Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Obama Administration To Tackle Gun Control In Coming Weeks

January 31, 2011 by  

Obama administration to tackle gun control in coming weeksWhite House officials have confirmed that President Barack Obama will address gun control policies soon. However, some critics believe that he should have used the State of the Union platform to address the hotly-debated topic.

According to media reports, the President intentionally omitted gun control from his nationally-televised address in order to focus on the topics of job creation and the economy. Administration officials said that the White House will unveil its plans to strengthen current laws, which allow some mentally unstable individuals to obtain certain weapons.

Gun control advocacy groups have pressured Obama and Federal lawmakers to implement more thorough background checks for firearm purchases following the Jan. 8 shooting in Tucson, Ariz. that left six people dead, including a 9-year-old girl.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), an influential lobbying group, has warned that an overreaction to an isolated incident may lead to a violation of the 2nd Amendment rights.

"Once again, you and your freedoms are being blamed for the acts of a deranged madman, who sent signal after signal that he was dangerous," NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said in an email to the group's members, quoted by The Washington Post

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Obama Administration To Tackle Gun Control In Coming Weeks”

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

  • s c

    Gee, that was utterly unpredictable. A space cadet progressive has plans to go on the anti-2nd Amendment trail. Are we to think that Obummer will come up with a kinder, gentler scheme?
    Do progressives and other loosely-wrapped wackos have enlightened ways to lead America so we can have a utopian, gun-free country? I wouldn’t trust most of the twits in this administration to take out the trash, let alone make America ‘better’ via new anti-gun laws.
    America’s master ventriloquists are aiming an Oz-like creation at us, and they’ll be trying once again to show us the errors of the Founding Fathers and all who love freedom more than political saviors.

    • wandamurline

      No, the progressive liberals feel that it is okay for them to own a firearm so they can protect their families, it is just no okay for you and me to have the same privilege….case in fact…a Democratic Congressman I believe from SC who has voted to ban guns in EVERY attempt to disarm you and I, had a burglar break into his home and he responded by shooting the intruder. Like always, it is do as I say, not as I do. Again, he had a gun even though he votes to outlaw guns, for himself, he just does not believe that we have the same rights and privileges…this is common with the progressive liberals…they want it all and we are to have nothing.

      • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

        I didn’t realize that ‘gun control’ meant *completely eliminating ALL privately owned guns of any and every kind*.

        I must have missed that NRA/KKK memo…

        • JohnK

          Stupid is as stupid does…..
          No Foresight

        • JC

          And so speaks a died in the wool communist, against one of the most effective organizations in place to gaurd a sacred American (human) right. Your whole line of thinking must be eradicated from these United States.

          • Dan az

            JC
            I would bet that on this list of mentally unstable individuals the conservatives will head up the list.

          • JC

            Not sure I follow you Dan…
            I’m pretty sure you and I are Libertarians.
            So are you saying the Cons are as bad or worse than the Libs?
            Could be…..

          • http://?? Joe H.

            JC & Dan az,
            Careful there, I’m a constitutional conservative!!! Please don’t EVER identify me in the same group or worse than a lib!!!

          • JC

            Hey Joe…in my mind, Libertarians and Constitutional Conservatives are one and the same…and by definition “not” big government Republicans.
            Which is why we are feared and despised by the right and the left.

          • Dan az

            Hey guys what Im saying is that if we are on the terrorist list for being a vet than the conservatives would also be on the list.

        • Ellet

          You must have been spending the last 40 years on another planet if you didn’t know this. The Anti-”Gun” crowd has more clot than the NRA and the pro “Gun” crowd. Two members of the anti “gun” crowd probably have more money than the pro 2nd Amendment people.George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. Then we have the Anti-”gun members of congress using our tax dollars to try and destroy the 2nd Amendment.
          The President and Mrs. Clinton have joined the United Nations in trying to disarm the citizens (The Militia) of the US of A. George Soros representative at the U. N., Rebecca Peters” is the person behind the disarming of the citizens of Australia.
          The Eastern Europe block countries have had more or equal number of mass murders than the US and they have had strict no gun or anti gun regulations for years. Look at Mexico, the citizens can’t have “guns” only the military, law and criminals. It seems there that there isn’t much difference in them.
          The threat of 80 million +- gun owners in this country are what keeps the wolf at bay.

        • Proud to be an American

          I really don’t care who you are but when the mention of the KKK with a better organization such as the NRA. The democrats have demostrated how in-step with the KKK, the Demotratic Socialist Party(aka The Nazi Party) and the comunists.

          You would have us go and make deals with the cartels in Mexico so you could have your crack and pot delivered to you by mail if it weren’t illegal already by Federal Law.

          So get off your fruit stand and listen to what is being said by this imbacile in the presidential office and the people who blindly follow him.

        • always right

          “Dogma Free”. Your handle defeats your argument, as you’re clearly delusional. IF you think that the NRA/KKK are in any way affiliated, you suffer from an irrational dogma. BTW, Can you explain why gun-grabber Diane Feinstein carries concealed?

      • Kinetic1

        wandamurline,
        Please take some time to look into a claim before writing about it. The man I believe you are speaking of was Carl Rowan from Tennessee. Mr. Rowan was not a Congressman, but a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under Kennedy. He also served as a delegate to the United Nations during the Cuban Missile Crisis and was appointed the U.S. Ambassador to Finland in 1963. None of these positions allowed him to vote for gun control.

        Carl Rowan was also a reporter for the Washington Post and the Chicago Sun Times. It was there that he wrote about the civil rights battles of the 50s and 60s, and his opposition to gun ownership. No doubt, this man was a strong supporter of gun control and wanted guns ownership limited to the police. In fact, the gun he used in 1988 belonged to his son, an FBI agent. As to the crime committed by the intruder … it was a group of teenagers who were swimming in his pool and refused to leave. He fired a shot and hit one of the kids in the wrist. Hypocritical? You bet, and he admitted as much, but does this prove that Democratic law makers are out to take your guns away while demanding the right to keep one of their own?

        • Brad

          Kinetic1,

          Why yes they do friend. To quote Diane Fienstien Senator from Kalifornia, “I have a lot of enemies, if gun control is passed I’m not giving my gun up”

          Spoken like a true progressive liberal, do as I say not as I do.

          • Kinetic1

            Brad,
            Please source this quote. I can’t find any record of Senator Feinstein saying anything of the sort. She did admit to carrying a weapon for protection in the past, but reports are that she relinquished the weapon and permit in 2000.

          • JeffH

            “Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.”–U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein Associated Press 11/18/93

            “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out right ban, picking up every one of them… “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in, “I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.”
            –U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV’s “60 Minutes,” 2/5/95

            The following comments were made by U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) during U.S. Senate hearings on terrorism held in Washington, D.C. on April 27, 1995
            “Because less than twenty years ago I was the target of a terrorist group. It was the New World Liberation Front. They blew up power stations and put a bomb at my home when my husband was dying of cancer. And the bomb didn’t detonate. … I was very lucky. But, I thought of what might have happened. Later the same group shot out all the windows of my home.”

            “And, I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself because that’s what I did. I was trained in firearms. I’d walk to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out, I was going to take them with me.”

            [During her comments at this hearing Sen. Feinstein made no disavowal of carrying a concealed weapon or of people arming themselves as she has done (and presumably still does) in California.]

            You can not have or carry a gun but she can!
            Dianne Feinstein believes that only the privileged should be legally permitted to protect themselves.
            http://www.alphadogweb.com/firearms/Diane_Feinstein.htm

          • JeffH

            Kinetic!, I also find difficult to believe that Feinstein would say…“I have a lot of enemies, if gun control is passed I’m not giving my gun up”…especially with her total commitment to the ant-gun movement. You can believe she would not give up her right to carry or own a gun no matter what laws were passed.

            With Feinstein it is a matter of a “do as I say, not as I do” mentality.

            “And, I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself because that’s what I did. I was trained in firearms. I’d walk to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out, I was going to take them with me.”

            [During her comments at this hearing Sen. Feinstein made no disavowal of carrying a concealed weapon or of people arming themselves as she has done (and presumably still does) in California.]

          • Kinetic1

            That’s great JeffH. You’ve found the same information I referenced when I said that Senator Feinstein did indeed have a gun and a permit to carry. I understand that you feel she is a hypocrite, and if she is still carrying while arguing for a total ban, then I have to agree. My understanding is that she has turned in her weapon, so any stand she takes against hand guns now is another story. Either way, your post still does not provide source for Brad’s “qoute” from the Senator.

          • JeffH

            Kinetic1, exactly and it was never intended to. As for your “understanding” that Feinstein turned in her gun and doesn’t carry anymore…liveing in California and fighting Feinstein tooth and nail over her commitment to total gun control, I’ve never seen or heard anything that remotely suggests that Feinstein does not carry…I’ve searched extensively with only this result.

            Senator Diane Feinstein on the Left Coast possesses something more rare than a conservative Republican in San Francisco — an unrestricted concealed weapons permit.

            “Apparently without shame, she participated in a citywide gun turn-in program that was intended to create some kind of statue from the donated guns that were to be melted down. One of her police body guards let it slip that she contributed a cheap model for the meltdown, while retaining her .357 magnum revolver for her own personal self-defense.”
            http://www.americandaily.com/article/9405

            Bottom line is that Feinstein is a “Second Amendment Hypocrite”.

          • Vicki

            Feinstein has her bodyguards carry her guns for her ;)

          • independant thinker

            I heard something about Feinstein turning in a handgun in I believe the early 90′s. She turned in a handgun she was not licensed to carry and made a big show of doing so but did not turn in the pistol that was listed on her carry permit.

        • http://GOGGLE vaksal

          WELL,your statement doesnt hold water,the united nations agreement hillary clinton signed ,(small arms agreement)talk about trying to soft sell the gun control agenda,kinectic truthfuly,your so far off the real facts,your post was beyond funny,but its ok,because when the cops and the crimnals have all the guns,you liberals will get eaten up by both sides,the communist neo-com police state or the gang bangers,then what? help me,help me,i need to defend myself,opps i forgot i pushed the anti gun agenda,well at least all the liberal left-wingers can point their fingers and go say bang together as they go to their (NEW WORLD ORDER DISNEY LAND utopia land in the sky,but remember this in the real world,danger is always there,look at egypt,chaos and the police are helpless,and thats the real world,have a nice day.

      • Kinetic1

        wandamurline,
        A bit more digging has brought up North Carolina State Senator R.C. Soles who shot a man in the leg when he refused to take it out of his doorway. Senator Soles is also a gun control advocate, however he supports the right to own a rifle, so again it’s not much of a story relative to your point.

    • Rob Houck

      So right. Those, such as the well-meaning Kinetic1, have not followed history or studied the ideology of Obama and the socialist members of the House of Representatives. It is in many of the Communist Party writings, as well as many of the numerous socialist organizations: Increased gun-control; incremental or otherwise; however possible; it’s just part of their ideology, just as we conservatives believe in the Constitution, freedom and liberty. I know a lot of people just don’t want to admit how radical this President and his minions actually are, but it’s time for a reality check. I’ve researched this President, his writings, and words he’s spoken. I’ve also researched many of his friends, associates, and appointed persons in positions of power; and the one thing they have in common is their radical ideology, much of which is identical to that of the Communist Party USA and many socialist parties. If you read the viewpoints of these anti-capitalist, anti-American organizations; you’ll discover a number of identical and supporting material. Don’t think that the number of Democratic Socialists of America(DSA), who are elected members of Congress (in excess of 70 before the 2010 elections) is meaningless. It’s time all Americans woke up, and did a little research of their own.
      –Something for anti-gun/2nd Amendment people to remember: Gun laws and more regulations do not stop criminals. Most gun crimes are committed with illegal firearms. Criminals don’t obey laws. Armed robbery, murder, etc., are against the law, yet they occur. If a criminal can’t, or choses not to legally purchase a firearm or high-capacity magazine, they DO obtain them illegally. Gun restrictions only impact the person who choses to obey the law. Limit firearm ownership and possession and you will only affect law-abiding citizens. This is proven, statistical facts.

  • JeffH

    Is this a surprise to anyone? Not at all…we knew it would come, it was just a matter of when. Some people just don’t get it. They don’t like the idea of ordinary people having guns and seek to rob them of their human right of self-defense.

    “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
    - George Washington

    “The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
    - Samuel Adams

    “One cannot legislate the maniacs off the street … these maniacs can only be shut down by an armed citizenry. Indeed bad things can happen in nations where the citizenry is armed, but not as bad as those which seem to be threatening our disarmed citizenry in this country at this time.”
    - Col. Jeff Cooper, known as father of the “Modern Technique” of handgun shooting.

    “If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!”
    - Diane Feinstein

    “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty.”
    - Adolf Hitler

    “All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”
    - Mao Tse Tung

    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.
    From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million un-armed dissidents,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    In 1911, Turkey established gun control.
    From 1915-1917, 1.5 million un-armed Armenians,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Germany established gun control in 1938 and
    from 1939 to 1945, 13 million un-armed Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others,
    who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    China established gun control in 1935.
    From 1948 to 1952, 72 million un-armed political dissidents,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Guatemala established gun control in 1964.
    From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 un-armed Mayan Indians,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Uganda established gun control in 1970.
    From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 un-armed Christians,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated

    Cambodia established gun control in 1956.
    From 1975 to 1977, 2.3 million un-armed “educated” people,
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Sudan established gun control in 1987.
    From 2003 to 2005, 200,000 un-armed Africans
    unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    The total victims who lost their lives last century because of gun control is at 110 million Plus. Since all Humans should learn from the mistakes of history, the next time someone Speaks in favor of gun control, find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.

    • JeffH
    • Dennis

      Youa re so right. This must not be allowed to happen in America, as I think soon we will need all our guns and amo to defend our country and homes.

      • wandamurline

        I believe that Thomas Jefferson said it best….”Those who pound their guns to plows, will plow for those who do not”. Without America being an armed militia, any country and they are standing in line, will want to take us over….the reason they have not done so is the fact that not only would they be fighting our military, they would also have to deal with the armed citizens. We must keep our rights to guns. If you don’t have one for your own personal protection, I suggest that you get one and learn how to use it. The time may come when we have to do that very thing.

        • Vicki

          wandamurline writes:
          “We must keep our rights to guns.”

          We can not loose our rights to guns. We can only fail to enforce that Creator given right. Such is the problem in the U.S. today.

    • Al Sieber

      Jeff, thanks for the link.

    • JC

      110 million reasons to own…many guns!

    • kate8

      JeffH – Excellent post. We try to pound this home to people over and over again, how removing guns is the final act before complete takeover and genocide. Always has been. And yet, we will have those on the Left who, as such people have throughout all of history, will say that this time is different.

      The rest of the Western world has been disarmed. The only nation standing in the way of the tyrants now is America.

  • Kinetic1

    HELP! HELP! THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY!! Any time a Democrat says gun control, “pro 2nd amendment” types are certain that their guns will be rounded up and taken away. The only thing I have heard seriously discussed after the Arizona shooting was (a) tightening up the loose ends of screening practices and (b) reconsidering the ban on extended round clips. Now I know that some of you will argue that limiting the number of rounds is a violation of the 2nd amendment, but come on, who really needs to be able to shoot off 31 rounds without reloading? And yes, I do know that it only takes a couple of seconds to eject and replace a clip, but it was during those few seconds that the gunman was taken down. So let’s not all get up in arms (pun intended) before the White House even has a chance to reveal their plans. You may be surprised.

    • http://! Angel Wannabe

      K__Limiting rounds ok, but ANY gun control never stops there, and won’t til the guv has all our guns!
      _Gun controls don’t do a damn thing, but take protections away from law abiding citizens!_Stating the obvious for most, and a dim light brightenes for others___The criminals could care less about gun control, hense the reason they’re called criminals.

      • http://personalliberty.com RandyH

        I love you Angel. Hope you’re female.

        • http://! Angel Wannabe

          RandyH, Last Time I checked I was!__I’m Just funnin’! :)

      • Michael J.

        Kenetic1,
        Your premise is flawed. What is an extended capacity clip, a longer knife or for that matter a hammer or a screwdriver without the hand that wields it?
        Answer = An inanimate object.

        If news report statistics is what your concerns are based on, then maybe we need hammer control laws as well.

        Headlines:
        Mother killed with hammer by her 14 year old daughter.
        Father killed with hammer by own son.
        Bordertown dad murdered wife with hammer.
        LA, Man attacked, killed with hammer.
        Atlanta, Man attacked with hammer, killed.
        2 small kids killed with a hammer.
        Dallas, baby killed in hammer attack.

        Maybe some screwdriver control laws just for good measure.

        Headlines:
        Woman sentenced for killing boyfriend with screw driver.
        Dnepropetrovsk, Maniacs murder guy with hammer and screw driver.
        Floyd Macfarland stabbed to death. Famous cyclist killed with screw driver.

        Sample hammer and screw driver legislation:
        Mandatory 5 day waiting period for the purchase of a hammer.
        Mandatory mental heatlh screening for screw driver purchasers.

        I apologize for the grizzly details, but thought them necessary in the hopes of gleaning the meaning of an old addage:
        GUNS DON’T KILL, PEOPLE DO…

        And slipperry slope concerns of gun owners are legitimate! I cite as an example of government slipperry slope tactics DADT, which slid down the slipperry slope to the open serving of homosexual individuals in our armed forces.

        Progressive gun control laws have but two goals, and that is disarmament and the turning of citizens into subjects.

        Those who hammer their swords/guns into plowshares…
        Will plow for those who do not…
        Thomas Jefferson (modified quote, same meaning)

        • Kinetic1

          Michael J,
          My premise is flawed? Note that the “weapons” you chose all have other purposes. Note that they require close contact and often offer a chance for fleeing or self defense. Screwdrivers don’t often kill people from 20 yards away. When you see someone throwing a hammer at you, you just might duck and not get hit. And what are the chances of someone carrying several hammers in a crowd and killing or wounding 11 people before they are stopped? Yep, just like a gun!

          • eddie47d

            That last sentence is hard for them to comprehend Kinetic. No one buys a hammer ,screw driver, car,syringe,brick or a table lamp for that matter for the Sole purpose to kill someone.People die from those items but not as an original intent.

          • Vicki

            People die from people. Guns have several purposes besides murder. Your entire argument is flawed. Eddie’s attempt to bolster the argument fails as well.

            Kenetic writes:
            “And what are the chances of someone carrying several hammers in a crowd and killing or wounding 11 people before they are stopped?”

            Don’t need several. Just one will do. Even an average person with normal reflexes and the will to do it could kill or wound 11 people in a crowd (I notice Kinetic failed to define “crowd” ) before the rest of the crowd was even aware of the trouble.

            Here is an example where a homemade hammer was used. Only got 6 but no one stopped him so he could well have gone for many more.
            http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-04/30/c_13273605.htm

          • JeffH

            Vicki, this is what I like about eddie. He’s always the knowledgeable one and is willing to share in his knowledge.

            He says, “No one buys a hammer ,screw driver, car,syringe,brick or a table lamp for that matter for the Sole purpose to kill someone.People die from those items but not as an original intent.”

            He knows that no one, got that, NO ONE buys any of those items for the sole purpose of killing. Of course he can prove it…just ask.

          • Kinetic1

            Vicki,
            Since this whole issue as of late centers around the Arizona shootings, that is the crowd I am speaking of. So, with that in mind let’s see the assailant kill and wound 10 people while in the process of successfully wounding the Congresswomen.

            As for a gun’s use beyond murder, you have fine tuned it’s use akin to saying a hammer’s only use is to mount a picture frame. Sure, hand guns are used for threatening or injuring an attacker (defense), for killing animals for food, for target practice and (boy is this a stretch) for collecting, but it’s main purpose is to shoot something. To argue that it is just a tool like a hammer or screwdriver is, at best grabbing at straws. Yes, anything can be used to kill, but guns were designed specifically for the purpose. They do the job better than just about any other device. They are safer than bombs, require little planning and can do the job from a distance.

          • Vicki

            Kinetic1 says:
            “They do the job better than just about any other device. They are safer than bombs, require little planning and can do the job from a distance.”

            Which is why they are the BEST tool for self defense ever invented. Thank you for proving the argument.

          • Vicki

            Kinetic writes:
            “So, with that in mind let’s see the assailant kill and wound 10 people while in the process of successfully wounding the Congresswomen. ”

            I think I shall not subject 11 innocent people to your straw man bloodbath. Good of you to show the liberal mindset though.

            Here is a list of random bloodbaths that did NOT happen because someone was there and had the best tools for defense with them.

            “In fact, some mass shootings have been stopped by armed citizens. Though press accounts downplayed it, the 2002 shooting at Appalachian Law School was stopped when a student retrieved a gun from his car and confronted the shooter. Likewise, Pearl, Miss., school shooter Luke Woodham was stopped when the school’s vice principal took a .45 fromhis truck and ran to the scene. In February’s Utah mall shooting, it was an off-duty police officer who happened to be on the scene and carrying a gun.”
            http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/04/18/2007-04-18_people_dont_stop_killers_people_with_gun.html

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            @Vicki – to quote you:
            “People die from people. Guns have several purposes besides murder.”

            hahaha…yeah, people use guns for all kinds of things…like:

            pounding nails into drywall, screwing in lightbulbs, to encourage faster potty-training of their children, to encourage faster house-breaking of pets, turning biscuits into instant ‘doughnuts’, de-coring apples, as an alternate tv ‘remote’, to encourage a neighbor to return your hedge trimmers even sooner, and so much more.

            yup…little utilitarian bundles of miraculous joy, they are…

            *swoon*

            Guns: Is there anything they can’t do…?

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            @Vicki – To quote you (again):
            “Kinetic1 says:
            “They do the job better than just about any other device. They are safer than bombs, require little planning and can do the job from a distance.”

            Which is why they are the BEST tool for self defense ever invented. Thank you for proving the argument.”

            No, they are the best weapon for murdering as many people as you can, before someone finally stops you. With larger capacity magazines, they have been made into even better killing weapons, capable of slaying even more people, if you so wish.

            They are also relatively inexpensive (much cheaper than a car, which was not designed as a weapon), easy to acquire and collect (much easier than cars are, which again, a car is a vehicle, not a weapon like a gun is), and easy to conceal (making it an ideal killing weapon…a car…not so much)…making it the ideal weapon for mass slayings when you have a busy schedule, and you’re in a hurry.

            As for the best TOOLS for ‘self defense’…well, I would have to say your own body (hands, feet, head, knees, etc.) in conjunction with your brain, and your ability to stay calm under pressure…I would say that would be your best bet.

            Actually, one of the John Wayne wanna-be nuts here apparently uses marshmallows as weapons, so you could always pack a couple of those with you. You could even maybe get little custom ‘holsters’ made up for them…

            They’d be much safer than guns, since they would never jam on you, or go off accidentally, and if someone got accidentally hit by marshmallow crossfire, it would be more amusing than anything, and certainly not lethal.

          • TIME

            Kin of 1,

            In a crowd with my Katana I could with ease kill over 30 people in a few moments, so what will you outlaw Katana’s too? And you know what not a single person could stop me, nor even get a hold of me.

            Also in a crowd a simple gallon can of gas with 300 marbles in it sealed nice and tight with a cotton cloth and a bic lighter and you could with ease kill 30 people and mame even more.
            So would you outlaw gas or marbles or perhaps just the bic lighter? Maby even cotton?

            Or place one cup of Bleach with a fork and a hand full of marbles in a Micro wave set at high, and the crowd also would be 30 or more.
            So would you also outlaw micro wave ovens? Or just the bleach? Perhaps a forks?

            If someone wants to kill you they will find a way to do so and a gun is not needed.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            kinetic1,
            give me a lightbulb and a little gas and I could kill more people than the tucson shooter did! Now you gonna outlaw lightbulbs and gasoline???

          • Kinetic1

            Vicki,
            Nowhere in any of this have I advocated the ban of personal weapons. My point, once again is that the only serious talk I have heard recently involved limitations on expanded clips. Even Dick Cheaney thinks it’s worth discussing! And assuming that a well trained, legally authorized gun owner had been on the scene, one well placed shot would have stopped the gunman (or Time wielding his Katana, which I assume is his sword and not a Kawasaki.) so 10 should be plenty. I do admit that I am not all that comfortable with numerous people pulling out their guns in response to shots fired. It’s not always easy to pick out the right target ( Just ask the one man who did respond with his gun,) but I am not arguing for a gun ban.

            As for you, Time, I must point out that carrying something like a Katana is rather more conspicuous than a concealed pistol. I don’t need to make it illegal either, since it’s already illegal to carry a sword in public in many (if not most) states. And don’t you think carrying a Molotov cocktail into a crowd gathered to hear a politician might get you some attention? Do you really think you could get it close enough to the speaker to kill her? Yes, you and JoeH have clearly spent some time thinking up good ways to commit acts of terrorism (are the Feds reading this?), but aside from the fact that the Constitution does not guaranty you the right to carry around these odd and assorted weapons, none are as well designed for assassination attempts as the one legal choice, a good old hand gun. Especially if you can double or triple the number of rounds between reloads. Well, maybe a high powered rifle, but those are for people who don’t want the press.

          • eddie47d

            Jeff; Do you buy any of those items for any other reason than what they were meant for? Normal people(the majority) use them for intended purposes. Maybe you aren’t normal or in the majority. I can always depend on you to be the smart azz!!

          • Vicki

            Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’ says:

            @Vicki – to quote you:
            “People die from people. Guns have several purposes besides murder.”

            hahaha…yeah, people use guns for all kinds of things…like:

            pounding nails into drywall, screwing in lightbulbs, to encourage faster potty-training of their children, to encourage faster house-breaking of pets, turning biscuits into instant ‘doughnuts’, de-coring apples, as an alternate tv ‘remote’, to encourage a neighbor to return your hedge trimmers even sooner, and so much more.
            ——————————————————

            Argument to ridicule. Pretty poor example of your thinking. Come back when you actually have a point to make.

          • Vicki

            Kinetic1 writes:
            “Vicki,
            Nowhere in any of this have I advocated the ban of personal weapons. ”

            I notice a conspicuous lack of definition. What are YOU considering as personal weapons?

          • Vicki

            Kinetic1 claims he is not out to eliminate personal weapons but says
            “I don’t need to make it illegal either, since it’s already illegal to carry a sword in public in many (if not most) states.”

            Since swords of all types are weapons of personal defense and have been used as such for centuries this gives lie to Kinetic1′s claim that he is not out to eliminate personal weapons. I have already observed that he has not defined what HE means by “personal” weapons.

          • Vicki

            Dogma-free writes
            “No, they are the best weapon for murdering as many people as you can, before someone finally stops you.”

            Someone with a gun finally stops you. Thus again proving my point that guns are the best too for defense. I really appreciate the help from Kinetic, Eddie, and dogma in proving the falsehood of gun control. Thanks guys.

          • JeffH

            Duh…eddie, and I can always count on you to use some foul language in your name calling.

            Here’s what you said:
            eddie47d says:
            January 31, 2011 at 4:08 pm
            That last sentence is hard for them to comprehend Kinetic. No one buys a hammer ,screw driver, car,syringe,brick or a table lamp for that matter for the Sole purpose to kill someone.People die from those items but not as an original intent.

            Where did I err? I didn’t. “Normal” people don’t buy guns to kill people either do they?

            Had you said “normal” people don’t buy a hammer ,screw driver, car,syringe,brick or a table lamp for that matter for the Sole purpose to kill someone. People die from those items but not as an original intent.”

            Had you not taken the “all knowing” high road of “no one buys”…we wouldn’t be having this discussion would we? Your choice of words, not mine.

        • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

          HELP, HELP!! MICHAEL J. WANTS TO TAKE OUR HAMMERS AWAY!!! ALLLLL OF OUR HAMMERS!!! PEOPLE, THIS IS MADNESS…MADNESS I TELLS YA!!!! THE REPUBLICANS WANT TO MAKE A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT…*WITHOUT HAMMERS*!!!
          OHHHHH, THE HUMANITY…!!!!

          …okay, and I’m good now…

          • Kinetic1

            I’ll give up my 16lb framer when they pull it from my cold, dead hands!

          • Michael J.

            Dogma,
            Go ahead and yuck it up funny boys, but even gnat brained liberals should realize that more gun control legislation will not curb the hankerings of criminals and the mentally insane. Knee jerk gun control legislation seems just as ridiculous to me as hammer control laws.

            The difference is that those who wish to disarm us see our weapons as a road block, while hammers and screw drivers are of little threat against military weaponry.

          • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

            Hmm: Kinetic1 says:
            February 1, 2011 at 2:29 am
            “I’ll give up my 16lb framer when they pull it from my cold, dead hands!” Since a “John Henry Adjusting Wrench” weighs 12 lbs. I assume that if you’re physically able to wield your 16 lb. Framing Hammer (as most weigh between 20 and 24 ounce’s (not lbs.), you don’t need any personal self-defense weapon other than the mass of your body, inflated ego, and your rapier wit, of course. (I also see from the time of your post that you were most likely in the “Uniform of the internet”. Not a pretty picture, I assure you.)

      • Michael J.

        Angel Wannabe,
        Pardon me for cutting in, but replying to Kenatic1 would have put me in a different zip code.

        Oh, and your common sense post cut right to the heart of the issue, as usual. Who needs a knife when you gotta sharp tongue.

        • http://! Angel Wannabe

          Micheal J, Yes(hiding my face) I’m guilty of having an “acid tongue”. I’m not nessesarily proud of it. I just spout off, when I read something stupid! :)

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            BTW, you can cut in anytime! :)

          • JeffH

            Angel Wannabe, I personally like your style although BW has a problem with it from time to time. lol!

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            JeffH, I like your stuff er style, too JeffH,lol– your always informative and up front too, whether it hurts or not. :)

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            JeffH, BobW, I believe is trying to decide which side of the fence he’s on, in regards to politics. I maybe wrong, but I’m just readin’ tween the lines!

          • JeffH

            AW, he’s a died in the wool liberal, not a far left liberal mind you, just a liberal.

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            JeffH, Yeah but he wrestles with his mind?!

          • JeffH

            Not a strong communicator, mostly a confusing communicator. It’s almost like wading through quicksand most of the time.

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            JeffH, yeah I think so too.

          • Michael J.

            Angel Wannabe,
            Can I have this dance? er, cut in?
            What I hear in BW’s post as he meandor’s back and forth is the slosh of Vodka which is broken up by moments of clarity.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Angel Wannabe,
            you say BW wrestles with his mind? good thing it’s weak and he doesn’t have to be an accomplshed wrestler!!!

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            JoeH, LOL!

    • Karolyn

      I’m with you, Kinectic. People always jump to conclusions. However, I don’t see any remedy for keeping mentally ill people from purchasing guns. Look at the mother who just shot and killed her 2 kids. She was an upstanding soccer-mom. People are people and s–t happens. I don’t have a gun, but most people here do own them; and I have no problem with that. Our crime rate is very low – mostly misdemeanors. There is the rare occasion when a woman shoots her partner during a domestic altercation, which recently happened.

      • DOGS FIGHT

        And tell me, if you would, genious, what is to stop crazy mom from grabbing a kitchen knife or scissors and carving up her little babies like steak? Should we ban all kitchen knives now or put restrictions on them?

        • DOGS FIGHT

          Or for that matter, a crazy mother could argulably kill her children through unarmed combat using both her probable higher stregth and element of surprise.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            dogs Fight,
            look at the mom a few years back that pushed her car into the pond with both of her kids strapped in!! guess we better start banning cars and ponds!!

        • JC

          Ummmm, Dogs Fight? If you read that again, you’ll notice she says she has NO problem with people owning guns. So why jump down her throat on that one?

        • pennsyltuckian

          The UK tried the knife thing in addition to its draconian gun laws. Ask anyone if things are better there now? I understand the next item on their agenda is banning Swiss Army Knives because of the non PC term Army.

        • http://! Angel Wannabe

          Dogs Fight_ anything can be used as a weapon! These Gun Control wack jobs, are always hunting for more excuses to add more regulation and more control. BUT Just for shytz & giggles, I’ll bet the Gun Control freaks would just love it, if we ALL opened carried, wouldn’t they?

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            Dog Fight and anyone else who interested, I’d lay it two to one, if we opened carried, people would eventually think twice, before trying to jump & rob our elderly, or kidnap our children!?

          • Vicki

            Thats cause liberals want us to forget WE are the weapon. Guns, Knives, screwdrivers (illegal dirk/dagger in California law) are just the tools.

            “(24) As used in this section, a “dirk” or “dagger” means a knife or other instrument with or without a handguard that is capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death. A nonlocking folding knife, a folding knife that is not prohibited by Section 653k, or a pocketknife is capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death only if the blade of the knife is exposed and locked into position. ”

            http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12020.php

            The astute reader will be amused about a nonlocking folding knife being added to the list if the blade is exposed and locked into position. If it is non-locking how could it be locked?

            You will also notice that pencil, icepick, pen, nail and a bunch of other things all fall into this category.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Vicki,
            don’t laugh! I’ve got a black scar on my upper arm from a girl that stabbed me with a pencil when I was in 5th grade!!! I want those pencils BANNED!!! I’m marked for life!!! LOL!

          • libertytrain

            JoeH – if that pencil event happened today, can you imagine – the girl would have been arrested, expelled, jailed and her life ruined. I wonder what happened to her -

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Libertytrain,
            Last I heard she got her dues! Seven kids and a husband in and out of jail!!! Talk about kharma!!!

        • Kinetic1

          DOGS,
          Once again, this is not about banning all guns. We don’t know what the President is going to propose, but I suspect he will speak to the issue of extended volume clips for hand guns. Would banning them have stopped this mother? Nope, probably not. Would she have used a knife? Hard to say. Experts believe that mentally it’s much easier to kill with a gun. More instantaneous and less personal. Same with physical violence like, say choking. Either way, she only needed a few bullets. Maybe that’s the point?

          As an aside, if you are going to use sarcasm and call someone a “genious”, you might want to spell genius correctly.

          • Michael J.

            Kenetic1 says; “Once again, this is not about banning all guns.”
            Sure, that’s what Clinton said about DADT, but it turned into homosexuals serving openly anyway.

            Experts? Did you say experts? The people who gave us the Global Warming Hoax were also experts.

            And finally oh Kenetic1 Spelling Czar, Let those without typos cast the first stone. Agreed?

          • Kinetic1

            Michael J,
            Comparing DADT to gun control is a bit of a stretch. You see, homosexuals have the same rights under the constitution as anyone else, so the issue was to stop denying them their right to serve. Gun control of the type you are speaking of would require repealing the 2nd amendment. Not the same.

            As for typos, yes, we all make them from time to time. My point is the irony of questioning someone’s intelligence by sarcastically calling them “genius” and then misspelling it. If there was ever a time to use spell check, that would be it.

          • JeffH

            Kenetic1, the premis of Michael’s comment was not about gays constitutional rights, but that politicians will mis-represent, mis-lead and lie to the public in order to set the groundwork for total change, whatever the subject matter may be.

            A good example is what happened last year in California in regards to the AB-962 ammunition sales restrictions. Portrayed as a registration system to stop criminals and gangs from purchasing “handgun ammunition”, but in actuality they (DeLeon) tried to add an addendum that would list all ammunition that has ever been used in a handguns including what is generally rifle ammo used in dual purpose hunting or target guns. Fortunately that portion was tossed out and eventually the law was overturned a week or so ago before it could take effect.

          • eddie47d

            Michael;There is no G.Warming hoax and there is no euthanasia in the healthcare package and yes a weapon is purchased for one main reason and we all know what that is.

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            eddie47d__copied and pasted> your words, mine in CAPS!

            “Michael; There is no G.Warming hoax(YES IT IS A HOAX(ITS A THEORY), NOTHING HAS EVER BEEN PROVEN) and there is no euthanasia in the healthcare package( MAYBE NOT EUTHANASIA, BUT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE, AN END OF LIFE COUNCILING, AS IF WE KNOW WHAT WE WANT UNTIL WE GET TO THAT POINT IN OUR LIVES) and yes a weapon is purchased for one main reason and we all know what that is. YES WEAPONS ARE PURCHASED FOR PROTECTION AND FOOD!

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            OH and BTW eddie47d, weapons that people purchase “illegally” are usually the ones who kill other people.__Wack jobs and accidents are a sad and unfortunate part of life.BUT, We need to call an incident, exactly what it is. Such as Gabby Giffords attempted assailant, he’s a definate WACK JOB ans should be taken off the street permanetly!__If a gun goes off while it is being cleaned and strikes someone, thats an horrible accident. But everything gets blown WAY OUT OF PROPORTION. A spade is till a spade!

          • Kinetic1

            Angel W,
            The very fact that we won’t “know what we want until we get to that point in our lives” is the reason for end of life counseling. No one is asking you to choose how you will die or asking you to commit to not seeking every option to live. The purpose of this counseling is to let you know what you can expect. Some people choose to prepare for life and death. They purchase grave sites and pick out coffins. They choose the clothes they want to be buried in and the music that will be played. I have no time for that myself. Just burn me and do what you please with the ashes. On the other hand, I want to be sure that I’m as ready as I can be for my final days. Maybe the good Lord will take me so quickly that all the planning will be wasted, but just in case I want to know my options. What is senior care like? If I need 24/7 medical care, what will it cost? If I begin to develop Alzheimer’s, what can I look forward to?

            The section of the health care bill regarding this simply says that doctors can charge Medicare for voluntary advance care planning. Under the rule, doctors can provide information to patients on how to prepare an advance directive, stating how aggressively they wish to be treated if they’re so sick that they can’t make health care decisions for themselves. Is that really so bad?

          • Vicki

            eddie47d says:
            “…and yes a weapon is purchased for one main reason and we all know what that is.”

            Hunting? Self Defense? Target shooting? If you all know what it is please enlighten the unruly masses.

          • http://! Angel Wannabe

            Kinetic-I get that, but by the time most of us are ready to die, we’ll have already sadly buried our parents, we’ll know what to expect. I buried ALL of my Family, Grandparents and Parents, Brother, only two di4ed before I got there , the rest I witnessed.

            No one behind a desk Kinetic, who is still living, can tell us what to expect. Each circumstance is different. And what decisions that are made now, can change when your on your death bed!__My mother for example, was minutes away from death. I told her the only way she could be saved, if she was intubated, I asked what she wanted, she agreed and lived another six weeks.__Bottom line God wasn’t ready for her yet.__ Who has the right to tell us, when its time to take our last breath?_-The Health Bureaucrats can go to hell, cuz Gods in control of that!

          • Michael J.

            Eddie47d,
            My first wife had 47d’s. She had to have her brazieres custom made. I considered myself a lucky man. I would sing her to sleep each night with a Bob Hope tune, “Thanks for the Mammories”. Hell, I didn’t even need pillows on my side of the bed.

          • Kinetic1

            Angel W,
            Some would argue that the doctors played God by keeping her alive longer than she was supposed to be. Did God give us the ability to create life extending treatments so that we could help those who could have long healthy lives if cured, or to prolong the suffering of those whose time has come? I agree that those who are willing to face the potential pain and suffering in return for a few more days or weeks should have that option, but I also believe that our health care system should be willing to pay doctors to advise those who want end of life counseling.

          • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

            Well, since “[I’ve} been accused of being direct before … “, I’ll just go for it. ¡Yo! ¡Fool! “Clips” are what I used in my M-1 Garand to qualify as an “Expert” in basic training. They are not (repeat – not) magazines. By the way, the 31 round capacity you keep quoting, is from the Limp Stream Media’s same misconception’s you have. There’s from a lack of research on the subject, and yours from relying on their misreporting. That figure is the number of rounds in the magazine (30) plus the one in the chamber. If you’d use some of your vaunted brain power, you’d realize that the very size of the weapon, loaded with a mag. of that capacity cannot be carried concealed successfully. Unless of course, you’re one of those who stand around on street corners wearing an overcoat with the pants legs sewn in.

          • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

            Typo: “There’s from a lack of research … ” should be “Their’s from a lack of research … “, of course.

      • wandamurline

        Drunk drivers kill every day…are we banning cars? People are stabbed to death with knives every day…are we banning knives? People should be upset because it is very evident that we simply can no longer trust our own corrupt, unconstitutional government. They are the biggest snakes around, they sneak into dark rooms to make deals, and we should not be afraid of their decisions? That is why so many progressives were shown the door last November…they had never read the Constitution that they had vowed to uphold. Our forefathers forsaw a corrupt, huge government in our future, and they provided us the instructions and freedoms to take that unholy government apart in the Constitution. That is why the federal government DOES NOT trump the States…the States were given most of the powers. If the federal government were to abide by the Constitution, it would be about 1/3 the size it is now. The federal government is overstepping its authority on a dialy event, and we are going to keep voting out the progressives, RINOS and anyone else who is not a constitutional candidate. If that doesn’t work, then you can expect America to look like Egypt before too long.

        • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

          hahaha…I love the ‘people don’t ban cars’ argument…

          The thing with *cars* is that they have a purpose OTHER THEN KILLING PEOPLE (and other animals). In fact, their *main* purpose is to be used as transportation.

          Even kitchen knives are meant to be used *in the kitchen* (hence the name) for food preparation.

          Do some people abuse these things?

          Sure they do, and if, at the core level, that’s based on mental issues, then they will need to try to address that at some point…and hopefully sooner than later.

          However, as I have said, a gun has no other purpose than for killing a living creature. That’s what they were designed to do, and after years of research and development, they have become the most reliable, effective, and efficient method of killing a whole bunch of people in a very short amount of time.

          Can you kill 30 people that easily with a kitchen knife, or a rock?

          I suppose if the people all stood around you with their hands behind their backs, and just let you stab them in their vital areas (or if you used the rock, I guess you could brain them), I suppose you could. Otherwise, it would be pretty tough to do.

          And as for knives, yes there are knives that are banned here. Ballistic knives are, as well as switchblade knives (other than in a few of the ‘redneck’ states), I believe.

          Doing the same with guns seems to make pretty good sense, and I’m sure you’d agree.

          • TIME

            Dog,
            I can kill anyone with just my hands should they be illegal too? I can also kill anyone with anything you give me to include even a marshmallow.
            Lets not even get in to H2o and a power cord with voltage, how many toasty critters would make you happy? How about a bottle of Clorox and a bottle of Ammonia with a nice closed room? How about a simple can of spray paint and a lighter?

            Guns may have been invented for killing other animals as per you’re quote, but so to were clubs knifes and swords, even a simple stick or stone. They were just the Technology of the moment.

            Guns don’t kill people, just as a marshmallow will not kill you unless some stuffs it up you’re nose and down you’re throat.
            Can you get you’re rather small mind around that idea.

            Its the person behind the action that kills you, the tool is irrelevant. And this may shock you but if someone wants you dead, they will find a way.

          • libertytrain

            Which states are “redneck” states?

          • JeffH

            Dogma, I find your use of the word “redneck” both offensive and racist.

          • libertytrain

            JeffH- yep.

          • Michael J.

            Dogma,
            Your duplicity is blinding. In this post you memetic compassion for shooting victims while simultaneously endorsing Obamacare in other post, which contains a provision for the eventual euthanasia of the infirmed elderly. Geesh, how’s that for liberal logic. OOOPS, I typed an oxymoron.

          • Michael J.

            Dogma,
            And another thing, As far as the car comparison goes, cars kill more people than guns and so do doctors and prescription drugs.

            In addition to as you say “shooting people”, guns have many other uses including gun collecting, competition shooting, hunting of all sorts, military, law enforcement and of course home and self protection. Only a Progressive Liberal would conclude that guns are only for shooting people. Hey, wait a minute, Loughner is a Liberal, Hmmmmm.

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            @JeffH – I find your finding of my post, offensive. I guess we’ll call that a stalemate.

            @libertytrain – If you have to ask…

            @TIME – As much as I appreciate your boastful (read: insecure) nature, and your bragging about how good at killing people you are with marshmallows, I’d say it’s time to put the bag of StayPuffs away, and take your John Rambo headband off, and allow the blood to flow freely to your brain for a little while…there ya go. See? Better, yes?

            The thing about hands is…(wait for it)…they were never invented. As we both know, they were evolved…likely from fins, or monkey fingers, or whatever…and they were meant to be used as…(wait for it again)…hands. You know, hands…for doing things like picking up things, or using tools to build stuff, and yes, even for hunting, and gathering, and wiping yer arse after crapping and whatnot. If you’re a priest, hands are used for fondling the altar boys. (okay, that was cheap, but kinda funny, I thought)

            As for knives (and yes, there are illegal ones, as I stated before), they can be used for all kinds of things (as I alluded to before), food preparation, skinning an animal, cutting rope, etc.
            Again, they can be used as a weapon (which I also alluded to before), but then as you pointed out, so can a marshmallow.

            As for clubs, well, they originally started out as jawbones, which as part of a jaw, was used for chewing, and biting. Then, when the jawbones fell off the animals (usually after they died), monkeys came along, and picked up the jawbones, and started bashing other monkeys with them. Again, that scene kinda reminds me of this place for some reason, but I digress. So, yeah…how ever many thousands (or ten thousands, or hundred thousands) of years of evolution later, man comes along and repeats the process. Monkey see, monkey do, right? Then the arms race begins, and man improves the lethality of the club, and thus…the club-with-a-nail-in-it is born. Somewhere along the way, someone must have hit a stone with a club, and then we got baseball.

            As for swords, well, I’ll grant you that swords aren’t really a tool – they’re a weapon, and we probably just the result of somebody saying something like, ‘I do like how I can use this knife thing for killing people and all the other animals too, but if only I could do my killing from further away, because I don’t want to get hurt in the process of killing someone or something’…and the other guy was probably like, ‘Well…what if we just made a really long knife?’…and thus, the sword was born.

            Having said that, I don’t believe it’s legal to walk down main street with a 4-foot long broadsword, though I would encourage you to try it one day, in hopes of proving me wrong.

            So, yeah…your argument kinda just fell flat. Again.

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            Oh, Michael J, you foxy scoundrel.

            Get it…? Michael J. Fox…eh? Did you get that…?

            Anyways, please point out where I said I specifically endorsed ‘Obamacare’ (haha…is that what the kids are calling it these days?), because I honestly can’t recall where I ever said that I would ever specifically endorse ‘Obamacare’.

            I believe what I said was something more along the lines of *THE CURRENT HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IS BROKE, AND NEEDS TO BE FIXED*…as only the rich folks can really afford to get really good health care, so no wonder the Republican politicians want the system to remain as it is, since they make great money (at the expense of taxpayers).

            And for the record, I make pretty decent money, and have pretty good coverage through my work, so I’m putting money into the system, just as I assume you are too.

          • JeffH

            Dogma-Marxist, did I say I found your “post” to be offensive? I didn’t! Your use of a racial epithet is what I find most offensive. As for your rhetorical posts, I find them somewhat predictable and amusing.

          • libertytrain

            Yes, I have to ask. You should be able to answer – it was your comment. So which states do you deem to be – your slur was I believe, “Redneck States?”

          • Vicki

            Dogma-free writes:
            “The thing with *cars* is that they have a purpose OTHER THEN KILLING PEOPLE (and other animals). In fact, their *main* purpose is to be used as transportation.”

            Interesting. Arms (that would be guns and knives and swords et all) have a purpose other than killing. You thoughtfully listed some for knives. I would say that the MAIN purpose for guns is defense. Defense of self and community. This is such an obvious fact that no one seriously suggests removing guns from the people we hire to protect us. Be they Feinstein’s bodyguards, security guards, or police et all.

            Dogma-free: “….they (guns) have become the most reliable, effective, and efficient method of killing a whole bunch of people in a very short amount of time.”

            Bombs are MUCH more reliable, effective and efficient and VERY MUCH Faster.

            Guns are, however, particularly reliable in use against specific individual threats. Hence for self and community defense they are by far the best tool. This is why those we hire to defend us (bodyguards, security guards, police et all) are armed with guns not bombs.

            This observation clearly shows that the MAIN purpose of guns is defense. However for those who still insist that the main purpose for buying a gun is to kill people will need to explain why 14+ million guns were purchased by non-police in just 2009 but the number of killings in 2009 were 15,241 http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

            Astounding to Dogma-free is the embarrassing fact that the number is DOWN from the 16,442 in 2008 before all those guns were bought. So, Dogma-free, Why are 13,984,759+ people still alive? If guns were bought to kill as you claim why are those people still alive. Not even reported as wounded.

          • TIME

            Doggie,

            Now you be a nice little doggie and go make du’ du’ outside.
            By the way doggie hands did not evolve, as well they were mans very first weapon.
            You sure are a real smart doggie a one may even note you as a real brain trust.
            BTW- you’re rhetoric was the only thing that was 100% FLAT but then again with you seem to have delusions of adequacy, and just so we are on the same page, you’re also “a modest little person, with so much to be modest about.”
            As well I have noted you seem to be able to compress the most words into the smallest idea of any person who post here.

          • Michael J.

            Dogma,
            No, not Fox, Foxy nor Jordan or Jackson is part of my name.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Michael J,
            another little point to your slippery slope thought. when the pres passed his baby health care, he also put all kinds of other little suprises in it as well. realestate taxes, gold sale reporting, all kinds of things that had NOTHING what so ever to do with health care!! what’s to stop p-lousy from saying I guess well have to pass it to see what’s in the bill again??
            He says were only going to make it harder for mentally disturbed people from purchasing weapons and badda boom! We got no guns!!!

          • Michael J.

            JoeH,
            I agree, and I also understand as those protesting in Tunisia and Egypt that that’s what you get from a Muslim despot wannabe. (sorry, no offense Angel)

          • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

            I suppose that if we’re basing this discussion on the efficiency of various and diverse tools-turned weapon that are either small enough to be “concealable”, or at least “Hand Carryable”, we’d better out law the “Insurgent’s” weapon of choice – Assault Vests”! (You laugh? You fool. There was a politician of not that long ago from here in LaLa Land, who wanted to abolish bullet resistant [note: not "proof"] vests for civilian purchase and wear. Americans (at least those worthy of the name) saw the fallacy of that line of that un-thinking elitist and peacefully rose up against such foolishness.) If you think the police are going to save you (Why? Because they’re armed?), remember this old saw: “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away”. But, they;ll be carrying plenty of yellow, crime-scene tape. Feel safer now?

      • kate8

        So, because there have always been and always will be those who do violence for whatever reason, we should all be left unable to defend ourselves against criminals. Typical Leftist logic.

        Progressive means incremental, step by step. That is what they do. So now that we have all kinds of gun regulations already, and the feds know where the (legal) guns are, they can implement more restrictions, one at a time. Soon enough we will see another crazed lone gunman shoot up some more people, and the noose will tighten again.

        It’s so predictable, to anyone but a Leftist.

        • Dan az

          Hey Kate
          The next step would be thought police.It dosent fall under the first amendment of speech so it would there for be illegal for you to think that you would kill another person.The day is coming when a nation of unarmed citizens will become a nation of slaves.

        • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

          Yes, Kate8…that’s exactly what we’re saying to you is that you must just be a willing victim from now on.

          Damn. You saw right through our gun-control ruse, and realized that we were trying to eliminate every single gun (as well as the possibility of gun ownership) in hopes of making you suffer humiliation.

          So now, if someone puts a bag of burning dog feces at your front door, you can no longer just pull your gun out and shoot them. Though, for now, we will allow you to yell curse words, and shake your fist at them.

          Though, maybe you might want to consider carrying a concealed marshmallow…

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Dogma
            and you might want to consider carrying a concealed BRAIN the one you’re playing with doesn’t work too well!!

          • Michael J.

            JoeH,
            Yes, posting with an empty clip is foolish. Heh, Heh, Heh

          • JC

            Sadly, he does have a brain. It’s just a really sick and twisted one.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            JC,
            Well if he’s got one he better take some manditory training as he doesn’t know how to use it!!

    • Robin

      A man knew that he was over the alcohol limit for driving but got in his car anyway. He passed over a hill and hit a car full of innocent people head on, killing everyone in the car. He himself was only minor injured. The news went crazy and one of the famous politicians stood up and said, – we need to outlaw cars, or make smaller motors mandatory. This sadly is exactly your logic when you think the Government knows best about 2nd Amendment rights.

      • eddie47d

        The auto industry is considering putting breathalyzers in newer vehicles or offering it as an option. Maybe that time has come since drunks don’t seem to have much regard for the rest of us. It’s their “right” to drink and drive and to heck with other persons rights. The same with any life situation including gun control. Gun owners always fear gun confiscation so they won’t accept any kind of gun control.Unless someone in government passes a law abolishing the 2nd Amendment then the pro gun folks are being unreasonable. Cars are controlled and yet people still die. That doesn’t mean we abolish auto laws and throw our hands up in the air and give up. Gun owners should be just as responsible as auto owners and yes there will always be a few rouge killings. We should be asking the NRA “how many isolated incidents” do we have to have before they and other pro gun groups become more pro-active in supporting sensible laws. To say something isn’t wrong with today’s laws is burying your heads in the sand. The same can be said about those who would even think about abolishing the 2nd Amendment. Common sense and a strong compromise is in order to protect all Americans.

        • Vinnie

          Autos are not covered by the Bill of Rights, firearms are. “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the secutiry of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not infringed.”

        • JC

          They’ll probably start with the Chevy’s eddie, after all they’re communist built anyways, right?

        • mythbusting

          Criminals and idiots don’t observe laws. There are tens of thousands of “gun laws” that have yet–and never will–prevent some moron from doing something illegal with a gun. Roughly 40,000 people a year are killed in automobile accidents, and NO one is calling to ban cars or limit their use; the laws are written against the DRIVERS–not the cars. Here we have laws being conceived and legislated about the guns, and ignoring the idiots, morons and criminals. What about banning/controlling sticks, rocks, golf clubs, baseball bats, axes, knives, hammers, hatchets, chain, beer bottles, 2×4′s, ice picks, nail guns(OMG!), pitch forks…and don’t forget the torches.

          From our cold, dead hands.

          • eddie47d

            Which laws are AGAINST the driver that aren’t beneficial for all drivers? Speed limits,seat belts headlights, turn lights,air bags,DUI laws,child seats,Drivers license,drivers test?

          • Brad

            Edwardo,

            It’s the idiots, morons and criminal drivers that the vast majority of laws are writen to protect us from, but they the idiots, morons and criminal drivers that kill the inocent daily. Cars don’t kill people, people behind the wheel kill poeople, just like guns wouldn’t you agree. Each stupid law is writen as a knee jerk reaction to a situation.

          • kate8

            I was talking with some Aussie friends a few years back, after their guns were confiscated. They told me at that time that needle jabs were becoming popular with criminals.

            Those who wish to kill and harm will find a way. Nor will they turn in their guns. Just look at how many caches of guns pour across our southern border every day. These are ILLEGAL weapons, and we only know about the ones that are caught.

            Who do you Lefties suppose will be in possession of those guns when the rest of America loses theirs?

            Gun control is an infringement of our Constitutional right to bear arms, and should be ignored the same as all the other unconstitutional acts coming out of DC.

            Who the heck to these people think they are? They are the creep who sits with a gun at the watering hole and makes you pay them to get a drink. They only control us because we ALLOW THEM TO. It’s all an illusion, people. It’s time to say NO MORE!

            They will push us further and further until we don’t give a rip anymore what they threaten to do. Then we will be free.

          • eddie47d

            Brad; Criminal driver? Most deaths from autos are from ordinary soccer moms,people driving too fast or teens not paying attention. It’s the DUIs or maybe an occasional illegal who grabs the headlines so you are saying ordinary citizen are criminals because they are in an accident resulting in death?

          • Dan az

            No Eddiee You are.Your being racist about guns,you think that there all evil and should be thrown in to the inferno.You think that if there wasn’t a gun then there wouldn’t be death.Sorry to rain on your parade but what would you have done when there was only swords around for protection back then?When someone has made up their mind to kill you it dose’nt matter if its a gun,sword a knife or a #2 pencil.The point is if you are unarmed what are you going to do?Wait for the police?Call 911?scream like a little girl I would expect.

          • eddie47d

            Dan; What’s with the racist comment? Your not reading very well if you think I want to do away with the 2nd Amendment. So your reply was more than off the wall. I honestly don’t care much for guns but then again I don’t care for comedians who use the F-word all the time either. Different strokes for different folks.

    • Allan Halbert

      For gun control to take one second away from this President’s responsibility to work on the economy is unacceptable. But I forgot, he doesn’t listen well.

      • wandamurline

        The President is not concerned with the economy or anything else. He is either the puppet being handled by the puppet masters, or he is soooo out of touch and unqualified to lead. He has a way with words, but when it comes to action, he is blatantly failed. I no longer watch is speeches…it is all rhetoric…the same thing over and over…he tries to motivate the people support with words, but actions are nonexistent, except to ignore our laws …. like not prosecuting the Black Panthers for voter intimidation…and not securing our borders or deporting the illegal criminals from Mexico. According to Article IV, Section IV, one of the few responsibilites given to the feds is to protect America from invasion…Mexico has invaded America with 12 million illegal aliens, and this president does nothing…not only that, he committed treason when he sided with the invading country by suing one of his own states and allowing Mexico to do the same…he is aiding and abetting the aliens and that is treason. Charges should be filed forthwith.

      • JC

        Allan, the prospect of this President working on either the economy OR gun control is frightening enough. His “work” on the economy so far has given many of us reason to buy even more guns and ammunition in preperation for the looming economic crash.

        I think the good President should just go on an extended vacation to what his wife calls, his homeland.

    • Bob

      Just another “gun expert” here spouting off like they know something

      Know the facts before talking like you do!
      He had a jam, and that’s why he was stopped, not because he was “changing clips“, no one would have been able to stop him in the 2 seconds required to change out a clip, who would had been that close to him that they could have reached him in that time?
      No one.

      Note, it’s against the law to go into a parking lot and start killing people, so if he was willing to break that law, why would he care about a ban on extended clips?

      … oh, that’s right, you can’t buy things that are against the law, they just don’t exist anymore, lol
      Just like you can’t kill people as that’s against the law…. How’s that working out for the dead in Arizona.

      And even if what you said had been true, what if it had been a good person protecting himself or his family that was “taken down” while changing one of your ‘low capacity clips’
      Screw him right, the law-abiding people don’t need their inalienable rights.

      But I suppose the cops and military will still have what ever they want, …. Your not much of a history buff are you.

      • Kinetic1

        Bob,
        Here is one report on the shooting that I read.

        “Loughner allegedly fired all 31 bullets in the magazine and was reloading when a woman in the crowd, already wounded, attempted to grab the gun from him. He finally changed the magazine and tried to fire, authorities said, but the gun jammed.”

        Here’s another.

        “The suspect Jared Lee Loughner, 22 was apprehended when his gun jammed as he was attempting to reload his weapon.”

        I have read short blurbs where they leave out the point that he was reloading and just point out the jam, but those reports that actually quote the witnesses seem to agree that he was in the process of trying to change clips when he was brought down. Had it not jammed, maybe he could have stopped his attackers, but that does not change the fact that it was the pause to reload that gave people time to respond.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        Bob,
        You can’t buy them if they’re illegal, but if I want one I can take two or three regular clips and make one!! I did it with an M16 in Viet Nam once and I could do it again!! Where there’s a will there’s a way!!! All the laws in the world aren’t gonna banish guns completely, it just makes them more valuable!!

    • Reggie Brian

      I have the right to move freely about the US, and I exercised that right when I moved away from Arizona. I was not among the people shot by that criminal that day. Had I been there, I probably would have used deadly force against him moments before he shot me. I wouldn’t have defended anyone else, including the 9-year-old, because you and the press and the courts have made it abundantly clear that it’s not my job to love my neighbor.

      Likewise, it is not your job to tell me how many bullets I am allowed to keep in my magazine. I would invite you to my house to tell you in person, but I am not sure if I trust you. Violence seems to follow you progressives around. How this is “progress”, I have no idea. Must be related to “hope and change”.

      • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

        While I admire your not so subtle humor, I feel constrained to point out that the term is “Cartridges”, not “Bullets”. Cartridges consist of the case; primer; powder and the projectile(s). Which will be a single bullet, as in most cartridge arms, or multiple projectiles, as in a shotgun shell. Capacity is, I think, self explanatory. At least to those who bother to arm themselves with facts, not wild, inflamatory speculation.

    • Al Sieber

      Kinetic, it only takes one car to mow down 13 people,more if you back up, people will always find a way to kill each other, so why restrict our freedoms more? why do liberals want more Govt. control? haven’t you learned from history?

      • Al Sieber

        Kinetic,and why is it always the democrats?

        • http://ajb221@cox.net ajb

          just a matter of popultion control rember obamacare and death panels

      • eddie47d

        Hi miner; No offense to decent gun owners (and they are in the majority). That could even include you Al. Why do some Conservatives want an open lawless land with no rules and regulations. Some don’t even want any government and want to rule by the barrel of their own gun. How thoughtful of some of you! You have your share of extremists who spread more fear and mistrust than any anti-gunner. I really don’t trust any BODY;whether government,left wing radical or right wing radical who wants to rule by those guns. More deaths in America come from civilians killings civilians than from any government force. So who is really the problem?

        • Al Sieber

          Why, that’s real kind of you eddie, I never said I wanted a lawless land. I’m a conservative in the sense I want to conserve the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which both parties have trampled on, more so the democrats when it comes to gun control, Brady Bill etc.

          • eddie47d

            There is nothing in the Constitution that says there can’t be gun control.

          • JeffH

            eddie, in case you haven’t been paying attention, there already is “gun control”, and plenty of it.

          • kate8

            Al – You can’t reason with a Lefty because they have no concept of common sense. They have to have every minute detail spelled out and regulated, because they just can’t figure out what to do any other way.

            Sad, but true. That’s what happens when you throw out every measure of morality and see everything as relative.

          • eddie47d

            Okay Jeff and Kate:Then let’s throw out all those thousands of gun control laws that are redundant and replace them with a solid Federal Law. That will make you cringe yet you never offer any positive solutions. The 2nd Amendment offers the right to own a weapon but it is not open ended to do as you please.

          • JeffH

            Again eddie, you just don’t have a clue do you? You just babble on with whatever sounds good in your mind. Just like your use of “loopholes” and the “90% figures” on American guns in Mexico. Un-substantiated anti-gun rhetoric, that’s all it is, for people like you to cling to and repeat without any clue or sense of reality.

            Solutions? Damn right, eliminate the redundancy. “Gun control” is never “criminal control” on any scale.

          • kate8

            Well, eddie, if you mold your population to reject all moral values, and regard life itself as of little worth, then you have people who don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to kill. Put weapons in their hands, and they can justify acts of violence.

            Of course, it’s a great plan if your goal is to disarm them.

            The trouble is, you leave those who DO value and respect life at the mercy of those who don’t, whether they are common criminals or government.

            That is why a set of moral standards, including THOU SHALT NOT MURDER, is a great idea in a society. People can be encouraged to do the right thing and understand they will be held accountable for their choices, just as they can be encouraged to indulge their urges unfettered.

            Which do you think works better?

            But then, that requires logic and common sense.

          • eddie47d

            That’s 87% Jeff. Yes sir there are plenty of loopholes so you need to “get out” more often and stop trolling right wing sites that don’t always tell you the whole truth. There is a difference between licenced dealers and gun shows. 30% of illegally trafficked guns come from those gun shows. Few require background checks and they sell whatever you want. Now you knew that but just won’t admit it.I’m sure you heard of the big undercover operation at gun shows in 2009.(Arizona) These investigators found 63% of sellers were willing to sell to someone who admitted they couldn’t pass the background check. That is illegal yet that percentage did just that. Were these sellers honest ? Apparently not. Would they be willing to sell to criminals? More than obvious. 81% 0f all legal gun owners want Federal background checks to be done. At least it’s good to know that most are honest and know their responsibilities to others and the 2nd Amendment.

          • JeffH

            eddie, you’re spreading mis-information and distortions again. 87%? Can you be more specific? What a joke.

            Do you really believe that the drug cartels are sending people across the borders to “Bob’s bait and Sports in Pima” to buy the latest semi-auto Glocks or TEC-9s or even Winchester 30-30s? They’re using fully automatic AK-47s, hand grenades, mines, RPGs all the while making billions from their drug trade. Does it really all add up in your deluded mind?

            Have you ever seen in e news or heard of the Russian Viktor Bout? The media doesn’t want you to hear about him. He’s just one who’s been arrested and indicted on charges of supplying these types of weapons to terrorists around the world, the narco-terrorists, cartels south of the border through the black market. He even has a fleet of cargo planes to transport his cargo. Wouldn’t you think that the Mexican cartels might just use a black market global air-fleet operation to arm themselves? Reality says yes!
            http://motherjones.com/politics/2008/03/viktor-bouts-last-deal

          • JeffH

            Propaganda ‘journalism’ blames U.S. gun laws for Mexican violence

            eddie, I’d like to share with you a bit of testimony, from the Statement of David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, United States Department of Justice, before the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing entitled “Southern Border Violence: Homeland Security Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Responsibilities”, presented March 25, 2009. Just a small bit, really, but a critical one.

            “According to ATF’s Tracing Center, 90 percent of the firearms about which ATF RECIEVES information are traceable to the United States.”

            They aren’t seizing RPGs, grenades and Class III Military ARs and AKs. The point is that the military guns aren’t coming from here. They come from Venezuela, Colombia, Cuba, Israel, Brazil and China…through the black market. The cartels are getting military grade weapons from non-U.S. sources.

            Some guns are indeed making their way south, which no one has ever disputed—after all, it’s a porous border. The arms that are going to Mexico are that of Mexican illegals going home and arming themselves in fear of the cartels and the Mexican govt. The drug cartels in Mexico are not getting their arms from the US civilian market.

          • Al Sieber

            Kate, I believe you’re right, I am wasting my time, but sometimes I think theres hope. in this case there isn’t.

          • independant thinker

            “There is a difference between licenced dealers and gun shows. 30% of illegally trafficked guns come from those gun shows. Few require background checks and they sell whatever you want.”

            The vast majpority of the sellers of firearms at gun shows are dealers and they have to do background checks no matter where they sell a gun. A private individual cannot call in for a background check on the private sale of a firearm you must be a licensed dealer or law enforcement to get a background chjeck done. Provide a source for your 30% figure the last thing I read said something like 1% or less.

          • JC

            eddie47d says:
            January 31, 2011 at 9:29 am
            There is nothing in the Constitution that says there can’t be gun control.

            “The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

            Hello? earth to eddie….

    • JC

      Kinetic, liberal “over reaction” is the norm these days…
      so in keeping with that policy here’s a thought…
      Since Arizona nut job had an Obama sticker on his car…we should just ban all Obama voters from having guns. After all, they must be nut jobs too right?

      Just trying to work with your sense of reasoning. :)

      • eddie47d

        JC Hello; You are not infringed from having a weapon but it doesn’t say anything about controls on that weapon

    • campfire

      K— Your comments are as good as supporting gun control.
      Who needs 31 rounds??? You do when it comes time to defend your loved ones or your country.
      we already have strict gun laws. Gun laws are not for Federal law supremicy. The states have the responsiblity for implementing their own laws. People like you like the Federal control. Read the 10th Ammendment of your Constitution.

    • JeffH

      Kinetic1 says:
      “HELP! HELP! THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY!! Any time a Democrat says gun control, “pro 2nd amendment” types are certain that their guns will be rounded up and taken away.”

      You liberals always use the same, lame comments…I live in one of the most restrictive states in the union and I can’t buy a magazine clip that holds over 10 rounds.

      Would you care for a list of National Organizations With Anti-Gun Policies?

      The following organizations have lent monetary, grassroots or some other type of direct support to anti-gun organizations. In many instances, these organizations lent their name in support of specific campaigns to pass anti-gun legislation such as the March 1995 HCI “Campaign to Protect Sane Gun Laws.” Many of these organizations were listed as “Campaign Partners,” for having pledged to fight any efforts to repeal the Brady Act and the Clinton “assault weapons” ban. All have officially endorsed anti-gun positions.

      How about Anti-Gun Individuals & Celebrities and National Figures?
      The following celebrities and national figures have lent their name and notoriety to anti-gun causes, speaking out for anti-gun legislation and providing a voice for anti-gun organizations.

      Or journalists that actively editorialize in favor of gun control
      laws and Anti-Gun Corporations/Corporate Heads?

      Or publications and media outlets have assisted in the attack on
      Second Amendment rights. The editorial policies of some of the media
      sources listed portray firearms in a negative manner in an attempt to
      generate public support for restrictions on firearms ownership. Others have refused some or all of NRA’s advertisements.
      http://gunowners.org/fs0302.htm

      • Kinetic1

        JeffH,
        What does all this have to do with my comment? Like I said, let’s wait and see what the President has to say before screaming about his wanting to take all your guns away.

        • JeffH

          Kinetic1, the president’s history is 100% anti-gun. Are you going to wait for the car to hit you before you make a move? To sit and wait is what fools do! If you are a fool, then sit and wait because your freedoms are at stake as well as the rest of us. You and many others just haven’t figured that out yet These threats are real and what I just presented supports the fact that they are real. It’s not a matter of wait and see…Do you think the anti-gun establishment will wait and see…NO! They are pushing daily to restrict or remove our freedoms, especially gun control.

          • kate8

            JeffH – I say, again. Obama supported, financially and every other way, Odinga’s communist takeover in Kenya.

            The Left has been stricken with strong delusion about this man. It’s uncanny.

          • JeffH

            kate8, not surprising considering the “communist” influence in Obama’s upringing and his Kenyan heritage.

          • kate8

            JeffH – Might I also point out that those Kenyans to whom he sold out to communism were HIS OWN PEOPLE.

        • Dan az

          Kinetic
          This is just the smoke and mirrors that he is using to hide the true ban of guns from us with the UN treaty.
          The UN wants to make all firearms subject to international law. The Small Arms Ban will:

          * Prohibit firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public.
          * Prohibit any transfer of firearm ownership.
          * Require US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.
          * Require micro-stamping on all guns.
          * Destruction of “excess” firearms.

          Guns protect citizens from governments who abuse their power. The only thing keeping the United States from Obama turning our country into a Marxist Socialist country is our right to bear arms. With a guy like Obama in power it is terrifying to think what would happen to our country if we didn’t have our Second Amendment Rights. The UN’s solution is to take away guns from all “insurgents.” Our founding fathers were considered insurgents. Our Democracy could not have been made possible if it weren’t for their courage and access to firearms. If there was a Small Arms Treaty in 1776 our country would not exist. The UN believes anyone fighting for freedom should be considered a threat and wants to leave the world defenseless against tyrannical governments.

    • Cawmun Cents

      Perhaps you(playing the part of the deranged politician shooter)then bring 3 guns with 10 round clips,and have the same little rampage….You people continue the remind me of the Steve Martin movie,the Jerk.When his adoptive Black father shows him the difference between Sh#t and shinola….you always need a refresher course too.Laws do not protect anyone….nor do the police.Laws are meant to deal with folks who have already(past tense)commited a crime. Police are there to arrest perpetrators(past tense)who have already commited a crime.Laws do not protect anyone,got it? How you can really feel safer is if you go to a place where no guns are allowed to be privately owned.The Sudan perhaps….

      • Kinetic1

        Cawmun,
        I never said that we should ban all guns. Fact is, I own a couple of rifles myself. I only stated that the only reaction I had heard was a consideration of renewing the federal ban on extended clips and that we should wait to hear the President’s proposals before we respond.

        You know, there aren’t too many Democratic politicians in the last 40 years who have ever suggested a total ban on guns, yet many of you on the right make it sound as if it’s a daily call. Go ahead, google Democrats call for total gun ban and see what you get. It’s just noise. A call for registration? Sure, you can read about that all day. A ban on assault weapons? Yep, you’ll find a lot of talk about that as well, but who is it that you all know of who is pushing for a repeal of the second amendment?

        • Cawmun Cents

          My point is that,A:Making a law designed to protect politicians from would be assassins,will not keep attempts from happening. B:Banning specific kinds of weapons,magazines and or/munitions,will not keep the assassination attempts from occuring. Therefore why the need for new legislation beyond what is already on the books?Laws were made to be broken…why spend the time and resources on a law that will do absolutely nothing? Its just idiocy running rampant…..

        • Dan az

          Kinetic1
          check out these grafts and explain to me how gun control works in any form of the word.
          http://americasenemieswithin.blogspot.com/

    • ValDM

      The very term “gun control” really does say it all. What don’t you get?????????

    • bhscpa

      You lost credibility at ’2nd amendment “types”‘.
      Encroachment on the 2nd amendment in any form, like limiting clip size, will be resisted by those who defend the 2nd amendmend.
      The same encroachment was resisted by Obama when he was in the IL legislature when they tried to ban the most gruesome form of late-term abortion.

    • kenny martin

      You seem to be missing the point.. it is LEGAL to own clips that shoot 30 rounds.. it is an American right our Fouding Fathers and millions of others fought and died for. It was said by George Washington and many others a well armed militia to protect us from our government should be established and maintained. Obama has snuck items into the “Health Cae Bill” that quite frankly have nothing to do with health care, one of those things is his campaign promise or idea whatever you call it, to establish a “itizens police force”, sound familiar?? Germany did it, Russia did it.. then they began to take away everyones guns. “If” you are foolish enough to believe there is no “conspiracy” to disarm Americans and turn it Socialist you obviously do not follow politics except the sound bites the propaganda media releases.. Our enemies said during the cold war they would infiltrate us by our weak immigration policies and become teachers, professors and politicians.. they have done exactly that and America has already fallen, it is but a matter of time before it fully realizes this fact.. very soon.

      • Kinetic1

        Kenny,
        This is what scares me. Folks like you get so wrapped up in fear that you’ll believe anything the right wing blogs offer up. The Health care bill establishes the “Ready Reserve Corps” which is a group of doctors and other health workers.
        “Before the law was passed, the Public Health Service, unlike other elements of the government’s seven uniformed services, didn’t have a “ready reserve” – a cadre of individuals who could be called up involuntarily in times of need. What it had was a regular, full-time corps of 2,800 doctors, nurses, scientists and other medical professionals, which was the limit under law. It also had a reserve corps. But most of the individuals in the reserve corps, which was larger than the regular corps, were on extended active duty for the duration of their careers; in other words, they worked full-time, just like the regular corps, because they were needed, but the statutory cap prevented the service from bringing them into the regular corps.
        The new law eliminates the personnel cap and brings the members of what used to be the reserve corps into the regular corps, which as a result now numbers about 6,600, according to an official at the Public Health Service who spoke to us on background.”

        Conspiracy theorists love to take candidate Obama’s call for “”a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as our military force.” out of context and use it as proof that he wants to build up a secret army. This quote referred to strengthening Americorps, the Peacecorps and USA Freedomcorps, not to arm them.

        • independant thinker

          “Conspiracy theorists love to take candidate Obama’s call for “”a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as our military force.” out of context and use it as proof that he wants to build up a secret army. This quote referred to strengthening Americorps, the Peacecorps and USA Freedomcorps, not to arm them.”

          But to be “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded” as our military they MUST be armed as well. The “Americorps, the Peacecorps and USA Freedomcorps” are not trained as security forces at the present to my knowledge.

          • Kinetic1

            Indi think,
            Just as powerful and strong at what they do. No one suggested arming the Peace Corps, just giving them the kind of support that we give our military.

  • Michael J.

    Well let’s see, first you have a preordained list of solutions in mind. You must then create or wait for the right problem/crisis too come along, such as oil spills or mass shootings in order to implement prepackaged solutions.

    In this new age of Progressive Marxism, solutions arrive prior to the problems they pretend to correct.

    • eddie47d

      That same scenario could be said about Conservatives in their support for wars, crony capitalism,gay rights,a women’s right to choose,and lack or Corporate accountability. Don’t be so narrow minded Michael J. and yes changes need to be made on both sides of the political spectrum.

      • JC

        Still don’t know the difference between a conservative and a big government Republican eh?

        • eddie47d

          Sure do and sometimes there isn’t a lick of difference.

        • JC

          That was childish and very informative(of who you are), but thanks anyway.

        • JeffH

          JC, that’s a fact!

          • eddie47d

            Opinion Jeff,Do you know the difference, buddy?

          • JeffH

            Yes and sorry, I’m not your buddy!

      • 45caliber

        eddie:

        You say the Conservatives support war. Were you aware that more wars have been started by liberals than conservatives? Actually, the conservatives don’t support war for war’s sake. We simply believe that if a war is started, we need to win it to end it – not walk away from it once everyone’s attention has been deverted from a domestic problem that caused the libs to start the war in the first place.

      • kenny martin

        I am a true Christian Conservative, I do not have ANY faith in the Republican party and I have NO problem with gays, womans rights etc.., I believe we MUST all let each other live ONLY if we do not hurt others by force or deception. Any lifestyle that does not affect the countries strength or safety of it’s citizens should be ok. But we should begin executing one by one, first a white man, then a black man, then one of every race in succession until we rid ourselves of violent and sexual offenders. Then we can live safely and only worry about the outside forces against us. Well almost, the government is another problem..

        • 45caliber

          Sorry, kenny. I don’t agree that we should execute each race in turn to get rid of them. We should execute the worst ones first, regardless of race. Execution for crimes committed – particular violent crimes – is reserved for those who will most likely commit a similar or worse crime when released from prison. It should be used and quickly for those sentenced to it.

      • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

        Would that your mother had made the “Right Choice”, then we’d not be bothered with you.

        • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

          Hmm. The above was intended tor good,ol’ “Eddie”. Must’ve pushed the wrong reply button by mistake.

    • Kinetic1

      Michael J.
      You just outlined the plan for PENAC!
      “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
      Rebuilding America’s Defenses, page 51

      Many sources say that Bush and Cheaney were creating plans to attack Iraq months before 9/11. As you say “have a preordained list of solutions in mind. You must then create or wait for the right problem/crisis too come along.” And then you get an unfunded war and the Patriot Act. Talk about undermining national security and civil rights.

      • Michael J.

        Kinetic1,
        I am unfamiliar with PENAC. My first thought was that it may be a type of urinary tract infection, but after searching I know that the author is a conspiracy theorist who describes his material as “my writings and rants on history and current events”. Having said that I also realize that contemporary conspiracy theorist co-mingle elements of actual history with widely dispersed flights of fantasy. (ie Dan Brown) Whether or not the author has the inside poop on the items he rants about is debatable. More likely he is just another blogger with lots of time for google searches.

        Starting from now and looking forward a couple decades, I do believe the crescendo of daily dilemmas befalling our country and others around the world are pre-scripted and foisted upon populations for effect. Like open range cattle destined to be driven towards temporary holding pens (regions of the soon to be created North American Union) where culling will occur prior to re-classification according to value by way of abilities and other potentials.

        Back to the present, I see the R’s and the D’s becoming indestinguishable as a result of deceptive political treachery and the emergence of new default monikers such as Progressives, Conservatives and Libertarians with Independents visiting each randomly depending on which day it is.

        • Kinetic1

          Michael J,
          I’m not certain what you found, but PNAC is the acronym for the Project for the New American Century. This group, founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan in 1997, included members such as Dick Cheany, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Donald Rumsfeld and John R. Bolton. They had plans to come down hard on Iraq years before 9/11. From Wikipedia

          “According to a February 27, 2003, editorial by William Rivers Pitt, PNAC has been agitating since its inception for a war with Iraq. PNAC was the driving force behind the drafting and passage of the Iraqi Liberation Act, a bill that painted a veneer of legality over the ultimate designs behind such a conflict. The names of every prominent PNAC member were on a letter delivered to President Clinton in 1998 which castigated him for not implementing the Act by driving troops into Baghdad.

          PNAC has funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to a Hussein opposition group called the Iraqi National Congress, and to Iraq’s heir-apparent, Ahmed Chalabi, despite the fact that Chalabi was sentenced in absentia by a Jordanian court to 22 years in prison on 31 counts of bank fraud. Chalabi and the INC have, over the years, gathered support for their cause by promising oil contracts to anyone that would help to put them in power in Iraq.

          Most recently, PNAC created a new group called the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Staffed entirely by PNAC members, The Committee has set out to “educate” Americans via cable news connections about the need for war in Iraq. This group met recently with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice regarding the ways and means of this education. …
          The Project for the New American Century seeks to establish what they call ‘Pax Americana’ across the globe. Essentially, their goal is to transform America, the sole remaining superpower, into a planetary empire by force of arms.”

          These are the people who were just waiting for a 9/11. They had plans and members in place should “another Pearl Harbor” occur. This is why so many of us fought to stop George W. Bush.

          • Al Sieber

            Kinetic, I agree with you.

          • Michael J.

            Kenetic1,
            It would have helped if you spelled it correctly when you first posted it.

  • Reggie Brian

    The President told us that he will be focusing “like a laser” on the economy and jobs. And then we are told that they will “Tackle Gun Control”.

    I can’t help but think that the use of metaphors indicates that this president thinks of us as children, or maybe as retarded adults. Besides the fact that lasers do not focus, nor do you tackle a problem like you tackle a football player, the overriding problem here is that the federal government is NOT in place to control the economy, and the federal government is NOT in place to control guns.

    The People of the United States have elected a clown for a president and now suffer the consequences. Many of us have acknowledged that sad fact, and are ready to move on, smarter and stronger. Others think that this is some kind of game we are playing here, to see how far patriots can be pushed before real change will take place. And yes, this would be the kind of change that Jefferson and those guys talked about in the mid-1700′s.

    I guess in a way it really is about the economy. Back then, different people paid in different amounts, depending in part on how badly they wanted freedom from tyranny.

    • mythbusting

      Reggie: You stated it well, “Back then, different people paid in different amounts, depending in part on how badly they wanted freedom from tyranny.” The clown got promoted from community half-baked organizer to clown in charge because of total ignorance and stupidity. Most of the 62 million who voted for this inexperienced pariah have no intention of reading history, becoming educated to the heritage and understanding the Founding Fathers. The ignorant want to paint a grotesque picture of old white slave owners who didn’t care for anyone outside their circle. Thomas Jefferson was 32 years old when all this came to be. Most of those who signed the Declaration of Independence died in poverty. Great sacrifice was made for posterity that the ignorant have no clue about–and have no intention of becoming enlightened about, either.

      • Al Sieber

        myth, you got that right. we have more laws, rules, regulations, etc., than any other country in the world. we’re fined or arrested for the most minor of infractions, with more people incarcerated than any other country in the world, so now they want more laws they can’t or won’t enforce.

        • mythbusting

          Thanks Al.

        • 45caliber

          Al:

          England today is a good example of what we are becoming. There are so many crimes that the police don’t (or won’t) even record most of them. But they have plenty of time (and money) to focus on the minute things done by otherwise good citizens.

          This morning in an English newspaper was a story about two Councilmen in a small town who were in trouble and went to court NINE times – because they cut a wire that was activating a burglar alarm on a deserted house every two hours. No one could sleep in the entire town and all complaints were ignored. Someone in authority realized it had been cut nine months later and had them arrested for cutting it. They finally settled for a warning ticket – but it cost them thousands of pounds ($) for the court costs. Good use of police time, when they don’t have time to check burglaries, isn’t it? The same paper also had a story of an elderly man who was burgled 5 times in ten weeks before the police decided to see if they could stop it. Sad …

          • Al Sieber

            Right 45, in England they took their firearms away years ago and the only ones with guns are criminals who don’t care.

      • Cawmun Cents

        In 2006,I blogged heavily about this current President being hailed as the next messiah of the Democratic party.In 2004 at the Democratic Convention I observed how loudly the constituents applauded Mr.Obama.I knew then that they would attempt to run this man and I told people loudly through blogging that he was going to be their man. I checked into his political tenents and knew he was a radical leftist.I then communicated this to media moguls from the right.But all I received was contempt,and political smuggery…welcome to my world America.I saw the second coming of the civil rights movement years before you were subjected to it.But my cries of warning went largely unheeded.Now you have been cornered and you still fail to get with the program and find a worthy opponent,while you struggle wtih what is happening around you.Careful or you will defeat yourselves again by not heeding my warning again.

  • Glenn

    To Kinetic 1 , Who needs to shoot of 31 rounds without reloading ? Maybe someone defending him or herself from a tyrannical government that is coming to stuff him in an oven ! The second amendment is for that very reason , to defend oneself from those who wish to take away our freedom and and or our very lives…. God forbid that day comes , but if it does, you will be really happy to have as many rounds coming out of your gun as is physically poss. Because you had better believe the ones coming for you will have every advantage and frankly , it’s opinions such as yours that scare the hell out of me. I pray that your you might have neighbors that will be able to forget your foolishness and be able to defend you and your like if ever a day like that comes…..and we all hope it doesn’t …..But , as for me I will be a good boyscout and be ready…..

    • I. Texas

      I put it like this to those who look sharply at me for owning a high powered rifle with a large magazine (and owning spare magazines). If something horrible should ever happen (use your immagination, it could be space aliens, it could be the Mexican Army, it could be a zombie horde, or the Fed flexing its muscles with its “civilian volunteer force” coming to silence you) and you’re my neighbor and you’re anti-gun? I can see your house from mine, and I can see “them” coming to get you? I’m not firing shot one.

      You can cry for help, you can scream for mercy, you can plead with me or apologize, but the fact of the matter is you’re not worth my time or my trouble. I’ll be too busy worrying about my own family and property. Instead of hoping your neighbor will save you, it’s better to invest in your own safety.

      I have no time, nor any patience, for liberal dogs any longer. They can stay on their side of my fence and I’ll stay on mine. Don’t deign to tell me what to do, what to eat, what to drive, how much power I can use, or how I should live my life and we’ll all just get along fine.

      And I used to be such a nice person. :)

      • JC

        What you just said is completely moral, but the libbies will never “get” that.

      • mythbusting

        That eloquently sums up millions of us these days. We just wanted to be left alone, to live our lives within the parameters of the common sense laws, enjoy the fruits of our labor and find our own peace in this world during our brief time in this mortal journey. But, we’ve now been fully awakened that there are those who do not mean for us to have a quiet and peaceful life because of the actions of a very few. Gov’t treats us like kindergarteners: When one juvenile acts up everybody else has to pay the price for their injustice. The funny part is that those vermin in gov’t can’t control or maintain their own lives, yet they seem convinced that only they can tell 300 million others how to live theirs.

        • 45caliber

          I agree. How many of those people in Washington is it that have broken some laws? I was told that you couldn’t vote or own a gun if you had. Yet they vote every day on things that really tend to screw up my peaceful life.

      • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

        hahaha…’space aliens’…??

        Really…?

        haha…I needed a good laugh today, so thank you for that!

      • Kinetic1

        I. Texas,
        First, I own my own rifles so I won’t ask for your help. Second, I was speaking of extended round clips for pistols, not rifles. A person walking into a crowd with a loaded rifle gets noticed. A person carrying a pistol in his jacket is not until it’s too late.

        Now, to another of your points. Many of you who want to “live free” seem to forget that we are all in this together. Just because you can afford to pay for all the gasoline, energy and water that you want to use does not mean that you have the right. When we talk about becoming energy independent, many on the right start yelling “drill baby, drill” without considering that curbing our use will do more right now then all that drilling. Maybe we do need to drill more, but using less at the same time will get us there a lot faster. Same with energy. If everyone took your position, where would all the energy come from? Ae we just going to continue to build plants and burn fuel so that you can have your whole house lit up 24/7?

        • 45caliber

          Kinetic1:

          You said, “Just because you can afford to pay for all the gasoline, energy and water that you want to use does not mean that you have the right.”

          Why not? If I need the fuel to get to work, then I need it. If I need water to irrigate a garden, then I need the water. If I can pay for it, why not use it? After all, it is there to be used. “Saving” it doesn’t mean a lot.

          I am against wasting it simply because I can. But if there is a need, it should be used. Yes, it takes awhile to become energy dependent. And we should save where we can but not because we shouldn’t be using the energy or water when needed just because someone else halfway around the world can’t get it or can’t use it if he can.

          It’s like I was told when I was a kid, “Eat all your food. Someone in India is going hungry right now.”

          So they are. I couldn’t (can’t) get it to them so why should I make myself fat eating it? Sure it goes to waste – but it is recycled too. It is simply a stupid argument.

          We have oil for a thousand years – despite what some of the libs insist. Saving it isn’t going to change things. Switching to something else that costs far more isn’t going to change things either. We need to do a lot more research to come up with a good way to replace it. Ignoring oil isn’t going to do that. All it does is force us to use something that isn’t researched well enough yet.

          • Cawmun Cents

            The new one is “Finish yer beer,there are sober kids in India!”

          • Kinetic1

            45,
            My point wasn’t regarding your need to use fuel to get to work, it’s whether or not you need a Hummer to do it. If you can prove that we have all this oil here in the U.S., that it is not environmentally destructive to get it and that burning it does not damage our air and soil, then fine.

            My point was not whether or not you need water to grow a garden for food, but whether or not there is enough water in your area to have a golf course quality lawn. If there is enough that it meets the area’s sanitation and crop production needs, then fine.

            We aren’t that far apart here since you don’t feel good about wasting, but there are those who believe that their ability to pay the bill is all that matters. Where we differ is in that we, as a nation have not done all that much to progress from the old ways. 15 of the 20 largest solar farms are in Germany. The government subsidizes homeowners to use solar power on their homes, creating enough power to differ the need for several new power plants. Opponents in the U.s. talk about how sources like solar are unreasonable and won’t work, while other countries are developing the future. Iran is turning to natural gas cars, then selling us their oil! We used to be the ones who said we could make the future work. We were the inventors of the new frontier. We embraced change. Now we sit by like old men mumbling “it’ll never work. It’ll never last.” as the future zooms past us.

          • 45caliber

            Kinetic:

            The oil companies have proved the oil is here – and are willing to plump down their money to prove it. There is only a very slight chance of spillage without outside help – and it can be cleaned up if needed. It does no more harm to the air than anything else does – CO2 is required for plant growth. The more in the air, the more the plants take out and the faster they grow. So that blows all your arguments right there.

          • eddie47d

            Caliber; His argument is not blown, for green plant life is not replaced as fast as they are taken down. All plants can only take in so much Carbon Dioxide. They do get bigger but the nutrients are spread out more within each plant thus making them less nutritious.If a plant (green pepper) takes in more carbon dioxide than needed or can use and becomes large;then it might win a contest at a farm show but a normal sized green pepper might be healthier.

          • Kinetic1

            45,
            Carbon Monoxide, nitrogen oxides, Benzene and on and on. CO2 is just one of many issues and plants can’t fix everything. Anyone who lived in L.A. during the 70s knows what it’s like. As for the oil supplies, the oil companies have told us all sorts of things over the years. Now it’s all about the safety of shale oil, though the shale oil sites in Canada don’t look to healthy.

          • independant thinker

            “Anyone who lived in L.A. during the 70s knows what it’s like.”

            Absolutely worst example you could pick. the problem in L.A. was there long before the first white man set foot on this continent. The Native American name for the L.A. basin translates to “place of stinky air or smokey air” so the problem has been around for as long as people have lived there.

          • Kinetic1

            Indi think,
            Exactly! L.A. is a basin and what better place to see the effects of excessive contaminants being spewed into the air? If you had seen L.A. in the 70s (and maybe you did) and compare it to now, you can see the effects of regulation. Since the effects are so clear in this hyper lab, why wait for a more open area to reach the same levels?

          • http://?? Joe H.

            kenetic,
            I live just next to Lake Erie. There should be PLENTY of water for what ever I wish to do to my half acre. There would be if the dam progressives would stop letting the water bottling companies sell it off to foreign interests around the globe like China!!

        • 45caliber

          As I said, there is a “chance” there might be a spill – but there is also a chance that an unknown asteroid might hit the earth tonight and kill us all. Or that space aliens might land tomorrow.

          • eddie47d

            Then Caliber you better run out and buy even more weapons. You never know when those space aliens will land!

          • Kinetic1

            Eddie47,
            Please don’t tell me that Breitbart has “actual video” of the aliens landing.

      • Glenn

        I. Texas …….dido……..!

  • http://yahoo jowolo

    Gun Control: Hitting what you aim at!

    • independant thinker

      Or gun control 7 in the X ring (or 6, 15, or however many rounds your magazine holds).

  • TIME

    Ok lets see: Barry Soetoro has a plan yea ok lets see he also has a plan for just about everything but saddly all of his alledged plans have failed thus far.
    So the question is really just how will this plan be any differant?

    You know I know hundreds of people who own guns and yet to date not a single one has shot anyone. WOW, how strange is that?
    I used to have a few guns and oddly I never shot anyone either.
    Yet I have been shot twice now once when I was in the UK, oh you all know that place where “GUNS are outlawed.” Yea how strange is that?

    The other time I was in Africa, OMG!
    I know how wierd is that you get shot in a place like Africia as they too have strong gun control laws.
    This is how it works, IF YOU are in the “Political Party” that rules you have the guns! And make the RULES.

    I can’t see how thats not cought on here in the US what a great idea. Its really kind of like OH thats the old {“do as I tell you or else”} Rule – dam and thats Barry Soetoro to a tee……….
    Thanks I feel so much better now that I know his plans.

    • 45caliber

      The “Do as I say; not as I do” rule.

  • Eric

    I’m a strict constructionist; we get all the blunderbusses and flintlocks and bags of powder we can carry. Who says a Glock is allowed? If you disagree,, don’t tell me you’re “conservative” ad rail about “activist judges” and by the way where does the Constitution say that Social Security, Medicare, Depts of education, Agriculture, fed reserve, etc., etc, make the 80 year old welfare queens and kings who are sucking the system dry give everything they have put in plus say 5% interest back!!!

    • DOGS FIGHT

      I am with you that gun control is not the only issue to be concerned with. Also, no where in the constitution does it say you are limited to only utilizing late 1700S era gun technology. Using up to 2011 gun technology is not expressily prohibited by our constitution so you are free to utilize up all gun technology available as anything not expressily forbiddon by the constitution belongs to the states and the people.

      LEARN 2 READ AND UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTION K THANKS

      • Eric

        I do get it, and understand that the people are sovereign and it is fundamentally a limit on the power of government. Where are all the strict constructionists when it comes to usurpation of our rights by all of the parts of government not in the Constitution? People murder abortion doctors that is a states rights issue, not a federal one.

        Of course, most of the monstrosity we have has been justified by every supreme court in the “Necessary and Proper” or “regulating interstate commerce” clauses, or to “promote the general welfare” (ha, what we have in welfare today is not at all what the founding fathers thought…)or maybe in the commerce clause….

    • DOGS FIGHT

      You seem to mis-understand the constitution. The constitution does not grant our freedoms. The constitution simply says in what very few ways that government can restrict your freedom. In other words, under our constitution, you are free to do anything at all with the EXCEPTION of what government is permitted to restrict under our constitution. In other words, government can under our constitution order me off to war if our nation is under attack. Under the constitution, I can be taxed as long as I have taxation with representation. etc, etc.

    • 45caliber

      Eric:

      The Constitution doesn’t list blunderbuss’s and black powder as acceptable weapons. Therefore you are not a strick Constitutionalist.

      It says that the people had the right to bear arms – which in their time was BETTER than what the military was issued. After all, the military was issued muskets which were seldom accurate at fifty yards. The American citizens then owned rifles – which were accurate to several hundred yards.

      If we were to use that reasoning today, citizens should have the right to own and test ALL weapons such as machine guns, anti-aircraft missiles, and nukes BEFORE the military got them. I don’t really believe that we need to do that – but that doesn’t mean that I don’t think the civilians now should be unable to get good rifles for other reasons.

    • Cawmun Cents

      Thats fine if you will come to my neighborhood and carry your flintlock around.Dont be surprised if you get aeriated by a 12 yr.old with a 12 gauge though….what a retard.

      • 45caliber

        About 40 years ago, Readers Digest commissioned a study to prove that the places with most guns had the most crime and vice versa.

        Instead the study found that the places with least guns had the most crime – the inner city areas. The places with the most guns had the least crime – the country areas. And the place with the most guns and the least crime? The Ozark Mountains in Arkansas – where I grew up. I was taught by the time I was five to load and shoot – and so were my kids.

  • Ironeyes

    To support and defend the constitution of the United States means nothing to the current administration esp Clinton. It is up to us to ensure that we do not lose any more via letting our congressmen know that we will not tolerate more rights being removed. We have lost enough due to governmental excuses and being mislead. We do not have a government of the people, by the people or for the people.

  • DOGS FIGHT

    I agree Barack, my aim has been a little off at the gun range lately; I could use some more gun training to improve my gun control.

  • J.M.R.

    WHYDON’T WE OUTLAW PENCILS AND PENS THATS WHAT THE GRONNIES IS W.D.C. USE TO KILL US.

  • Darrell Russell

    There is always implication to the gun, when some one either deranged or with a political ideology does something such as the shooting in Arizona. But was there the same out cry when the individual at Fort Hood decided to eliminate 13 people?
    There seams to be some double standard when it comes to some one off the street and some one that has been passed along so not to look political correct.
    Guns do not kill people,people kill people.

    • 45caliber

      But to admit the shooter at Fort Hood had a religious reason for the shooting he did would be to admit there is a religion and a religious people who want to kill everyone else. So they ignore what he did and try to kill the story. The one in AZ is definately crazy so the media jumps on that story big time.

      • Cawmun Cents

        Whether its some Islamic jackass who tries to disrupt our military or some politically motivated assassination attempt,the progressives wont be happy until America is dead and the world is a happier,shinier,place.They hate us and are a cancer from within.They hate what we stand for…freedom,liberty,armed civilians,capitalism,moms apple pie,baseball,John Wayne.They hate it all,because it reminds them of being the gelatinous,trembling,semi-conscious dung piles that they are.They talk of Imperialism,and brow-beat folks that are just trying to get ahead.But they have no problem forcing one of those folks out of a job to”spread”the wealth as if they are some kind of modern day Robin Hoods.What a farce these people are….

        • 45caliber

          You can bet Robin Hood kept a good percentage of his “taxes” before passing the rest along. And the ones in Washington believe in that too.

  • jopa

    Glenn; Your rant about someone coming to take your freedom and rights away are the reason you need a 31 round clip.I believe you will lose your rights and freedoms quicker by someone with a 31 round clip than some tyrannical government unless you live in some African or Commie country with a tyrannical ruler.Do you agree some rights and freedoms were taken away by that gun loving Arizona shooter or is that just like Chaney would say collateral damage.I’m not against guns but a 31 round magazine is a bit too much.Just a matter of common sense and if the shooter had an even larger clip more would be dead and wounded but when he went to change clips that’s when they finally brought him down.

    • 45caliber

      And you actually believe that everyone would give up their 30 round magazines if they were illegal? Just like everyone would give up their guns if made illegal?

      They will always be around as long as they are made for any military anywhere in the world. And you can bet those will be wanting them.

      Be realistic … for once.

    • Glenn

      It only takes one bullet to get the job done……..You would feel better if he had shot 5 people ? Really ? How many bullets would jopa allow the good people to have ? I know of and am one who has guns with a 30 round capacity and none of us would think of going out and shooting a bunch of random people , or even shoot people at all. Guns for me are recreation , hunting and for protection . I would hate to shoot a person, but if ( may God forbid ) a day comes when all hell breaks loose I want every advantage available. It isn’t the amount of bullets in the magazine…..it’s the amount of marbles in the head …..I believe that guy was missing a few..and from my understanding he was using some pretty powerful drugs to compensate for the problems in his life …..It is a shame what he did , but maybe if more good people were armed and not so afraid of being sued or locked up if they were to get involved, more of these things could be stopped or avoided all together……There is soo much more to this issue than the amount of bullets he had.

  • Al Sieber

    Why is it always liberals and democrats that want to restrict our freedoms, and want the Govt. to control them, and take care of them, don’t you care about our rights and freedoms?

    • 45caliber

      There are two ways to have freedom.

      You can give everyone all the freedom possible while they do the same for you. Or you can take away all freedom from everyone while conserving all of it for yourself.

      I think the progressives are interested in the second version of this.

    • Dan az

      Hey Al
      They are like little children that need their mommies to fix their booboos and wipe their azzes and noses and tell them not to touch that you may get hurt.Its a sickness,they live in a fantasy world and refuse to leave it because they feel safer in it then the real world.There the ones that didn’t experience the hard knocks of life or the sore rear end when they through their fits.Sad but true I blame their parents for the way they all turned out and I blame them for trying to change our young with there bamby loving ways.To make them wake up to reality in this life time would take a nuke in their back yard but then again they still wont get it!

      • eddie47d

        Sure Dan; Pretty soon you will be demanding pocket Nukes to defend yourself. I’m sure you’ll find it in the Constitution somewhere.

      • Al Sieber

        45 and Dan, that sounds about right. I can see there’s no hope for most people. once you’re disarmed, you’re through.

  • newspooner

    Practically speaking, only one gun law would be needed to maximize the number of people who are kept “safe” from “gun violence”. That law would be that if you drink alcoholic beverages, you can’t have a gun. Almost all criminals drink alcoholic beverages. Almost all crimes committed with guns are committed by people who drink alcoholic beverages. Sure, such a law would be unconstitutional, but most of the existing gun laws are also unconstitutional. If politicians were serious about keeping us “safe” from “gun violence”, then they should attack the alcohol problem.

    • 45caliber

      If they were realistic about stopping gun violence, they would simply require ALL adults to carry all the time. Very few people would be interested in starting something with a gun when they KNEW that every adult they saw was carrying a weapon at the time. Plus, everyone would be far more polite.

    • Cawmun Cents

      Yeah,but first lets make sure that prescription drugs are outlawed as well.I hear that if you mix them with alcohol,bad things happen,and guns start going off..Oh,and no more morning Java…too much caffiene,can cause people to become excited,therefore leading to gun violence.Also,ethnic people seem to bee very agitated alot.Better ban them from having guns as well.oh,and feminists have a period every 28 days…they seem to be angry once a month.Better ban them from having guns too.Protesters…wow! They break windows and throw rocks,and gather in large crowds often becoming violent,a clear indication that they shouldnt have guns either.you know what?People who eat meat might be capable of violence to prove their point,so lets ban meat eaters from having guns.where does it possibly end?…..

      • 45caliber

        Cawmun:

        Really? I don’t believe I’ve ever heard of a case where someone mixed pills with alcohol and then went shooting. Generally they either sleep it off or kill themselves by doing it. They must have different people in your area.

  • American Patriot

    Reggie Brian! good response. I want people like you in my corner when the fight happens. and, I think that the tyrant’s in Washington are going to try that push soon. very soon! There is a desperate need by them to get the ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT into position. Watch Obama Deception Full length on Youtube. That and “9-11 Loose Change” full length. Remember! Americans were being called crazy for saying that Obama had no birth certificate. now it’s known. Also, that George W. Bush and Chaney were in on the attack on 9-11. Documents are there to see. American’s still will not come to grips with that. Please people, Please look up HAARP, Look up Chemtrails, Please go to INFOWARS.COM and PRISONPLANET.COM and see what is happening. Don’t follow FOX NEWS. Please? Also, look up FEMA CAMPS. They are concentration camps here in the USA. ready to fill with AMERICANS. Alex Jones and Gov. Jesse Ventura exposed the truth. Its all on youtube. Question, Has anyone noticed that Conspiracy Theory was removed from the line up? It was the number one show of all their shows. think about it. It appears that someone did not want that info to get out to the people. Question everything! Including what I am saying. But, please look these up. OK? A police state is coming for all Americans very soon. PEOPLE, It is going on right under our noses. It’s all for a one world government. “The New World Order”

    • eddie47d

      Your no patriot but only a paranoid fool as much as you dwell on those misleading hokey TV programs. We’d all be living in underground bunkers and afraid to come out if we didn’t compare those shows with reality. You need a better balance in your life.

      • JC

        Please eddie, tell us all how we’re all so wrong about obvious facts. Tell us more about how we’re all just “paranoid”. And then stand up there on the podium and show us your little hopey changey button and your “Che” T-shirt so that we may become as enlightened as you are…

        God I could just puke about how absolutley deluded and blind you Libbies really are to all things factual andf real.

        • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

          JC – please enlighten all us ‘Libs’ as to what the ‘facts’ are about what your crazy friend in on about then…

          The truth is – you don’t actually *know* the *facts*.

          You have your suspicions, as do we all, as to what is going on behind the scenes, but the truth is, none of us definitively know…other than maybe Bob Livingston here, and he doesn’t want you to know the real truth, because if you knew the real truth, he wouldn’t make any money from his many books, mugs, and t-shirts.

          And not making any money from such things would be very un-American.

          Also, what good would a ‘one world government’ do? Who would profit?

          And with only one currency, and no one to buy anything, how would the money have any value?

          Also, who would rule this New World?

          And since there is no one else left to conquer, how would expansion work?

          I don’t know…I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the whole sinister, dystopian ‘One World Government’ thing is about as realistic as everyone living together in a utopian world of peace and harmony with unicorns, sparkly vampires, and non-judgmental ‘christians’ (and other mythical creatures).

          It would seem more likely to me that the powers that be would want to keep things pretty much as they are now, but with a few changes.

          To me, it appears that the middle class is disappearing, and I would hazard to guess that it’s by design. I’m not sure who it would benefit, yet, but it sure isn’t benefiting the middle class.

          I guess that the choice would be to work more hours to try to maintain one’s current lifestyle, or if you can’t find work, maybe join the military, and replenish the invading forces for when we want whatever Iran has (or when Israel asks us to…whichever comes first)…?

          • JeffH

            Dogma, go back to your Marxist study hall and push your Marxist ideology somewhere else. Haven’t you figured it out that your Alinsky inspired rhetoric is nothing more than that…just rhetoric?

            “A good tactic is one your people enjoy. A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

            In other words, you’ve become a drag.

          • JC

            Exactly Jeff, these vermin are contemptible communists and not worth any sort of discourse whatsoever. We’re way beyond that now.

          • ChuckL

            Do yourself a favor. Find and read both Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World”, and George Orwell’s “1984″.

            Then, ask yourself how much of these predictions are already in place.

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            @JeffH – sure, I’ll do just that.

            And then you can put your tin-foil hat back on, and slither back down into your home-made bunker, and wait for the sky to fall.

            @ChuckL – hmmm…I haven’t read ‘Brave New World’ yet, actually…so, yeah, I’ll have to check that one out in the near future. ’1984′ on the other hand, I have read a few times now, and I do have it somewhere, and will read it again when I find it.

            I also read ‘Lord Of The Flies’ not too long ago, and now that I think about it, that’s what this place kinda reminds me of.

            In fact, I’m almost sure some of you would try to split Eddie’s head open on one of the coral rocks below, just to keep him from getting the precious conch shell, and speaking his mind.

          • Al Sieber

            Dogman, you’re very naive, where do you get your info.?

          • Al Sieber

            Chuck, this guy can’t read, he’s a troll, or lives in his dad’s garage swilling down “RC cola’s” and “eating moon pies”, he has a sugar high, or he can’t read.

        • eddie47d

          Dogma; JC needs that One World Govt. so they can band together and attack the Klingons. He’s been a little touchy today!!

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            haha…Eddie, now that you mention it, he does seem a little shaky…

            haha…and the space aliens thing still cracks me up!
            Me’thinks some of them have been watching the ‘Predator’ movies a little too much lately…maybe there was a ‘Predator’ marathon on FOX the other night.

          • JC

            Beavis and Butthead….a love story. ;)

      • American Patriot

        “NOT” Paranoid Eddie47. Just a”NOID”

      • 45caliber

        eddie:

        There is one big difference between liberals and conservatives on this matter.

        The progressives/liberals prefer to believe the best about their fellow human beings and give their trust easily as a result. Then they are shocked when it backfires on them.

        The conservatives, due to study of history, prefer to believe the worst of the politicians and take steps to minimize any damage. Then, if they turn out to be good after all, nothing is lost but a little money invested in something that can still be used for something else.

      • eddie47d

        JC; When Jesse Ventura and company start telling the whole truth and not their sensationalism and hyped up bull crap then you can call them facts. Until then you are the one who is gullible .

        • JC

          Ventura and other such shows barely touch on the reality involved..and unlike you, I did all my homework years before there were shows like this. If you think that all of this was invented by Ventura and Co….you’re way behind the times.
          But that’s been obvious all along hasn’t it?

  • Eric

    yeah, that’s the irony; we have the right to bear arms, but where does it say we have the right to body armor piercing bullets or any size clip; I agree that way too much time is spent on this issue by people trying to limit our freedoms; they need to outlaw cars as they kill a lot more people and there is no constitutional right to own cars (especially Japanese. Korean and German ones), watch soon for the first Chery from PRC, people will line up to send our money there, like sheeple we enable our foes and competitors if is a nickel cheaper

  • Raggs

    Yeah I knew obama and his communist party would jump all over this I figure that he wants our guns before we revolt against the government like europe is doing.

  • American Patriot

    Raggs, Both the Dem and Reps are on the same page. “NO” differences. It’s all smoking mirrors. They want a “ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT” And they are talking about it all over the place. And, This issue in the middle east is a staged event. They created a problem, then they will create a solution by putting in one of their own in power there. 9-11 was another staged event to rally the American people behind Bush to go to Iraq. Why are we still there? I think American’s know why. Then we have Janet Napolatano and Rep. Peter King telling us to say something if we see something. As if American’s are stupid and won’t figure out what that is all about. Divide and Conquor. sorry about the spelling. Watch the other hand in their little magic trick that they have up their sleeve.

    • Raggs

      Well… I thought I may have been the only one to figure out the “crisis” in europe and why it is happening.

    • 45caliber

      What is amusing to me is that first, most people and politicians in the world are against a One World Government and second, our politicians believe they will be the ones in charge if they get it in place.

      I don’t believe they will be in power in the first place and doubt if they will achieve a One World Government without a war to conquere most of the world.

      Incidently, wasn’t both Germany and Japan fighting for a One World Government in WWII?

  • American Patriot

    eddie47d, Go back to sticking your head in the sand. It’s no use in directing someone like yourself to areas that will be of use and benefit. So, Welcome to the world of sheeple eddie47. your about to be fleeced. And, as far as balanced. I have both feet firmly planted. Thanks!

    • JC

      AP,these people are contemptibly, deliberately stupid. Discourse with them is pointless.

      • JeffH

        JC, eddie’s words remind me of the monkey in the cage at the zoo that is always slinging his feces around. No real rhyme or reasoning behind it.

        • eddie47d

          …and Jeff is like that Azz in the barnyard kicking up dust to get attention.

      • eddie47d

        JC; You have proved that about yourself many times and now added another to that list.

        • JC

          Wow! Good comeback eddie. I’m absolutely floored by your wit and cuttind edge sarcasm…who writes your stuff? Bugs Bunny?

        • eddie47d

          JC:Your cousin Daffy!

  • Airedale Sun

    Central Planners, sound familiar try this Marxism, Socialist, Progressives, Liberalism, in what Socialist Country has the elite or Central Planners not had the best of everything including the privilege of protecting their families and themselves.

  • JeffH

    Did you know that there are more than 270 federal firearm statutes that are spread through 30 of the 50 Titles of the U.S.Code.
    Gun laws in the United States vary from state to state and are independent of, though sometimes broader or more limited in scope than, existing federal firearms laws. Some U.S. states have also created assault weapon bans that are independent of, though often similar to, the expired federal assault weapons ban. The state level bans vary significantly in their form, content, and level of restriction. Forty-four states have a provision in their state constitutions similar to the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The exceptions are California, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York; however, the statutory civil rights laws of New York contain a provision virtually identical to the Second Amendment. As well, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that the protections of the Second Amendment apply against state governments and their political subdivisions (see: McDonald v. Chicago).

    Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, now the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) was given wide latitude on the enforcement of regulations pertaining to Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders. Allegations of abuse by ATF inspectors soon arose from the National Rifle Association (NRA) and certain targeted Federal firearms licensees.

    In the Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 97th Congress, Second Session (February 1982), a bipartisan subcommittee (consisting of 3 Republicans and 2 Democrats) of the United States Senate investigated the Second Amendment and reported its findings.

    It concluded that seventy-five percent of(BATFE)Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives prosecutions were “constitutionally improper”, especially on Second Amendment issues.

    • 45caliber

      BATF reminds me of MPs in Vietnam. If everything was off limits all they had to do was ride around all day to do their “duty”. They basically coasted. They were very much against allowing soldiers in town since they might have to work then.

      The BATF is the same. If all guns, alcohol and tobacco was banned, all they would have to do is make-work. I think this is their goal.

  • JeffH

    To think that there are still some who still believe that “NO ONE” is out to get your guns…maybe you should reconsider.

    There are people like Mayor Bloomberg with his anti-gun coalition, MAIG, that feel it isn’t necessary to create new anti-gun legislation by encouraging Obama to bypass Congress altogether and usurp existing laws with his “Blueprint for Federal Action against illegal guns”. The problem with Bloomberg and all of the anti-gun establishment is that in there view, no one should be allowed to posses guns except the police and military and of course themselves for their own personal protection.

    NY Mayor Bloomberg Sends Stern Letter To Obama Demanding Gun-Control Action.
    New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is urging President Obama to make 40 changes to federal gun law interpretation and enforcement on his own-without congressional approval.

    Bloomberg conveyed his recommendations to the president through the euphemistically named anti-gun coalition he heads, Mayors Against Illegal Guns(MAIG).

    *****Titled “A Blueprint for Federal Action” and released only in response to requests under the Freedom of Information Act, the 51-page Bloomberg battle plan takes another cue from the military in calling for its mission to be carried out jointly by seven federal departments and agencies: the departments of State, Justice and Homeland Security, the FBI and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), the White House Office of Management and Budget and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The first six agencies are wholly under President Obama’s command, while the CPSC is an independent agency headed by commissioners nominated by the president.

  • 45caliber

    They have to get rid of the guns to be able to give themselves a free hand to do what they want in Washington. That is their number 1 purpose in this. So they have to take advantage of every crisis that comes along ….

  • JeffH

    Do not forget about Obama’s ploy to undermine our 2nd Amendment sovereignty with International treaties like CIFTA and the United Nations Small Arms Treaty.

    Obama Pushes Anti Gun Treaty CIFTA
    http://vodpod.com/watch/1792934-obama-pushes-anti-gun-treaty-cifta

    • JeffH

      The U.N. gun grabber
      Global Small Arms Treaty threatens your right to self defense
      http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/27/the-un-gun-grabber/

      American gun owners might not feel besieged, but they should. This week, the Obama administration announced its support for the United Nations Small Arms Treaty. This international agreement poses real risks for freedom both in the United States and around the world by making it more difficult – if not outright illegal – for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.

      • 45caliber

        The main supporters of this bill are ones who DON’T want to allow their own citizens guns for fear there would be an armed revolt due to their take-over of the government. Makes you wonder about Oblama and others in Washington, doesn’t it?

      • TIME

        Jeff,
        Great point!!!!!!

        All of you should read the UN bill, if you still think that Barry and Hillofbeans are of any value after that read you may have a differant tune to sing, well that is unless your one of them.

        • JeffH

          TIME, are you back in the country?

  • Roger

    For the folks that think Obama is not a threat to our Second Amendment rights, look in some history books about Nazi Germany 1938.

  • 45caliber

    I’ve one big question. How in the heck is a gun dealer to know which people are crazy and which are not? It sounds as if the government is simply wanting to give some victim families a reason and an ability to sue dealers who were only doing the best they could with what they have to work with.

    • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

      @45caliber – quoting you:
      “I’ve one big question. How in the heck is a gun dealer to know which people are crazy and which are not?”

      *Under the current system*, it would be pretty tough for a gun dealer to assess a potential gun buyer’s mental state.

      So would you agree that maybe we should look at modernizing the way guns are bought and sold here?

      And…quoting you again:

      “It sounds as if the government is simply wanting to give some victim families a reason and an ability to sue dealers who were only doing the best they could with what they have to work with.”

      That sounds pretty reasonable, actually, and so maybe the dealers should have insurance for such things, especially since guns are so deadly in the wrong hands, and the dealers are the ones who help put the guns into said wrong hands (and even sometimes accidentally in the ‘right’ hands).

      I mean, the dealers make tons of money off the tools of death (aka: guns) they sell, and since the far-right loons tell me that the MASS GUN SLAYING incidents like the Tucson tragedy happen so infrequently, then having to be accountable for helping cause such a tragedy, really shouldn’t be a problem for the dealers, I would think.

      It’s kinda like if you go to a restaurant, and you tell them your wife has a food allergy to something specific (say, shellfish), and then they go ahead and serve her a dish with that very specific ingredient in it, and she dies. Would you not think they would sue the restaurant?
      I think I would. And it wouldn’t matter to me if it was due to sheer incompetence, or out of malice, or whatever…I would expect to hold them accountable for their mistake. And so no, an apology followed by ‘well, sir, sh!t happens…’ wouldn’t cut it for me.

      Somebody would have to pay.

      The catch is, the gun dealer can go on selling Glocks and M-16′s to people who obviously need such weapons to hunt the well-armed deer of Red-Neckville-town, and so they will recoup their financial losses.

      Meanwhile, there’s a 9 year old girl in Tucson who will never see her 10th birthday.

      How does her family recoup that loss?

      For that matter, how does a society recoup that loss?

      Answer: It fixes the broken system that caused it.

      • 45caliber

        I can’t agree with you about suing dealers for putting the guns into wrong hands. If they have no way of determining who is “wrong” then it isn’t their fault. You are basically saying that it doesn’t matter if they can’t determine an answer – they are still guilty.

        It would be the same as someone stopping to offer aid if you were in a car accident. They are trying to help you. If you sue them for doing the wrong thing, then they and everyone else will stop trying to help when they see an accident. Then what is your solution? Sue them because they did NOT stop to help? How can they win in this situation?

      • 45caliber

        Incidently, that is the difference between you and I. I don’t believe in suing at the drop of a hat. Your preference is not to actually punish someone who deliberately set out to do you wrong. You simply want the money and see that as an easy way to get it. I think you should have some responsibility for your own actions. Why would you take your wife to a restaurant that serves shellfish if she was alergic to them in the first place?

        • eddie47d

          I bet if your neighbor shot off a weapon in his yard and the bullet hit and killed your wife that you would want a wee bit of vengeance.( Lawsuit or severe punishment for your loss). I think you made an earlier statement to that effect so be careful in what you say.

      • JeffH

        45caliber, why waste time with the Dogma-Marxist’s rhetoric and use of “target” words such as “Glock” which is the new gun word of the day in the news. The M-16 is the United States military designation for the AR-15 rifle. Anybody with a bit of AR-15 knowledge understands that! Again, the use of “target” words that might stir emotion. The use of “MASS GUN SLAYING” referencing the Tucson shooting is another target word or in this case words. “Tools of death” and “far-right loons” and Dogmas ever racist ” Red-Neckville-town” along with pointing out “there’s a 9 year old girl in Tucson who will never see her 10th birthday.”

        You Marxist/communists really enjoy preying on others emotions.
        Again, Dogma-Marxist, most of us are wise to what is in your “tool box”. The problem behind your training in this kind of Marxist ideology is that you weren’t taught how to get past the people that have exposed your game.

        • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

          Oh, JeffH, how astute are you, hey?

          I love how you talk about my ‘game’ of preying on peoples’ emotions…uh huh.

          And crying that, *THEY’RE TRYING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY!! THEY’RE ALL COMMUNISTS, PEOPLE!!! SOCIALISTS!! MARXISTS!! VEGETARIANS!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!*…and on and on…yeah, that’s not trying to elicit an emotional response from people on the right, now is it?

          And what is this fascination you have with drag…??

          Is there something you’re not telling us here, JeffH…? Are you secretly into drag or something? haha…or is this one of those things where we don’t ask you, and you don’t tell us…?

          And, yes, I was also aware of the AR-15 designation of the blah-blah-blah. The thing is, other than to you, me, and a handful of gun geeks, no one else gives a crap. The same as no one really cares whether it’s called a ‘magazine’, or a ‘clip’. That means absolutely nothing to most people in the real world.

          The death of a 9 year old girl or boy does. And I would sure as hell hope it means something to you.

          • 45caliber

            The death of a 9 year old girl is bad – but no worse than millions killed by abortion or thousands killed by abusive people. A man in Houston last week was charged with beating a toddler to death with his belt.

            But the death of one child does NOT mean that we should give up one of our strongest freedoms – the right to defend ourselves and keep our government in check. It is an emotional plea.

            It is like a law here in Texas. Some idiot blew up a raft and loaded it on his pickup to take to the beach. It wouldn’t fit because it was too big so he laid it on the sides of the pickup and put three small children in it to hold it down. Driving over a high bridge the wind caught it and flipped it off over the side of the bridge.

            3 dead children. So a law was passed forbidding anyone from riding in a pickup bed – even though millions of us have ridden there safely in the past. That is overkill – pardon the expression – just as a law based on this one dead child would be.

          • JeffH

            Dogma-Marxist, I was merely pointing out how you commies like to use the emotions generated by a childs death to promote your agendas.

            ” Never let a serious crisis go to waste…it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before” – Rahm Emanuel

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            @45caliber – *Millions* of abortions…?? Are there really that many, or are you exaggerating to try to sway opinions?

            Look, no one (to the best of my knowledge) is saying we can’t have guns, period. As I hear it, and I agree with this view, is that there is a problem with the system, and it needs to be addressed.

            To ignore it, is *almost* like saying that you condone what happened in Tucson. Almost. Though I would have to say I’m pretty sure you don’t.

            Now, abortion is a tricky subject, I think. I know you ‘creationists’ (if I may blindly lump you into a group) feel differently, and see it more in black-and-white terms. You guys, if I understand correctly, see it as killing a baby. Or at least, that’s how it gets phrased by the far-right media ‘loons’ (and, yeah, I’m borrowing Bill O’Reilly parlance), and then gets parroted by anyone who either truly feels that way (but can’t put the time or effort into thinking up their own phrasing), or just wants to sway the opinions of others…as most of us try to do here.

            And, yes, the Left is equally as guilty of it as the right. I have watched almost as many Keith Olbermann rants, as I have watched O’Reilly rants, and have likely spouted talking points from both sides while trying to graphically make a case in support of whichever side I’m on for whatever issue is at hand.

            Obviously, on many things, I tend to favour the left side, but then I’m also for corporal punishment, and for having a strong, well-trained, and well-equipped military…but then, only using them when absolutely necessary. So, I definitely do NOT support the wrongful invasion of Iraq, and all the lives that were lost in the process. Though, I still do say I support the troops themselves…maybe even moreso than someone who thinks they support the troops, but in reality, is just blindly supporting the government who deploys them…and seems to deploy them rather willy-nilly in some cases. To me, human lives are just too valuable, regardless of whether they get paid to put their lives on the line or not.

            So, yeah…abortion is a tricky one, in my mind, because on one hand, you have the plucky-sperm/fetus/developing baby (depending on what stage the abortion takes place), and on the other hand, you have the life of the woman, whose vagina was penetrated, in order for the conception and pregnancy to occur. So now, was this the result of a rape? Incest? Consentual sex? Group sex? No sex (in which case, the baby could turn into Jesus…)?
            So say she decides to keep the baby – will it have a father? Will it have several possible fathers (result of group sex)? Maybe it’ll have two ‘mothers’…as in lesbian women…so how would you feel about that? Is the baby going to have a good home to grow up in? Will it have enough food, warm clothes, and a loving environment? Will the mom be able to support herself, and now her newborn baby, if she has to do it on her own? If she was raped, does she have to live whatever rape must be like, AND now deal with a baby she wasn’t planning on having? Is she even old/mature enough to have a baby? What if she’s in school…will she have to quit school?

            To me, there are just too many ‘ifs’ to really make one hard and fast rule that makes the decision for them, so in the case of abortion, I am pro-choice. And if the girl/woman/lesbian decides she wants to have the baby, and can give it a good home, with lots of love, and whatnot, then great. And if she decides that she can’t give it these things, or that she doesn’t want to have ‘little rapist junior’, then I support that decision too.

            Also, to borrow the slippery-slope approach that I see here whenever someone mentions gun control, we could apply the same ‘logic’ to abortion. Say for a moment that I was arguing in support of anti-abortion thinking, where would I draw the line? I mean, plenty of sperm has wound up in college shower drains, on hand towels, on cocktail/prom dresses, and so on…should we make the donors of said sperm go back, scoop up their potential offspring, and stuff ‘em into the first box they find? Or stuff ‘em in their girlfriends/wives/mistresses, if they have them, because the church likes babies.

            I know that’s a ridiculous mentality to take, but like I said, it seems to be the way some of the people here approach gun control.
            Just sayin’…

          • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

            @JeffH – Dude, you don’t need to explain yourself to me, or anyone else here. What you like to do in the privacy of your own home is up to you, and I promise I won’t judge you for that. I don’t need to hear about it though…but again, I won’t judge.

            Anyways, half of these people you bring up, I have no idea who they even are. If these people are ‘commies’ then it would appear that communism is much closer to your heart, than it is to mine. Maybe you fear communism, because deep down, you are a communist, and are just afraid that might get out…after all, if you’re old enough to remember the McCarthy era, then perhaps you have reason to be scared to expose your true self.

            I will say this though: We could learn something from the Soviets.

            They were repeatedly spending more on their military than their economy could support, and it led to the collapse of the Soviet empire.

            So now, with two wars abroad, and working on starting a third…with the most technologically advanced military on the planet…but also, the largest fiscal deficit on the planet…maybe it’s time to bring the troops home, and to cut some of the extraneous contracts (Blackwater, Halliburton, etc.), and get started on rebuilding the country.

            The thing is, JeffH, that just as you like to label others, to make it *sound* like you know what you’re talking about, and that you have everyone *all figured out*…the same could be done to you.

            I don’t know you, any better than you know me, but by your stubbornness, your own right-wing rhetoric, and your willingness to jump to conclusions…I would say you’re probably a scared, little, red-neck, who can’t handle having your ideologies challenged, or even questioned, and one who tries to ‘prey on emotions’ just as much, or maybe even more, than anyone else here. And so I would label you as such.

            And IF you think that you’re not only reacting emotionally, rather than thinking logically, then I *dare you* to try to make a serious, rational argument FOR gun control…and IF you can do that, I’ll make a serious, rational argument against gun control.

            The thing is, I don’t think you can do that, but if you’re not too afraid of letting go of your Chuck Heston/NRA security blanket for a little while, I’d love for you to try and prove me wrong…

            The ball is in your court, JeffH…plus, your balls are showing under your mini-skirt, so you might wanna put a longer one on…just sayin’…

            (for those that didn’t pick up on it, that was another drag reference…something that is near and dear to JeffH’s heart, along with communism, or so it would seem)

          • eddie47d

            Jeff and your labeling everyone a communist, rants. I think that is one of your favorites because it get’s you alot of attention and puts you up on that Conservative pedestal.It doesn’t have to be true because that doesn’t matter to those Conservatives. You get those high fives and a pat on the back and you love it. Now on the labeling liberals as using a child’s death that was really weak also. Remember when that women in SC drowned her two boys in that lake and that women in Tx that drowned her 5 children in the bathtub. Those two women were castigated and “burned at the stake” by the holier than thou folks for weeks on end. In other words it was a tragedy that they took advantage of and used to the hilt. If a child is sexually molested Conservatives come out of the wood work and demand tougher laws and longer prison sentences. I believe the majority of humans feel pain when a child or even an adult dies and that has little to do with being a liberal or conservative. Remember 15 or so years ago when you seldom heard about a pedophile. Yet today because of the Catholic scandal it seems to be everywhere. I doubt if there any more of them now than back then but the laws and lawmakers are making it tougher on them. Where they can live or work,etc. Are you complaining about those tougher laws to control a situation? Yet when rouge gun shows sell weapons to criminals and run guns into Mexico you think they are untouchable and our weak laws can’t go after them. The pro gun folks come up with all kinds of excuses to keep them in business.

          • JeffH

            Nice to see the two “peas in a pod” have even more they can agree on. Doesn’t change who or what you both are and what you both embrace.

            “I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence.”
            Frederick Douglass

          • JeffH

            I do believe I detect a bit of jealousy coming from the two of you, and very possibly a delusional or phychotic jealousy. Since jealousy is seen as such a common human emotion, people often don’t realise that in its extreme forms, jealousy is actually a disorder of the mind. Medications such as antidepressants are helpful, but because you two are the psychotic type, anti-psychotics may be necessary.

          • JeffH

            Dogma-Marxist…your use of the rules is uncanny…NOT!

            7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.(obviously your favorite)

            8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”

            10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”

            What is it with you and eddie…both of you seem to have this thing about men in dresses? Just sayin’…ya know!

          • independant thinker

            Dogma

            “Since 1973, over 45 million legal abortions have been performed in the United States.”

            These numbers are from the CDC. Other sources give numbers as high as 55 million. That is an average of 1.6 million a year or more.

          • JeffH

            eddie says: “Yet when rouge gun shows sell weapons to criminals and run guns into Mexico you think they are untouchable and our weak laws can’t go after them.”

            What exactly is a “rouge gun show”? Are you saying that “cosmetic” gun shows sell weapons to criminals?

            Never heard of a rouge gun show and never heard of rogue gun show either. Perhaps you can enlighten us with a bit more than your anti-gun show fabricated talking points and provide some definitive proof of these “rogue gun shows”.

            Once again, I won’t hold my breath waiting.

        • eddie47d

          Couldn’t answer the question or comment again could you Jeff. Only resorting to Psychobabel!

          • JeffH

            eddie, you’ve read all my comments, you know my answers and the only psychobabel(it’s actually psychobabble)is coming from you and your “man/woman” fetish partner Dogma-Marxist.

          • JeffH

            Oh..and eddie…YOU are a jealous one aren’t you?

      • Cawmun Cents

        Ye…that’s exactly what America needs,another fumbduck law that causes class action to be attained.Look Socrates,laws are one thing we have enough of.We have more lawyers per square mile than the pits of hell have brimstone.But it doesnt stop the violence.Get it thoroughly through you thick skull….no new gun laws are necessary.

        • Dogma-Free ‘The Trinity’

          @’Cawmun Cents’ – You sound like my grandfather. And, yes, he barely knows how to use the computer as well…though at least he can spell.

          Anyways, your goofy, down-home colloquialisms and piss-poor spelling aside…it’s not about how many gun laws you have, it’s about how applicable and effective they are. It’s kinda like having modern day traffic law, that still addresses horse-and-buggy era concerns – it’s not really very relevant.

          Clearly, there is something wrong with the current system. To me, that would indicate that the laws need to be addressed.

          No one is saying that you can’t own guns, or at least not that I know of. If you can point out to me where Obama has said he’ll make it illegal for everyone in America to own a gun, I’ll take that statement back…otherwise, maybe you need to turn off FAUX ‘news’ for a while, and come back to reality, where currently, a 9 year old daughter has been tragically taken from her family.

          …in Arizona, of all places…one of the friendliest states.

          Unless, of course, you’re of Mexican descent.

          But otherwise, my grandparents (who aren’t of Mexican descent) said they loved living in Arizona. Then again, they said they also loved Vegas, and it’s a slimy sh!thole.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            dogma,
            sounds to me like your grandparents got ALL the brains in your family!!! Course they probably didn’t have a very INFLATED view of their own importance like you either! Like i said earlier, if you and your buddie eddie HAVE a brain, you need some serious manditory training as you sure don’t know how to use it and playing with it like you do just causes you trouble!!

  • ChuckL

    You folks are just looking at this all wrong. Obama isn’t trying to violate the Second Amendment. He is just trying to make the workplace safer for criminals.

    I hope you all understand SARCASM

    • 45caliber

      I believe we have a big need for a SARCASM font.

  • JeffH

    “Gun control” is never “criminal control” on any scale.

    • 45caliber

      It is on one scale. If you control your gun well enough to hit where you want to hit, you can control that criminal by insuring that he never robs or harms anyone else.

  • http://personalliberty.com RandyH

    There has to be a warming up period to get everybody ready for the upcoming vote to ratify the UN Small Arms Treaty, due for a vote in 2012. If we agree to more and more control we will reach a point where we say “oh well, whatever”, then we can be brits, aussies, canadians, south africans, or whatever surfdom you choose. America, or what’s left of her, is the only pseudo free country not under total control of the UN “leaders” (political or financial) and our gun ownership is the only thing keeping us that way. That’s why BO has to get a move on before his alloted time has run out. If’n he can’t pull it off his funding will be taken away and the next stooge in line (billary?) will try it. You think this little disagreement in Egypt is ungly? Just wait til the call comes to turn over our guns to the blue helmeted whores. Or I could be wrong and we will all be good little sheep and eat our “soilent green”.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      NEVER!!! If I’m trustworthy enough to carry a weapon FOR this country then I sure as hell am to carry one IN this country!!

  • mickey

    i think that a sanity test should be a requirement for a peron to run for public office, but then there would NOT BE ANY.

    • 45caliber

      The sane people are too busy trying to make a living to want to go to Washington.

    • Cawmun Cents

      PERON HELD OFFICE IN ARGENTINA…BUT WE DONT NEED PERONS HERE…HAW!

  • Bertha

    It really amazes me that people think gun control will nab every criminal. mentally ill person or anyone that shoots somebody or stop crime. Criinals, etc will always have guns and if someone wants to kill another person there are a multitude of ways to acomplish that.
    It isn’t normal people that commit crimes or go around shooting others. I do hope everyone will use at least some logic in their thinking!!! I agree we do need a test of some sort to check the morals and honesty of all elected people.

  • tracycolorado

    Slaves Dont Own Guns

    • TIME

      Tracy,

      BRAVO!

    • JC

      And that’s why they’re slaves.

  • http://com i41

    mickey, also politians must submit to drug tests every month, we have several doctors waiting for these over paid pukes to get a hang nail, put them to work. Every time some socialist puke complains about too many rounds, why the hell do they want a V8 or a V6. a 3hp lawnmower engine will get them from point A to B. 300 horses in a 1500# plastic match box car? In states everyoner should have a side arm at hand. Nuts might get one shot but chances he would get 3-4. Just too much feely meely crap from the bleeding hearts who let mental squirrels creater problems. Once the libs opened up the nut huts we have been havingmore problems all the time!

  • Cawmun Cents

    Apparently you havent found the same training videos that I have…which probably means you werent searching for them….but there are those who are training for just such a thing as you say doesnt exsist.But you are just one of those who wont believe…no matter how much proof there is.They could arreast you and torture you inthe name of socilaism and you’d think it was all just a figment of your imagination.There arent that many Democratic Socialists in our Congress.They have no power world-wide and dont want to have a world-wide socialist power structure….its just a dream….keep telling yourself that.

  • http://! Angel Wannabe

    Hey all, This is off thread, but a Florida Judge just deemed Obama’s Health care over “UNCONSTITUTIONAL”! link below

    http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20110131/US.Health.Overhaul/

    • http://! Angel Wannabe

      sorry_ I got excited, Florida judge just deemed Obama’s healthcare overhaul_ unconstitutional!

    • JeffH

      U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson in Richmond, Virginia, said yesterday that the mandate on individuals in President Barack Obama’s health-care legislation goes beyond Congress’s powers to regulate interstate commerce. Hudson severed the issue of the mandate, which is set to become effective in 2014, and didn’t address other provisions such as expanding Medicaid.

      “At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance — or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage — it’s about an individual’s right to choose to participate,” wrote Hudson, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2002.
      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-13/u-s-health-care-law-requirement-thrown-out-by-judge.html

      • http://?? Joe H.

        JeffH,
        another found that the mandate cannot be severed so the whole thing is unconstitutional!!

  • American Patriot

    Smart Americans will never give in to tyrants wanting to take away their guns. It will never be like the stupid British a few years back. Now look at them. the crime has gone through thee roof there. Smart/Brave Americans will never back down to the tyrants in the U.N. either. “NEVER” GOD BLESS AMERICA! Victory signs “V” going up all over the world against the tyrants of the new world order. check it out at INFOWARS.COM/PRISONPLANET.COM PEACE! My fellow American’s

  • John R. Harbison

    JeffH Your right on. There is a War going on south of my house in Old Mexico, with the unarmed citizens being murdered, raped and robed daily. You guys don’t here 1/10th of 1% of what goes on down there. They claim there has been 34,000 plus people killed in the last four years which is not even clost to the real number. They estamate 1.500 abanded cattle ranches joining Texas in the Tamp’s state.Including mine.Everone with monies to do so have left there land, cattle and equipment and come to the U.S. We are already getting a spill over here in south Texas. I have lived and made my living in Mexico for over fourty year and and sadden by whats happing to the good ones. Here in Texas on our little cattle ranch out in the sticks I fell a little better with or 30 round AR-15′s and 20 round AR-10′s with a couple or Kel-Tec PMR-30′s 30 round .22 mag.pistols plus all of the .45 autos and L.C. 45′s along with the 12 gauge shot guns. Even then with gard dogs and all You never know when evil can come. We have some Home invasions to clost to Home with in the last year. I foeget the deer rifles with scoops. I am not good with words but all I can say by what I see going on here in the good old U.S.is that I think You had better to prepair to defend Yourself’s
    Later, John

    • JeffH

      Thanks John for your input. You’re down there experiencing what the media really doesn’t want the people to know. Do what you have to do my brother and stay safe, as hard as that might be.

  • http://gunner689 gunner689

    Let BO and his clones pass all the illegal laws they want. We just won’t obey them. If they send their minions around to enforce the illegal laws; we’ll stack them up like cord wood.

    • American Patriot

      I can hardly wait to see what OL “Barry Soetoro” AKA Barrack Husein Obama-lama-ding-a-ling will try to pass. LOL

    • http://! Angel Wannabe

      gunner689. Kewl!_I could use and xtra cord! :)

      • http://gunner689 gunner689

        I hear they’re good to eat to, especially the back straps.

  • American Patriot

    END GAME! Historical warnings to American’s is about to happen. watch this. then decide for yourself what is what.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho&feature=related

    • Glenn

      AP….that End Game video is ( Wow) incredibly scary. I don’t think we have a chance if that is all real…..I guess all I can say is I will not be rounded up and forced to do anything ! I will stand, fight and die ..I just can’t believe my grandfather and many others fought and gave their lives for anything but this great country that I feel is no longer what it was ….Pres.Bush Jr. just said again for the second time something that I can’t believe should ever come out of a Presidents mouth from this country …..That ” Nationalism ” is something evil….I for one love this nation and always thought what and honor it would be to die protecting it ….Damn all the other nations I wouldn’t live any where else…..this is or maybe was the greatest Nation on earth…..if we lose it we are done! I won’t go without a fight. They keep preaching this anti violence mantra ….What kind of fool believes you can stand up to the likes of Hitler without shedding blood? We had to fight to create this Great Nation ….The United States of America !!

      • James

        Well said! Like Patrick Henry said: “Give me Liberty or give me death!”

  • G.B.

    Why does ANYONE need a freaking gun anyway? As Josh Sugarmann and Mike Bloomberg have known for decades, most people will just blow their own foot off with it, or shoot a family member, or get it taken from them and stuffed up their hiney by the attacker. What makes you think you’re better than a thug anyway? Most criminals and gangbangers are just really cool, street-smart, tough people (a lot of them are black, and black people are REALLY cool) they just have self esteem problems from childhood.
    I hope Obama pushes hard on gun control. I hope he repeals the second amendment (or at least changes the wording to “IN CONTEXT OF A WELL-REGULATED MILITIA…”)I hope he BANS ASSAULT GUNS. I hope he hires a million ATF agents to go door-to-door. I hope a lot of insane nazi assault gun owners end up in PRISON CAMPS where they belong! Why do you need a machine gun to kill a deer? Why do you need to hunt at all when you could just go to Arby’s? (As far as game management goes, REINTRODUCING WOLVES is a better way to manage deer than having crazy people running around with guns in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming ect.)
    OBAMA IN 2012!!!

  • Glenn

    G.B. That’s funny ! Your are probably the best imitators of a crazy, left leaning progressive loser I have ever had the privilege to read. “Men and women without firearms are defenseless subjects of their government, and at the mercy of an armed opponent. Men and women with firearms are not subjects, but citizens. Citizens who stand proudly and ably against any foe, foreign or domestic.”What is the definition of ” MILITIA” or better yet what was it our fore fathers meant when they used the word MILITIA ? You’ve got to understand what the militia is. In May of 1792, five months after the adoption of the 2nd Amendment, the Militia Act was passed. That act distinguished between the enrolled (or unorganized) militia and the organized militia. Before the passing of that act, there was only the enrolled (or unorganized) militia, which was the body of all able-bodied men between the ages of 17 and 44, inclusively, and it is that militia to which the 2nd Amendment refers. It couldn’t refer to the organized militia because it didn’t exist yet. The 2nd Amendment was to ensure that this body of citizens is armed and that’s why the Founding Fathers thought to place it in the Bill of Rights. Legally, both militias still exist. Read the Militia act. It will explain what the militia meant to the Founding Fathers. It will also show that the 2nd Amendment came before the Federal law that created the organized militia, and provide evidence that what they referred to as the enrolled militia—the body of citizens—were allowed to arm themselves. In fact, read this quote from the New Hampshire State Constitution written in 1784, 7 years BEFORE the adoption of the 2nd Amendment and the passing of the Militia Act: “Composition of the Militia – The Unorganized Militia shall consist of all able-bodied residents of the State who are 18 years of age or older, who are, or have declared their intention to become, citizens of the United States”.Thomas Jefferson: “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government”. And, “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms”. I guess I could go on and on , but why waste anymore time ? The evidence is clear. G.B. when your home watching your dancing with the stars or your two homos and a baby and the door knocks , I guess you’ll already have your bags packed , enjoy your freedoms while you still have them you Dunce……

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.