Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

How Television Will Shape The New Gun Culture In America

January 18, 2013 by  

How Television Will Shape The New Gun Culture In America
PHOTOS.COM

Weapons are being fired all the time on television, but that happens on cop shows. Network programmers know the public will obsessively watch guns going off and bodies falling.

On the news, however, the issue of gun ownership is adjudicated independently of the glee that accompanies watching fictional people kill each other.

When it’s fantasy, the audience wants violence. When it’s real, the audience wants no violence.

Dealing with this schizoid condition would be a problem for the networks, were it not for the fact that there is a bridge between the two states of mind: “The good guys win.”

They win in every episode of every cop show. They always have. Decades of this operant conditioning lead the audience to expect it will happen in real life where crime, guns and cops are involved.

So in the wake of Sandy Hook, for the public, the resolution must belong to the cops. The idea that it might somehow belong to private citizens doesn’t sit right. The cops win by controlling the guns.

For the television-watching public, that fits. It makes sense. In every crime series, the guns of the cops turn out to be superior to those of the criminals, so to speak.

And in real life, it translates into: Take the guns from private citizens. Make the good guys win.

Logic is not part of this. The vision is of cops (and their allies) taking guns away from bad guys, who are then left powerless to commit murder. It’s simple, obvious, conclusive and satisfying… to a mind that’s been captured by television cop shows at a 9-year-old level and frozen there forever.

Bad guys had guns. Therefore, they could kill people. Now they don’t have guns. They can’t kill people.

The nonsense, illegality and unworkability of this vision are beside the point.

The myriad ways in which thousands of criminals obtain weapons is off the table as an issue. It’s too complex for a 9-year-old to consider.

As a corollary to this puerile solution to crime (take the guns), we have an equally insane command: The solution must apply to all 315 million people living in America.

Again, 9-year olds don’t pause to reflect on the logistics.

Enter the elite television anchor. Whether it’s the slick momma’s boy who crafts the image of a “post-Newtown era of gun control” (Brian Williams, NBC), a gray man who looks down his nose like a tightly wound FBI agent about to raid a warehouse full of weapons (Scott Pelley, CBS) or a blonde can of syrup dripping maple tears as she weeps for America (Diane Sawyer, ABC), the mission is the same: By gesture, facial expression and careful placement of not-quite-neutral words, let the viewing audience know that a corner has been turned, the way guns are viewed has changed once and for all, the tragedy at Sandy Hook is too deep and we cannot move on as before.

From the three networks, the message is delivered. This is a watershed moment for the culture.

It’s the 9/11 of guns.

Not only will we see new laws and new executive orders from the President. “All civilized people” will talk and think about guns differently, just as they changed their minds about wearing animal fur. This is the program coming out of the gate.

We’ll see it performed six ways from Sunday on the news and on news magazine shows. Forever.

However, there is a glitch. In the world of fiction, movies, television and video games, trillions of dollars are riding on the public fantasy about guns. How do you change the culture when people are still hungry to spend their money on vicariously living out the shoot-’em-up blow-’em-up legends?

What about Hollywood actors, who have made a handsome living portraying vicious pricks and relentless cops, blasting thousands of rounds from assault weapons? Do you expect them to boycott those roles in the future? What roles will they play to satisfy the audience’s desire to experience violence? Kung Fu masters fighting other Kung Fu masters? Animals tearing their prey to pieces on open plains?

How many comedies can you sell about four idiots taking a road trip to Las Vegas?

The elite television anchors will go up against the cop shows on their own networks.

The outcome won’t be decided in a month or a year.

Painting all gun owners as Neanderthals takes time. It takes a crazy concealed-carry Texas uncle here and there on sitcoms.

It takes a few dozen episodes of “Law and Order” in which parents leave guns lying around for children to pick up and tragically use.

It takes a Lifetime movie about a video game designer, who enters a moral crisis when he sees his game come to life on the streets of small-town America, as kids riddle each other with bullets outside a barber shop.

It takes a movie about a fur-wearing psychopath mowing down a gay household.

The shows people love will morph into updated teaching moments, as the networks pray their ratings will hold.

On cop shows, you’ll eventually see this sort of thing: members of a team of community organizers, working to rid a neighborhood of guns, are murdered one at a time by a rogue serial-killer cop who drinks heavily and has a psychotic fixation about the 2nd Amendment. Finally, a Department of Homeland Security squad blows the cop away — afterward expressing deep regret they had to use their 60 weapons with 600-round magazines.

Williams, who maintains his deep abiding empathy for men out west with guns, will give you this: “Today in Moosehead, Calif., police retrieved the very last gun owned in that town by a private citizen. But it came at a price.

“John Anger, who at the age of 84 had been living all of his years in the house where he was born, was sitting on his back porch cleaning his grandfather’s Bushmaster rifle when three children — cutting through his yard, as they always did every day coming home from school — saw Mr. Anger with his weapon, and obeyed those vital lessons they’d learned in school since the first grade.

“They called the police. And the police came. With the children safely out of the way, a squad of eight DHS-certified men and women issued an order to Mr. Anger, who unfortunately was deaf and wasn’t wearing his hearing aid, which neighbors later said he called an ‘annoying Medicare contraption.’

“Mr. Anger didn’t put down his rifle. This gave the police no choice.

“John Anger is now lying in the Soames Mortuary on McGillicudy Street, in Moosehead, the last person in that town to own a gun. He is gone, but the children are safe tonight in their homes with their parents.”

“60 Minutes” will run a story about a rich banker who lives on his large estate in Virginia and has decided he no longer wants to skeet shoot. Instead, he’s donating that acreage to a “research project,” in which former gun owners are re-educated in the ways of nonviolence.

If you think all this is frivolous, look at a few hundred hours of television from the 1950s and then compare the content to today’s network programming. You’ll understand that more than money drives the evolution of popular culture.

Influencing minds is an ongoing preoccupation of the television medium.

It’s all about creating a new culture when the order comes down to make it so.

Reality-formation. Fabric realignment in the matrix.

In the case of guns and violence, the blueprint for changing the culture has been on the drawing board for some time. The television networks have planned how to make citizens think about guns the way they now think about animal fur.

Sandy Hook was the green light to put the blueprint into effect.

–Jon Rappoport

Jon Rappoport

, The author of an explosive collection, "The Matrix Revealed," Jon Rappoport was a candidate for a U.S. Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern and other newspapers and magazines in the United States and Europe. Rappoport has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic and creative power to audiences around the world. His blog, No More Fake News, can be read here.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “How Television Will Shape The New Gun Culture In America”

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 newstips@personalliberty.com

  • CZ52

    ” The television networks have planned how to make citizens think about guns the way they now think about animal fur.”

    In my case they have done a good job. Nothing beats a good firearm just like nothing beats a good fur lined hat, parka, or gloves.

    • FreedomFighter

      The same program of gun confiscation, useing media, and interest groups, has be perpetrated around the world.

      Something they will not show you.

      Gun Control in Australia – Watch and Weep
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fGaDAThOHhA

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • eddie47d

        I see Freedom Fighter felt the need to post the same fear mongering video twice which naturally doesn’t tell the whole story. No surprise there ! Isn’t that visual propaganda dressed up as fact. I agree that there is way to much hooky violence on TV and in movies which shapes the minds of 9 year olds. Yet here we have these never ending agenda provoking videos geared to spread fear and brain washing in Adults.

      • FreedomFighter

        Facts are Facts commi boy…crawl back under that rock.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Robert Smith

        Eddie points asks: “Isn’t that visual propaganda dressed up as fact. ”

        Absolutely true.

        I can’t help but wonder about all the religious stories on TV, and how do they impact young minds?

        The flooding of the entire world, killing everyone in it except Noah and his kin.

        Blowing up a couple of cities, allegedly (modern interpretation) because the “wrong” folks are in love.

        Killing the first born!

        Brother against brother with Able and the other guy. (I can’t help but wonder if the weapon used to kill his brother was registered.)

        Oh! And the guy who was tortured to death saying something like, “Forgive them because they don’t know what they are doing.”

        Oh, oh, oh… Then there is the story of that really old guy knocking up a virgin.

        Thanks, but I’ll change the channel from all that stuff.

        Rob

      • Randy G

        Isn’t it funny, that people my age, I’m 62, grew up with 14 of 21 hours of prime time TV as westerns & people getting killed & yet NONE of these persons shooting anyone are old?

      • eddie47d

        Nothing is factual if the whole truth isn’t told freedom fighter and I’m not YOUR commie boy!

      • Robert Smith

        Edward Asner as August March has bumped off a very pretty girl in Hawaii Five O with a gun.

        Rob

      • MexicansaysLibtardsRPukes

        I see Gringo eddie47donkey foaming at the mouth again! Having a Libtard meltdown eddie47donkey the red??

      • Vicki

        eddie47d writes:
        “I agree that there is way to much hooky violence on TV and in movies which shapes the minds of 9 year olds.”

        And yet with all that “shaping” ~300 MILLION AMERICANS (any age) DID NOT SHOOT ANYONE nor commit any other acts of (actual) violence.

        STOP PUNISHING US.

        Stop it
        STOP IT NOW.

        (Btw as a gift across the “isle” you are free to use the above when they come for your violent video games and movies)

      • Robert Smith

        Hey Vicki, how do you explain that there brutal god that killed everyone on Earth except Noah and his kin? That’s a pretty high body count.

        Rob

      • Robert Smith

        Vicki demands: “STOP PUNISHING US.”

        Really? And how’s ’bout the poor girl who gets pregnant and doesn’t want to be pregnant?

        Ohhhhh, that’s right… She’s “responsible” for her condition and you are gonna make sure she does the “right” thing by your religion and keep her pregnant no matter what.

        Thanks for that insight.

        Rob

      • eddie47d

        Your punishing yourself Vickie for openly endorsing the bought and paid for policies of the NRA. They welcome the carnage because it mightily improves gun sales and their coffers.

      • vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Your punishing yourself Vickie for openly endorsing the bought and paid for policies of the NRA. They welcome the carnage because it mightily improves gun sales and their coffers”

        You mean the carnage that has come from the easy access to guns by criminals? That carnage? Oh wait. Despite the supposed easy access to guns and despite the statistics that show that carnage DIDN’T happen when citizens were allowed to carry concealed firearms and despite the fact that gun sales went up, way way up several times during the current administration (curiously near times when there are elections and when there is significant talk of punishing the ~300 MILLION INNOCENTS by denying them their GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, and despite the obvious truth that all those additional gun purchases did NOT create carnage (crimes have been going down) you STILL claim that carnage is a useful selling plan of the NRA?

        Obama and his respect of the Constitution is a far better salesman than mere carnage.

        Do you ever wonder why your credibility here is ZERO?

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “Hey Vicki, how do you explain that there brutal god that killed everyone on Earth except Noah and his kin?”

        Global Warming?

      • Robert Smith

        Vicky says: “Do you ever wonder why your credibility here is ZERO?”

        Isn’t that there thing you keep objecting to?: Argument by ridicule?

        Oh well.

        We’re used to it Vicki. One standard for you, and another for those you don’t like.

        Thanks for such a fine example.

        Rob

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “Vicki demands: “STOP PUNISHING US.”
        Really? And how’s ’bout the poor girl who gets pregnant and doesn’t want to be pregnant?

        “Ohhhhh, that’s right… She’s “responsible” for her condition and you are gonna make sure she does the “right” thing by your religion and keep her pregnant no matter what.”

        Who do you think is “responsible” Were you planning on blaming some (supposedly) mythical “brutal god”?

        As to the right thing, let us talk for a moment about the rights of the child. What of them?

        Or does your religion set an age limit on murder. Anyone under this age is fair game. But then if a criminal shoots and kills a pregnant woman he is charged with 2 counts of murder. Care to argue to change that. If it saves just one life (sentence).

        - Robert Smith: “Thanks for that insight.”

        Ditto :)

      • http://google rose

        Why is the media not looking into the Sandy Hook incident as being a hoax? Why was there a website set up for donations for the victims of Sandy Hooks school shootings on December 11, 2012 when it didn’t happen until December 14, 2012. Don’t me believe just google it. Better hurry before the government removes it. The date can’t be faked. What about Emilee Parker who supposedly killed there? She was photographed leaning on Obama’s leg with other kids two days later. Just google it. Or how about her aunt that said Emilee had two bigger sisters when they are little sisters? Wouldn’t an aunt know one way or another? And then how about the video of her dad on u-tube? How he was laughing and then how he suddenly when into acting mode to psych himself into acting sad. I don’t believe there was a mass shooting in a grade school at Sandy Hooks. And the list goes on of people who were supposedly killed there and who are still alive and the inconsistency of the facts.

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “Vicky says: “Do you ever wonder why your credibility here is ZERO?”

        Isn’t that there thing you keep objecting to?: Argument by ridicule?”

        Where was I objecting? I was simply pointing it out.

        Robert Smith: “We’re used to it Vicki. One standard for you, and another for those you don’t like.”

        ?? I obviously don’t dislike you Robert. I don’t know you well enough. Why we even agree on some things. We both object to the war on (some) drugs for instance.

        - Robert Smith: “Thanks for such a fine example.”

        You’re welcome. I try to be.

      • eddie47d

        Rose : Grow up!!! The little girl on his lap was Emily’s sister! She happened to be wearing the same patterned dress the her sister had on the day she was murdered. Some of you are over the top sickos.

      • TIME

        Dear Uncle Ernie aka RS,

        You can’t understand the story of NOAH ~ well thats easy enough ~ its due to your lacking Comprehension skills, do I need to remind you of this issue yet again?

        Peace and Love, Shalom

      • Guest

        Then pray tell, what is the other side of the story Eddie? Near as I can tell it is a case of the Australian authorities essentially telling every aspect of the criminal element in their society “Hey, it’s open season you curs! Come one, come all! Take advantage while the takings good!”. As far as I’m concerned it couldn’t be any clearer. They confiscated the vast majority of the weapons and left the rest basically unavailable when needed in the crush. How is that in any way propaganda?

      • Guest

        Robert says: Hey Vicki, how do you explain that there brutal god that killed everyone on Earth except Noah and his kin? That’s a pretty high body count. Okay, so let’s take my brutal God out of the equation altogether, as is being attempted anyway. Now all of that “brutality” you speak of falls squarely on mankind’s shoulders. God is no longer responsible for any of it because he does not exist, right? So what does that say about us as a species Robert?

      • Jana

        Robert Smith

        Some times you actually come across as an intelligent person, but this isn’t one of those times.
        You are using the same ole same ole mantra showing your hateful disdain of God and His word without even doing any research or study to find out WHY God did any of these things. He DID have good valid reasons for what He did and IF you would bother to find out WHY, you might actually become enlightened.

        Meanwhile until you really know what you are talking about move on!

        By the way, I did say MIGHT because I am also a realist. I see your hatred towards my heavenly Father is so great that MORE THAN LIKELY nothing will ever penetrate your hardened heart.

        Meanwhile you go ahead and keep on praising Satan, because that is exactly what you are doing, and your ignorance is showing!

      • Robert Smith

        Vickie: “Who do you think is “responsible” Were you planning on blaming some (supposedly) mythical “brutal god”?”

        Remember the headlines, Vicki? It takes a brutal god to punish folks the way he does, but this isn’t my idea.

        “GOP Senate candidate: Pregnancy from rape “a gift from God”
        October 24, 2012 4:43 PM

        Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock ignited a firestorm in the campaign when he suggest that a pregnancy resulting from rape was “a gift from God.”

        Rob

      • Robert Smith

        Time says: “You can’t understand the story of NOAH ”

        What’s to understand about that huge body count? Everyone except Noah and his kin bumped off by a brutal god.

        Looks like mass murder to me.

        Rob

      • Jana

        Robert,
        You just love praising Satan. You shout it every time you can. Your master must make you so happy.

        Some times you actually come across as an intelligent person, but this isn’t one of those times and I will admit recently you have been sounding less and less intelliegent.

        You are using the same ole same ole mantra showing your hateful disdain of God and His word without even doing any research or study to find out WHY God did any of these things. He DID have good valid reasons for what He did and IF you would bother to find out WHY, you might actually become enlightened.

        How would you find out? By going to the actual source, the Bible and looking it up and reading about it, but I doubt you will ever do that as 1.) It makes too much common sense.
        2) You would have to quit praising your master Satan.

      • Robert Smith

        “You just love praising Satan.”

        Nope. Satan is part of that there christian thing. BTW, if your god is so powerful and all that why doesn’t he just beat statan and be done with him?

        Maybe he aint’ so all powerful after all.

        Rob

    • Joe Spano

      The NRA=

      Nasty, Rants, Awful………….

      • Vicki

        Argument to ridicule

      • eddie47d

        You’re not exactly a saint in that department Vickie! LOL!

      • TIME

        Dear joe spamO

        Wow ~ your such a wizzard with words, hey your almost like a painting done by my dog after it plays in the mud. Its crazed, with few features that resemble any form of Intelligent design.
        Hey thanks for the very deep post, I am sure other sheep will find meaning within its slow witted format. As your vast pool of mental ability could almost destroy an ameba.

        But hey good news ~ you keep trying – some day you can get out of those pampers.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.98892 Benjamin Fox

      I’m with you CZ52, the only thing you left out was the good tasting steak I’m about to eat as I’m a member of PETA, People, Eating, Tasty, Animals, love that group. God Bless Friend:

      • Robert Smith

        If god didn’t want mankind to eat animals he wouldn’t have made them out of meat.

        Rob

    • Bob Da Grouch

      You nailed it CZ. You can tell the propaganda has had a real profound effect on me. Long live guns, hunting and trapping

  • Jeremy Leochner

    Violence is glorified in all media. But crime and especially gun related crime is a serious issue in this country. And of course the solution is not to take away everyones guns. Though I would point out nothing that is on the table does that. Nothing the President proposed takes away peoples guns. And its not for nothing that the tool makes a unstable or immoral individual all the more dangerous. Now a common argument is that most guns used to commit crimes are obtained illegally. I agree with that. And often the argument is made that innocent people should not be punished for the actions of a few criminals and psychopaths. I agree with this as well. I think a good way to combat the problem of gun related violence is to tackle the problem of the illicit gun trade. I am glad the President made several proposals along those lines such as

    5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

    9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

    10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

    11. Nominate an ATF director.

    I also respect the Presidents focus on safety and mental health issues which also affect the debate. He has made good plans for those issues including:

    7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

    8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

    14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

    15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

    16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

    17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

    18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

    20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

    22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

    23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

    I would love to hear peoples opinions on these ideas. I think they are good ways to address the issue of gun violence without putting pressure on law abiding gun owners.

    • FreedomFighter

      Its all been done b4, the results are the same registration, confiscation enslavement to a totalitarian state

      Russia had a similar program for mental health:

      All political enemies were obviously insane and were locked up, druged, and sent to re-eduction camps. Obama’s system creates the groudwork for the same system.

      Its about finding all the guns and owners
      Its about future confiscation
      Its about demonization of gun owners
      Its about control, not safety, learn your history.

      The powers that be did the same thing in Austraila;

      Gun Control in Australia – Watch and Weep
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fGaDAThOHhA

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • Joe Spano

        So much for the NRA……..=……..Nasty, Rants, Awful…………….

      • Vicki

        Argument to ridicule.

      • Robert Smith

        Hi Vicki…

        Ridicule! Reminds me of the days of samurai and his “moron” thing going around calling anyone who didn’t agree with him names.

        Do you think he was effective for the right wing?

        Rob

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Actually Freedom Fighter since most guns used to commit crimes are obtained illegally its about tracking stolen weapons and trying to catch those who would use guns to commit violence.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Actually Freedom Fighter since most guns used to commit crimes are obtained illegally its about tracking stolen weapons….”

        Tracking them is easy. Catch the criminal with a gun. And there it is.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “….and trying to catch those who would use guns to commit violence.”

        You wouldn’t have to catch them if you would QUIT PUNISHING THE INNOCENT. Fewer crimes of violence would happen (http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493660) and when they do the intended victim would be able respond effectively in seconds while the police are only minutes away.

      • Vicki

        Minor correction “Catch the criminal with a STOLEN gun.” Same way you catch a criminal with a stolen TV or stolen purse etc.

      • Robert Smith

        Tell us Vicki, how did that work out for the school kids in CT?

        What could the police have done to stop that?

        They didn’t know the mother had been murdered. They didn’t know the guns were stolen.

        BTW, I do understand that taking your gun would not have stopped the shooting either, but you having it didn’t help either. Nor did it help with Gifford, nor did an armed guard help at Colembine.

        So Vicki, what is the solution?

        Oh, I remember, you want more guns on our streets. You gonna catch the bad guys?

        Rob

      • Robert Smith

        BTW, when Ronald Reagan got shot he had armed guards with fully automatic assault weapons in their hands. IN THEIR HANDS!

        What good did those guns do to stop a shooting? They were in the hands of the most highly trained professional Secret Service guys you can imagine. Yet three people were shot in that event.

        If six guys with automatic weapons and weeks of planning standing around one guy couldn’t stop a nut case do you propose we put seven armed guards around each school child?

        Really?

        Rob

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Again Vicki I ask. How do you catch a thief. You make it seem like the guy runs around with the stolen item in broad daylight asking to be caught. Its not that simple.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Again Vicki I ask. How do you catch a thief. ”

        During the crime”
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmyLw62sArQ

        Way to late cause the police are only minutes away?
        Good detective work.

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith writes of the attempt on President Reagan:
        “If six guys with automatic weapons and weeks of planning standing around one guy couldn’t stop a nut case do you propose we put seven armed guards around each school child? ”

        You make a REALLY good argument for disarming all government bodyguards and officials. They obviously are not worth the time and money invested in them. Just another example of government waste.

        I don’t think obama will share your opinion though.

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “Tell us Vicki, how did that work out for the school kids in CT?

        What could the police have done to stop that?

        They didn’t know the mother had been murdered. They didn’t know the guns were stolen.”

        You explain our case very well Robert. (Are you a double agent?)

        - Robert Smith: “BTW, I do understand that taking your gun would not have stopped the shooting either, but you having it didn’t help either. Nor did it help with Gifford, nor did an armed guard help at Colembine.”

        OF course not. Neither me nor my gun were at those locations. And in at least 2 of the cases I COULD NOT BE THERE even if I had wanted to cause they are GUN FREE ZONES. Had I foolishly been there with out my gun my fate may have been like the teachers that died that day.

        Or the fate of this lady.
        http://personalliberty.com/2013/01/18/brady-bill-testimony/#comments

        Btw since taking our guns will not have stopped the shootings why do you continue to punish us by taking our guns?

      • Vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “So Vicki, what is the solution?
        Oh, I remember, you want more guns on our streets. You gonna catch the bad guys?”

        Is that you the singular (me) or plural (us, the armed citizen)?
        http://actionamerica.org/guns/guns1.shtml

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki I am not talking about bank robberies. I am talking about guns being stolen. I am talking about the crimes the bad guys committed in order to obtain guns. Its easier to stop a bad buy from robbing a bank if you first stop him from getting a weapon. And an armed good samaritan is no guarantee of a successful outcome. In fact it might just as likely provoke the robbers to start killing people. A good samaritan with a hand gun would have done little good against the body armor wearing, fully automatic rifle wielding North Hollywood robbers.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Its easier to stop a bad buy from robbing a bank if you first stop him from getting a weapon.”

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84yv-uH2jsY
        No gun required.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “And an armed good samaritan is no guarantee of a successful outcome.”

        Argumentative.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “In fact it might just as likely provoke the robbers to start killing people.”

        not that the police would know anything about provoking robbers.

        – Jeremy Leochner: “A good samaritan with a hand gun would have done little good against the body armor wearing, fully automatic rifle wielding North Hollywood robbers.”

        Funny you should mention that. A good police officer or several with hand guns found the same problem.

        Fortunately for the police that day the gun grabbers had not gotten the assault weapon ban and the gun shop nearby had lots of scary looking guns for the police to use.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        First- I am pretty sure the girl in that video is the exception rather than the rule. Because if most bank robbers use notes I think the gun control laws might be working. And I don’t think you need a gun to take down an attacker armed with a note.

        Second- I agree it is argumentative. So we agree its not as simple as give people more guns and crime will go down.

        Third- Touche

        Forth- Perhaps your right. Though I will point out it was trained police officers and not John and Jane Q Public fighting those robbers and carrying those scary looking weapons.

      • Jana

        A person who has a conceal carry is well trained!

    • eddie47d

      That video has been shown before and it is nothing but one sided propaganda. The citizens of Australia still have the right to own weapons and totally ignores the reason why their was a gun ban on certain weapons in the first place. There are certain parts of their gun law that should be changed for easier home defense but beyond that the ban on assault type weapons had a 100% success rate. (Zero mass killings in 18 years) If this article is about how the media manipulates the mind then this video is far worse in not telling the whole truth.

      • FreedomFighter

        Innocents Betrayed – Genocide By Gun Control – True History of Gun Confiscation

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgJg3L7VLxU

        Get the facts Eddie. As an American indian our history shows in great detail what “gun control” and confiscation leads to – helplessness against a well armed government and death.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • eddie47d

        Your third video facts doesn’t take away from the fact that your first video was not factual but nice try! I think we all know about the hapless Indians who were slaughtered by Americans from coast to coast and encouraged by “normal” Conservatives so they could profit from stolen lands. Unfortunately if the Indians had more weapons even more of them would have been slaughtered because of the push westward by those insistent land seekers (stealer’s). Another way of putting it would be that those with guns forced their way on people and took what they wanted and killed to achieve that. That would make our early settlers no different than today’s criminals.

      • Ann

        Illegals don’t expose their status by voting in states where photo ID is not required to vote.
        I don’t condemn people who live on Social Security, especially old people. What I mean that these people should not vote for measures asking for increasing taxes (and only on these measures), because their personal interests affect their decisions . After all, many of old people who currently have to rely purely on Social Security, were probably be better financially if they paid less taxes when they were younger.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        The problem with your video Freedom Fighter is the bad guys are already in power when “gun control” is implemented.

      • oh oh

        Actually Jeremy, nothing’s changed. You just don’t know the bad guys when you see them.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        No offense oh oh. But you would have to be blind as a bat not to see Hitler and Stalin for who they were.

      • redhawk

        Eddie, get off of this site if you won’t portray history accurately. You must be one of those who actually swallowed the politically correct history that’s been taught in American schools for several generations. Have you ever been to Pine Ridge, SD or any other reservation where the ability to defend yourself and your family have been absent for over a century? Religious freedoms denied? If you want a window into the future look at them as there are plenty to look through. Entire cultures destroyed beyond recovery, 80% unemployment rates, drug and alcohol rates enormous, violence abounds and mostly due to disenfranchisement by our “benevolent” government. Lie after lie after lie that continue to this day!. Documented treaties and legislation not worth the paper their written on. Is that what yoiu want for our future? Just have the courage to look through even one of these windows from the past and see what that promiseed future became. Now, it;s not hard to see other more profound and older documents written by this governemnt that are falling by the wayside in the name of progressivism. The one that come to mind is the Consritution. and I don’t just mean where it refers to guns. There arer countless example of these agencies (EPA comes to mind) that have trashed individual Constitutional rights and made life a living hell for the families targeted. Large beaucratic, centrally controlled governments are NOt our friends and I can give you more references and examples than you can read in a month.

    • Warrior

      Jeremy, these are all splendid ideas. However, they just don’t “reach” far enough. How bout teachers ask their students if their parents own guns? How about divorce attorneys ask their clients if they own guns? Maybe census workers could ask that question when they come a knockin too! Maybe your employer, your barber or perhaps the family vet. Why even play this charade? Why doesn’t the “one” just come out and order every citizen to tell on themselves? That would certainly save a lot of time and resources, wouldn’t you think?

      Maybe we could have a “national confession” day. Ok, so now you know ALL the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS who have them and the ones that don’t come forward, well, we’ll have “ways” to deal with them.

      • Robert Smith

        Just say “NO” to answering such questions.

        When someone asks me about gun ownership I never feel obligated to answer. It’s NONE of their business.

        Rob

      • Robert Smith

        Warrior says: “Maybe we could have a “national confession” day. ”

        Doesn’t one of the christian sects make an issue of “confession?” Isn’t it supposed to be good for the soul? Ain’t nothing can beat being contrite before a god, or other authority figure.

        Rob

      • Ann

        As much as I don’t like the idea of gun control, proposals #16 and #17 make sense. First of all, these proposals do not require health care professionals to ask about gun ownership, nor do they require people to report their gun ownership to doctors. Second, I believe that in case when a health care professional suspects that his patient may pose a danger to other people or himself it should be a duty of a doctor to report this case to at least psychiatric services. And doctors should report the case regardless whether a suspected person has or doesn’t have firearms. Weapons of mass murder don’t have to have bullets. They could be found in any Home Depot or medical or outdoor equipment stores. Or one can drive a mass murder tool, which most people call a car.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Warrior no one wants to hurt law abiding gun owners. But regardless of whether or not a lot of good guys have guns bad guys having guns is still a problem. President Obamas ideas are about trying to prevent the bad guys from having guns while making sure the good guys still have them.

    • TML

      The most glaring aspect of all those proposals is that not one of them, save school resource officers, seems to directly address anything that would have remotely prevented the tragedy that has been the leading battle cry of these gun control measures. I mean, sure, stop the illicit gun trade, but that isn’t how the shooter at Newtown got his weapons… so what is the true intent of these measures as it relates to mass shootings? Even the school resource officer might not be effective enough, since we know there have been mass shootings at schools which had such guards (Columbine).

      Jeremy Leochner says “And often the argument is made that innocent people should not be punished for the actions of a few criminals and psychopaths. I agree with this as well.”

      You said to me not long ago that you have no problem with treating all gun owners as criminals. Based on your statement here, I might think that you have changed your position on that had it not been for your support for number 16 – The idea of asking medical professionals to question patients about gun ownership and report it to authorities creates the atmosphere that treats every gun owner as exactly that… a criminal… for no other reason than owning a firearm.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        TML Indeed the shooter at Newtown did not obtain his weapons from a gun shop illegally or legally. He stole them from his mom. The ideas addressing the mental health service and creating outreach programs and campaigns to spread awareness of guns and their potential for violence addresses the key issues that could have prevented the shooting. The other measures are intended to combat the problem of gun violence we have in this country.

        As for my statement I stand by it. As to number 16 I believe it is intended either for doctors in the field of Psychiatry or doctors in general who may be dealing with a patient with mental health problems. In the same way that they would ask the patient if they are suffering from suicidal thoughts or thoughts of harming others they could also ask if the person owns a gun which would be the means to inflict said harm.

      • TML

        Jeremy Leochner says “The ideas addressing the mental health service and creating outreach programs and campaigns to spread awareness of guns and their potential for violence addresses the key issues that could have prevented the shooting…. …
        As to number 16 I believe it is intended either for doctors in the field of Psychiatry or doctors in general who may be dealing with a patient with mental health problems. In the same way that they would ask the patient if they are suffering from suicidal thoughts or thoughts of harming others they could also ask if the person owns a gun which would be the means to inflict said harm.”

        They may as well ask if they have a 6 foot rope handy or a knife in the kitchen and spread the awareness and the potential for violence with those items as well, eh? Usually, expression of suicidal thoughts or thoughts of harming others would get you locked in a mental hospital already, so again, I see this as ineffective measures that only disparages patients from disclosing certain things if they had true intent, since doctor/patient confidentiality goes right out the window.

        Jeremy Leochner says “The other measures are intended to combat the problem of gun violence we have in this country.”

        So admittedly, the other measures are nothing more than long-time political agendas that they finally saw the chance to push through, even though it had nothing to do with preventing the tragedy being used.

        Btw, I find this term gun violence to be a term that is misdirected (much like the term “assault” rifle, when in fact to the law-abiding citizens it is a “defensive” rifle). There is more violence in this country without the use of guns than there is violence in which a gun is used. If there was a true, genuine, intent to combat violence, then it seems ridiculous to place restrictions on the item used for defense, rather than harsher punishment for the crimes. While you worry about “gun” violence, and banning or restricting certain weapons and munitions, rapists and murders often spend less time in jail than a non-violent drug offender.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        TML

        First- When I was younger I suffered from severe depression to the point of having thoughts of death and hopelessness. I was not locked in a mental hospital for that. I was given therapy and medicine which helped me overcome it.

        Second- The idea of telling law enforcement is if the person threatens violence against other people.

        Third- These ideas are part of a much broader plan involving numerous actions. Alone some of these ideas probably would not produce much affect. But as part of a larger plan they can help.

        Forth- No the plans are not “nothing more than long-time political agendas that they finally saw the chance to push through”. Unless you consider combating gun violence to be nothing more than an agenda. Not to mention the shootings are part of the over all problem of gun violence. Its usually a good time to start addressing a problem when it affects you.

        Fifth- I agree we need tougher sentences and better rehabilitation. However there is still an issue of weapons allowing for easier committing of the crimes. Assault rifles are exactly that to non law abiding citizens. We need to restrict access to those both legally and illegally.

    • ranger09

      #17 is interesting. Any way amazing the answers biden and Obama came up with, Makes me wonder what they do all day on our money, Also have this consern about all the usless Congress we have in office, But the biggest consern is the supreme Court.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Well Ranger unless a doctor has the power to detain a person based on threats of violence I would think it would be alright to point out said threat to the authorities. However if doctors do have that power than I will agree with you on that point.

    • Vicki

      Jeremy Leochner says:
      “Violence is glorified in all media. But crime and especially gun related crime is a serious issue in this country. And of course the solution is not to take away everyones guns.”

      Just the scary looking ones. Until the final solution time.

      • Robert Smith

        Gosh Vicki, with the way you toss “final solution” around I suspect the gays, blacks, Jewish folks, Gypsies, and the mentally defective would be near the head of the list, just like last time.

        Have confidence, it will be a long time before they come for you, unless you are the one doing the coming.

        Rob

      • vicki

        Robert Smith says:
        “Gosh Vicki, with the way you toss “final solution” around I suspect the gays, blacks, Jewish folks, Gypsies, and the mentally defective would be near the head of the list, just like last time.”

        You mean the last time that a free people foolishly gave up their right to keep and bear arms? Which last time. There were several in the 20th century.
        http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM

        - Robert Smith: “Have confidence, it will be a long time before they come for you, unless you are the one doing the coming.”

        Since I am one of the ~300 MILLION AMERICANS WHO HAVE NEVER SHOT ANYONE it is likely that it will be a long time before some mythical “they” come for me. Now YOUR brutal god (government) might try. And judging from their purchases of all those firearms and ammo that YOU claim the people don’t need, it might be soon.

        But first they will come for the “useful idiots”. Then I and my fellow Americans will do our DUTY and defend even the “useful idiots”.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        No Vicki. Its to try to prevent bad guys from getting guns, scary looking or otherwise. And at the same time its to address this belief that tyranny is so close that we need to start stock piling powerful weapons as quickly as possible.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “No Vicki. Its to try to prevent bad guys from getting guns, scary looking or otherwise.”

        We’ve TOLD you how to do it. Worked for longer than there have been guns. Scary looking or otherwise. YOU just have NOT BEEN PAYING ATTENTION.

        Hence the yelling.

        ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ILLEGALLY GET A GUN.
        (That may change when the government outlaws guns. Well actually it won’t change because an unconstitutional law is null and void from it’s inception.)

        STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT.
        STOP IT
        STOP IT NOW

      • Jeremy Leochner

        No Vicki you did not tell me anything. You told me lock criminals in jail. You never said how we investigate the crime or figure out who are the criminals. We need to stop those who steal guns and use them to commit crimes. We need to be able to track the stolen weapons. Protecting the feelings of the innocent does little good if it places them in danger.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “No Vicki you did not tell me anything. You told me lock criminals in jail.”

        I did tell you something. You just were not able to see it. Even though you exactly described it.

        - Jeremy Leochner: ‘We need to stop those who steal guns and use them to commit crimes.”

        Before they act in a criminal manner? (look up prior restraint and think about punishment of the innocent again)

        - Jeremy Leochner: ‘We need to be able to track the stolen weapons.”

        You can track them. And I did tell you exactly how with examples.

        - Jeremy Leochner: ‘Protecting the feelings of the innocent does little good if it places them in danger.”

        Interesting you should say that since flashy is always claiming that we have to give up our right to keep and bear arms because he “FEELS” he is in more danger.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First-Your always getting on me about truisms. Locking criminals up is a truism if presented as an idea. Its not enough to say it.

        Second-You provided no examples of how to track stolen weapons.

        Third- That’s flashy. And if he is basing his arguments on his feelings than I would disagree with him too. Its not a matter of feelings. Its a matter of the reality of the crimes that are committed in this country and what we are going to do about. We can never make a perfect world of no crime. But that does not mean we cannot start to address the issue.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.98892 Benjamin Fox

      Jeromy, as always you start out well and then fall off the cliff. The way to stop gun violence is for people to become moral again and many don’t want that because they find it easier to rob and kill people then working for a living. The problem is morals, the guy that shot up Newtown stole the guns, the guns just didn’t walk into the school by themselves and kill the children and adults, a evil person who committed another evil by stealing the guns in the first place was the problem. You guys always want to blame the gun. I sleep with mine in my bed, it has never shot me or went down the hall killing people. John Adams said and he was surely smarter then you said “A armed person is a citizen, a un-armed person is a slave”. You just want everyone to be a slave and I say “Live Free or Die”.

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

        Benjamin: The way to stop gun violence is for people to become moral again and many don’t want that because they find it easier to rob and kill people then working for a living.

        Yes, and that’s because they are given a “free-pass”! Notice, that the “freak-messiah” never makes mention on dealing harshly with criminals, but would much rather attack law-abiding-citizens. And that’s because he’s and his administration are criminals themselves! Fast and Furious should be all the evidence one needs to confirm just what desperate-criminals they are! I say, arms yourselves folks. And under no circumstances relinquish your guns!

      • eddie47d

        “freak”? Thanks for the opening WTS! You may certainly mean something else but ask the millions of blacks who were harassed by “law abiding citizens” with hoods on their heads. Ask the thousands of native Americans who were slaughtered by “law abiding” and civilized citizens.Ask the field workers who have worked in this country for years who have been harassed by “law abiding citizens”. Ask the folks at American Family Association who will say they are “law abiding citizens” but advocate for the death penalty for gays. Ask the “law abiding” leadership of GOA who think its okay to form death squads to take care of those they don’t like. Millions have suffered and have been threatened at the hands of a gun. Not all were bad guys!

      • vicki

        Considering eddie47d’s definition of law abiding it is no wonder he doesn’t want people to have guns.

      • vicki

        Benjamin Fox says:
        “Jeromy, as always you start out well and then fall off the cliff. The way to stop gun violence is for people to become moral again and many don’t want that because they find it easier to rob and kill people then working for a living.”

        Even as amoral as people claim that Americans have become, ~300 MILLION did not shoot anyone. The few that do are not “many” of anything important.

        Another really good way to stop gun violence is for people to be armed and dangerous as the founders intended. Criminals are NOT stupid. They want to live too.

        “Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.” – George Washington”
        http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I don’t blame the gun Ben. I blame the mentality that makes a person think they need to commit senseless acts of violence to deal with their own problems. I blame the the circumstances that lead that person to that dark place. I blame the lack of intervention to stop it from reaching that point. And yes I do also place some blame on the tool. I blame the drunk driver if he kills someone. However I also blame the idiot who allowed a drunk to get behind the wheel of a car. Without the tool a drunk is less likely to kill someone. I agree that we do need morals. We do need to improve our view of each other and the world. But we also need to take concrete steps to prevent crimes aside from encouraging people not to commit them.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “I don’t blame the gun Ben.”
        “And yes I do also place some blame on the tool.”

        I detect and inconsistency in your argument.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “I agree that we do need morals. We do need to improve our view of each other and the world. ”

        Good to hear.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “But we also need to take concrete steps to prevent crimes aside from encouraging people not to commit them.”

        We want to. Eliminate GUN FREE Zones. Nothing like the barrel of a gun to convince a criminal to find something else to do. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMZbW2Q92MM

        Far more effective than any silly law (Illegal to commit armed robbery) that criminals routinely ignore anyway.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First- I do place some blame on the gun. However I do not just generalize and place all blame on the gun. Ben implied that those who support gun control just blame the gun alone. I was pointing out I do not.

        Second- Eliminating gun free zones will not stop a deranged and suicidal person from trying to take out their aggression. And in the mean time it will only encourage students to bring weapons to school.

        Third- Laws against robbery are not silly. For one thing if its not against the law its not a crime. In order for something to be illegal there first needs to be a law. Not so silly if you think in those terms.

        Forth- I want the police and the government to protect and serve the people which is what they are supposed to do, instead of expecting people to do it themselves.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says (to me):
        “First- I do place some blame on the gun. However I do not just generalize and place all blame on the gun. Ben implied that those who support gun control just blame the gun alone. I was pointing out I do not.”

        That you blame an inanimate object AT ALL is our concern. That and your inconsistencies as pointed out above.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Second- Eliminating gun free zones will not stop a deranged and suicidal person from trying to take out their aggression.”

        Of course it will not stop such a person. That is what the armed citizen is for.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Third- Laws against robbery are not silly. For one thing if its not against the law its not a crime. In order for something to be illegal there first needs to be a law. Not so silly if you think in those terms.”

        The law is not silly. What is silly is believing that CRIMINALS obey laws. OBVIOUSLY silly to believe that a law will stop a criminal if you think in those terms. (which we have pointed out to you in the past. Many times.)

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Forth- I want the police and the government to protect and serve the people which is what they are supposed to do…”

        You might become a libertarian yet. We want the police and government to protect and serve the people too Not trying to control every part of our lives and trying to be our master.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “instead of expecting people to do it themselves.”

        They have no obligation to protect us so we rather have to do it ourselves..
        http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0
        Hence we want the best tools for the job.

        When SECONDS count the police are only MINUTES away. They make really good backup though. Unless they decide to arrest you for defending yourself.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First-The object which in this case is designed to inflict harm is partially to blame. Since the killer would slightly less dangerous without it.

        Second- The suicidal person is not going to know or care that someone is armed. There were armed guards at columbine and that did not stop the killers.

        Third- No one thinks criminals will obey laws The laws are in place to make things more difficult for them. We create laws so as to deny people access to guns who would use those guns for crimes. If there were no laws the criminals would buy guns from gun stores instead of going through the hassle of stealing it.

        Forth- I do not want the government to be master. I just want to make it possible for them to do the job they are supposed to be doing. You may not agree with everything the President proposed. And maybe some of his proposals could be called violations of the constitution. I just believe that most do nothing more than help law enforcement to catch bad guys and allow honest Americans to not need guns to protect themselves. I want a world where the good guys have the guns and the bad guys don’t. That is my intention. That is my desire. I want to get all the bad guys in jail. All I want is to make that possible. If what I propose violates the peoples rights I hope I will realize it and back off. As long as I am convinced that what I propose is good for the people and will protect them both from a thug in the streets and a thug in a suit I will support it.

        Fifth- Police are better than vigilantes. And they do have an obligation to protect us. Its their oath-”To Serve and Protect”. I do not deny that people need to be able to defend themselves. And people should not be arrested for defending themselves. However I will say that we need to make sure that they were in fact defending themselves. Plenty of killers have tried to hide their crime by claiming they were acting in self defense.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “First-The object which in this case is designed to inflict harm is partially to blame. Since the killer would slightly less dangerous without it.”

        And the intended victims are helpless without it. As demonstrated by resent mass shootings in GUN FREE Zones.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Second- The suicidal person is not going to know or care that someone is armed.”

        So why do you care? The victims surly cared. We can’t ask them THEY ARE DEAD.
        What ever happened to the progressive claim that “if it saves just 1 life…..”

        STOP PUNISHING THE ~300 MILLION INNOCENTS
        STOP IT
        STOP IT NOW

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First- Making gun free zones will mean children and teens bringing guns to school not just teachers. I may sound like a broken record but children and guns is a real problem for me.

        Second- The reason I care is I do not want a deranged monster coming to a school and shooting at innocent children. And during the times when such a tragedy is not happening, which is almost all of the time, I want children and teens to be in a healthy and safe environment.

        Third- How is anything the President is proposing PUNISHING THE 300 MILLION INNOCENTS.

        Forth-Just so you know I can’t hear you if you shout at the computer.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Third- No one thinks criminals will obey laws”

        And yet you want more and more laws. Hmmmmm….

        - Jeremy Leochner: “The laws are in place to make things more difficult for them. We create laws so as to deny people access to guns who would use those guns for crimes.”

        And yet right above you say that you know that criminals will not obey those laws.

        So why again are you creating laws? Job security? Or is this another inconsistency?

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Forth- I do not want the government to be master. I just want to make it possible for them to do the job they are supposed to be doing.”

        How will punishing ~300 million innocent people by taking away their GOD GIVEN RIGHTS make it possible? Are you really claiming that the government can not do the job? Or is your first statement another inconsistency and you DO want government to be master.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “I want a world where the good guys have the guns and the bad guys don’t.”

        I want a world were there are no bad guys. How does it feel to want?

        - Jeremy Leochner: “I want to get all the bad guys in jail.”

        So focus on that task and LEAVE US ALONE. If you are nice we might even help you and the police catch bad guys.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “If what I propose violates the peoples rights I hope I will realize it and back off.”

        Which is why I bother to try and show you the obvious violation of peoples rights. And others have already chimed in with detailed explanations.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “As long as I am convinced that what I propose is good for the people and will protect them both from a thug in the streets and a thug in a suit I will support it.”

        Since your proposals (so far) do neither how about you

        STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT.
        STOP IT
        STOP IT NOW

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First-A person does not have to be an immoral individual or criminal to misuse a gun.

        Second- I want more laws because when Obama tries to enforce the existing laws everyone cries tyranny and does everything they can to stop him. People want the ATF to do more to stop the illicit gun trade. But when Obama tries to appoint a director to it people attack him.

        Third- If things like back ground checks were not in place people would buy guns in stores instead of stealing them. The laws serve as barriers. Because they make it so that in order to obtain a gun a bad guy would have to follow the rules. Because the rules are strong the bad guy has to either steal a gun or buy it from someone he knows in order to obtain it.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First- Nothing the President or I support takes away the peoples rights.

        Second- The ATF is the branch of government responsible for dealing with guns. Its hard to do the job its supposed to do without a director.

        Third- I want a world with no bad guys either. Sadly that will never happen. I am trying to make compromises between what I wish and the reality of the situation we find ourselves in.

        Forth- I am trying to focus on that task. We need help. Its hard to catch bad guys if they are forbidden from investigating the innocent in any way. We need to determine who is guilty before we can catch them.

        Fifth- I have never proposed to take away the peoples right to keep and bear arms. I will concede that the assault weapons ban could be called an infringement. Other than that I see no violation of the peoples right to keep and bear arms in the Presidents proposals.

        Sixth- What I propose is intended to stop bad guys from having guns which will help protect people from thugs on the street. My support of actions which crack down on the illicit gun trade is to provide a way to combat gun violence without getting the government involved in our lives.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Fifth- Police are better than vigilantes.”

        No one was talking about vigilantes before you tried to distract by changing the subject.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “And they do have an obligation to protect us. Its their oath-”To Serve and Protect”.”

        Argumentative. I already gave you the link proving that (implied) assertion false.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “I do not deny that people need to be able to defend themselves. And people should not be arrested for defending themselves. However I will say that we need to make sure that they were in fact defending themselves.”

        There is a policy for that. Invented over 200 YEARS ago. I told you about it multiple times.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Plenty of killers have tried to hide their crime by claiming they were acting in self defense.”

        Yep. It even handles that case.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “First- Making gun free zones will mean children and teens bringing guns to school not just teachers. I may sound like a broken record but children and guns is a real problem for me.”

        You go right ahead had have a problem. STOP MAKING IT OURS. We have seen enough death in your GUN FREE Zones to last a lifetime.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Second- The reason I care is I do not want a deranged monster coming to a school and shooting at innocent children.”

        Demonstrably false since you insist on keeping GUN FREE Zones around for monsters to hunt in.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “And during the times when such a tragedy is not happening, which is almost all of the time, I want children and teens to be in a healthy and safe environment.”

        Which GunFreeZones have proven time and again to NOT BE A SAFE ENVIRONMENT. Abolish them.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Third- How is anything the President is proposing PUNISHING THE 300 MILLION INNOCENTS.”

        I’ll start with the big one. Disarming our militia. Well more so. The original obvious one is NFA 1934 that even in Miller decision makes it clear that SCOTUS considered milita firearms to be outside the control of the federal government.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Forth-Just so you know I can’t hear you if you shout at the computer.”

        Just so you know I am not shouting at my computer. I’m just using large print for important points.

        Like this one.

        ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT SHOOT ANYONE THIS YEAR or last…

        STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT.
        STOP IT
        STOP IT NOW

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First-I was not trying to distract. You have often put forth the idea that a citizen armed with a gun is a better defense against violence than the police. I consider such would be heroes to be little better than vigilantes.

        Second- Its not argumentative. The police have to swear an oath. Whether they live up to it or not is an issue. What I am saying is all right minded police officers have a sworn responsibility to the people and to the community.

        Third- Again Vicki we have to determine who is guilty first. We can’t just throw anyone who we think is guilty into jail. Aren’t you the one so concerned with hurting the innocent.

        Forth- It only handles it if they get caught in the lie.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki

        First- The problem is ours. Getting rid of gun free zones will make the problem worse not better.

        Second- If preparing for the unlikely event of a mass murderer results in children carrying guns in school I will take my chances. What is it you say so often about all the Americans who don’t shoot people. The chances of a mass murderer seem all the more unlikely to me after seeing your statistic.

        Third- My high school has been around for over 50 years and it has been a gun free zone for just as long. As have all the schools I have ever gone to. None of them suffered gun related or weapons related violence. They were safe environments to learn in.

        Forth- The President is not calling for disarming the militia. He is calling for an assault weapons ban. Banning a particular type of weapon and a vague type at that does not equal disarming the militias.

        Fifth- I know that’s what you are doing. I was making a joke.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “First-A person does not have to be an immoral individual or criminal to misuse a gun.”

        Irrelevant. And we have procedures for dealing with misuse. meantime…..
        ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DIDN’T MIS USE A FIREARM.
        STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Second- I want more laws because when Obama tries to enforce the existing laws everyone cries tyranny and does everything they can to stop him.”

        Maybe you should ask yourself if obama is enforcing an UNCONSTITUTIONAL law. How about we drop all of them (they are null and void from their inception) and save some enforcement money.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner writes:
        “Third- If things like back ground checks were not in place people would buy guns in stores instead of stealing them.”

        So you even openly admit that crime (stealing) would go down. Is that a logical oops?

        - Jeremy Leochner: “The laws serve as barriers.”

        To the innocent shopkeeper. You don’t seriously think a criminal cares do you?

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Because they make it so that in order to obtain a gun a bad guy would have to follow the rules.”

        We already established that criminals don’t follow the rules. Why do you think he would now?

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Because the rules are strong the bad guy has to either steal a gun or buy it from someone he knows in order to obtain it.”

        The rule we are talking about (background check) is weak and full of inaccuracies which deprive INNOCENT PEOPLE of their GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. Meanwhile the criminal does not need to buy from someone he knows any more than you do.
        http://gunguy.tempdomainname.com/nicsfail.htm

        Now let us entertain a thought experiment. A hardened criminal wants a gun. He will
        A. Steal it
        B. go to the gun shop and buy it
        C. send someone else to a gun shop to buy it.
        D. go to his black market source to buy it.
        E. go to a black market source to buy it.
        F. go to another hardened criminal who has one for sale.

        Name the LEAST likely.

        Meanwhile 100s of thousands of INNOCENT AMERICANS are denied their rights do to bureaucratic errors.

        Now tell me again how background checks have ANY purpose other than to punish the innocent.

        STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT
        STOP IT
        STOP IT NOW

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “First- Nothing the President or I support takes away the peoples rights.”

        Demonstrably false. Or were you not paying attention to obamas proposals to congress.
        Here is the big one again

        * A ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Third- I want a world with no bad guys either. Sadly that will never happen.”

        Good. now that you have accepted reality give us back the best tools for self and community defense. Though it would be fun to wait around for a policeman to show up we know that when seconds count the police are only minutes away. We need the proper tools to hold the bad guy or chase him away.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “I am trying to make compromises between what I wish and the reality of the situation we find ourselves in.”

        The compromise is easy, Jail the criminals. Leave the innocent alone. Use the tools provided by GOD and enshrined in the Constitution to do both.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Forth- I am trying to focus on that task. We need help. Its hard to catch bad guys if they are forbidden from investigating the innocent in any way.”

        Have you not been paying attention again. I have told you SEVERAL TIMES where to look for the process to accomplish the task.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “We need to determine who is guilty before we can catch them.”

        Go and actually study just a tiny bit of the Constitution please. The process is there in black and white. ALL or most in the Bill of Rights. It has worked well for OVER 200 YEARS.

        Or we could do it the really old fashioned way and let the monarch decide who is guilty before he sends out the royal guard. Even England did away with THAT system.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Fifth- I have never proposed to take away the peoples right to keep and bear arms. I will concede that the assault weapons ban could be called an infringement.”

        Could be? or is. Let’s see. People get to keep and bear arms. There shall be NO infringement. ONE GIVEN reason (not the only one but they did have limited parchment to write on) is so that a state of freedom could be maintained and this was to be done by a well regulated militia. And now you just think that a ban on keeping and bearing arms similar to military arms MIGHT be and infringement?

        Let’s compromise. We will let you ban all hunting firearms but you give us back ALL military arms. (Yes that means swords too). (Hunters take a deep breath and relax. Select fire means you get to choose one shot per pull or multi-shot.)

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Sixth- What I propose is intended to stop bad guys from having guns which will help protect people from thugs on the street. My support of actions which crack down on the illicit gun trade is to provide a way to combat gun violence without getting the government involved in our lives.”

        None of your proposals will have any effect without involving more government in our lives.

        ALL of obamas proposals and ALL of his EO’s clearly gets more government involved in our lives.

        Now go ahead and list JUST your proposals that you believe do NOT get more government into our lives. Keep the list to one item per line please.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “First-I was not trying to distract. You have often put forth the idea that a citizen armed with a gun is a better defense against violence than the police. I consider such would be heroes to be little better than vigilantes.”

        Now not only do you want to PUNISH the innocent but you want to call them names too? Do you even have the 3rd clue what a vigilante is?

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Second- Its not argumentative. The police have to swear an oath. Whether they live up to it or not is an issue. What I am saying is all right minded police officers have a sworn responsibility to the people and to the community.”

        You have been shown that your point is in error. To bring it up again and again is the very definition of argumentative.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Third- Again Vicki we have to determine who is guilty first. We can’t just throw anyone who we think is guilty into jail. Aren’t you the one so concerned with hurting the innocent.”

        You are changing the subject. You claimed you had to determine if they were guilty before you could CATCH them. Stop changing the subject.

        Forth- It only handles it if they get caught in the lie.

        To which it are you referring?

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “First- The problem is ours. Getting rid of gun free zones will make the problem worse not better.”

        Proof by bald assertion. I now assert that GUN FREE Zones make the problem worse.
        I submit the following as proof:
        http://www.dailybarometer.com/forum/history-shows-gun-free-zones-are-not-the-solution-1.2383230#.UPodjnc1B8E

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Second- If preparing for the unlikely event of a mass murderer results in children carrying guns in school I will take my chances.”

        Sure go ahead. STOP FORCING US TO FOLLOW what we know is very dangerous.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “What is it you say so often about all the Americans who don’t shoot people. The chances of a mass murderer seem all the more unlikely to me after seeing your statistic.”

        So why do you, obama and gun-grabbers insist on PUNISHING THE INNOCENT?

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Third- My high school has been around for over 50 years and it has been a gun free zone for just as long.”

        We had this discussion several days ago. It is as irrelevant now as it was then.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “As have all the schools I have ever gone to. None of them suffered gun related or weapons related violence. They were safe environments to learn in.”

        Yet you continue to want to strip us of OUR RIGHTS because you feel your schools are safe? Too bad those 20 kids didn’t go to your schools. They would still be alive. Of course someone elses kids would be DEAD cause that school was a GUN FREE Zone.

        - Jeremy Leochner: “Forth- The President is not calling for disarming the militia. He is calling for an assault weapons ban. Banning a particular type of weapon and a vague type at that does not equal disarming the militias.”

        How does it not disarm them? Just cause you let them keep some pea shooters? YOU (government) already deny them actual military arms like the M16.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki this is to your first response

        First-Its not irrelevant. You cant give guns to children. And its risky to have someone who knows nothing of fire arms have a gun. Would you want someone like me who has never owned a gun to have one one questions asked.

        Second- First you tell me we have laws for dealing with criminals. Than you tell me we should drop all of them. What the President is proposing is recommendations to congress to vote on. He isn’t just doing this on a whim. And how are “7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.” or “11. Nominate an ATF director.” or “18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.” or ” 23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.” unconstitutional.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicki this is to your second response

        First- No Vicki it is not a logical oops. In the same way it is not a logical oops to condemn murder and admit that if murder was legal the crime rate would go down. My point was if the immoral act was not illegal it would happen more often. And when it did we would be unable to throw the person who committed the immoral act in jail.

        Second- If the criminal wants to buy a gun at a gun store instead of stealing it he has to go through the red tape whether he likes to or not. Most criminals refuse to go through the red tape and instead opt to steal a weapon. The only reason they do that is because the red tape is there. If the red tape was not there they would buy a gun instead of steal one.

        Third- See second argument

        Forth- You admit the current back ground checks are “weak and full of inaccuracies”. That suggests to me that they should be strengthened. And how is it depriving someone of their rights to make sure a person who is trying to buy a gun is a trust worthy person or at least trust worthy enough to be given a gun.

        Fifth- Least likely is B. Most likely is probably A. The reason B is the least likely is because the guy would have to go through a back ground check that would throw up a red flag and prevent him from getting one. That or a registry will record the gun he now owns and if he uses that gun to commit it can be traced back to him. If those laws and that bureaucracy wasn’t there to make it hard for him to obtain the weapon I am pretty sure B would become more common.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Vicky well you know

        First- No Vicky as you have said the ban violates peoples rights. It doesn’t take them away.

        Second- I think we can recognize the reality we face and not simply say Arm yourselves. And I never said people cannot carry weapons to protect themselves. I just do not want guns in schools. But you can carry guns in banks or parks or cities or where ever you live or want to go. Just keep guns out of schools.

        Third- Its not enough to simply want to throw criminals in jail.

        Forth- Yes Vicki you have told me. And at the same time you have referred to that process as weak and unconstitutional.

        Fifth- The Bill of rights provides a a prohibition on abuses committed by the federal government. It does not spell out the process by which law enforcement can investigate crimes and figure out who is guilty. The bill of rights stops them from going to far. But while its big on the what not to do. Its a little silent on whats the best thing to do.

        Sixth- OKAY OKAY I GET IT. Alright. Personally I think people should not have assault weapons. But since the constitution is a prohibition on the federal government infringing on the right to bear arms and an assault weapons ban by the President is therefore unconstitutional I will follow the constitution. An assault weapons ban is unconstitutional and I will not support it.

        Seventh- Don’t play with me Vicki. After your last point I am feeling very vulnerable. I am against hunting. I guess we should limit the weaponry. I say multi shot is fine.

        Eighth- Alright here is my list:

        7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

        11. Nominate an ATF director.

        23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

        Dang. Your right a lot of those proposals do require government involvement. Well I still support most of them. But these three I think are pretty benevolent.

      • Jana

        Jeremy,
        You stated:
        “And its risky to have someone who knows nothing of fire arms have a gun. Would you want someone like me who has never owned a gun to have one one questions asked.”————
        Heaven forbid someone like YOU would have a gun who is afraid and probably would drop it and run. I have no confidence that you WOULD protect your family even with a knife!
        You also stated
        “Second- First you tell me we have laws for dealing with criminals. Than you tell me we should drop all of them. What the President is proposing is recommendations to congress to vote on. He isn’t just doing this on a whim.”___________________

        You are right. He was just waiting for a good crisis to occur so he could do this very thing that is only going to cost the taxpayers another estimated $500million, until we get the final bill and oops it was actually a billion.
        The real problem is dealing with mental health. Every person that has committed these crimes have had some type of mental health problems. Has Obama even touched on the mental health problems plaguing our country right now? NO HE HAS NOT!

        No mother in her right mind could let her daughter date you because you truly cannot be trusted to protect her if a problem arose. You would have to debate yourself too long and then you would outrun the poor girl you were dating. You said one thing that almost made you sound like a man, but every word you type on this site says fear fear fear. A fearful person cannot be trusted to make a wise decision when facing a real crisis.

    • Jana

      Jeremy L, The wimp!

      So help me if someone came into your house to rob you with a gun you would probably have to debate yourself and the robber on what you should do. The robber would get so tired of your ignorance that he would just give up and shoot you.
      Quit living in fear.

      • Jana

        Jeremy, He would shoot you just to put you out of your misery.
        Remember a coward dies a thousand deaths.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Jana I am not a coward just because I want to do something about the problem of gun violence. And just for the record I have a guard dog and plenty of baseball bats, aluminum and wooden, in my house as well as a readily accessible supply of fighting knives. And if someone enters my home and threatens my family all bets are off. I am no coward. You do not have to be a coward to oppose violence, ask Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Jesus.

      • Jana

        Well Jeremy,
        That’s the first manly thing I have ever heard you say. How long would you have to debate with the person breaking in before you decided to use any of these things?

      • Vicki

        You keep all those tools you want Jeremy. Jana and I prefer to stop criminals at range. I personally am not fond of being shot while closing on the perp to neutralize him with a “fighting knife”.

      • Jana

        Vicki,
        You are so right. I am not going to let someone get close enough to me so that I can use a stupid knife on them that they could take it away from me. Jeremy has a child’s mentality of what life is supposed to be like. I pray he never has to experience the reality of having to fight for his life.
        Even Obama said he would take a gun to a knife fight, and he sounds like a girly man too.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Jana and Vicky.

        First Jana I would not debate with someone who is in my house without my permission. I would beat him to a pulp.

        Second I live in a town of about 50,000 people. Not exactly a small town but still a calm suburbs. Never had a problem with burglary or home invasion. So I do not keep my house at deathcon one readiness. But I consider my house pretty safe. I also hope I never face a home invasion. However I hardly consider my view of the world to be childish. I follow the statistics which say that a majority of home burglaries happen when the owner is not home. And in case you missed it I have a dog. And if your wondering she is a Rottweiler Pitt Bull mix who is well trained and devoted to me and my family. Anyone breaks into our house will first have to get past her near perfect ears which can hear a footstep a block away. And if they some how manage to get the drop on us her bark is sure to either get the robbers attention or at least the attention of the neighbors. And if said robber is still stupid enough to break into a house with a guard dog he is going to face the wrath of a Rottweiler/Pitt Bull trained to protect. And I have seen my dog in protection mode. Anyone who breaks into my house will have their legs ripped off before they can say I give up. And if my dog does not get them I am ready with a knife or a bat and the desire to protect me family. I will die to protect my family. So if I have to take a few shots to get close enough to stab him so be it. At least I can die protecting my family. And don’t be fooled by my naivety and gentleness. When its my family I fight to the death guarantee.

      • Jana

        And I rest my case!

      • Jeremy Leochner

        What case is that Jana?

  • Harold Olsen

    During the 70′s, TV went through a period where you never saw anyone actually getting shot. On shows such as Mission : Impossible, you saw someone like IMF leader Jim Phelps pull a gun, aim it at the bad guy, and then you’d see the bad guy lying dead on the floor. You never heard the shot or saw Phelps fire the gun or see the bad guy get hit. It made the shows look ridiculous. This lasted into the early 80′s. Shows like Knight Rider and The A-Team never had people dying by getting shot. They were blown up, pushed out of a window and or run over with a car. In the case of A-Team, people were firing guns all over the place but no one actually got shot. It was almost as though they were sending the message that you could shoot guns all you want and no one gets hurt. So, in effect, if there is a lot of gun violence around, there’s a good argument for blaming it on TV and the morons who come up with the lame ideas for their shows. Most of what is on TV is just crap anyway. I often wonder why I keep my cable service since I seldom watch TV.

    • eddie47d

      Yes TV and movies are as hokey as they come and all our fantasies will come true if only we twinkle our nose and jump in bed with Barbara Eden. LOL! Let’s face it times have changed and some programs are even dumber than they were 50 years ago. Yet some movies are far more realistic to what goes on in real life too. Should we cut out the violence and sugar coat it and pretend folks don’t really die? Should we refuse to watch Nancy Grace who hypes up every incident as the scariest and worse that has ever happened? Now that is some heavy propaganda and spreading of fear!. Many kids (our generation) grew up watching Marshall Dillion challenging the bad guy and putting them 6 feet under and we loved it.On Monday nights we were eager to see Chuck Connors on the Rifleman saving his son from all the perils of life. We couldn’t get enough of it and the gun was the ultimate hero that saved the day! Wasn’t that “a public fantasy about guns”? Fictional characters “killing each other” and assuming the good guy always wins. Some of these good guys over the life of the series where shot at hundreds of times and even jumped out of the way of an onslaught of bullets. Few of these TV heros ever received a scratch or even twisted an ankle. They never felt the pain of a real gunshot wound and our nation became invisible where the good guy always wins and the bad guy had a terrible death. Wasn’t that totally unrealistic considering how many real people die in gun violence in America. The image of the superhero was ingrained in our minds but seldom reflected actual reality. So didn’t the producers of those movies and shows “drive the popular culture”?

      • Robert Smith

        “The image of the superhero was ingrained in our minds but seldom reflected actual reality. ”

        For me the magic moment realizing it was literally a comic book entertainment was when the bad guy shot at Superman. Superman stood there with hands on hips and and the bullets bounced off him. In frustration the villein tossed the gun at the hero and Superman dodged the thrown gun.

        It’s FICTION.

        Rob

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

        Benjamin: and I’m suppose to hope a cop is around to protect me from those who would harm me…

        Of course not. You would be an idiot if you did! Where were the cops when the chit was going down at Sandy-Hook? Where were the cops when the chit was going down at the Aurora theatre? Handing out parking tickets, no doubt. No no, only a fool would be so stupid as to rely on a cop being around when you need one. The best person for the job is yourself. Let the cops do what they do best, whatever that is…and you take responsibility for your own protection. The left-wing progressives will try to convince you to rely totally on the cops/state for your protection, but keep in mind that that mentality to rely on government for everything else will naturally fall into the area of self-protection! Of course, why wouldn’t they. They believe they are gods and can do anything and everything for you. The fact of the matter is that, they are idiotic-bumblers, who haven’t the where-with-all to understand even the simplest of truths.

      • eddie47d

        Once again WTS you are addressing the problem by saying you won’t have the means to defend yourself . By now even you should know that is a lie. By the way and as a side note ONLY the police arrived at the Aurora theater in 2 1/2 minutes .

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

        eddie: By the way and as a side note ONLY the police arrived at the Aurora theater in 2 1/2 minutes .

        A little too late, wouldn’t you say? Btw, they arrived late at the Aurora theatre, and all the rest of the massacres, too many to mention. The fact is, eddie, if you choose to decide to wait for the po-lice, you are basically dead in the water! Self-protection must be the sole responsibility of each individual, since, naturally, the po-lice cannot be everywhere at once! An armed citizen is the best deterrent to crime, period!

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

        The Police Cannot Protect You –But You Can Protect Yourself!

        If a criminal attacks you on the street or in your home, you cannot afford to wait 30 minutes, 20 minutes, or even 10 minutes for the police to arrive, assuming that you even get the chance to call police and they respond. Ten minutes is more than enough time for a thug to rob, rape, murder, or cripple you for life.

        Making guns illegal will primarily disarm peaceful citizens. That gives a green light for violent criminals to attack everyone, both gun owners and non-owners alike.

        In Los Angeles, during the 1992 “Rodney King Riots,” police abandoned entire neighborhoods. Live TV broadcasts showed hoodlums burning homes and businesses, and dragging innocent motorists from their cars, beating and killing them. The only thing that prevented entire communities from being burned to the ground were community residents barricading their streets and using their guns to protect their homes and families.

        In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that you, as an individual, have no right to protection by the police. Their only obligation is to protect “society”, what-ever that means. So if you want to protect your home and family, you have to rely upon yourself!

  • Corkey

    You cannot allow a decadent culture to influence your mind. Turn off or limit your TV and stop going to the movies. All the movies suck anyway. That’s the message we should be conveying. Garbage in, Garbage out

  • retired72

    How about a morals class in school???? And the 10 Commandments writtin on at least one wall…Where is that today??? It is not the gun issue. That is just the excuse…

    • Warrior

      Now we’re getting to crux of the problem. Gubmint control of the edumacation system and the results herewith.

      • http://realsustainability.wordpress.com realsustainability

        Right on, Warrior! Today we’re basically being told how to think and what’s important to think about. For years nearly everyone has been funneled towards Liberal Arts and Sciences schools. Does anyone know anything about the conservative Arts & Sciences? Ex. What kind of watch dogs to we have over technology? IMO very few and there are plenty of examples. of “advancements” that have, in the long run, caused more problems than they are/were worth.TV may be one of them. Being conservative doesn’t mean the absence of all things progressive but it does mean careful consideration with an eye to being skeptical. In the words of some who have gone before: “We must take care when we walk upon the Earth, for the faces of our grandfathers, grandmothers and generations of children yet unborn are looking up at us.” Advance, yes. Do better, of course, But never at the expense of others whether they walk among us now, in the future or in the past. We can provide a way better life for our kids and grandkids if we only heed the warnings history has provided and the people who made them.

    • Jeremy Leochner

      I think the stories and lessons of the bible should be read and taught to kids. However I disagree with the ten commandments being in class. I do not believe in god and have violated the commandments of strange gods, lords name in vain and honoring the sabbath day. However I consider myself a law abiding decent person. Children should be taught to help and care for each other. Not bully each other.

      • Jana

        Of course you would disagree with the Ten Commandments being in a classroom, they stand for something.

        Yes, children should be taught not to bully each other, but they also need to be taught how to stand up to a bully.
        We have bullies in this world and will face them all of our lives.

        As for the rest of your statement, it doesn’t make sense.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        The Ten Commandments do stand for something positive. But so do those who do not follow ever single one of them, depending on which ones they do not follow. Children should be taught to stand up to bullies. As for the rest of my statement. I am a law abiding citizen and I give to charity and I love and take care of my family. I think most people would consider me a decent fellow who is not a threat to his fellow men and women. However I do not believe in god. As such I have no qualms about taking his name in vain. And I have not gone to church on the sabbath day since I was a young boy. The point of my nonsense as you call it was to point out one does not have to have the Ten Commandments in the classroom to be a good person. I did not need the Ten Commandments to teach me the golden rule.

      • Jana

        Jeremy,
        Reread it. I never called it nonsense. I said it didn’t make sense. The part about violating the commandments of strange gods.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Forgive me I made an assumption. I assumed not making sense and nonsense were the same thing. I meant the commandment that says “Thou shalt not have strange gods before Me. Thou
        shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing
        that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that
        are in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve
        them. I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the
        fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them
        that hate Me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me, and
        keep My commandments.”

      • http://realsustainability.wordpress.com realsustainability

        But, truth is truth no matter where it comes from. Whether you want to call them the 10 Commandments of Moses or the 10 visions of Skrit Waterhover. There is nothing wrong with honoring your father and mother, not thinking about sleeping with your neighbors wife (or husband), keeping at least one day to reflect on spiritualness, don’t misuse the name of our creator, don’t murder, don’t lie, don’t steal……. these are common sense things that would do us all good to reflect upon now and then. But in this quasimoral state we’re in now, anything goes. BTW, these concepts are not just found in the Christian Bible. What if we were to hold Congress accountable for keeping these truths? That’s a topic for another time but something to think about and nobody has mentioned the penalties for breaking them! These concepts CAN and arguably SHOULD be posted, simply as truths.

  • SGT YORK

    TV will have a hard time to push gun control unless they remove all there shows with guns. That means a 75% loss they just try as Daddy O’Vomit tells the pusses to do.

    • Freedom

      Who’s your Daddy? Does anybody know where my birth cerificate is? I’m incharge, I get the Assault weapons with high capacity magazines and the explosives, and then I can do what that guy did in Germany in the late 1930′s.

  • Tired of TV Nonsense

    I stopped watching such programs a ‘Criminal Minds’ & the ‘CSI’ Multi Cross Country Series’ from Miami to Las Vegas, because of their repetitive, insane bang bang gun shoot ups, gloryifying depraved counter- culture criminal heroisms and assorted psychologically underdeveloped mental midgets. I am not amused by the “Agents of Heroism” and their last minute realizations, who rush into darkened rooms silhouetted in back lit doorways to save the day whilst they wave their spotlamp equipped pistols and machine guns around the room…..why not just turn on the light and both participants and TV Viewers could actually see what is going on ? Serving in three ‘Little’ Wars we learned never to backlight ourselves as silhouetted targets. Excessive blood and guts and disgusting depictions of pus oozing corpses as in ‘Bones’ – awaiting to be boiled flesh free, only serves to sate the sensational depravities of certain freakish viewers. The depiction of the beautiful heroines of ‘Bones’ being entirely insensitive to blood, guts & gore (Probably of old Al as well !), – must send some negative pictures and thoughts to some young meat slab minded female teenagers to emulate their mostly imaginary role models. I once met an initially very attractive young female L.A. County Criminal Medical Examiner, but quickly recognized that she was a badly balanced nut job herself, seeking oblivion in booze and dangerous self inlicted punishments for what she saw on a daily basis. One day she turned up with two heavily bruised & blackened eyes, and bad facial cuts sustained from one of her self punishing ‘Bad Boy’ encounters – she said she had walked into a door in the darkness of her beach house. I think she had walked into a couple of fists and possibly a baseball bat – but self loathing takes all forms and chances coupled with an obvious death wish.
    TV programs are rotten systems to mal-educate the impressionably young.

    • Freedom

      They should confiscate the beach house.

      • Tommy

        Well that wouldn’t be fair, just confiscate the door it’s the guilty party. I’m sure it was the bathroom door (they are evil you know) but why punish the kitchen door or the bedroom door for that matter. If you don’t believe me then lets run some forensics and be sure. lol now i feel better.

  • Steve E

    The belief systems people hold are absolutely, in no way, shape, or form the result of any objective evaluation of information. The prejudices are inherited, they’re socially inflicted, they’re propagandized in school, in church, in communities, in families. They are reinforced by endless bouts of patriotic media and all of this nonsense. People are an emotional Gordian knot kaleidoscopic clusterfrack of prior prejudices stuffed into their heads and held aloft by the spears of social approval and ostracism.”
    ― Stefan Molyneux

  • Ann

    A democracy of idiots is still a democracy. It just ends up with idiotic results.
    Politically-correct education which treats an independent thinking as a crime creates generations of politically-correct marionettes brainwashed by their teaches and their own self-censorship. Television sells to these marionettes everything from diet pills and Viagra to the President and the vision on Constitution. When amount of these marionettes is getting close to 50% of voters, freedom gone and the Republic became a farm of citizens with rights of domestic animals. Obviously, chicken, sheep and Obama’s voters don’t need 2nd amendment. The rest of the country can keep quietly waiting to 2016 when 98% of voters will vote for Obama, or they can cancel their TV subscriptions and teach their children to read.

    • Freedom

      This country started as a republic. A republic is where the people control the government and country, a democracy is where the people elect somebody else to control it. What happened?

      • Ann

        The American Republic was formed in a way that the powers of sovereignty were exercised through representatives chosen by democratic elections. In democratic elections where the majority of votes decides who will represent all the people the question about how long the Republic will stay is determined by who is eligible to vote. Theoretically, people of special interests should not be given rights to vote to any measureless affecting these interests. Government employers should not be eligible to vote for any measure about increasing or decreasing the power of the government. People who lives on Social Security and don’t pay taxes may not vote for increasing taxes paid by somebody else. Thanks to political-correctness, all the voting barriers are gone and everybody including retarded who don’t understand what and who they vote for and illegals who are getting paid to vote can vote. That’s what happened.

      • eddie47d

        Where do illegals vote Ann? Why would they jeopardize their “illegal” status by exposing that status at the polls? Why would you condemn those on Social Security since that includes the biggest majority of older Americans. Oh I see when you age you then lose your status as an American.

      • Vicki

        This video will help with the explanation of what a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic (what our founders created) is and also gives clear examples of why democracy is really really bad.

        It’s only about 10 min long but well worth the time.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

  • boyscout

    Jon, although you are certainly not wasting your time writing for PLD, you are capitalistically denying a great windfall in the TV industry. Carpe diem! I would suggest that you toss in a few episodes involving the brutal slaughter of those mealy mouthed propagandist reporters. Those TV addicts that are truly sick and imbibing FDA approved anti-psychotic meds could lead the anarchic parade. Otherwise, keep up the good work and prosper at whichever course you choose.

    • Freedom

      Has our fearless leader ever had pschological evaluation, or does get immunity?

      • Robert Smith

        Why? Has he applied for a gun permit?

        Rob

  • Don

    It is more likely that before the anti-gun crowd will be able to satisfy their wet dream of taking guns away from all the law-abiding citizens, we will experience a financial collapse of American society, or real hyper-inflation, along with a breakdown in law and order of a magnitude unimaginable by the low-information voters who support Obama’s reckless spending. Only a fool believes we can continue to operate the way that we are. There is not enough money in the entire world to bail out America. Without money to pay them, you may not even have law enforcement. You may recall that when Katrina hit New Orleans, most of the cops up and left their jobs to protect their own families. Armed gangs of thugs roamed the city and terrorized the citizens. So good luck to you anti-gun people. Stock up on your baseball bats and hammers to defend yourselves when the roving gangs of armed thugs hit your residence during a home invasion. You will be praying for a gun, any gun.

    • Freedom

      What would they steal from me I had to sell everything to make my house payment. I know, why don’t I just raise my debt limit?

    • Vicki

      Don writes about Katrina.
      “Armed gangs of thugs roamed the city and terrorized the citizens. So good luck to you anti-gun people.”

      And government agents went door to door confiscating the guns of the law abiding citizens rather than taking the guns from the thugs. Probably cause the thugs shoot at them

      Any government agent violating his oath to defend the Constitution will get no respect from us.

      • Don

        Thank you Vicki. You’re absolutely correct. And…..it was just announced today that the Democratic mayor of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina has been indicted on 21 charges by a federal grand jury for things he did while he was mayor.

      • Robert Smith

        Oooooooooh, and it was so good for business. I’m surprised the right wing isn’t supporting it saying ti was a “business expense” and let them deduct it.

        I can’t help but wonder if any of those “business” guys will see a day in jail, or are they gonna blame it all on the black guy.

        Rob

      • vicki

        Robert Smith writes:
        “Oooooooooh, and it was so good for business. I’m surprised the right wing isn’t supporting it saying ti was a “business expense” and let them deduct it.

        I can’t help but wonder if any of those “business” guys will see a day in jail, or are they gonna blame it all on the black guy.”

        And the crowd goes wild as RS plays the “COLOR” card.

      • Don

        Robert Smith, it is so easy to spot a liberal. You can always see a “missing link” in their thought pattern. This missing link is why there is no logic in the liberal mindset. You blame the guy in charge, Robert, the guy at the top. In New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina, the guy in charge, the guy at the top, Ray Nagin, was a black guy. Hello…..Robert, oh Robert…..get it?

  • curtis thompson

    Hey Bob!I told you this summer & that the bulling in schools had to start in the white house!! So only take the credit if you deserve it & pass the credit to some of the ones who have telling you this all along! Editors alway take credit even at someone elses comments!

    • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

      Dear curtis thompson,

      You write: “So only take the credit if you deserve it & pass the credit to some of the ones who have telling you this all along!” What have I taken credit for?

      Best wishes,
      Bob

  • ibcamn

    OK this is going to be odd for you but hear me out,this type of stuff can just make your head hurt thinking about it..in tv and movies things are real or fake,period!i always tell my kids, this is fake,it’s just a show!.but i will say that tv is influencing a lot on the way we see things.watch a tv commercial once,look at the people in it.you’ll see one asian girl with a white girl with a black girl with a red headed girl and their swooshing around and flowing and hocking some cosmedics!then another one will have a couple(asian wife with a black husband)buying a car from a white guy or another one with an office space and have one black guy a white guy an asian guy and a white chick standing around a broken copy machine talking and then a black chick(boss)comes up and tells them to get back to work,then she calmly goes over and fixes copier machine with a push of a button!…think about it,it’s the color and mix of the people in the commercial and who’s in charge!the commercials and movies are going (PC)!why you think some remakes of old movies don’t float well in theaters?it’s who they put in place of the original characters!.here is just one EXAMPLE;(old tv series to movie)wild wild west,lead man,Robert Conrad(smart,tough fighting, gun wielding,woman loving,good looking and brave[white]guy working for the gov’t)remake;Will Smith(smart,gun toten,women chasing,good looking,[black]guy working for the gov’t),and the nemesis is a dwarf trying to kill him,but in remake you had half a guy(which he would of had 0% chance to survive back then!)in a steam powered wheelchair trying to kill him!OH,did i mention they work for the secret service for the white house,in the old west at or shortly after slavery?!..OH yeah and a big steam powered spider!!..but it was all about putting a black man in the place of the white man,the hero role!to me,it seems about diversity in tv commercials and make minorities the hero in movies!(woman too)it’s everywhere in Hollywood and tv land…Clint Eastwood made a war movie(Spike Lee openly bitched there weren’t enough black people in his movie)so Spike Lee made his own war movie with an all black cast(except for some[heavily racist]white guys),W.T.F. is that all about,directors have to have evenly balanced amout of white to black to asian to women ratio??..don’t believe me?check it out for yourself,then come back with any hate mail…..as for weapons or violence,it’s part of whatever story you tell and how you tell it..it’s just a story..characters are the influence!

  • FreedomFighter

    Nothing proposed by Obama in all those exectutive orders will stop a single school shooting of the mass murder type.

    on the other hand

    Every single exectutive order proposed grows government, gives government unlimited access to all medical databases, creates and deputizes doctors to have patients arrested and effect not a single criminal but does effect 300 million other Americans that never commited a crime, by infringing on there right to own firearms. In addition, it will cost billions to implement out of your taxes.

    This cant be to stop criminals, its to subject you the normal American to NWO takeover, once disarmed you are easy pickins.

    Laus Deo
    Semper Fi

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

    There’s another big difference between cop-shows and reality. Unlike cop-shows, in real-life, cops don’t show up until “after-the-fact”, and only for the clean-up! This is something that all parents should be making clear to their children; the police cannot help you or save you; when seconds count, and the boys in blue have no clue as to what is about to transpire, you had better have a trusted fire-arm in your possession! Otherwise, you can kiss your azz, goodbye! Of course, you can always fall-back on chop-suey, which takes years and years to master, or you can simply learn to use a GUN, which, with some competent-instruction, takes very little time to master!

  • http://google rose

    Why is the media not looking into the Sandy Hook incident as being a hoax? Why was there a website set up for donations for the victims of Sandy Hooks school shootings on December 11, 2012 when it didn’t happen until December 14, 2012. Don’t me believe just google it. Better hurry before the government removes it. The date can’t be faked. What about Emilee Parker who supposedly killed there? She was photographed leaning on Obama’s leg with other kids two days later. Just google it. Or how about her aunt that said Emilee had two bigger sisters when they are little sisters? Wouldn’t an aunt know one way or another? And then how about the video of her dad on u-tube? How he was laughing and then how he suddenly when into acting mode to psych himself into acting sad. I don’t believe there was a mass shooting in a grade school at Sandy Hooks. And the list goes on of people who were supposedly killed there and who are still alive and the inconsistency of the facts.

  • carol814

    Sandy Hook was a farce and show for all of to see so Barry Soetoro could get his laws for gun control but it certainly was a good show of which everybody’s heart was broken all over the USA and the world.

    The man who saw the six (6) children in front of his house is a member of the Screen Actors Guild and he changed his story several times. There were 600 students in that building and we only saw a hand full walking away from the school.

    There are so many things that didn’t make any sense about this entire story that made no sense. The police were supposed to have an excercise that day at that school on what to do if that were to happen and they made out to be something that really happened when in fact in never happened at all.

    There have been several pictures of even Barry Soetoro holding the dead girl in his arms at meeting with the child’s mother and father and all of them are actors.

    If you recall the father of this child came out laughing and smiling but when he was interviewing he “cried” but when you think about there wasn’t a tear in sight.

    All of this makes me sick to have to say this because all of us were deeply effected by this horrible thing that never ever happened.

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

    More insanity from Obama and his administration. Are you sure you want this man and his administration in charge of regulating your lives, folks?

    ABORTED FETUS INGREDIENTS IN VACCINES MEDICATIONS MAKE UP JUICES CANDY PEPSI FOODS TEA COFFEE SOUP GUM WATER GATORADE MOUNTAIN DEW GUMMIES SOYLENT GREEN IS HERE !!! CANNIBALS Drink Pepsi Products !!!

    PEPSI SERVES UP ABORTED FETAL CELLS IN SOFT DRINKS WHICH MAKES YOU WHO DRINK PEPSI CANNIBALS !!!

    Obama agency rules Pepsi’s use of aborted fetal cells in soft drinks constitutes ‘ordinary business operations’.

    (NaturalNews) The Obama Administration has given its blessing to PepsiCo to continue utilizing the services of a company that produces flavor chemicals for the beverage giant using aborted human fetal tissue. LifeSiteNews.com reports that the Obama Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) has decided that PepsiCo’s arrangement with San Diego, Cal.-based Senomyx, which produces flavor enhancing chemicals for Pepsi using human embryonic kidney tissue, simply constitutes “ordinary business operations.”

    The issue began in 2011 when the non-profit group Children of God for Life (CGL) first broke the news about Pepsi’s alliance with Senomyx, which led to massive outcry and a worldwide boycott of Pepsi products. At that time, it was revealed that Pepsi had many other options at its disposal to produce flavor chemicals, which is what its competitors do, but had instead chosen to continue using aborted fetal cells — or as Senomyx deceptively puts it, “isolated human taste receptors”

    A few months later, Pepsi’ shareholders filed a resolution petitioning the company to “adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements.” But the Obama Administration shut down this 36-page proposal, deciding instead that Pepsi’s used of aborted babies to flavor its beverage products is just business as usual, and not a significant concern.

    “We’re not talking about what kind of pencils PepsiCo wants to use — we are talking about exploiting the remains of an aborted child for profit,” said Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director of CGL, concerning the SEC decision. “Using human embryonic kidney (HEK-293) to produce flavor enhancers for their beverages is a far cry from routine operations!”

    To be clear, the aborted fetal tissue used to make Pepsi’s flavor chemicals does not end up in the final product sold to customers, according to reports — it is used, instead, to evaluate how actual human taste receptors respond to these chemical flavorings. But the fact that Pepsi uses them at all when viable, non-human alternatives are available illustrates the company’s blatant disregard for ethical and moral concerns in the matter.

    Back in January, Oklahoma Senator Ralph Shortey proposed legislation to ban the production of aborted fetal cell-derived flavor chemicals in his home state. If passed, S.B. 1418 would also reportedly ban the sale of any products that contain flavor chemicals derived from human fetal tissue, which includes Pepsi products as well as products
    produced by Kraft and Nestle.

    Full article: http://2012patriot.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/aborted-fetus-ingredients-in-
    vaccines-medications-make-up-juices-candy-pepsi-foods-tea-coffee-soup-gum-water-gatorade-mountain-dew-gummies/

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAY

    Richard Stevens is a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and author of Dial 911 and Die.

    Underlying all “gun control” ideology is this one belief.” “Private citizens don’t need firearms because the police will protect them from crime.” That belief is both false and dangerous for two reasons.

    First, the police cannot and do not protect everyone from crime. Second, the government and the police in most localities owe no legal duty to protect individuals from criminal attack. When it comes to deterring crime and defending against criminals, individuals are ultimately responsible for themselves and their loved ones. Depending solely on police emergency response means relying on the telephone as the only defensive tool. Too often, citizens in trouble dial 911 . . . and die.

    Statistics confirm the obvious truth that the police in America cannot prevent violent crime. In 1997 for example, nationwide there were 18,209 murders, 497,950 robberies, and 96,122 rapes. All those crimes were unprevented and undeterred by the police and the criminal justice system.

    Many criminals use firearms to commit their crimes. For example, in 1997 criminals did so in 68 percent of murders and 40 percent of robberies. Thus criminals either have or can obtain firearms. The existing “gun control” laws do not stop serious criminals from getting guns and using them in crimes.

    Practically speaking, it makes little sense to disarm the innocent victims while the criminals are armed. It is especially silly to disarm the victims when too often the police are simply unable to protect them. As Richard Mack, former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, has observed: “Police do very little to prevent violent crime. We investigate crime after the fact.”

    Americans increasingly believe, however, that all they need for protection is a telephone. Dial 911 and the police, fire, and ambulance will come straight to the rescue. It’s faster than the pizza man. Faith in a telephone number and the local cops is so strong that Americans dial 911 over 250,000 times per day.

    Yet, does dialing 911 actually protect crime victims? Researchers found that less than 5 percent of all calls dispatched to police are made quickly enough for officers to stop a crime or arrest a suspect. The 911 bottom line: “cases in which 911 technology makes a substantial difference in the outcome of criminal events are extraordinarily rare.”

    It’s not just that the police cannot protect you. They don’t even have to come when you call. In most states the government and police owe no legal duty to protect individual citizens from criminal attack. The District of Columbia’s highest court spelled out plainly the “fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen.”

    In the especially gruesome landmark case the “no-duty” rule got ugly. Just before dawn on March 16, 1975, two men broke down the back door of a three-story home in Washington, D.C., shared by three women and a child. On the second floor one woman was sexually attacked. Her housemates on the third floor heard her screams and called the police.

    The women’s first call to D.C. police got assigned a low priority, so the responding officers arrived at the house, got no answer to their knocks on the door, did a quick check around, and left. When the women frantically called the police a second time, the dispatcher promised help would come—but no officers were even dispatched.

    The attackers kidnapped, robbed, raped, and beat all three women over 14 hours.

    When these women later sued the city and its police for negligently failing to protect them or even to answer their second call, the court held that government had no duty to respond to their call or to protect them. Case dismissed.

    The law is similar in most states. A Kansas statute precludes citizens from suing the government or the police for negligently failing to enforce the law or for failing to provide police or fire protection. A California law states that “neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service.” As one California appellate court wrote, “police officers have no affirmative statutory duty to do anything.”

    The state legislatures and courts protect government entities and police departments from civil liability for failing to provide adequate police protection. Some states invoke the “sovereign immunity” defense, a throwback to the days when the subjects were forbidden to sue the king.

    Other states have statutes that prevent legal challenges to police “discretionary” functions. Courts preclude lawsuits in those states by holding that answering emergency calls or providing police protection are “discretionary” functions.

    Many states evade liability by relying on the ironically named “public duty” doctrine. Like a George Orwell slogan, that doctrine says: police owe a duty to protect the public in general, but not to protect any particular individual.

    Police Advice: “Get a Gun”

    http://www.psacake.com/dial_911.asp

    • http://realsustainability.wordpress.com realsustainability

      Wow! What a convincing boat load of FACTS, complete with sources, to defuse the gun grabbers utopia! My wife was going through the final stages of nursing school a few years back and had the need to visit a notoriously rough part of town. Acting as responsibly as she know, she went to the local state police post and asked the best way to defend herself if the need arose. I was sure the advice would be to get mace, a club pr just take a detour so the answer the officer gave stunned me into silence (with a smile!). he said, “A Lady your size should be able to handle a .380 semi-auto just fine.” She has since graduate from nursing school and to a 40 S&W!
      I also know of several county sherriffs that TEACH concealed carry classes. I think we’re under a misconception, proliferated by media, that police want law abiding people disarmed. At least in my experience that’s not true.

  • http://oldpatriot46.wordpress.com oldpatriot46

    While I can not completely disagree, something will occur long before that brain washing is completed. The situation is boiling now. The networks, and their kind, have no clue what the result will be.

  • Eagle

    Hey Robert Smith … been reading your inane crap! My question is why do innocent kids get gunned down and unborn kids get murdered daily, and godless scumbags like you keep breathing! It’s beyond me!

  • Allen Rinyon

    You can do what ever you want but you will never in my life time take my guns away.

  • Joey

    Most people will say they don’t trust the cops though. Liberals talk about how cops are malicious and always screwing everyone else over, but at the same time they entrust the cops to be the only people to carry guns. They’re just idiots, there’s no nicer way to put it.

    “However, there is a glitch. In the world of fiction, movies, television and video games, trillions of dollars are riding on the public fantasy about guns. How do you change the culture when people are still hungry to spend their money on vicariously living out the shoot-’em-up blow-’em-up legends?”

    Can we stop it already for pete’s sake? Video games do not cause people to be murderers. we should focus on more important things like crazy people walking the streets.

  • noname

    Number 1.. People enjoy entertainment.. Number 2 when there is only violence on tv and there’s nothing else to do, of course people will watch shoot’um ups.. If the tv execs changed their policies and used responsibility in what they broadcast, this trend would stop.. In the 50′s and 60′s people had a choice of good comedy. good drama or shoot’um ups.. the majority shunned the shoot’um ups.. today we have mediocre comedies, half of drama shows are cut for time allotted and the only thing intact is shoot’um ups.. sounds like manipulation to me.. what about you? So, don’t knock the shows, knock the producers who keep us dumbed down and hooked on these dogs for advertising sakes.

  • http://none Bill Henry

    The argument of rightful, legal, and law abiding gun owners will carry no weight against the government until it becomes united in it’s stand, and intention on how to deal with the government. Organization is the key word. Liberals or Progressives not matter what you call them have the bully pulpit, and as all of you know that there is not limit to what they will do to oppose us. They lie, they cheat, the buy the vote, they bully, they over talk any attempt to debate with them. They do not use reason, only emotions, to pursue their cause. It is obvious that they do not know what is coming, and they will refuse to see it until it actually happens, which you and I know will be too late. We need to state our aims and stick together on them. If it is true that there are eighty million or only twenty million of us, one voice from that many citizens is one that will resound through the halls of government like the shot heard ’round the world. We must try to voice our cause through the ballot box and that failing, fall back on our only other recourse, and you all know what that will mean. The question is then can we stand firm in our resolve to do what is necessary to maintain our freedom. If not then we must acquiesce to losing our liberties or continue in our resistance with diminished numbers. It calls to mind the war in Vietnam. The Viet Cong and the RVN kept going from the end of WWII to the evacuation of Saigon without a single victory against the U.S. military because the were fighting for a cause. The war was lost for political reasons. If we had continued fighting after the TET offensive we would have had a total defeat of our communist foe. So I argue that organization and a firm stance on our goals is the only answer to what is coming.

  • jjw
  • Joey

    Who under 50 even calls them ‘shoot ‘em up shows’? They’re not called that and the only people who would be inspired to violence against people because they saw somebody shoot someone on TV are either extremely crazy or extremely stupid and shouldn’t even be on the streets in the first place. It’s as coherent as that serial killer who heard voices who told him killing people would prevent an earthquake.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
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.