look like desperate fools who are willing to do anything to unseat Obama and get back into power. Look at the voter suppression in Florida, PA and Michigan. Look at the Super-pacs and the billions that are pouring into the election campaigns. The GOP have done nothing to create jobs in the last 3 years and have tried to undermine any attempt at Obama to create bills and laws that would help the country. In other countries, these GOP congressmen would be arrested and hung for treason. Instead they are being paid to undermine the USA. How can you stand for this?
      It is so obvious that this scam by Issa is another of the desperate tricks the GOP are trying as they are desperate to get back into power to control and abuse the American Citizens.
      Just do a google search on “Fortune Magazine Fast and Furious and you will get dozens of articles that are exposing this witch-hunt Who you believe will show how gullible you are.
      Viet Nam Vet. You joke about believing Pelosi. Romney has not said anything about what he will do if elected. It is the same. Just vote me in and then you will see what I will do. Haha. I would not trust him. His big deal is to repeal Obamacare. Your medical system if one of the worst in the world. That is unjustifiable for the wealthiest country in the world. The reason that your health care has gotten out of control is that there are too many wealthy people getting too much profit in the middle of the medical costs. Watch CNN where they show that one bottle of saline solution drip is charged $228.00 in US hospitals. Our single payer system in Canada, costs our government $8.00 for the same thing. No wonder your health care costs are so high. How many people are profiting from someone’s sickness and bad fortune? Hospital HMO administrators and owners are prospering on the backs of sick people. Just how much profit is required?
      Your second amendment and other parts of your constitution were made more than 100 years ago. Just how far into the future will you operate on these laws before updating them? Do you think that your founding fathers had any idea of life in the 21st century? Laws need to be updated. we pay 1.5 % in each paycheck for medical costs. This is collected with each paycheck. The more you make the more you pay. If you are under a certain threshold, you pay nothing. We can go into any hospital or doctors office and be served with out any question. They never ask for your credit card. I live each day with out worrying how I will come up with another $1200.00 plus monthly, to insure my family.
      No wonder you are so paranoid. You need to have a gun to keep your neighbor off your case.
      I am an independent, and have come to these conclusions from watching, listening and reading. It is so blatant that I cannot believe what is going on south of my border.

      • CZ52

        Nick you have used 1,000 words and not one of them in any way refutes or even attempts to refute my shreading of your original post. In fact 99% of this post has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand that being Holders criminal actions regarding Fast and Furious. Of course I shouldn’t expect anything better from someone who is most likely an adminstration plant spewing nonsense.

        • Nick Cz

          Hay CZ52. How many guns and what types do you have? You seem to be the resident gun law expert here. Yes I am not familiar with US guns laws. I do not really care. Other than I do not think that average citizen should not be able to walk into a gun store, any where in the US, and buy an Uzi machine gun. And if getting special vetting and security checks to be able to sell them immediately to another party. Like the Mexican cartels.

          CZ52. “Nick you have used 1,000 words and not one of them in any way refutes or even attempts to refute my shreading of your original post. In fact 99% of this post has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand that being Holders criminal actions regarding Fast and Furious.”

          I do not remember and I cannot see anything here that you have refuted anything I said about Fast and Furious. Can you be more specific? Have you seen the article about the investigation from Money magazine? Who is more believable, the investigative reporter or REP Issa?

          The evidence that is coming out now is that the STF was unable due to loopholes in the second amendment, that prevented them from arresting or tracing the purchased guns that killed the border agent. that started before the Obama administration.
          Him and Holder should not be blamed for something that started before they came into power. What really irks me is the obviously political moves that the House is making about this case. After 7000 documents, they want another 8000 docs, and then when they cannot find anything that supports their case they will ask for another 8000 docs. Some of those docs should be privileged communication. For example, if the docs deal with party election issues. The GOP would love to have something that they could use in their political battle. I bet you that 90% of the docs that they are asking for have nothing to do with Fast and Furious. It is so obvious that the GOP are only politically motivated on everything that they are doing until the election. They have not done anything to help the USA in the last two years in Congress. What are you paying them for?
          This has been a paid political message. I am Barack Obama and I approve this message haha.

  • sean murry

    Today is the day that holder should be on trial.

  • cedarridgefarmsinc

    The government tries to convince americans that we would be safer if the public wouldn’t have guns. What about the bad guy’s and the government who will defend us from them? I was talking to a freind from Australia and he told me when they take your guns your freedoms is gone for ever and you will not get them back! I am sick of hearing that the constitution is out dated so we need to do away with it, who came up with that? Some “A hole who wants us not to have rights. This is the only part of the constitution right now that our government even uses and they are going to try and take forcibly our guns from us. It will be a fight to the finish for this too ever happen!

    • Nick Cz

      The common theme among most of the posters here is that the right to have guns to protect yourselves is the over-riding sentiment. I am in Canada. We can have guns here if we want, to hunt, target practice etc. But what we can’t do, is to carry weapons on our bodies or in our vehicles, without following some simple rules. Like carry the gun in a locked gun rack, keep the ammunition separate etc. What this means is that we will not lose our children who decide that they want to play cops and robbers, we will not have senile grannies shooting away the UPS delivery man, who steps onto the front porch with a delivery. All of the legal and legitimate uses are not restricted. What this will do is slowly prevent more crimes because anytime someone is caught with a gun, it will be confiscated and they will be charged. In Canada, we do not have the need to defend ourselves on a daily basis because there is danger of guns being widely carried. Evern most robberies do not have gunds involved. there is absolutely no danger to our lifes from criminals carrying guns. If some one wants to kill someone, they will probably succeed. If a person knows that he is a target, then they will probably have a gun themselves. But as a whole and over 99.9 % of us, do not suffer from any danger from guns. But in the USA, that is an entirely different matter as the gun finatics want to be able to carry them, and also be able to buy them and resell them to criminals and that makes it an entirely a more dangerous situation. So your need to protect yourself is expanding the need to have more guns. With the Fast and Furious case, it makes no sense to me that your laws allow a 18 year old with no money to be able to go in and buy 200 Assault weapans and not be subject to inspection, detention and arrest. This is what has happened with this situation. It seems that the Rifle Association and gun proponents want to protect this lack of control. Don’t blame Eric Holder and the ATF. It is the lack of appropriate laws and controls that has caused this controversy. The added injustice is the sham commitee that is chaired by REp ISSA that refuses to ask the questions of the appropriate people that were involved in this issue, but instead concentrate on Eric Holder and people that had nothing to do with the issue. Of course I can see that it is the fervent partisan politics and it is so obvious that I cannot believe that sane people even consider this. How would adding some laws and control, that prevents gun shops from selling to straw purchasers and resale to criminal elements? Do responsible gun users have a problen with this? I know that it will negatively affect the sales volume of some of the gun shops. But imagine how many fewer people would be killed by criminals> What is the problem with that?

      • CZ52

        Nick if you truely do live in Canada you are totaly ignorant of the laws in the US especially those involving firearms. You are also totaly ignorant of what happened in operation Fast and Furious.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        You say, “Evern(sic) most robberies don’t have gunds(sic) involved.”. If they don’t have guns, why would anybody give them the money?

      • CZ52

        Judging by his typing and language skills (or lack there of) Nick is at most in the 6th grade.

      • Vicki

        Since Nick is from Canada I will direct his attention to one of his fellow Canadians so that he might gain wisdom from her.

        She has a bunch of other videos on firearms that I suggest people watch.

    • Larry K.

      they’ll take my gun bullet by bullet.

  • MAP

    “I am sick of hearing that the constitution is out dated so we need to do away with it, who came up with that?” The power-hungry in government, helped by the useful idiots on the left.

    • Power To The People

      Obummer said “Damn the Constitution”n in one of his speeches in 2007. However, the destruction started long ago and is picking up steam. Americans better wake up, stop watching American Idol and racing and observe the real actions of the power brokers in the most corrupt town in USA….DC!

  • Cribster

    I haven’t heard anywhere what the fate of Eric Holder will be if he is found in contempt. Will he be indicted, sent to prison? Does anyone know?

    • Nancy in Nebraska

      Seriously?!? Absolutely NOTHING will happen to him. It’s just a technicality! It’s all for show! The laws they pass to control us do not apply to them!

    • Larry K.

      he needs to face the fireing squad.

  • Greg

    Whoever (and I don’t care who you are) comes for my guns will get them one bullet at a time. Period.

    • Joseph

      Greg, I and thousands of others agree totally with your statement. As my president said ” From my cold dead hands”

    • Nancy in Nebraska

      If you won’t give them your guns, they’ll just burn your house down with you in it!

      • Alex

        The Amerikkkan Gun—psuedo-phallus for frightened losers.

        A very wise person once said that if Teabaggers could “figure out a way to liquify guns they would shoot them straight up into their arms”—HAAA!!

      • TIME

        Dear Alex,

        Perhaps you need to grow up some before you post, or ask your Mommie if you can be on the Big Boy Computer rather than that little toy that Mommie bought you.

        Hey Alex BTW – do you know what Sig F, said about people who use sexual terms about others, {its a clear indication that person is the one with the sexual issue.}

        Peace and Love

      • Alex

        TIMEout— so you are a Freudian? Do you accept EVERYthing he wrote? REALLY?

      • TIME

        Dear Alex,

        Whats your point again? It was YOU afterall that used old Sig’s laws of human behavior with your comments clearly displayed within your post.
        Thus proving one of two things based on Sig’s laws of Human behavior and interactions, saddly you fit both profiles to a tee, as in your posted comments are “100% textbook” for both issues noted below please note #1 & #2.

        #1, You are an very angry woman who has a really bad case of
        “Penis Envy.” Thats based on your first less than note worthy comment.

        #2, Or – Your a closet Gay. based on your follow up comment.

        Be that as it may, again it was YOU who invoked the retort based solely on your post content value.
        – AKA reading between the lines, really others here should afford you the same value of retort.
        Other than thevalueless let alone absurd comments you provide little in the way of any form of positive or Intelligent platform.

        Peace and Love

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        Alex is the most ignorant person on here. He knows nothing about any topic. He is only here to disrupt the flow of conversation. Since he is ignorant and knows nothing, he posts stupid vulgar remarks to get attention. SAD AND PITIFUL! I bet he crawls around on his belly too!

      • CZ52

        At least eddie and Flashy provide a certain amount of comic distraction with their posts Alex provides Nothing.

        By the way, despite my dissagreeing with about 99% of what he posts I hope eddie is OK. He lives in Colorado where they are having all the fires although I forget what town he said he lived in.

      • Vicki

        Alex demonstrates abysmal ignorance by writing:
        “The Amerikkkan Gun—psuedo-phallus for frightened losers.”

        You mean like this? (She’s Canadian btw and obviously smarter than a lot of Americans)

        She doesn’t look at all frightened but you bet the rapist (he’s the one with a phallus btw) sure did. Oh and he would be the loser too.

      • Vicki

        Or maybe Alex could learn from this 11 year old American and her mothers “pseudo-phallus”

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Alex, you have a dud for brain. Don’t show off what you don’t have.

      • Larry K.

        that’s okay, i’ll take a few with me.

  • Sue

    This picture shows,obama to holder,America be dammed,I got your back bro.

  • Jimmy The Greek

    Every one at the ATF. needs to be given prison time that had anything to do with this gun running , And saying i was just doing what my bosses told me to do is no reason to be let off the hook , all in charge of this should get double prison time all the way up to the top of the Chane of command .

    • Alex

      I believe Fast and Furious was initiated by the Bush Crime Family, no?

      • Jimmy The Greek

        Then jail them to !

      • http://http/yahoo sophillyjimmy

        As you well know Alex, GW Bush administration had a sting operation going on with the partnership of the Mexican government, and the guns involved in that stig has gps trackers on them, and none of those guns were involved in the death of any US law enforcement agents, while Fast And Furious involved upwards of 2,500 semi automatics and since the ATFE had experience with already running guns to Mexico in a planned sting operation, they knew well that the guns should have had gps trackers on them but since Fast And Furious had an alterior motive which was to assist in the abolishment of the second amendment of our Constitution although the ATFE knew how to do it, they were folloing orders from the DOJ and the head of the DOJ, Eric Holder, and I don’t think that Holder would have done this without prior orders by the anti second amendment president and secretary of state, and again as we all know Obama is a puppet on a string with George Soros another anti second amendment billionaire footing the bill and paying the prsident to do his bidding, so once Holder is sitting in a Federal Prison for witholding vital documents and perjury at a Congressional Hearing, just like any other criminal in prison will begin to squeel like a pig on all involved and that is before he even faces charges of gun running and hopefully involuntary manslaughter for the death of Officer Brian Terry, so since Holder is so familiar with making a deal and getting on the Witness Protection Plan of the Federal government, he will realize that if he doesn’t, his life will be worth a plugged nickel since it will be so easy for him to be shanked or poisoned in prison. So if Congress plays their cards right this administration could fall like a house of cards, this I know first hand since I worked in a prison and as a supervisor I sat in on many deal making plans with inmates and the bigger the crime the faster the deals are made, it doesn’t matter if Holder and Obama are homies or not, if holder is detained, he will give up the tapes and say frig my homie, it is time to save my own arse, but again it all depends on how Congress deals with this crime.

      • CZ52

        Let me make it real simple so that maybe even you can understand it Alex. The operation under Bush involved about 400 firearms it was carried out with the full knowledge and “co-operation” of the Mexican government. When it was seen that they could not track the guns once they went into Mexico the operation was quickly ended. Fast and Furious started under obama approximately 9 months after he took office was done without the knowledge of the Mexican government. There was no attempt made to track any of the guns after the left the dealer that is where the term “gun walking” comes from, the BATF just let the guns walk away.

      • MontieR

        The fast and furious, is SOLELY Holders baby. Yes bush did have a program similar BUT
        for the most part it worked and when it started to fail he ended it, plus nobody DIED. Bush did it WITH the Mexican governments cooperation and knowledge. Mr Holder did it intentionally without Mexico’s knowledge. Fast and furious was a perversion of that program in that the guns were NEVER intended to be tracked. What was the purpose of giving the guns to Mexican terrorists without a viable way of tracking them and then telling your officers on the ground to STOP tracking them.
        Both England AND Australia (the people) have warned every one else giving up their RIGHT to own weapons was a GREAT mistake. Are you honestly happy with the royalty
        in DC having the authority to ignore ANY of the laws that constrain you and I. Do you really believe in the benevolence of the RULING class in Washington DC.

      • Vicki

        Alex says:
        “I believe Fast and Furious was initiated by the Bush Crime Family, no?”


        But you actually knew that already. You are just trying to confuse readers.

    • Rodney

      We have to do something about the ATF and FBI and all the other alphabet agencies they have been out of control for years. Ruby Ridge, Waco and many other times when the government has made criminals out of citizens, and push for more gun confiscations.

  • Todd

    Right, we have been waiting for them to hold Polosi ,Waters and Rangle for there dirty little deeds for 4 years?….Don’t hold your breath. He’s guilty…He’ll walk.

  • Alex

    Reich Wing gun fetishists blather on and on about the stupid, slave-owner scrawled Second Amendment, but never allow the term “Well-Regulated” to register in their tiny, frightened, and fevered minds.

    Sam Rolley has clearly missed that as he whines about poor gun dealers who have commited crimes. What’s the matter little Sammy boy, the Second Amendment as written is not so lustrous if you READ WHAT IT SAYS?

    • MAP

      Listen up folks! Alex is here with the sound advice and useful wisdom of the useful idiot. Well, it may not be useful….but it is good for a laugh!

      • John the Libertarian

        THANKS, MAP— totally concur… poor alex has had his head up in nether regions so long, he has killed most of the few brain cells he once had, for lack of O2…

      • http://peresonallibertydigest.. gottaplenty

        Alex hasnt had one sliver of useful advice and I cant see any humor in his posts, but we will respect freedom of speech to make stupid statements, even tho he would like to restrict all rights to other people in his observation of controls..

    • Nancy in Nebraska

      AGAIN, you blather and say NOTHING!

    • phideaux

      Why don’t you tell us what “well regulated” means Alex.

    • Mutant

      ‘Well-regulated’ is an 18th century term of which most people today are ignorant. As anyone who has ever tried to shoot at a moving target will attest, it is very difficult to regulate the motion of the firearm to get an accurate shot.
      Perhaps it would have been better if the 2nd amendment had used the equivalent phrase ‘accurately shooting’.

      • CZ52

        Nice try Mutant but that doesn’t really cover it. While the ability to shoot with reasonable accuracy was part of it well regulated meant much more as it applied to the unorganized militia when the second amendment was written. Well regulated included bringing your personal firearm in good working condition and, I think, 100 “rounds” of ammunition. It meant being familiar with the firearm and as noted above being able to shoot it with reasonable accuracy. It also meant bringing your own blanket and a certain amount of food and other supplies. Well regulated also meant you were supposed to have been exposed to a certain minimum amount of training organized by the local sherriff or other local officials.

    • MontieR

      IF you are going to quote the second amendment, QUOTE ALL of it.

      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 first half states the STATE (not the federal government) should have a well regulated militia. The national guard does NOT fit this description.

      The second half reads. The RIGHT of the PEOPLE to keep AND bear arms shall NOT be infringed. Look up the definition of infringed.

      There is NO such thing as “sensible gun control laws”, gun control has NOTHING to do with guns and EVERYTHING to do with control.

      Two monumental examples of sensible gun control. Chicago is now a WAR zone. Notice that the CRIMINALS pay absolutely no attention to the laws about it being against the law to carry a gun. And of course there is the peoples republik of New York. If I am correct the fourth highest murder rate with fire arms.

      Guess witch state rates number ONE. You guessed it Kalifornia the state with THE second strictest gun legislation in the nation.

      As far as your apparent ability to read AND comprehend is impaired, any further comments by you will be considered biased by your willful ignorance.

    • Vicki

      Alex says:
      “Reich Wing gun fetishists blather on and on about the stupid, slave-owner scrawled Second Amendment, but never allow the term “Well-Regulated” to register in their tiny, frightened, and fevered minds.”

      Hey Alex. Can you squeeze in a few more ad hominem attacks in there? Anyone who knows language understands who’s mind is tiny, possibly fevered, and obviously afraid of inanimate objects.

    • Rodney

      Alex I know this will be over your head but I just have to say, get a dictionary from the 1700 and you will see that regulated only referred to working and the militia was every free male between the ages of 18 and 45 who were not serving in the military. Each was required to have their military style weapons with plenty of ammunition (ball and powder)
      that would get together each Saturday for shooting competitions.

  • Nancy in Nebraska

    When they get around to passing the gun control laws, I wonder how many idiots will voluntarily turn in their guns.

  • Originalintent

    Mr. Hoyer is right. Those criminals wear suits and sit in Congress, the White House and the DOJ. Those are the most prominent criminals responsible for all these gun deaths, most particularly in this case.

  • Jeremy Leochner

    Yes guns dont kill people. Other then the 8775 murders caused by a firearm in 2010 alone.

    Fast and Furious in my mind was a stupid and ill conceived idea.

    It is wrong to go after innocent people based on perceptions. All I can think is lets focus on the guns. We need to do everything we can to prevent insane people from obtaining guns and we need to restrict things like automatics and assault weapons as much as possible. People have a right to bear arms. But we can regulate how they can obtain those arms and we can regulate the circumstances in which they carry them. They can have a militia. But it must be well regulated as the constitution says.

    • http://peresonallibertydigest.. gottaplenty

      How about restricting every thing else that you dont like. Thats the problem with America , so many arm chair lawyers think they, over and above all, that they and only they know how to keep the world straight Join the obummer think tank,, narcistics

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I like guns. I would love to go to a shooting range and fire one off. But there is a place for guns like automatics and assault weapons. We need to regulate so that people cant just carry around automatic weapons that could cause great harm to others.

    • CZ52

      “… and we need to restrict things like automatics and assault weapons …”

      First, automatics (meaning firearms capable of full-auto fire) and Assualt weapons are the same thing.

      Second, automatics and assualt weapons are very strictly controlled. to legaly purchase one you have to purchase a special l;icense and go thru a much more extensive background check that you do to purchase/own a non-full auto firearm.

      Third. there is only instance I am aware of where a legaly owned full-auto weapon was used in a crime. That instance was a law enforcement officer using a department owned machine gun to, I believe, kill his ex wife.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I believe websters defines assault rifles as being of a military use or made for military use. There is a difference between an automatic rifle and an assault rifle. A pistol can be automatic but it may not necessarily be something designed for military use.

        I respect that they are strictly controlled. I want it to stay that way. My problem is the idea that gun control equates to violating the second amendment. I want things to stay the way they are in regard to automatics and assault weapons.

        That is bad. Perhaps that particular office or district should improve its standards for selecting police officers.

      • CZ52

        “I believe websters defines assault rifles as being of a military use or made for military use. There is a difference between an automatic rifle and an assault rifle.”

        Jeremy, by that definition any shoulder fired firearm is an assualt rifle including my antique Sweedish Mauser bolt action rifle.

        The US military defines an assualt rifle as compact rifle shooting a small caliber cartridge capable of select fire. Select fire means you have the option of shooting the rifle in semi-auto mode or full auto mode with full auto including burst fire. Since you seem to be definition challenged as concerns automatics let me tell you what it means concerning firearms. Automatic means the gun will fire when you pull the trigger and continue to fire until you release the trigger. Semi-auto means the firearms self loads each shot but a pull of the trigger gets you one shot to get a second and following shots you have to pull the trigger again and again. In other words an automatic rifle and by the US military definition an assualt rifle are machine guns and licensed and controlled as such. What is commonly called an assualt rifle is ONLY capable of semi-auto fire and as such is NOT truely an assualt rifle although it can look like or similar to one.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I apologize. I was too general in my definition. Thank you for clearing that up.

    • MontieR

      What you fail to grasp is that the laws we already have prevent (supposedly) those classes of people FROM owning firearms. Laws do NOT restrict criminal behavior they are supposed punish it. Our laws give the criminal element NO reason not to commit crimes. We have removed deterring consequences and now punish the victims.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        If the laws and regulations are not enough then maybe they should be strengthened. We should not hurt innocent people. But just because people disobey laws does not mean the laws are meaningless.

    • Vicki

      Jeremy Leochner says:
      “Yes guns dont kill people. Other then the 8775 murders caused by a firearm in 2010 alone.”

      Darn I missed seeing 8775 cases of inanimate objects jumping up and hunting down their human prey. Is there a youtube video?

      Guns are INANIMATE objects. They kill people of their own volition as often as cars (other than Christine (1983 fantasy/horror movie) ) kill people of their own volition. As often as hammers kill people of their own volition. As often as knives kill people of their own volition.

      See a pattern here Alex. Oops I mean Jeremy? Are you guys related?

      • Jeremy Leochner

        First me and alex are not related. Would like for us to stick to actual names and identities here.

        Second: There is a difference between a knife/car/hammer and a gun. A gun has range and if automatic can be far deadlier then any of the things you listed.

        • Katrael

          Jeremy Leochner, you’re wrong about guns being more dangerous. Automobiles are responsible for more deaths and mutilations than firearms are in the hands of civilians. Now try to tell me that most people don’t use their firearms everyday and I’d tell you; yep that’s the point lad they don’t use them everyday. It’s estimated that there are 200 million privately owned firearms in the USA. There were only 10,000 homicides due to firearms in 2005. There were 32,000 traffic fatalities in 2010. There are 237 million registered vehicles in this country. So, your assertion about the danger of firearms is wrong.

          That 10,000 firearm homicides were committed mostly by criminally minded people. There probably were a certain number of those deaths that were crimes of passion but I don’t have that statistic. That 32.000 traffic fatalities were committed by normal everyday citizens texting while driving. Ban cell phones they’re more dangerous than guns.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        My issues involving cars versus guns is in the purpose of a gun versus a car. A gun is designed to cause harm. A car is not designed to cause damage. As to deaths I would guess a vast majority of deaths due to cars are accidents or deaths caused by drunk drivers. Either way it is more through incompetence and stupidity behind the wheel rather than the deliberate actions of the driver. Not to say it is any less dangerous for a mad person to be behind the wheel of a car. I guess I feel more fear from something that is designed to kill over something that can kill.

        • Katrael

          Jeremy Leochner all actions are deliberate. Each person who gets behind the wheel of their auto is doing it deliberately. Everybody who drives knows that their actions behind the wheel can cause the death of somebody and yet they get in and drive for a myriad of reasons and sometimes they even do it to kill somebody.

    • Katrael

      Jeremy Leochner, the best idea is for you to regulate yourself out of existence.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I just think guns are dangerous and those who use or carry them should have to follow rules to ensure they do not intentionally or unintentionally hurt someone. Sorry if that offends.

        • Katrael

          Jeremy Leochner, you seem to have a childlike way of viewing a godlike government and I believe you need to mature some?

          I don’t have a problem with someone being trained to use firearms and perhaps that could be a condition of sale however I don’t agree with restricting what type of firearm, assault or otherwise, that I should be allowed to own. On the other hand I don’t believe that I should be forced to register my firearms as what I own is of no concern of the government’s. In my view what’s offensive is your call for greater levels of regulation and your contention that the government and the military should have the final say in who owns what type of weapon. Aren’t they people just like both of us? What makes them wiser than us?

          Responsible people would never use a firearm irresponsibly against anyone as most of them are too civilized to do that. In fact most criminals lack that same level of civilization and have little or no restraint when it comes to harming people.and I’m sure you know that there is no way to keep assault weapons out of the hands of criminals. Lets be fair about this: if anyone is allowed to own assault weapons then everyone should be allowed to own them. That’s equality and the American way.

          And by the way, I don’t buy into your statement that you would like to fire one off at a target range. If you wanted to do that you’d have done it and not talked about it here. You seem to be trying to take a moderate position while being anything but moderate?

      • vicki

        Since Jeremy thinks we should follow the rules (there are rules for safe gun handling btw) I would suggest that Jeremy push for the same kind of rules that are used for cars. We have already pointed out that cars are MUCH more dangerous than firearms.

        Now the problem with my idea is that the Constitution explicetnly forbids governent from infringing on the right to keep and bear arms so we can’t really do it. But just think

        Car. simple license and driving test but only to use on public roads
        no restriction on size, type, power, cosmetic details.
        no restriction on possession on private property.
        no waiting period.
        Can be transported from private location to private location.
        I’m sure there are a bunch of other things but that will do for a start.

        • Katrael

          vicki, i guess that I don’t have any problems with the states administering a gun licensing system but, I say “I guess”. I know that there will always be a “compromise” between reasonable and unreasonable regulation because that’s what we’re talking about here. That compromise line will always be moving depending on public opinion and because of that we will never be able to “relax” our vigilance and not even on the state level.

          The problem with the gun licensing system as I see it is that it probably requires “registering” our firearms. What the government knows about they can take away and a licensing system may also be used to restrict “private” sales of firearms.


      • Jeremy Leochner

        One slight difference is a gun can be concealed. You can see a car coming from a mile away. I would say the process for people to get a drivers license is not that good. Alot of idiots on the road. I would also point out a gun is designed specifically to cause damage or injury. A car is designed for transportation. If someone uses a gun to kill someone they are misusing it but they are still using a gun to do what a gun is designed to do. As such I treat guns and cars differently.

        • Katrael

          Jeremy Leochner, no kiddin you don’t really mean that firearms are made to damage things do you? I know that but it still doesn’t change anything. That doesn’t give the government the right to restrict the ownership of firearms. People have a right to hunt, target shoot or protect themselves by any means they desire. Swords, axes, knives and even saws are made to damage but we don’t need to regulate those although that has been done in other countries.

          You seem to have an inordinate fear of firearms? Perhaps you should do as someone here suggested: go out and become acquainted with them. Also I see an issue that you don’t feel secure or safe and you think the your god the government is capable of making you feel that way by passing laws?

          Again Jeremy, why in the world would you think that it’s a good idea to take or restrict the ownership of firearms to responsible citizens? These people will never pose a threat to you unless you plan on going on a crime spree where you plan to harm other people? Is that what you have in your mind or do you have something even darker and more sinister than that you’re planning? I don’t feel good about people like you who will always be looking for creative ways of taking other peoples freedoms away from them.

          This is something that I know: this government will abuse abuse us. I know this is true because the history books are full of examples of it. Hmm, something that comes to mind is the “Trail of Tears”, “Reconstruction”, Ruby Ridge and the case in Texas where they took 440 children from their parents all on an unsubstantiated child molestation charge. Will that do for starters? Maybe you think you’re safe from abuse because of you’re race or ethnicity? I wouldn’t count on it.

          Something else: you will never make a totally safe environment no matter how many laws you pass and all man made laws are designed to restrict freedom. The more law and regulation you demand and get, so that you can “feel safe”, will only give you a false sense of security. I see so many issues here that it will be impossible to address them all.

          Now I’m serious about this: I feel that if you don’t like it here because you don’t feel safe then you and others like you should go to some other country where you’ll feel safe but, this isn’t something that should be “forced” on you either. It’s just a suggestion.

  • Average Joe

    Breaking news:
    The SCOTUS, has just announced that the Obamacare “mandate” is Constitutional as a TAX ( although is falls short as a Commerce Clause” issue)…However…it has been upheld.
    May God have mercy on us all.

  • Beno

    This was a set up to take away our rights, armed men are citizens, the unarmed are slaves and that is what obozo wants, people forget there were black slave owners during slavery, and now obozo wants his own plantation and the slaves are to dumb and blind to see his Change for America, when the chains come out it will be to late, idiots:

    • Jeremy Leochner

      People always have the power to fight back with or without guns. The founding fathers put a great deal of faith in the power of speech, expression and the press. That’s why they put those freedoms in the first amendment and the right to bear arms in the second one. The spoken word will always have power and it will always be strong. Yes guns are powerful. But they are not the only source of power. As men like Gandhi and Martin Luther King showed, millions can gain freedom through non violence and non cooperation.

      • Vicki

        Let us take away your 2nd amendment protections and then see what you will do to try and stop us from taking away your 1st amendment protections. It will be a very short film.

        2nd Amendment. The Constitutions Teeth and claws.

      • Vicki

        P.S. the pen is mightier than the sword but only works on those who have the ability to read and comprehend.

      • Deerinwater
      • Jeremy Leochner

        The constitutions teeth and claws are its ideals and the people who believe in it. Armed or not. “While the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power”. I think guns are exciting and fun to shoot. But they are dangerous and can cause harm. I know guns are very powerful. And yes if someone came at me with a gun and all I did was try and reason there is a chance I would not come out okay. I have no desire to take away any ones guns or leave anyone with no means to protect themselves. Maybe my point is wanting gun control does not mean I want to prevent people from having guns. Wanting restrictions on obtaining guns, particularly automatic ones, does not equate to violating the second amendment. I believe guns can be necessary. But only when they are necessary. So long as I believe guns and violence are not necessary I will always try and appeal to reason for a solution. As Lincoln said “Let us have faith that right makes might”.

      • CZ52

        “Wanting restrictions on obtaining guns, particularly automatic ones, does not equate to violating the second amendment.”

        We already have restrictions on obtaining guns and particularly automatic ones. The minimum for purchasing a firearm is filling out the paperwork and submitting to a FBI background check. To purchase an automatic firearm you have to submit to a much more extensive background check and purchase a special license. When you are approved and purchase the automatic I think you also have to submit to a BATF inspection of said firearm anytime they want. It would note I am only aware of one instance where a legaly owned automatic firearm was used in a crime and that was a law enforcement officer using a department automatic to, I think, kill his ex wife.

  • Viet Nam Vet 67-68

    Isn’t it great to have a House Representative to quote such a cute statement as ““The fact of the matter is this life was tragically lost because there are some criminals on both sides of the border who facilitate violent criminal behavior,” Hoyer said” Yes and the criminal behavior was done by Obamination and Holder. Yes guns only kill when a human fires it but that dosen’t mean we give Murderers guns to do it, Hoyer your a Moron. Just like the entire New
    Communist Party that also brought the famous ” Don’t worry about whats in the bill just pass it and we’ll find out Later the super smart Pelosi said” on the most significant bill passed in the last 75 years.Only a Demo-Communist is stupid enough to not read a Bill and pass it. I will write a bill if you promise not to read it and pass it and when your in front of the firing squad you’ll know whats in the bill.

  • RightGunner

    “The fact of the matter is this life was tragically lost because there are some criminals on both sides of the border who facilitate violent criminal behavior,” Hoyer said. Hoyer is correct if he was talking about the Mexican Drug Cartels and the U.S. Justice Dept and the other Federal offices involved in “Fast and Furious”.

    It should be pointed out to all American citizens of Hispanic descent who will be voting this year, that it was the Obama Administration, through their Justice Department and Homeland Security that authorized “Fast and Furious”. This provided the guns that killed hundreds of Mexican law and government officials as well as ordinary citizens. And the Obama Administration did not terminate it until one American, possibly two, were also killed, although it was rebellion in the working level ATF that really forced it to stop and elevated its scrutiny to public view.

    Pass it on.

  • truesoy

    In reality Hoyer was throwing back at the republicans (maybe sarcastically) the same foolish argument the conservatives use to justify guns prolifaration.
    But for one of those rare moments in life we now see the ‘conservatives’ putting the blame on guns for the killing of a border patrol agent, and to use it as the justification for criminal proceedings against the Attorney General.
    The spin masters……, conservatives are second to none!!!!.


  • http://timeWarner Annie Ironside

    Hey Everyone; On July 27, the Bill is going to the Senate to give our 2ad amemdment rights to the U.N. Which means when Obama needs to payChina what we owe and they ask for Nebraska or Ohio, etc.(he already gave them Panama) they can send in U.N. troops and take it. Please call your senator, or write. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is supose to give it to the U.N. write them call them tell them how you feel, print all of this and let them know, If they realize they are on the brink of having a lot more criminals in this counry, Cause I will not give up my rights, and they are on the brink of another Civil war. Maybe it will make a differencel Harry Reed is in charge of the Senate. Thanks Everyone.

  • magasin la redoute

    Since individual doesn‘r love you profession desire them for,doesn‘r indicate these companies get into‘r love you with all there is.

  • code la redoute

    It could be Goodness likes us all based on two or three drastically wrong most people prior to now get together the best one, make sure once we subsequently fulfill the character, you will have learned to happen to be pleased.

  • nike air jordan pas cher

    Although a professional doesn‘MT accept you fascination with this occupation would like them to actually,doesn‘MT indicate many put on‘MT accept you system they need.

  • mia clarisonic

    A fabulous uncle definitely isn’t companion, but companion will be each uncle.


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.