Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

The Gun Control Debate Continues

December 31, 2012 by  

The Gun Control Debate Continues

Last week, there was a huge amount of media coverage of the gun-control debate that has gripped the Nation in the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy. The emotionally charged national conversation has been chock full of harsh knee-jerk gun control proposals from the left.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announced recently that she will introduce legislation early in 2013 that will essentially criminalize millions of law-abiding American gun owners.

A summary of the legislation posted on the Senator’s website is as follows:

  • Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
    • 120 specifically-named firearms;
    • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
    • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
  • Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
    • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
    • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
    • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
  • Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
  • Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
    • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
    • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
    • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
    • Background check of owner and any transferee;
    • Type and serial number of the firearm;
    • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
    • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
    • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

Feinstein, who co-introduced the original assault weapons ban in 1994, is “going for broke” with her 2012 version, according to the National Rifle Association. The bill would classify three rifles that are decades old and extremely popular throughout the Nation as assault rifles: the M1 Carbine, a model of the Ruger Mini-14 and virtually any variation of the SKS.

The bill would ban any firearm with a fixed magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds (except for tubular-magazine .22s), threaded barrels on handguns and any semiautomatic, centerfire or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

The NRA points out that Feinstein’s bill would also open the possibility of government prosecution of firearm enthusiasts who don’t even break her harsh anti-2nd Amendment law:

Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.

The bill would not immediately lead to government confiscation of semi-automatics considered by her definition as assault weapons, but would require owners to register the firearms with the Federal government by submitting photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), informing the ATF of the address where the firearm will be kept and obtaining the ATF’s permission to transport the firearm across State lines. It would also impose a $200 per firearm tax.

In the end, however, Feinstein wants ultimate confiscation of any firearm she and other 2nd Amendment haters deem too dangerous for Americans. Owners of so-called assault rifles would not be permitted to pass them on to loved ones after death, the point at which the Federal government would confiscate the firearms.

Sam Rolley

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

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “The Gun Control Debate Continues”

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

  • Vicki
    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Vicki,”

      AFTER THIS PAST-WEEKEND’S GUN DISCUSSIONS, I WANT TO SAY, FIRST – I KNOW YOU LOVE GUNS. AS YOU MAY REMEMBER, I TOLD YOU MONTHS AGO YOUR INTEREST “CAUGHT MY EYE.” “Vicki,” THAT IS YOUR BUSINESS.

      BUT, IN REFERENCE TO ARMED SCHOOL-SECURITY, WOULD YOU AGREE Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) MADE A VALID POINT IN HIGHLIGHTING THE INEFFECTIVENESS OF THE Columbine Security?

      • http://personalliberydigest big wyo

        the columbine sheriffs deputy was out side the school eating lunch and never entered the school knowing there were active shooters inside the school shooting innocents. He did magage to distract the shooters from outside and most likely saved many lives.

        As far as the Wicked Witch of Gun Banning is Concerned she is wrong and lying around the truth to prop up her point. The old harpie has never had an original thought (most are Sarah Bradys’) and most likely never will. She has been trying to Ban Every Gun in America from the day Reagan was shot.
        She has to be in her 90′s isn’t she.

      • FreedomFighter

        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

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Lynn

        Obviously Christopher, you and Senator Feinstein have never been in a gun fight. Ineffective? If you are planning on mass-murder and I am shooting at you, you have to deal with me. That effectively interferes with your plans.

      • Bob

        Feinstein is actually a Nazi in disguise that should be tried for treason as should most of the rest of our politicians!

      • http://google gary gerke

        You do not take away the American’s citizens right to own and bear arms because of a few crazies! You people have no idea what the government is striving for, when it is to late, your last exclamation will be…WHAT HAPPENED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • eddie47d

        We know exactly what happened Gary Gerke . You allow anyone and everyone to own any kind of weapon they desire and then blame the other guy if they are used and abused. If you can’t reasonably control the distribution of certain weapons then we’ll let Feinstein have a shot at it. Maybe when the extreme gun owners take a little responsibility for what is going on then their toys may have to be taken away.

      • JC

        eddie you idiot! The only thing gun owners need to take responsibility for is their own conduct. Feinstein is a NAZI cow…so naturally you will follow her.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Lynn,”

        ABOUT TEN DAYS AGO, Personal Liberty Digest HAD AN ARTICLE ON A SIX-YEAR-OLD GIRL WHO WAS BANNED FROM SAYING, “god” IN SCHOOL ASSEMBLY. MANY Personal Libertarians THOUGHT BECAUSE THE CHILD HAD INNOCENTLY WRITTEN A POEM CONTAINING THE WORD, “god,” SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO RECITE THE POEM, DESPITE THE “LEGAL ELEPHANT” OF CHURCH/STATE DIVISION.

        SO, “Lynn,” SINCE RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES BELIEVE IN THE “INNOCENCE” OF CHILDREN IT IS LOGICAL THAT THESE SAME RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES WOULD BELIEVE CHILDREN WOULD EXHIBIT “INNOCENT PANIC” DURING A TIME OF CHAOS. HAVING ARMED SECURITY IN SCHOOLS WOULD – IN A CHAOTIC SITUATION – CREATE AN EXCHANGE OF RAPID- AND HAPHAZARD GUNFIRE. “INNOCENT” CHILDREN CAN NOT BE SECURELY CONTAINED IN THIS TYPE OF MELEE.

        GUN LOVERS DO NOT THINK ABOUT THAT.

      • ranger09

        Chris, I just love People that have to use the whole name , reminds me of Clinton. Oh back to the subject. What do you think would solve the problem, lets see TheArmed Police and the armed military cant protect us, And you do not want the people to protect themselves. What do you suggest. Should we become like Mexico, Or someother Country controlled by crooked Politicians and Criminals. Heck i almost forgot WE are almost there.

      • eddie47d

        Brilliant JC! Lowering your mind down another notch?

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “ranger09,”

        I AM NOT SAYING I HAVE THE ANSWERS.

        I DISAGREE WITH METAL DETECTORS IN SCHOOLS; A “BODY SEARCH” WOULD HAVE A TERRIBLE IMPACT ON THE PSYCHE OF NEGRO CHILDREN. ALTHOUGH IT IS INEVITABLE, NEGRO PARENTS TRY TO “SHEILD” THEIR CHILDREN FROM CAUCASIAN-RACIST EXPERIENCES FOR AS LONG AS, POSSIBLE. MOREOVER, HAVING POLICE “SQUAD CARS” STATIONED AT SCHOOL ENTRANCES – AS DONE, IN Memphis City Schools – FURTHER CAUSES THE NEGRO CHILD’S MIND TO “TAKE ON” A CRIMINAL PERSONA.

        GUN LOVERS “RAN WITH” A PROPOSAL SET FORTH BY National Rifle Association WHICH HAD NOT BEEN “CLEARLY THOUGHT THROUGH.”

      • Average Joe

        CAH,

        You write:
        “ABOUT TEN DAYS AGO, Personal Liberty Digest HAD AN ARTICLE ON A SIX-YEAR-OLD GIRL WHO WAS BANNED FROM SAYING, “god” IN SCHOOL ASSEMBLY. MANY Personal Libertarians THOUGHT BECAUSE THE CHILD HAD INNOCENTLY WRITTEN A POEM CONTAINING THE WORD, “god,” SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO RECITE THE POEM, DESPITE THE “LEGAL ELEPHANT” OF CHURCH/STATE DIVISION.”

        Which leagal elephant is that? Please, point out where in the Constitution,Declaration of Independence or Bill of Rights that you find this supposed elephant? I can’t seem to find it within any of the documents…pehaps you have a different version?…please enlighten us with your vast wealth of knowledge…. as to where this “CHURCH/STATE DIVISION”
        lies within those documents (hint: it doen’t exist)

        AJ

      • Vicki

        CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON says:
        “AFTER THIS PAST-WEEKEND’S GUN DISCUSSIONS, I WANT TO SAY, FIRST – I KNOW YOU LOVE GUNS.”

        I do not love guns. They are inanimate objects that I can use in the practice of martial arts.

        BUT, IN REFERENCE TO ARMED SCHOOL-SECURITY, WOULD YOU AGREE Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) MADE A VALID POINT IN HIGHLIGHTING THE INEFFECTIVENESS OF THE Columbine Security?”

        I do not see a link to her point so it would be hard to agree or disagree.

        If you are asking what I think of armed security and it’s effectiveness I would consider it an improvement over what seemed to be available at Sandy Hook. The problem with armed security at schools is what to do about shopping malls and theaters and the town square.

        Well our forefathers, being obviously smarter than Ms. Feinstein, cut to the chase and determined that the best security is to have everyone armed (if they chose to that is).

        This solves the problem of having to have “special” people guarding “special” places and thus leaving the rest of the town square open to un-resisted attack. And as a plus the solution provided armed security at ALL points of the town square and against all kinds of attackers. Individual, group, gang, government. Oops repetitive. Sorry. The keyboard did it.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “We know exactly what happened Gary Gerke . You allow anyone and everyone to own any kind of weapon they desire and then blame the other guy if they are used and abused.”

        The “other guy” we blame is the madman. Who did you want us to blame? 50 MILLION innocent people? How about we blame YOU?

        -eddie47d: “If you can’t reasonably control the distribution of certain weapons then we’ll let Feinstein have a shot at it.”

        How’s she doing in the reasonable control of the distribution of (some) drugs dept?

        -eddie47d: ” Maybe when the extreme gun owners take a little responsibility for what is going on then their toys may have to be taken away.”

        Evidence that eddie47d thinks that he is your parent and will take away your “toys” if you don’t do as he tells you. This would be the attitude of a (petty) tyrant.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Average Joe,”

        YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WANTS TO IMPLY THAT “I” BELIEVE The Constitution MANDATES A SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

        IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, American Atheists – UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF Madelyn Murray O’Hair [I used to be a dues-paying member] – WAS AT THE “FOREFRONT” OF A CAUSE [WHICH CAME TO LEGAL FRUITION] DEMANDING NON-CHRISTIAN CHILDREN HAD AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO BE FREE FROM EXPOSURE TO RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Vicki” – SORRY, FOR THE CONFUSION.

        AS PART OF HER COUNTER-RESPONSE TO NRA, Senator Feinstein PRESENTED DOCUMENTATION ON THE INEFFECTIVENESS OF ARMED GUARDS DURING THE Columbine Tragedy [AIRED ON C-SPAN; 21 DECEMBER].

      • Average Joe

        ““Average Joe,

        YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WANTS TO IMPLY THAT “I” BELIEVE The Constitution MANDATES A SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.”

        Does the right side of your brain have a clue about what the left side is doing? Your Comment: “DESPITE THE “LEGAL ELEPHANT” OF CHURCH/STATE DIVISION.”
        So, you deny that you posted this?…I think not… Open mouth…switch feet….

        “IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING”

        Excuse me, but I didn’t ask for “your understanding”, I specifically stated: “Please, point out where in the Constitution,Declaration of Independence or Bill of Rights that you find this supposed elephant? I can’t seem to find it within any of the documents…pehaps you have a different version?…please enlighten us with your vast wealth of knowledge”.

        You did nothing other than attempt to blow smoke up my backside…it didn’t work. I care not what your opinion is..I asked for specific info…which you failed to produce. Now, go back to blowing smoke up your own backside. Either bring what was requested…or admit that you haven’t got a clue and that you are simply spouting your opinion…and…. as I told eddie…your opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee in some places…this isn’t one of those places. So, either provide what I ask for…STHU…..

        AJ

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Average Joe,”

        YOU MISUNDERSTOOD MY COMMENTS.

        I WAS REFERRING TO THE COURT CASES FOLLOWING Ms. O’Hair’s EFFORTS. COURTS HAVE DECIDED CHILDREN MUST NOT BE FORCED TO DEAL WITH RELIGION IN SCHOOL.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Average Joe,”

        TRYING TO “HOLD PEOPLE’S FEET TO THE FIRE,” IN REFERENCE TO WHAT The Constitution DICTATES ON THIS ISSUE IS A REASON WHY RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES FAILED – NO P-R-A-Y-E-R IN SCHOOLS.

      • Average Joe

        CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON ,

        I didn’t misunderstand anything…More smoke?
        Maybe a reading comprehension course will help you?
        Two more posts…and you still haven’t provided what was ask of you…trouble following directions? (I’ll make a note of that,”Child does not follow directions”).

        Ramble on…….

        AJ

      • Vicki

        CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON says:
        “T IS MY UNDERSTANDING, American Atheists – UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF Madelyn Murray O’Hair [I used to be a dues-paying member] – WAS AT THE “FOREFRONT” OF A CAUSE [WHICH CAME TO LEGAL FRUITION] DEMANDING NON-CHRISTIAN CHILDREN HAD AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO BE FREE FROM EXPOSURE TO RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION”

        Interesting. So Christian children CAN be exposed to religious expression. Which religious expression do you think they had in mind? What if the non-Christian children wanted to pray 5 times a day to their god? Or celebrate Hanukkah or any of a number of religions who have ways of expressing it.

        “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

        So even if the non-christian children have the absolute right to be free from exposure to religious expression (even their own) there is no power delegated to Congress to pass a law to prohibit the free expression of religion. Bummer.

      • Vicki

        CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON says:
        December 31, 2012 at 6:15 pm

        “Vicki” – SORRY, FOR THE CONFUSION.

        AS PART OF HER COUNTER-RESPONSE TO NRA, Senator Feinstein PRESENTED DOCUMENTATION ON THE INEFFECTIVENESS OF ARMED GUARDS DURING THE Columbine Tragedy [AIRED ON C-SPAN; 21 DECEMBER].”

        And yet she started by claiming she would support armed guards in schools. I think there is a column right here on PLD about what that is called. D-is for Hypocrite.
        http://personalliberty.com/2012/12/29/d-is-for-hypocrite/

      • Vicki

        Or maybe its 2-faced. Similar expressions actually

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Average Joe,”

        I AM NOT A CHILD. SO, YOU DEFINITELY WILL RECEIVE NO COOPERATION FROM ME. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS DEPENDENT ON AN AFTERLIFE – NOT, ME.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Vicki,”

        YOU TWISTED MY WORDS.

        I PLACED FOCUS ON THE NON-CHRISTIAN CHILD BECAUSE Personal Libertarians ARE ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN CHILD. NICE TRY – YOU FAILED.

        ["Vicki," it was not my goal to upset you when I typed you love guns. As I told you before, when I began seeing your moniker in June/July, 99.9% of the time it was showcased in a gun thread].

      • Average Joe

        CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON,

        Once again, obsfucate and avoid the original assignment. yada yada yada……
        If that’s not childish, I don’t know what is.
        I could give a rats behind about your “beliefs” or lack of…
        You made a statement concerning the ““LEGAL ELEPHANT” OF CHURCH/STATE DIVISION” which you have steadfastly refused to back up with any evidence to support your claims that such division actually exists. You’ve danced a good jig…you’ve hawed and hollered…but you have failed miserably of addressing the issue at hand…please do so…and stop the incestant bantoring…… You have lost any semblance of credibility.

        AJ

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Average Joe,”

        IT IS NOT MY FAULT YOU ARE A DUMB-ASS. IF YOU COULD COMPREHEND, YOU WOULD KNOW, “LEGAL,” IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH, “Constitution.”

      • eddie47d

        Vickie: I’ve taken responsibility for what goes on for many years now and actively work for a positive change in policies. YOU on the other hand continue to repeat the same old mistakes that keep these incidents going. YOU need to stop pretending that YOU are not the other guy and “man up”! YOU know someone has to be the “parent” (your word) around here since it is obvious some of YOU keep repeating the same childish and arrogant behavior!

        • Frank Kahn

          Childish and arrogant? are you speaking of yourself eddie? is it possible for someone as bereft of adult comprehension, as you are, to realize just how childish and arrogant you are?

      • Average Joe

        CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “IT IS NOT MY FAULT YOU ARE A DUMB-ASS. IF YOU COULD COMPREHEND, YOU WOULD KNOW, “LEGAL,” IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH, “Constitution.””

        Once again you obsfucate..as well as “assume” too much.

        How the UCC 1-308 works.
        Compare that the constitution for the US establishes for the court’s jurisdiction at common law, equity and admiralty under article 3. As opposed to this, the Federal corporation establishes a similar jurisdiction except as principles under the Uniform commercial code. See…                      
                                                   UCC § 1-103. Supplementary General Principles of Law Applicable.
        Unless displaced by the particular provisions of this Act, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, Bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating cause shall supplement its provisions. 

        Anytime ya see law by itself as in the foregoing, it means the common law. Except that they are taking the common law jurisdiction from the contract the UCC. The remedy of course is UCC 1-308.  So the UCC is a deceptive criminal contractual constitution of sorts to those who uses it against us.  

        UCC 1-308 is the remedy for any legal process under commercial law in the U.S.

        UCC § 1-308. Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as “without prejudice,” “under protest,” or the like are sufficient. 

        Since the Federal Corporation is just that, a corporation. It has no jurisdiction except with those that contract with it. Also see Congressional act of 1871 and USC Title 28, Part VI, chapter 176, sub chapter 176, subsection A, 3002 (15) “United States” means—(A) a Federal corporation;

        The states illegally contracted with the federal corporation by passing the Uniform Commercial Code making themselves as well as the unsuspecting people subject to the Federal corporation and also to the states in their new commercial capacities. Therefore all of the laws (color of law) are contractual commercial laws and the remedy is UCC 1-308. The Uniform Commercial Code makes all crimes commercial only by contract as per 27 CFR 72.11. The problem is that you have to get into higher courts before they will recognize the remedy. The remedy however should legally and always be give without delay on demand or claim. This of course is the problem. The misdemeanor courts do not have a clue as to where their jurisdiction comes from and neither do magistrates. You have to get in front of a court with a real judge that tries felonies. The courts try to string ya along under duress of threat hoping that you can be scared into a plea. But they in the end have to honor the remedy. 

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Average Joe,”

        AFTER ALL OF THE DISCUSSIONS YOU AND I HAVE HAD, YOU SHOULD KNOW ME, BY NOW.

        IF I TYPE SOMETHING WHICH IS CONFUSING TO OTHERS, I IMMEDIATELY TYPE A CLEARER EXPLANATION. WHEN I FIRST TYPED, “LEGAL ELEPHANT, ” The Constitution [IN ITS PURE SENSE] WAS NOT ON MY MIND. AS AN ATHEIST, I WAS GIVING “KUDOS” TO American Atheists [AND, Madelyn Murray O'Hair] FOR CREATING AN ATMOSPHERE WHICH ALLOWED COURT CASES TO COME TO FRUITION AND PROTECT ATHEIST- AND AGNOSTIC CHILDREN FROM UNWANTED “Christ- TALK.”

        • Frank Kahn

          your use of the words LEGAL ELEPHANT was inappropriate. Biased and prejudiced bludgeoning of our right to free speech would have been more correct.

          I personally dont want to be forced to listen to people talking about being homosexuals, would you applaud an organization that forced the courts to stop that type of speaking? I believe that vegetarians are wrong to talk about how their lifestyle is healthier than mine. Would you support banning them from speaking out also?

          To give thanks to someone for taking away a vast majorities right to free speech is inappropriate. Hearing someone say the word Christ or God should not cause any undue hardship or provoke violence and cause personal injury. The fact that you, or anyone else, denies the existence of a supreme being does not give you the right to censure the words of those who do believe.

          And, I am a little slow reading and responding to your wild claims about blacks, but I want to insert some common sense and personal wisdom into one of your more outrageous remarks.

          You said that having a police presence at schools brings out the criminal actions of negro kids, WHAT THE F ARE YOU SAYING? Do you actually believe that the police cause blacks to be criminals simply by existing? I have followed your posts for many weeks and never entered the discussions when you were called a racist but NOW IS THE TIME TO DO SO. I DONT KNOW IF YOU REALLY ARE BLACK, I DONT KNOW IF YOU REALLY ARE A HOMOSEXUAL, I DONT KNOW IF YOU ARE RACIST AGAINST BLACKS OR WHITES. BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE STATEMENT I AM REFERENCING IS EXTREME RACISM. IF YOU ARE BLAMING WHITE MEN IN POLICE UNIFORMS FOR MAKING YOUNG BLACKS ACT LIKE CRIMINALS YOU ARE A RACIST AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE. IF YOU ARE SAYING THAT IT IS AN INBORN TRAIT OF BLACKS TO BECOME CRIMINALS TO OPPOSE WHITE PEOPLE YOU ARE RACIST AGAINST BLACKS.

          If, by some insane chance, you are correct, that having the police present at schools (where black kids attend) causes black students to act like criminals, then we need to lock up all the black kids right away to prevent their inherent criminal tendencies from endangering our society.

          Maybe, and I hope it is true, I have not understood what YOU MEANT TO SAY.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “eddie47d,”

        SIR, I HOPE YOU HAD A HAPPY YULE. HAPPY NEW YEAR AND THE ABSOLUTE BEST OF WISHES FOR 2013.

        “eddie47d,” SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CRITICISM OF, “Vicki.” I HAVE ALSO NOTICED [AND, PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED] THIS “TRAIT” OF, “Vicki.”

        I LIKE “Vicki,” AND SHE SEEMS TO BE A HIGHLY-INTELLIGENT “woman;” YET, SHE FEELS THREATENED BY OTHERS WHO PRESENT “WELL THOUGHT-OUT AND REASONED” COMMENTARY. SO, SHE PURPOSELY TWISTS OTHERS’ WORDS OUT OF SOME “THRILL-FACTOR.”

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Frank Kahn,”

        IF I HAD TO EXPLAIN EVERY WORD I TYPE, I WOULD SPEND THE MAJORITY OF MY TIME CONDUCTING A GRAMMAR LESSON.

        SO, “Mr. Kahn,” MAKE THE OPINION ABOUT MY COMMENTARY WHICH IS BEST FOR YOU.

        IN REFERENCE TO RACE, I ASSUME YOU BELIEVE ALL MEMBERS OF A RACE SHOULD ACT AND THINK ALIKE. SINCE MY ARRIVAL, I HAVE FORMED AN OPINION ON WHICH Personal Libertarians I THINK ARE NEGRO [AND, OTHER PEOPLE OF COLOR]. WHENEVER, THESE PEOPLE MAKE COMMENTARY, I HAVE NOTICED A Caucasian Personal Libertarian WILL IMMEDIATELY ATTACK THEIR VIEWS AND LABEL THEM, “LIBERAL.” SO, “Mr. Kahn,” IF MY COMMENTARY IS CAUSING DIFFICULTY IN YOUR
        N-E-E-D TO DETERMINE MY RACE, THAT IS NOT MY PROBLEM.

        • Frank Kahn

          My post was not about grammar, and my comment about not knowing your color had nothing to do with the point. I dont care if you are black or white, your comment that I was responding to was racist in one direction or the other. Your meaning might be clear, if it was clear then you believe that all black (negro) kids are criminals that just need the presence of the police to start acting their role.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Frank Kahn,”

        WELL, THAT MEANS YOUR PROBLEM IS AN INABILITY TO COMPREHEND AND AN IGNORANCE OF URBAN LIFE. OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW NOTHING OF COMMON PROBLEMS WITHIN INNER-CITY SCHOOL DISTRICTS. OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW NOTHING OF THE BEHAVIORAL PATTERNS OF NEGRO YOUTH.

        TO SAY THIS PLAINLY, “Mr. Kahn,” YOU STATED YOU HAD BEEN READING MY COMMENTARY FOR WEEKS. SO, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW YOU COULD “HAVE MISSED” THE FACT I AM BIASED AGAINST PEOPLE OF COLOR.

        “Mr. Kahn,” I THINK YOU ARE A CAUCASIAN MALE OVER SIXTY-FIVE. IF SOMEONE HAS INDICATED HE IS A FORTY-SIX-YEAR-OLD NEGRO MALE, IT IS BEST TO REMAIN SILENT IF THAT PERSON HAS TRIED TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU [TWICE]; YET, YOU STILL MISUNDERSTAND HIS MEANING.

        “Mr. Kahn,” IT IS NOT ONLY YOU; A COMMON PROBLEM ON THIS SITE IS THE MAJORITY POPULATION [CAUCASIAN SENIORS] NOT BEING ABLE TO UNDERSTAND COMMENTARY FROM THE “BELOW FIFTY CROWD” AND PEOPLE OF OTHER RACES.

        • Frank Kahn

          I am not over 65, and I understand the black mentality much better than you think.

          I dont give a crap about “inner-city” kids, that is just a lame excuse for criminal behavior.

          I have worked with, for and as a supervisor for blacks. I know the mentality that is pervasive amongst them that WE WHITE PEOPLE OWE THEM SOMETHING.

          I dont owe them a damn thing, I never owned slaves, I never discriminated against blacks and my ancestors never had slaves (black slaves).

          Not all blacks are bad, but the ones I served with in the military were worthless scum. They used their color to avoid doing what was required of the other troops. They THOUGHT they were better than everyone else because the LAW prevented you from punishing them the way you did the others. That is the true discrimination that is rampant in this country, give it to the poor blacks and latinos, they have suffered and deserve everything we can give them.

          Behavior patterns of black kids? You mean the rampant disrespect for authority? The fact that they have no good family structure? You mean that they blame whitey for all their problems?

          What is it that you THINK I am missing, compassion for the POOR BLACK BOY that uses hatred and violence to get his way?

          Take some advice from Dr. Cosby (you know the black comedian), when those N word start acting like human beings people will treat them as equals.

          The problem with black people is not the white people, it is the black peoples attitude. You want help, ask for it, dont demand it.

          You might also look into WHO causes the problem in the URBAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS, IT ISNT THE WHITE PEOPLE.

          And, as to your statement about you being a black 46 year old man, whoopy ding. Your opinion is no better than anyone else’s and telling me to be quiet because you dont like me pointing out your extreme racism is BS.

        • Frank Kahn

          ps. It is not our problem that you, younger people, dont understand the reality of NORMAL human interactions. And RACE is your problem not ours.

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Frank Kahn,”

        NOW, I KNOW – WITHOUT A DOUBT – YOU CAN NOT COMPREHEND.

        I HAVE NO OVERALL PROBLEM WITH YOUR COMMENTARY [4:30 PM]. I TOLD YOU I AM CRITICAL OF blacks – NOT, SYMPATHETIC TOWARDS THEM.

        “Mr. Kahn,” TO BE FRANK, I WISH YOU HAD TOLD ME YOU ARE OVER SIXTY-FIVE; YOUR COMMENTARY WOULD HAVE BEEN UNDERSTANDABLE. “Mr. Kahn,” YOU ARE “TALKING OUT-OF BOTH SIDES OF YOUR MOUTH.” ON ONE HAND YOU SAY YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH blacks; ON THE OTHER HAND YOU CALLED blacks WHO SERVED WITH YOU IN THE MILITARY, “worthless.”

        “Mr. Kahn,” YOU NEED TO LOOK IN THE MIRROR; YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS “RACE THANG” FIGURED-OUT.

        • Frank Kahn

          Age has nothing to do with knowledge, even a 20 year old could see the same as me.

          I did not speak out of both sides of my mouth, I dont consider the blacks in the military to be representative of all black people. Nor do I contend that all the non blacks were great people.

          The RACE THANG as you put it is a contrived situation where everyone wants to do something about something that does not exist as they perceive it.

          I actually was present when a black woman told a Russian friend that she owed her for the slavery of her ancestors. There are two very big problems with that statement: 1. The Russian woman immigrated 4 years before that and they did not have black slaves in Russia. 2. There is no available conclusive evidence that the black woman had ancestors who were actually slaves.

          What is needed in this country is for all sides of the RACIAL DEBATE to stop making ridiculous claims and discuss where the problems really are and identify the root causes.

          • http://yahoo.com Joann Flanagan

            Some of my ancestors were white indentured servants.
            How would the mass media react if my siblings,cousins and I were to picket Buckingham Palace or Number 10 Downing Street carrying a picket sign demanding compensation?
            How would they react if a Black American were to demand conpensation from the descendants of a slavetrading African King?
            How would they take it if a Black African were to demand compensation from an African royal family for the fact many African kings owned more slaves than the average American plantation owner?
            As Senaca pointed out “Trace any slaves’ bloodline far back enough you find a king;trace any kings’ bloodline far back enough you find a slave.”
            We’re all descendants of slaves and kings.
            Joann Flanagan

      • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

        “Frank Kahn,”

        I WOULD SAY THE NEGRO FEMALE WANTED MONEY FROM THE RUSSIAN FEMALE BECAUSE NEGROES BELIEVE CAUCASIANS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD PLAYED A DIRECT [OR, INDIRECT] ROLE IN THE SLAVE TRADE. THE VISUAL ABILITY OF NEGRO EYES TO SEE “white skin” MAKES ALL CAUCASIANS – ACCORDING TO THEM – GUILTY OF SOMETHING

        • Frank Kahn

          And, they also conveniently forget to acknowledge the fact that is was the BLACK leaders in AFRICA that sold them (their ancestors) into slavery.

          Also, it is a form of RACISM to blame all WHITE people for the actions of a few way back in history.

    • eddie47d

      Vickie; All your article proves is the proliferation of guns in America and you apparently love the combat scenario that is increasingly making citizens vulnerable. Really does highlight the pro gun culture in America and how we solve our problems with more guns and violence.The article didn’t state what type of weapon either person used and there may not have been any mass shooting. The cop also was authorized to carry a weapon and knew how to react in those kinds of situations. Far more interesting is the other story about how the police had to confront a man who pointed an AR-15 at them in Florida, (Examiner article). He also had other weapons with him which makes gun owners look dangerous and a threat to others. That would make a positive case for gun control! Its really unfortunate that one side encourages the tools for so much violence yet boasts of wanting more guns on the streets.

      • JUKEBOX

        eddie, no one said a word when Schumer brought an automatic weapon to the floor of the Senate, and waved it around, back a few years ago. I wonder when someone will have the guts to ask Feinstein what happened to the weapon she carried when she was an official in San Fransico.

      • ranger09

        Yes, We do want more guns on the streets, And we want them in the hands of Honest law abiding citizens so we can protect what is ours, heck we may even have to protect someone like you.

      • eddie47d

        So what! Was it loaded and ready to kill or strictly to show others what is being talked about.

      • Average Joe

        eddie47d,
        “America and you apparently love the combat scenario that is increasingly making citizens vulnerable.”

        You do realize of course…that the only people that are vulnerable…are twits like yourself who refuse to arm and protect yourselves. While folks like you lie dying on the ground, waiting for a police officer to come save you…the rest of us will feel quite safe knowing that we have a much higher chance of surviving an encounter with bad people than you do. BTW, if you are ever in one of those situations, be sure to let the bad guys know that there are laws against them carrying firearms…and that you wish to make a citizen’s arrest…I’m sure that they will be understanding and go along peacefully…..
        Bob was right, your comments really do get more ridiculous with each new comment….

        The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes; the response time of a .357 magnum is 1400 feet per second.

        Cops carry guns to protect themselves, not you.

        Arm and protect yourself…or don’t…that is entirely up to you. However…you also get to deal with the consequences of that decision….you can choose to be a victim and a statisic if that’s what you want.
        As for me, I choose not to be a victim.
        (please don’t respond, you have no credibility to spare)

        AJ

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Vickie; All your article proves is the proliferation of guns in America and you apparently love the combat scenario that is increasingly making citizens vulnerable.”

        The article is evidence that an armed law abiding citizen can, will, and has stopped mass murder. It is a direct counter to your argument (in other threads) that armed citizens can’t stop mass murderers.

        No other logical conclusion can be drawn from it and the conclusions you tried to draw says much more about you then about America.

        -eddie47d tries to hide from the proof by saying: “The article didn’t state what type of weapon either person used…”

        The article didn’t say cause it wasn’t relevant. Or maybe it couldn’t be used to further the hysteria about “assault weapons” :) )

        -eddie47d: “…and there may not have been any mass shooting.”

        Eddie doubts the police report? From the article “Before Garcia could enter the theater, where police say he was planning to gun down patrons, he was shot four times ” Oops. Darn. Someone with a gun dared to interfere with Gardcia’s grand plan.

      • eddie47d

        Wake Up Average Joe! I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again for your benefit so you will shut up and stop repeating lies. I SUPPORT the Second Amendment,gun ownership,the protection of ones home and property and even the killing of an intruder. You don’t know what I own and don’t own so don’t make an assumption about me you know nothing about. So enough of your I won’t protect my family and your police response time drivel in relationship to what I would or wouldn’t do! Apparently you are the one without any “credibility”!

        • Frank Kahn

          The second amendment is about protection our rights from an oppressive government not against intruders to our homes.

      • eddie47d

        Vickie: “Never said that “armed citizens can’t stop a mass murderer”. Where do you come up with this stuff? I have said that an armed person could cause more carnage if a shoot out happened and I used the NY police shooting as an example. Apparently you are twisting things a bit so good day and HAPPY NEW YEAR!

    • Bobby G

      What is being sold to the Ignorant, is that self defense should be only in the hands of The Socialist Communist. We see how that went so well to the Chinese, Russian and all Countries that gave up the right to self defense. The Government is only interested in keeping their opinion, to be the only one that is allowed to be heard. And they know that it can only happen if you disarm and destroy Religion (with Gostopo tax). This Government is ruling by directives not by laws, this individual in the White House is the most Anti American that has ever set foot on our Country.

      • Fieldmaster

        You Are roght

      • moonbeam

        Here’s what I can’t wait for. Those who love this present illegal and corrupt administration are going to get the shock of their lives when they get their first pay checks of 2013. The Social Security checks will be cut some time after that.

        What’s that I hear? People bitching about all the new taxes that came out of their checks and now they can’t pay their bills?

        Also I heard a little buzz about tax refund checks…there might not be any. So, while BO gave politicians (congress, Biden, etc) a raise they don’t deserve, the people’s paychecks next year may be somewhat short and you might not get a tax refund. Your taxers are going up. You know, due to the intentionally orchestrated fiscal cliff hanger and all.

        Yep, that’s what I can’t wait for. We’ll see how much they luv BO then.

        And for those think it outrageous that law abiding citizens own guns, to you I say: None are so blind as those who refuse to see. Criminals around every corner with guns, but to stop THEIR madness you’ll take guns from responsible law abiding citizen gun owners? Real smart. Did you go to college to learn that?

        There should be an arsenal in every household. But then it makes perfect sense to me to disarm the good guys and let the bad guys keep theirs. Nobody is going to take the bad guys’ guns. They’re waiting for stupid asses to turn theirs in.

      • Average Joe

        moonbeam,

        “Real smart. Did you go to college to learn that?”

        The sad reality is… many of them did just that….

        They’ve been pampered from cradle grave ( everyone’s a winner mentality)…and are afraid of their own shadows.
        Liberals have a need to be victims…and they constantly need to have new “monsters” to villify. If they don’t understand something…it must be irradicated, post haste….
        Facts? Who the heck needs those?…Common sense and rational thought , be damned!

        AJ

      • eddie47d

        Average Joe can’t comprehend that Conservatives have their share of “victims” .Blame Obama even when he wasn’t envolved, blame gays for taking away your religious rights (bull crap), blame Liberals for taking away your free speech (bull crap), some Conservatives actually believe that Obama started the Iraq War, etc. The blame game is alive and well in both camps but some of us know that and some are just to ignorant to realize it!

    • sunshine

      All gun owners in her state should start a recall campaign and get her out of office. She is one nasty old bitch who is corrupt with her position and power.

      • cawmun cents

        Apparently…you do not realize how hypnotized the citizens of Caliph-own-ya are.
        Otherwise you would not have made such an obviously flawed statement.
        I live in Caliph-own-ya…so I am qualified to tell you…haw!
        Cheers!
        -CC.

      • Bill

        lets face it this senator is a traitor. When she took office she took an oath to uphold the constitution . The second amendment clearly states “……shall not be infringed.” plain and simple. What part of “shall not” does she not understand. Her not keeping the oath that she took when she entered government service is very evident and plain. She is a traitor and ought to be thrown out of office, put on a boat to China and spend her last days eating rice instead of eating at the public expense. There are a lot of things I don’t like but that does not give me the power to prohibit you from liking something. I don’t like what she is saying to the public but under the first amendment she can say what ever she wants to. Her words are doing more harm to us as a nation than any individual protection devices that a citizen might have to defend them selves of their family. You can/t destroy a nation with a gun in the hands of citizens but you can destroy a nation with the words of an idiot.

      • http://BookPrintPublishing.com Charles D. Richardson

        Agree with Sunshine but suggest everyone go back and reread FreedomFighters entry. Our founding fathers had been there, done that. They have duly warned us to keep alert unless our own government obtains complete control over us. The only reason the current government does not attempt a takeover is our weapons. Once they’re gone, we, the ordinary workers are history. Believe it couldn’t possibly happen here? It could and if the Feinsteins, Hussein and others have their way, it will. DON’T VOLUNTAIRLY GIVE UP YOUR GUNS TO ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.
        Texas has the right idea on protecting school children. They have a program currently in use in which selected teachers are screened, trained and carry weapons in school. This program has been in use since 2008 without any incidences. Parents love it. Obviously many Americans are concerned about our government destroying the 2nd amendment because it is hard to purchase a gun at most dealerships. They’re sold out !!
        Happy new year !!!
        Charlie Dog

      • eddie47d

        Sorry Bill the “traitors” are the ones who allow these multiple magazine clips to proliferate within our society. They are freedom killers not freedom savers!

      • Bill

        Right on, Sunshine

      • Bill

        There are two Bills here,
        I am glad we agree. Hi Bill, what’s up

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

      Hey D. Feinstein, does that mean you give up your concealled carry permit? Stupid is as stupid does and she is a real nut case.

      • eddie47d

        Why should she if she can prove she needs it? The same goes for you!

      • ranger09

        And just think She gets Paid by us, Amazing what we pay them for, Maybe if she spent her time working on all the waste in calif govt. She might even do some good. OPS sorry its politicians like her that are responsible for this problem. And again we pay her a lot of money and perks to do what she does.

    • http://yahoo stev

      i believe the any kid getting ahold of their parents weapon is child endangerment on the side of a parent. it has nothing to do with what kind of gun. but putting more money in the hands of a government that has a proven track record for unjust spending, of taxes that were never intended for the purpose its being used for, and disarming a nation only opens the door for another genicide.

    • Timothy Shafer

      I disagree on her on this banning. It’s funny in a way. It took the shooting of innocent kids at a school for them to do this, but what you people don’t realize is that the president and staff are giving guns to the mexican drug cartels. Innocent kids in Mexico were killed almost the same time as those 16 kids and adults. Buying guns is our write for protection and for hunting. Grant it, the store owners should do more in doing a thorough background check on people buying. But i as a vet from the army who has worked in law enforcement and now protects military bases. I for one will keep my gun since the government lets convicts and mentally insane acquire guns easier than normal people who are just trying to protect themselves. As far as protecting our schools, yes they should have armed officers/guards there as well as metal detectors to prevent this from happening again. In banning our weapons, it is not going to happen and the people will not give up there guns. We all believe in the 2nd Amendmant and no one is allowed to change that. It’s the constitution and our rights as Americans. To change that and there may be a war here and not overseas. I for one don’t want to see that happen.

  • Nunyer Binnis

    How about hang the whole obama administration for TREASON from the top down.

    • Chocopot

      SInce they ARE all guilty of treason, I second that motion.

  • Jamie

    Vote Her OUT ‘and anyone Else who’s Ideas are same as soon as Possible
    the Gov. Military will kill Us all later on ,if these become Gov overlords laws.

    • chuck

      WE can’t vote them out, they now count ALL of the votes, The Communists have taken over, almost completely. They only need the guns! They are already arming the muslims and training them. Next the UN armies arrive…to augment those already here.

      • Warrior

        I wonder if we call ourselves “freedom for democracy fighters” or “drug cartel”, would the doj or state dept run some guns our way? Seems to work elsewhere!

      • posttime

        You said it chuck. Notice too, how they never mention the millions of illegal guns in the inner-cities. They’ve been given the “green light.” These gangstas will be coming in through our windows.

    • eddie47d

      Chuck: Maybe there are decent people in this world who want to put an end to your fetish with weapons of mass killings. Maybe thre are people who are tired of burying their kids because of thrill seekers who can’t control their testosterone’s and glorify gun carnage. Oh yes we can blame Hollywood,we can blame video games,we can also blame the easy access to every type of weapon imaginable. The market is already flooded with all those triggers to set people off and all the fools clamour for more.

      • http://personalliberty.com Texas

        eddie47d, how about addressing this problem from where it starts, in the home! I must have been around 8 yrs old when my father started breaking me in on handling and proper shooting of guns. However, I would never touch those guns without his permission. That would mean a trip out behind the barn and another introduction to a paddle he kept hanging on the wall. These kids, or grown ups could not have been raised correctly, or may have mental conditions, which means no contact with guns at all and be under professional care. Many bad things happening today other than guns can be traced back to the home.

        • Motov

          You are so right,… Whatever happened to spanking? It went the way of “Spocking”
          Proverbs (That wonderful section of wisdom in the bible) teaches us how to raise children.
          Then some people got a bug up their arse and said we cannot discipline our kids by spanking any more, oh and protect their “fragile self esteem” treat then like adults?… Then we wonder why the crap just gets worse.
          Kids grow up without real consequences to their actions, so you gotta expect more disrespect, less striving of personal excellence, and not thinking before they act.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Chuck: Maybe there are decent people in this world who want to put an end to your fetish with weapons of mass killings.”

        Which weapon would that be? Fire? knife? blunt object? Never occurred to you that they might be used in 1/3 of the mass killings? No surprise there. And as a bonus, when guns were used guess what type was the number one, by far, choice for mass killings?

        A. handgun
        B. rifle
        C. scary looking rifle.
        D. none of the above.

        http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/18/mass-killings-common/1778303/

        Guess which one(s) Ms Feinstein wants to ban.
        A. handgun
        B. rifle
        C. scary looking rifle.
        D. All of the above.

        -eddie47d: “Maybe thre are people who are tired of burying their kids because of thrill seekers who can’t control their testosterone’s and glorify gun carnage.”

        Ah so you DO understand that MSM going on and on about Sandy Hook is the problem. There’s hope for you yet.

      • Rod

        Eddie, I normally do not butt heads with liberals, I can’t stand on my head so our heads will be on the same level. I am a disabled VietNam vet and ex state correctional officer. I raised five children and I would take each to to the gun range when they were eight. I taught them the safe handling of firearms and how to shoot them. I also used training aids. I put up targets of people and some I would place a watermelons and behind others I would put full jugs of red koolaid. When they shot the targets the watermelons or jugs of liquid would explode. I would tell them that that is would happen if they were shoot one of their friends. I showed them that guns are dangerous but sometimes they must be used to protect lives.
        The three laws of safe gun handling are All Guns Are Loaded (there is no such thing as an empty gun, if guns are loaded there would never be an accident because someone thought the gun was empty.) Never point a gun at anything you are willing to destroy. Never put your finger inside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot. Now all my kids have kids of their own and although only two own guns, they have brought the grandkids to Grandpa to take them to the range to teach them gun safety. After the kids became adults they all told me at different times that although they didn’t always obey my rules when I was not home not one would have touched my guns without my permission nor would they allowed any of their friends to know where my guns where. I could have left my guns on the kitchen table and none would have been touched by anyone but me. Guns are a tool just like anything else they can be used for good or bad. A few years ago a nut went into an elementary school and killed twenty five kids with a butcher knife. A copy cat did the same in Japan a couple months later. Here on the left coast a nut drove his car onto a elementary school playground and ran over a number of children. Chicago with some of the strongest gun laws in the country averages 200 murders a year. Vermont which has had constitutional cary of firearms since it has had a constitution averages seven murders a year and most of those were from knives and clubs (FBI numbers) I know this will not affect your guanaphobia but guns save more lives each year than they take them them at a rate of about 10,000,0000,000 to one. Try to give the truth a chance.
        Please try to understand that although I can not stand your liberal views I do not hate you.

      • Bill

        Blah Blah Blah, eddie
        Where do you get off trying to take away my rights to defend myself from all of the deadbeats that you defend. Mind your own damn business and stay out of my life

      • eddie47d

        Was that another one of your tantrums Vickie? Keep mocking and enjoy the carnage sweetie!

      • eddie47d

        Bill: Keep your multiple killing weapons off the streets and stop interfering with the lives of those being killed!

        • Frank Kahn

          Hey, eddie47d, are those the guns you so ignorantly claim are always bought to kill people with? I need to recheck my mental state when I bought my guns, dont remember saying, hmmm wonder how many people I can kill with this one.

    • roger

      voting her out isn’t an option. the free-[expletive deleted]-army of gibmedats, that makes up most of her constituency, won’t kill the goose that keeps laying those golden eggs. why do you think she’s been there this long? hmm?

      • Walt

        Surely, there must be some way to rid ourselves of this meddling politician?

      • Bob w

        We must determine if she is intentionally harming the security of our country,then criminal charges of treason can be brought…..also,taking/swearing an oath to defend our constitution , then trying to gut the constitution could be considered perjury as a minimum ..

      • eddie47d

        Yes Bob it has to be proven. If its the governments job to protect its citizens then reasonable gun control would fall into that category thus it wouldn’t be treason or even perjury.

      • moonbeam

        There is a way, Walt. It’s called revolution. There’s no way we should be putting up with the BS that’s coming out of Washington. If we stand with the Constitution then we shouldn’t be afraid to use it.

      • Average Joe

        eddie47d,

        “If its the governments job to protect its citizens then reasonable gun control would fall into that category thus it wouldn’t be treason or even perjury.”

        Who told you that is was the governments job to protect us? Yes, they are supposed to defend us against foreign invaders ( and the aren’t doing such a good job at that, as evidenced by our borders)….and nothing more.
        Dang eddie, I guess you need the government to spritz your boo-boo for you? Maybe you need them to hold your hand while crossing the street ?…What a whiny, worthless excuse for a human being you are,you can’t do anything for yourself…you need your nanny….so sad. Sorry eddie, you’ll have to learn how to change your own diaper…..

      • eddie47d

        Average Joe: Its the governments job to repel a foreign invader. That is why we have a huge defense budget and pay taxes. You can continue with the name calling all you want big boy . The government can also set reasonable laws to keep Americans from killing other Americans or are you one of those vigilante justice types?

        • Frank Kahn

          The word REASONABLE is in question when you use it. None of your suggestions falls into the category of reason when viewed by a rational non paranoid individual.

    • http://personalliberty.com Sheldon

      Just a way to make law abiding citizens criminals. Then as criminals we cannot expect them to be law abiding citizens. WW 3 starts as a civil war.

      • ranger09

        Sheldon, Dont you know with all the laws they have written, That all Americans are criminals now its only when they want to come after you I remember my time with the Govt. Then i got wise and Left because i was never taught to do the things they do. The Govt has a rule you can arrest any citizen and Jail BUT there are people that you will not arrest.and prosecute. I tried but all ended up in file 13.

    • ranger09

      Jamie, Not going to happen, People do not control the Politicians, The Politicians control the People. And when all the Protection we have is gone(Guns) Then we become the sheep 100% just following the Bell. The people no longer have the will to resist all we do is Talk,and Talk.
      The illegal people in this Country Protest more than the Legal Americans.

      • moonbeam

        “The illegal people in this Country Protest more than the Legal Americans.”

        Now, you’ve hit on some real truth there, ranger09. Have you seen them marching in the streets holding signs “DEMANDING” their freaking rights in a country they are illegally residing in? We’ve got illegals here from all over the world and they want their rights!

        They have the right to get the FUQ outta here.

      • posttime

        Of course. That’s the way communism operates.

  • http://Old Mark

    Of all the studies that are done relating to guns, why hasn’t anyone done a study on how often a legally purchased, legally registered gun was used in the commission of a crime by the legal owner? My suspicions, of course, are very few. Passing stricter gun laws to reduce violent crime is akin to passing stricter drug laws to reduce the use of illicit drugs.

    • eddie47d

      James Holmes was a legal gun owner and he bought a wide variety of guns and ammunition without any problem.So that brings us right back to the easy access of all weapons. So possibly those legally registered owners aren’t doing enough to to keep weapons out of the hands of the wrong people. That makes them part of the problem too!

    • Bob

      Criminals and the government will always have guns. Hard to tell at this point if there’s a difference between a criminal and a government official?

      • http://HOME Hobert Davis

        VERY WELL SAID BOB.

      • Fieldmaster

        SO TRue SO TRUE

      • eddie47d

        How quaint! Since there are at least 90 million gun owners in the US and 180 million guns then apparently they have the criminals and “government ” outgunned by a wide margin. Since there are less than 2 million in our military services who have guns I think You are way ahead of your game of numbers. Gun owners have driven their capabilities into a fantasy of fear and its getting worse by the day.

      • ranger09

        The Govt. Or the Powers to Be have a Rule for Govt Employees CONFORM to our rules or you are Out, So you can better understand the People that have Govt jobs.And the major concerns are the many different types of Police Units they have, Plus the Military. All conforming to their Rules.

    • Reloader

      We had a gun law here in Canada and we voted it gone. Since its inception, not one registered gun was found to be involved with any crime. The process cost us unknown millions of dollars and it did not save even one life. My good neighbors to the south, do not let idiots in power take your guns away, vote them out.

      • posttime

        FACTS mean NOTHING to gun grabbers, Reloader. These programmed liberal nitwits won’t understand until inner-city gangstas are coming in through their windows. THEN they’ll finally “get it.” I forgot t mention government thugs who kick down doors at 4 am. They don’t need windows.

      • Bill

        Thank you for that advice, Reloader
        The problem is that we have idiots like Eddie, Robert Smith, Flashy and Right brain thinker who are brain washed by the socialists and are just mind numbed robots.

  • http://exodus-consulting.com Thomas

    Tough talk from our “leaders” who themselves travel around with armed guards. Feinstein in particular has a long reputation of packing heat for her own defense, but would deny that same right to you and yours.

    • eddie47d

      Feinstein doesn’t carry around a Bushmaster or an AR-15 so your comment is ridiculous. How many people have actually tried to kill you? Are you really sure you don’t have a right to defend yourself with a handgun? At least in your home. Please be honest! There are hundreds of officials who are targets of public assassinations so it doesn’t matter if you or others want Feinstein dead. Their need is an absolute neccessity to keep chaos from taking over. That is why we have the ballot box to change our leaders for assassinations seldom solve a nations problems. There are 30 attempts on Obama’s life every single day (some are just angry E-Mails) but some are physical in nature also. Are we a better country because Kennedy was shot or Reagan or possibly Ford? They have a greater need for protection on a daily basis because of the threats coming from the Left and the Right. Over the years I have seen both sides pushing for Revolution and all too often they are fired up by angry rhetoric and are willing to kill if the moment presents itself.

      • momo

        eddie47d says: “There are 30 attempts on Obama’s life every single day (some are just angry E-Mails) but some are physical in nature also”

        Really eddie, 30 attempts on Obama’s life every day? You whack job, go take your meds. How about, maybe 30 THREATS? There’s a nig difference between a threat and an attempt.

        • Motov

          I think that number is much higher than 30 IMHO,….
          I also think many of us would love to see this clown i a maximum security cell with “Bubbah” who hasn’t been with another for quite a long time,..
          Just so “Bubbah” can do to this clown what he’s been doing to US

      • eddie47d

        I can’t help if you get upset with facts MOMO so maybe you should be put on meds to calm your ignorance. Although all Presidents have had threats made against them the attempts against Obama has increased 400% since 2008. The largest plot was hatched in Tennessee by white supremacists. Since you are so touchy about exposing such things maybe you are one of them!

      • Bill

        Eddie, clearly you write from an assumption mentality. lets see the facts. Your rights to free speech permit you to lie, but we have the right to question everything you say.

      • eddie47d

        I was responding to MOMO’s “assumption” mentality. Works both ways pal.

      • Average Joe

        eddie47d,
        “I can’t help if you get upset with facts MOMO ”

        You wouldn’t know a fact…if it bit you on the arse. The only thing you bring to the table is your personal opinion…and a bad attitude.
        You opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee in some places…this isn’t one of those places…..

        AJ

      • JC

        eddie47d says:
        December 31, 2012 at 8:38 am
        Feinstein doesn’t carry around a Bushmaster or an AR-15 so your comment is ridiculous. How many people have actually tried to kill you? Are you really sure you don’t have a right to defend yourself with a handgun?
        ____________________________________________________________________

        I have a right and a duty to defend myself and my nation with any firearm I can “Keep and bear” meaning physically carry. That includes AR 15′s and AK 47′s.
        Which doesn’t seem like enough considering the firepower the (anti American) authorities have, but I’m a law abiding citizen so I have to accept that there are limits. ;-)

      • Vicki

        JC writes:
        “I have a right and a duty to defend myself and my nation with any firearm I can “Keep and bear” meaning physically carry. That includes AR 15′s and AK 47′s.
        Which doesn’t seem like enough considering the firepower the (anti American) authorities have, but I’m a law abiding citizen so I have to accept that there are limits. ”

        What firepower do the authorities have that you can’t have? Looking at the law (The SUPREME LAW of the land) I don’t see a limit on what arms you can keep and bear. Judging from the writings of the founders it is clear that they wanted you to be able to keep and bear every terrible implement of the soldier.

      • momo

        eddie47d says:”I can’t help if you get upset with facts MOMO so maybe you should be put on meds to calm your ignorance. Although all Presidents have had threats made against them the attempts against Obama has increased 400% since 2008. The largest plot was hatched in Tennessee by white supremacists. Since you are so touchy about exposing such things maybe you are one of them!”

        What facts? You pathetic fool, do you know the difference between a threat and an attempt? Come back when you have an answer, or are done filling out petitions, whichever happens first.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        ”I can’t help if you get upset with facts MOMO so maybe you should be put on meds to calm your ignorance. ”

        That you think that meds calm ignorance tells us much about your knowledge.

      • JC

        Hey Vicki, I guess I’m using an old court ruling on what the word “bear” means.
        Something that can be carried is what I’m lead to believe.

        I could be wrong, but I’m at an age where I might have a little trouble “bearing” an F-16! LOL

        Keep fighting the good fight.

      • eddie47d

        Once again Average Joe and I have told you this before. I look up the facts before posting so that information is there for all to see. If all you can come up with is a snippy put down then I’ll just label you as another ignorant Conservative with nothing of value to say. If you can prove me wrong have at it so take the time and look up those 30 attempts and show me differently!

        • Frank Kahn

          Please provide us with documentation concerning ATTEMPTS as opposed to THREATS.

      • eddie47d

        You sound like a dangerous citizen half the time JC . Always half cocked and ready to rumble and seldom level headed! At least you do admit there are limits and that is a good start.

      • JC

        eddie47d says:

        January 1, 2013 at 10:38 am

        You sound like a dangerous citizen half the time JC . Always half cocked and ready to rumble and seldom level headed! At least you do admit there are limits and that is a good start.
        _______________________________________________________________________

        Really eddie? In what way?
        The only thing I’m dangerous to is criminals intent on doing me or my family harm.
        The rest is, like the bats and moonbeams…all in your head….

    • Chocopot

      Yes, that is correct. She is a fascist who considers herself above the law; laws are only for peasants like you and me, not for ‘special’ people like her. Like a typical left-wing hypocrite, she has a concelaed carry permit but will do her best to ensure you do not. Chuckie Schumer, who never met a gun control law he didn’t like, is another left-wing hypocrite with a concealed carry permit – in NYS, where it is easier to get hit by lightning three times in one day that get a concealed carry permit unless you are a politician, judge, or celebrity.

      • eddie47d

        Not all revolutionaries are Freedom Fighters and some gun owners are nothing more than armed and dangerous to the Freedoms of others. How many people have tried to kill or assassinate you Chocopot?

      • Chocopot

        Eddie -

        Walking around any major city in this country each and every day is far more dangerous than anything Comrade Feinstein is ever forced to do. Any average urban citizen in this country is in far greater need of the CC permit than Madame Feinstein is.

      • last of the Jedi

        Throw their asses in jail.Evil triumphs because good people do nothing.Its not we the People,Its we three people Obama,feinstein,and reid!

      • eddie47d

        Chocopot: I live in a large city and have never been threatened with a gun or any other type weapon. If you truly feel threatened by something then feel free to get a CC permit. Now once again who has attempted to kill you?

      • ranger09

        The govt can say anything it wants, The Media prints what the Govt tells them, The Govt can make a criminal out of any Honest American, The Police and Military will believe anything the govt tells them to believe, Anyway what this means is our Police and Military are not our Protectors. They serve at the will of the Powers to Be. And even if every American was armed, They cannot match the fire power the Govt has. SO in case of a civil war the govt would use all the power it has againest the American People. One hell of a lot of dead Americans. But some Americans will not make it to easy for them. As history will show as in Afganistan, Iraq and Remember Viet Nam. Its pretty hard to defeat ave citizens with a means to fight even againest the most powerful govt in the world.

      • Vicki

        eddie47d says:
        “Not all revolutionaries are Freedom Fighters and some gun owners are nothing more than armed and dangerous to the Freedoms of others.”

        Not all governments protect a free people and some government agents are nothing more than armed and dangerous to the freedoms of their own people (poor sentence construction.).

        Did you have a point eddie?

        eddie47d: “How..”
        Irrelevant comment ignored.

      • eddie47d

        There are plenty of spelling police and now Ms Vickie is a sentence police. LOL! Will you now correct all the Conservative commenter’s who jumble up a sentence? LOL!! I highly doubt that so can you see the bird!

  • Z Legras

    Those are half-measures, the only solution is to amend the constitution for good, make insurances mandatory for every gun owner (like for cars) and put sufficient controls in place.

    The other option is to let things as they are. Given that the chances a purchased gun will kill its owner or a member of his family are higher than killing any anyone else, it is just a matter of darwinian patience that the problem clears itself. But examples in 3rd world countries show that the cost in terms of innocent lost lives is very high…

    • Chocopot

      You’re an idiot, spouting more left-wing lies and nonsense. The actual incidence of legal gun owners harming themselves or anyone else by accident is so miniscule as to be almost unmeasurable (http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#accidents – check the section on accidents, keeping in mind there are about 100 million gun owners in the country).

      • eddie47d

        Chocopot is good at name calling and is a devious little devil himself. Should I say you are spreading right wing lies to counteract your comment? There are multiple millions of car owners too but that doesn’t mean we don’t have numerous laws in controlling the behavior of the driver. Driving at 90 miles per hour can kill a few more people if there is an accident just like owning a semi-automatic can kill far more people once the trigger is pulled. Thus we need far more controls on semi-automatics to lessen the damage to others. The damage inflicted by safe car owners is minuscule also yet they still have laws to keep others safe.

      • Chocopot

        Eddie -

        You really are an idiot. There are more than 22,000 federal, state, and local laws controlling firearm purchase and ownership in this country. Firearms are the most regulated and restricted consumer product in this country – by far. Isn’t 22,000 enough laws already? And since those laws apply only to the law-abiding citizen and not to the criminal, what is the point of adding more laws and restrictions?

      • eddie47d

        Those 22 thousand are spread out helter skelter throughout all 50 states. Yes that is a problem with little coherency. Which means maybe its time for strong national laws instead of all these little annoying laws.

      • Bill

        Chocopot,
        You are right, Eddie is an idiot. We need more guns and gun classes in all schools. The eddies of this world be damned.

        • Rod

          When the NRA suggested putting armed guards at schools the liberals started foaming at the mouth about money and fear that the guards would be more dangerous to the children than some nut off the street. (Liberals always believe that they are the only people who can be trusted themselves or their guards, because every liberal knows the the masses are walking time bombs especially ex military, PTSD don’t you know…) I am a disabled combat VietNam vet and ex correctional officer, if the state would buy me a H and K mp5 nine mill I would gladly donate eight to ten hours a day to be the armed security at a local school, I live in Olivehurst Ca. and in 1992 while one of my daughters was attending the local high school a nut killed three kids and a teacher. Then he wounded another nine kids and another teacher with a shotgun and a sawed of 22 rifle no “Assault Weapon” was used. As for being shot with a “Assault Weapon” i think I would have a better chance of surviving a 223 than a real caliber like a .308.

      • eddie47d

        Thanks Rod for exposing another school shooting and the apparent fact it also got buried from the collective memory of US citizens. We forget so easily and then let it happen again and again. You make a terriffic point in restricting more than semi-automatics since you are saying how much carnage they also cause. Although I wouldn’t go that far in weapon restriction you do give a compelling reason for bring all guns to the table. “Armed guards” Maybe but as Columbine proved two guards didn’t even slow the killers down. I would be willing to bring everything to the table how about you?

        • Rod

          eddie you got my stand backwards, I am against the banning of any gun. There are over two million guns a year that have never been used to kill anyone. Vermont has had Constitutional carry ever since it has had a constitution and the state averages seven murders a year state wide and most of those were with a knife. Chicago, New York and Washington DC Which have the strongest antigun laws average more than seven a day, Chicago has that many unrelated shooting in a half hour period. It is not the gun and if you go back and check my other posts you would see that I am for gun training not confiscation.

      • eddie47d

        Bill the typical Conservative name caller! LOL!

    • Steve E

      “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”
      - William Pitt

      • eddie47d

        Too many gun owners have become “slaves” to guns just like a junkie becomes a slave to drugs. Neither is seldom better off because of their addiction and they could care less to the harm caused to others.

      • Steve E

        Never met anyone who was a slave to a gun. Drugs yes.

      • http://yahoo.com Ron

        Note to Eddie47, Eddie Eddie Eddie! In reference to the Lesbian you talked about with birth controll! Don’t you remember the girl in your class in High School who got pregant from the school toilet seat? Yeah I know, I wonder who the real “toilet seat” was too!

      • eddie47d

        Ron; LOL!

      • momo

        And you, eddie, are a slave to ignorance.

      • Average Joe

        mom,

        I believe that there is a special brand of stupid reserved….just for people like eddie….RBT…flashy…etc.
        There is no other explanation possible.

        AJ

  • http://Yahoo.com Cessna

    We have seen so much come to pass within the last few decades that we never thought would.
    The founding Fathers had insite that our so called leaders lack,or choose to ignore, and that is that they had the misfortune of living under a tyrant, but they understood that the only defence they had was the same kind of weapons for war that the other side had.
    We could easily face the same situation as Egypt or Syria, and we would be out gunned it they take our weapons away.
    This Administration is the most tyrannical that we’ve ever had.
    Obama and Feinstein lie about the facts to decieve the public and control the people and every aspect of our lives !
    These are the Kind of people that our Founding Fathers warned us about, And for that purpose the Constitution & bill of rights were written !

    • firefight

      Cessna,
      You are spot on. The only thing is that more gun control from the communists like Feinstein will not be tolerated by the true patriots of this nation. There will be a civil war and they must surely know many of them will perish along with many of us. In addition, those individuals of the electorate that helped put this administration in place have chosen their destiny as well. We are definitely in bad times. I pray to God for his love, help and guidance.

      • Bill

        Take away all of the government,s politicians, workers, police, and protection agents weapons and then when they restore the right of the citizen to bear arms they may be returned to the government “employees”.

      • http://personalliberty.com Texas

        Amen firefight.

    • eddie47d

      Cessna: The Egyptians won their revolution with out weapons and did it against a powerful dictator. Now they have to make sure this new guy Morsi won’t be another one. Heck we won our Independence against a more powerful force so it doesn’t always come down to fire power.

      • ranger09

        Sorry Eddie,It was fire power from reg Citizens that won you the right to Open your mouth as you do on here.

      • JC

        That’s a fact ranger…one completely lost on the board eddiot.

      • eddie47d

        09 and JC: Were those replies an attempt to DOUBLE down on ignorance? If you couldn’t think of anything relevant then maybe you should have just zipped it up instead of looking so foolish!

      • JC

        eddie…you speak and I hear…blah blah blah…
        You sir are a gnat.

        Actually I love that you come here….I can tell people all day long that the progs are crazy…but you prove it every time you post.

        Thanks eddie. :)

    • http://personalliberty.com Texas

      Right on Cessna.

    • http://BookPrintPublishing.com Charlie Dog

      Cessna
      Well written. I hope some of your facts soaks into the brains of those who think our government would never want to totally control them, as in Communism.
      Charlie Dog

      • eddie47d

        Doesn’t take much for some of you to be impressed .

  • Right Brain Thinker

    Right Brain Thinker says on another thread:
    December 29, 2012 at 11:09 am

    Food for thought…..

    Firman Debrander argued in this morning’s New York Times. It’s worth the time to read the whole thing, but here’s the core of his case:

    “…guns pose a monumental challenge to freedom, and particular, the liberty that is the hallmark of any democracy worthy of the name — that is, freedom of speech. Guns do communicate, after all, but in a way that is contrary to free speech aspirations: for, guns chasten speech.

    “This becomes clear if only you pry a little more deeply into the N.R.A.’s logic behind an armed society. An armed society is polite, by their thinking, precisely because guns would compel everyone to tamp down eccentric behavior, and refrain from actions that might seem threatening. The suggestion is that guns liberally interspersed throughout society would cause us all to walk gingerly — not make any sudden, unexpected moves — and watch what we say, how we act, whom we might offend.

    “As our Constitution provides, however, liberty entails precisely the freedom to be reckless, within limits, also the freedom to insult and offend as the case may be. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld our right to experiment in offensive language and ideas, and in some cases, offensive action and speech. Such experimentation is inherent to our freedom as such. But guns by their nature do not mix with this experiment — they don’t mix with taking offense. They are combustible ingredients in assembly and speech.

    “After all, a population of privately armed citizens is one that is increasingly fragmented, and vulnerable as a result. Private gun ownership invites retreat into extreme individualism — I heard numerous calls for homeschooling in the wake of the Newtown shootings — and nourishes the illusion that I can be my own police, or military, as the case may be….

    “As Michel Foucault pointed out in his detailed study of the mechanisms of power, nothing suits power so well as extreme individualism. In fact, he explains, political and corporate interests aim at nothing less than “individualization,” since it is far easier to manipulate a collection of discrete and increasingly independent individuals than a community. Guns undermine just that — community. Their pervasive, open presence would sow apprehension, suspicion, mistrust and fear, all emotions that are corrosive of community and civic cooperation. To that extent, then, guns give license to autocratic government.

    “Our gun culture promotes a fatal slide into extreme individualism. It fosters a society of atomistic individuals, isolated before power — and one another — and in the aftermath of shootings such as at Newtown, paralyzed with fear. That is not freedom, but quite its opposite. And as the Occupy movement makes clear, also the demonstrators that precipitated regime change in Egypt and Myanmar last year, assembled masses don’t require guns to exercise and secure their freedom, and wield world-changing political force. Arendt and Foucault reveal that power does not lie in armed individuals, but in assembly — and everything conducive to that”.

    • eddie47d

      Absolutely RBT! You hear a few say that the 2nd guarantees the 1st yet your article punches a hole in that. If someone is trying to say something and then someone brings out a gun and says no you can’t speak then that is a suppression of those 1st Amendment rights. So indeed a weapon can can stiffle the right to free speech.

      • Alan

        Sorry Eddie, but the mere presence of a gun being leveled at you does not stifle your right to free speech in any way. It is your “fear” of the weapon which suppresses your will to speak. It is you yourself who makes the choice to continue speaking or not. For if it were the way RBT and you both think, the voices of our Founding Fathers would have been silenced before the first shot was ever fired.

      • posttime

        So can a knife-wielding loony (a wigged-out progressive?) in an unarmed gathering.
        http://personalliberty.com/2012/12/31/the-gun-grab-cometh/
        The truth is that of the 12,664 murders committed in the United States in 2011, rifles were used in only 323 of them. “Knives or other cutting instruments” were used in 1,694 murders; hands and feet in 726; and blunt objects like clubs and hammers were used in 496. A ban on knives and hands and feet would be far more effective in reducing murders, which Nadler claims is the goal.

      • eddie47d

        There is a time and place for everything Alan and if you need a gun to prove your point in conversation then you lost right off the bat!

      • eddie47d

        Posttime: There were 34,593 killings by guns in this country so you left out a few facts. Yes about 11,000 were suicides but that still leaves a few out of your picture.

    • Chocopot

      Spoken like a true collectivist…

    • Steve E

      ” … for it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that the people are commonly most in danger when the means of insuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion.”
      - Alexander Hamilton

      • eddie47d

        There again years ago few were suspicious of gun owners because few had them and those who did were mostly used for hunting and home defense. Now it has gone far beyond that where its a hot item to have and not much different than a cell phone or a TV. Most can do just fine without any of those items yet we conjure up a “necessity” in owning them. No one wants to be left out and I see no difference in wanting a gun. Our yearning for self importance knows no bounds even if that obsession is a danger to others. That would include texting while driving and owning a 30 round magazine!

      • Chocopot

        Eddie -

        How do you equate a constitutional right to texting while driving? My 30-round magazine – or 50-round or even 100-round – poses no danger to anyone. Am I more law-abiding if I have only 10-round magazines in my possession as opposed to 100-round? Where do you get that logic? And for your information, with 15 minutes of training and practice, anyone can change magazines in under two seconds. Is that going to accomplish something – or am I missing something?

      • Steve E

        Eddy, I never new a time when few people had guns. My first guns were those that were handed down to me by my ancestors.

      • http://BookPrintPublishing.com Charlie Dog

        Amen Steve !!!!!!!!!!

      • eddie47d

        I’ll stand by what I said Steve and those who did have guns were mostly hunting rifles including my dad .

      • eddie47d

        It was strictly an example Chocopot. I thought it would help you understand but apparently you confuse easily. By the war I’m not preparing for war and I have what I need!

    • Frank Kahn

      I would propose an experiment for you to conduct RBT (no thought from you), why dont you and your buddies, like flashy and eddie47d, pick a small town of patriotic gun owners, go in to that town and attempt to confiscate their weapons. Please employ a body of neutral observers who can record the chaos and bedlam of those gun owners. See if they act as selfish individuals or band together to fight you off.

      The article, you sited, contained nothing of scientific or logical consideration. It used extreme hyperbole to make a case about a fantasy world of gun owners being all anarchists at heart. Take the world population as a whole into consideration. What nation in this world is feared by most others? What is the reason for their fears? I will tell you the answers, the US is the most feared, because we have the most guns.

      There is a saying, and it goes like this, DONT WAKE THE SLEEPING GIANT, FOR HE WILL DESTROY YOUR WORLD.

      Do you, and the rest of your ignorant cohorts, really want to WAKE THE SLEEPING GIANT that is the patriotic, law abiding, gun owning citizens of this nation? So far, the INTELLIGENT, politicians have been walking softly and whispering their unconstitutional message to the country, because they dont want to WAKE THE SLEEPING GIANT. But now we have some (non intelligent / stupid) politicians, that are screaming in its ears and pounding their war clubs on the floor. This is causing the SLEEPING GIANT to have bad dreams (nightmares) and it is flexing its muscles in its slumber. In its sleep, its tail might twitch, lashing out and harming those causing its nightmares(someone challenging the police with a gun). But, when the SLEEPING GIANT opens its eyes, and lets out a deafening roar, you best tremble and hide because he will be looking for everyone who disturbed his slumber.

      Take WWII as an example (and leave out the conspiracy to get us involved), how did the citizens of this country act when the attempts to enslave people with tyranny was just in Europe? When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, what changed in how we acted? Did you learn in school how THE SLEEPING GIANT raised its head and ROARED? Did you learn about how THE SLEEPING GIANT went forth and destroyed the world of those who woke it up? In the last 70 years, has anyone been able to put THE GIANT back to SLEEP?

      The patriotic gun owners do not advocate violence, they just want this country to let them sleep. They want you to let them keep having their peaceful dreams. They have the same peaceful dreams, like a single entity. Please dont think that the nightmare you propose will not be a shared event.

      The war on guns will be an exact duplicate of the war on alcohol and the war on drugs. Read some history, do some research, check out what happened during prohibition. See how much of an increase there was, in violent crime, associated with prohibition. Find out how the DRUG CULTURE became more rife with violence after the war on drugs started.

      The best way to describe these three things is 1. war on alcohol 2. war on drugs and 3. war on guns. The reason I use the word WAR in all three, is because they are all violence creating events, just like a war. They also have another thing in common, they were all efforts of the GOVERNMENT to make LAWS to PROTECT the CITIZENS of the NATION from a PERCEIVED THREAT to our HEALTH and SAFETY. Now, you and eddie47d, and flashy, might think that YOUR PEACE OF MIND is more important than OUR RIGHTS, but you are all sadly mistaken. Taking away our RIGHT to BEAR ARMS, in any way, will eventually REDUCE YOUR PEACE OF MIND. When the GOVERNMENT clamps down and tells YOU that you must SUBMIT to their AGENDA, you will want OUR HELP. But WE will either not be ABLE, or will be UNWILLING to PROTECT YOU from the PROBLEM YOU CAUSED.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Frank fails to notice that my posting was a quote of a column and that I did NOT say anything other than “food for thought” about it. Of course, since Frank is a motivated reasoner with axes to grind, he must go off on a rant about “you this” and “you that”, as well as a whole bunch of other horsepucky because he views himself sees a “Real American” and a “Patriot”, etc..

        He chooses to attack me and others he perceives as “the enemy” instead of THINKING about what someone other than me said and address the points that were made—-good points that ARE food for thought for those who think rather than react as parrots.

        Frank’s comments prove many points made about the characteristics of conservative thinkers as outlined in The Republican Brain (and has ANYONE on PLD read that book yet?—-it’s available in libraries and sells for 25+% off on Amazon).

        • Frank Kahn

          First and foremost you are not a right brain thinker, I doubt that you think with anything but your base instinct. You have never posted anything with any thought in it at all. I am not a conservative, I am a centrist moderate. Something that someone as far out in left field as you could never comprehend. Your posting as (food for thought) is another way of saying “I dont have any ideas of my own so I will use this one”.

          In a distant post, I challenged you as to the efficacy of claiming that being a right brain thinker was somehow better than left brain. YOU REFUSED TO ANSWER THAT POST. You chicken? You want me to repost the differences so you can see that my left brain abilities have a more direct logic based ability than your scatter brained (right brain) thinking. The right brain uses RANDOM association of ideas, as opposed to the left brain using structured logic flows.

          Eddie has no thoughts in his head either, he just rants and says stupid crap that has no basis in reality. He is incapable of supporting any of his insane ideas with logic or thought. You want to side with him, that is no surprise if you do since you show the same consistent inability to associate reality with your life.

          Here is one for the all of you. Information to ponder (as opposed to food for thought),

          1. Eddie says that all guns are purchased for the purpose of killing people.
          2. Eddie says it is the legitimate gun owners fault that criminals use guns to kill people.
          3. Eddie says that he believes in the 2nd amendment BUT only for hunting and protecting your home from burglars.
          4. Eddie says that our right to bear arms should not be infringed BUT only if he approves of the weapons we want to have.
          5. Flashy is insane in everything he says.
          6. Flashy says his crybaby fear over rides our right to bear arms.
          7. Flashy says it scares him to know we have guns in public.
          8. Flashy says he believes in the 2nd amendment BUT he agrees with Eddie in that it is only when HE approves the type of weapons involved.
          9. Eddie claims that restricting the size of the magazines available to 10 rounds would reduce the number of victims (haha 20 children is two magazines and would take less than 5 minutes).
          10. Eddie says that banning assault weapons (incorrect name) would eliminate the ability to do mass murder.
          11. One of them even said that the founding fathers were only talking about single shot muskets.
          12. We should only be allowed to have guns in our homes.
          13. We should store our guns in a safe unloaded and with the ammunition locked up elsewhere.
          14. We should disassemble our guns before storing them.
          15. The government should track all ammunition.
          16. We should all have a psychological examination to determine we are sane enough before getting a gun.
          17. Eddie says none of us law abiding gun owners are responsible enough to have guns.

          I can make an even larger list of the ridiculous statements by the anti-gun nuts on this blog site if you desire.

          I have responded to all of these ignorant ideas, in other posts, with solid logic. I dont parrot anything. If there are others that have good reasoning and logic skills which leads them to the same conclusion as me, that is not parroting it is coincidental agreement.

          I am amazed that you appear to think that logic and reasoning is a trait of conservatives, but if that is a part of the definition of being a conservative then I thank you for the compliment.

          Eddie, by the way, has never once even attempted to dispute my posts when I respond to him. And, the majority of the time when he responds to someone else that has used logic to dispute his statements, he resorts to the same tiring drivel that you do, calling names and using ad hominem attacks.

          As always, I am available to discuss anything you want to discuss as long as you refrain from name calling and stick to verifiable facts instead of conjecture. I also will not accept the patented diatribe of the left wing lunatics that is spouted by so many of you on this site. Guns are not the problem, assault weapons are not the problem it is a people problem pure and simple.

          So many of your anti-gun maniacs constantly refuse to acknowledge the other forms of killing and terror that uses other weapons. I even remember an incident where a tank was stolen from an armory and used to wreck havoc on a community. Was it the tanks fault? There was a man, I think it was in Oregon, that used AIDS as his weapon of choice. He was trying to infect as many women as possible. Was it the AIDS virus that was responsible.

          Do you think that only a conservative can ask those types of questions?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Frank says, “In a distant post, I challenged you as to the efficacy of claiming that being a right brain thinker was somehow better than left brain. YOU REFUSED TO ANSWER THAT POST. You chicken? You want me to repost the differences so you can see that my left brain abilities have a more direct logic based ability than your scatter brained (right brain) thinking. The right brain uses RANDOM association of ideas, as opposed to the left brain using structured logic flows”.

        No, Frank, I am not “chicken”. You asked that question on a “dying” thread, one that was petering out (mainly because of the disruption of the discussion by the trolls). I had begun a reply but didn’t bother wasting the time to post it where no one would see it. Another problem is that your talking about your “left brain abilities (that) have a more direct logic based ability” etc. shows that you you looked up “right brain-left brain” on a popular site like “Brains’R’Us”, rather than explore political neuroscience or read the book The Republican Brain, as I suggested many times to PLD followers. Have you read the book, Frank? Or are you “chicken”?—-are you content to find something that sounds good to you and don’t want to take the chance that it’s wrong.

        I have replied to others who wanted to “play” with “right brain thinker” and pointed out that “right brain-left brain” was an oversimplification and a rather “old” view—-that recent studies of political psychology and neuroscience are pointing to a contrast between using the amygdala and the anterior cingulate cortex, and even that oversimplifies because there is much “crossover” between parts of the brain and their functions. (And I use much of my “left brain” along with my “right”—-that’s why I see and “connect up” so many things that you and others don’t). Also, I didn’t think “anterior cingulate cortex thinker” was a very catchy handle either, and the knowledge that the “left brains” would go nuts over the use of “right brain thinker” was also appealing—-sure drivers you nuts, doesn’t it?

        I have other things to do in life, and consider posting on PLD to be like doing an every-other-day-or-two crossword puzzle. I also might find the time to talk to you more about this if you would go out and get yourself educated enough on the topic to understand what I’m talking about rather than just spout something you “looked up”.. Show me that you understand “amygdala brain” and “ACC” and I’ll spend the time with you.

        • Frank Kahn

          First order of business, I dont get my FACTS from politically motivated sources. Your books are worthless in factual acquisition. The name of the book “The Republican Brain” is biased from the start by the implications of its title. BTW, I am not a Republican so I cannot have a REPUBLICAN BRAIN.

          I do know the function of those parts of the brain, I am not sure why you want to place a portion of the brain that is centered on emotional responses as a center piece of cognitive reasoning. The amygdala would not support any form of superior logic or reasoning skill. The anterior cingulate cortex, when used in conjunction with the amygdala, as you did, is also pertaining to emotional response, memory. It is also shown to be active in ones cognitive ability when presented with error conflicts contained in perception. It is possible that it is what corrects your perception of words when there is something in a sentence that is just so wrong that it is impossible to have it there. Although this part of the brain might be responsible for correcting perception errors that you are presented with, it would need a training period for a specific set of items to be effective in correcting your logic ability. These two items, either separate or combined, do not support any theory of improved logic and reasoning ability on a macro scale.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        • Frank Kahn says: “I don’t get my FACTS from politically motivated sources”.

        Thanks for the laugh, Frank. That’s one of the more absurd comments you’ve ever made. All one has to do is read your comments to know that you lack self-awareness and any real understanding of your thought processes.

        File this one under “lack of self-awareness” as well: “I am not a conservative, I am a centrist moderate. Something that someone as far out in left field as you could never comprehend”—-you really don’t understand that I am not out in “left field” and that you are not a “centrist”, do you?.
        This one is pretty funny too—-file this one under “evidence of Frank’s self-delusion”. “I have responded to all of these ignorant ideas, in other posts, with solid logic. I don’t parrot anything. If there are others that have good reasoning and logic skills which leads them to the same conclusion as me, that is not parroting it is coincidental agreement”. Yep, self delusion fits—-anyone who doesn’t agree with you is “ignorant”, your arguments display “good reasoning and solid logic”, you don’t “parrot”, and any agreement with other motivated reasoners is “coincidental”.
        I love the “good reasoning and solid logic” you display so inconsistently with these comments: “Eddie resorts to the same tiring drivel that you do, calling names and using ad hominem attacks”—–“Flashy is insane in everything he says”—–And my favorite—“You (RBT) have never posted anything with any thought in it at all”. Frank, you have just torpedoed your sad little boat of self-delusion because YOU have showed us the name-calling and use of ad hominems that you would lay on me and others—-start swimming.
        Just to show some self-deluded smugness and selfrighteousness, you feel the need to state, “As always, I am available to discuss anything you want to discuss as long as you refrain from name calling and stick to verifiable facts instead of conjecture. I also will not accept the patented diatribe of the left wing lunatics that is spouted by so many of you on this site”.
        That rates a “Lord love a duck!”, Frank. YOU can call names but others can’t—-YOU get to define “verifiable facts” (anything YOU say) and “conjecture” (anything that YOU don’t agree with). And “patented diatribe of the left wing lunatics”? Another “Lord love a duck!”—-swim faster—-the boat is going down and may suck you under with it.

        And you are actually serious when you say “Your books are worthless in factual acquisition”?. Are you a book burner, Frank? Or do you burn only those books that your use of “solid logic and good reasoning skills” tells you are “worthless’? You can tell the worth of a book from just its NAME? Like Johnny Carson doing his Karnak bit?—-hold the book up to your forehead and you “see all”? How can you NOT see how ludicrous it is to make the statement that “The name of the book “The Republican Brain” is biased from the start by the implications of its title”. You rate yet another “Lord love a duck” there.

        And, never ceasing to amaze, you double down on your bet by saying, “BTW, I am not a Republican so I cannot have a REPUBLICAN BRAIN”. And you HAVEN’T EVEN READ THE BOOK to know what that title refers to? LOL
        If you read the book, Frank, you will find “that logic and reasoning is a trait of conservatives”, as well as all others who really THINK, and some conservatives like George Will and Charles Krauthammer do, although what they say tends to be a bit warped by their ideology. The book says many positive things about the “Republican Brain” and the positive contributions conservatives can and do make in the political realm. It also points out the failings of the “liberal” mindset as well.
        Your little essay beginning with, “I do know the function of those parts of the brain….” Just shows that you have again just looked some things up because “you don’t have any ideas of your own and will just use those”. You really don’t know what any of what you quoted means, Frank. If you insist on surfing around for “things to say”, at least look under political neuroscience and political psychology rather than the general brain function areas that you keep referencing.
        Recall that I said that I “might find the time to talk to you more about this if you would go out and get yourself educated enough on the topic to understand what I’m talking about rather than just spout something you “looked up”. Show me that you understand “amygdala brain” and “ACC” and I’ll spend the time with you”. The offer still stands—-read the book and THEN use it to dig further until you DO understand and we will talk some more—-we can reference what is said on any particular page and debate it..
        In closing, let me say that the only name-calling and ad hominems you will find here are quotes of your words. I have looked at your words and thoughts, applied “good logic and reasoning skills” in analyzing them, and offered some opinions about them and how you think. That is not name-calling. Using “Insane” and “left wing lunatics” is. Try to see the difference.

        • Frank Kahn

          Another MEANINGLESS post by you which is in its entirety an ad hominem attack. I will not read YOUR BOOK. I dont need to read any book that is biased.

          Logic, is something that eludes you quite obviously. Anything that purports to be based on political thinking as a function of science of the brain is in itself brain dead.

          You used two parts of the brain that are not directly connected to cognitive reasoning.

          Nothing is IGNORANT just because I DISAGREE with it. Eddie’s comments are IGNORANT because he either does not know the facts or chooses to ignore them.

          You, on the other hand, are IGNORANT because you do what you falsely accuse me of doing. You accept the insane lies put forth by the ignorant leftist regime as facts.

          You are also IGNORANT because you think that REPUBLICANS are RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS.

          You are also IGNORANT because you THINK you are INTELLIGENT.

          You are also IGNORANT because you CLAIM to have THOUGHTS that are independent of the DOGMA that comes from the LEFT.

          I USE THE WORD IGNORANT BECAUSE I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. ACTUALLY MOST OF EDDIES COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FALL MORE INTO THE CATEGORY OF STUPID AS DOES FLASHY.

        • Frank Kahn

          PS, your IGNORANCE might lead you to BELIEVE that POLITICALLY MOTIVATED analysis of the BRAINS function is BETTER than my study of SCIENTIFIC papers, but you are WRONG.

          AND, YOU DID NOT APPLY ANYTHING THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED LOGIC IN YOU ATTACKS ON MY INTELLIGENCE.

          AND, IMPLYING THAT I AM A BIGOTED BOOK BURNER IS AN ATTACK OF NAME CALLING.

          THE LENGTH OF YOUR IGNORANT RANTING DOES NOT ADD ANY CREDIBILITY TO YOUR WORDS. YOU STILL HAVE NOT GIVEN ANY FORM OF STATEMENTS OF FACTS TO SUPPORT ANY SUPPOSED IDEAS YOU HAVE POSTED OVER THE LAST WEEKS.

          YOU HAVE ALWAYS BEEN GUILTY OF DENIGRATING THE INTELLIGENCE OF EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOUR IGNORANT IDEAS. HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THAT AS CONSTANT AD HOMINEM ATTACKS?

          BRING SOME FACTS TO THE TABLE, STOP YOUR LEFT WING RANTING, ACT LIKE YOU HAVE SOME FORM OF INTELLECT. JUST POSTING CHILDISH PUTDOWNS, TRYING TO DISCREDIT ME PERSONALLY, INSTEAD OF STICKING WITH THE FACTS WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING BUT TO PUFF UP YOUR ALREADY ABSURDLY HIGH OPINION OF YOURSELF.

        • Frank Kahn

          PPS THERE WERE NO QUOTES IN MY POST, THEY WERE MY ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC FACTS REPORTED BY RESEARCHERS IN NEUROLOGY.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Frank fires back! I say “fires” because that is more appropriate to the quality of his comments here than “answers”. The use of “fires” better relates to the “anger and irrationality” we see here in Frank’s THREE posts.

        I am struck by the similarity of Frank’s three posts to what DaveH does when backed into a corner from which he cannot escape—-FIRE off a quick series of comments that don’t say much but give you some breathing space in which you MIGHT be able to think of an intelligent response (if you could think intelligently, that is).

        I think it’s kind of “neat” that Frank SHOUTS perhaps half of his first comment, most of his second, and ALL OF HIS THIRD . I wonder if his face got redder and his blood pressure went up in tandem with his SHOUTING?

        Frank says, “I will not read YOUR BOOK. I don.t need to read any book that is biased. Anything that purports to be based on political thinking as a function of science of the brain is in itself brain dead”.

        I won’t bother to comment on that other than to quote it back to you. Some horses ARE too dead to beat and by uttering those three sentences you have committed intellectual suicide. I will, however, comment on just a couple of your later SHOUTS—-i will speak quietly so that you can tell where my words begin.

        THE LENGTH OF YOUR IGNORANT RANTING DOES NOT ADD ANY CREDIBILITY TO YOUR WORDS.

        True enough, Frank. I try to say just enough to lay out the facts and arguments that are needed to address and counter the “ignorant ranting” that gets my attention on PLD threads. Sometimes that does require a “lengthy” posting. In your case and the case of many others, length matters not anyway, since you really don’t read them (or can’t comprehend them because of your confirmation bias).

        YOU HAVE ALWAYS BEEN GUILTY OF DENIGRATING THE INTELLIGENCE OF EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOUR IGNORANT IDEAS. HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THAT AS CONSTANT AD HOMINEM ATTACKS?

        If you were able to get beyond your confirmation bias and comprehend what I post, which you are appearing less capable of doing with every word you type, you would understand that anyone who has no better word to use to describe my comments than IGNORANT is actually showing little or no intelligence and it is perfectly proper and “intelligent” to point that out to them. We ARE, after all, engaged in discussion, debate, argument, discourse, etc here on PLD. Maybe you don’t understand what any of those words mean or how the things they define operate, but we lived by them in the schools as we sought “truth” and tried to teach the students how to seek it for themselves.

        You disagree with my ideas—-I point out the fallacies in your statements—-you either come back to that with better arguments or you admit defeat. YOU are the one (and you’re not alone on PLD) that can not see that YOU (and they) are the ad hominem attackers, not me. You have proved that point in this series of replies to me. You have said little or nothing of substance that could be debated ar discussed., Rather than do that, you have just stated OPINIONS with no supporting arguments. Do you even understand that, Frank? That just because you say it, it doesn’t mean it’s true anywhere but in your self-deluded and closed-minded left brain?

        AND, YOU DID NOT APPLY ANYTHING THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED LOGIC IN YOUR ATTACKS ON MY INTELLIGENCE.

        Yep, that’s me—-Mr. Non-Logical. That’s why I have won every extended debate that I have engaged in on PLD. Or haven’t you noticed that? That I always have the last word except when I choose to ignore the final stupid ad hominems of guys like JeffH and DaveH? Just like I’m going to have the last word here with you, Frank, since you’re beaten (even though you may not know it and certainly wouldn’t accept it if you were that aware of reality). Don’t bother responding to what I said here since I’m about to delete this “dead” thread and move on to others. I only came back to see if yo9u had responded to me. I’m sure you wouldn’t have anything different to say anyway, so don’t waste the effort proving that to me. We WILL meet again on other threads, I’m sure.

        A bit of advice, Frank—-I know you’re angry and now really hate my guts, but you should try to contain that anger when next we meet. One of the things that always made me effective at whatever I did (aside from being a smart and well-educated guy), is the ability to NOT get angry. It works for me too on PLD (although I do get a little “exasperated” at times and that may show a bit). When you next come after me, as I’m sure you will, try to remember that advice.

        PPS THERE WERE NO QUOTES IN MY POST, THEY WERE MY ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC FACTS REPORTED BY RESEARCHERS IN NEUROLOGY.

        PPS Uh-huh, yep, if you say so—you said it and it must be true because everything you say is beyond dispute, etc. etc.. I won’t point out how ludicrous it is for someone like you, who has no apparent science background and has shown himself to have reading comprehension deficits as well, to speak of his “analysis” of what he determines to be “scientific facts” from “reports” by researchers.

        You see, Frank, you are the same person who said, “I will not read YOUR BOOK. I don.t need to read any book that is biased. Anything that purports to be based on political thinking as a function of science of the brain is in itself brain dead”. Anyone who would say something like that has no right to use the words logic, analysis, scientific, or facts—-ever.

        • Frank Kahn

          I am still waiting for you to say 1 (ONE) intelligent fact. You still stoop to just name calling and ad hominem attacks.

          You want to test intelligence, then start acting like you have some to compare.

          I stand by the logic of denying the efficacy of books written with political bias as opposed to research done by scientists.

          You show your ignorance every time you try to denigrate me with smarmy word play. If you have a problem with science, just say so and I will mark you down as willfully ignorant as opposed to stupid.

          I am still waiting for you to engage in an intelligent discourse with anyone on this site. You pick the person, anyone you want, and then use FACTS and LOGIC not YOUR PERSONAL OPINIONS.

        • Frank Kahn

          And, my use of multiple responses is due the magnitude of your ridiculous claims.

          If I had any reason to need to prove my scientific background I would. If I needed to expose the books (of science not political drivel) that I have read, I would do so.

          I would, however, point out that you have not even attempted to put forth a personal analysis of anything. You make a comment using the scientific names of two parts of the human brain, and then what, you imply those two things are a part of reasoning ability? You dont give any specific facts to back the implication, you dont even attempt to show you have even the slightest idea of the workings of the brain. You do, however, exhibit thinking mannerisms that would support the idea that you do use those two parts of your brain to a great extent in your daily posts. You definitely show extreme emotional bias towards your perceived existence in this world.

          Give it your best shot, scientifically, I will get as technical as you need right up to the point where the truth goes whizzing right over your head.

          Come to think about it, you might be exhibiting some symptoms of frontal lobe syndrome. Have you had any form of sever head trauma to the front part of your brain? This can cause severe personality changes and can cause you to lose your inhibitions and ability to calmly think through something before reacting. It also causes a person to use words in an emotional outburst without thinking of the impact of the poorly chosen words. In other words, it makes it difficult to relate to and interact with normal people in a society.

          Please, keep your obnoxious childish derisive remarks coming, I enjoy the witless banter you are providing.

    • Bill

      What! are you advocating all of the minorities? What the hell are you talking about before you think. The individual is the smallest of all the so called minorities. And there you go-take away the constitutional rights of the smallest minority and assign the rights to the majority. What crony thinking you have.

    • Bill

      And here we have Right Brain Thinkers opinion.
      What the hell are you doing on a libertarian sight. Anything you say will be percieved as being stupid. Seeing how you are a socialist

    • posttime

      “EXTREME individualism?” RBT, I suspect that Debrander isn’t just talking about guns and the “dangerous mentality” of the NRA. Surely he’s referring to free thought and “selfish inventions” of bright minds which brought us out of the Stone Age. As a collectivist, he recognizes self-motivation and ambition as a threat to mediocrity. I give him and Foucault an F.

  • http://Google George

    I use to hunt for years, i own guns for that purpose. i fail to understand why anyone would need to own an assault rifle, or why anyone needs a gun with a 60 round clip. they are not trying to take all the guns, just ban the ones not needed by anyone other than military personel. Wanting people to believe they are is the NRA’s bull crap.

    • Warrior

      Today, the “assault weapon”. Tomorrow, ?

    • eddie47d

      I don’t want rocket launchers in any one’s home or a box full of hand grenades either.The police use to complain that they were outgunned on the streets so they were given more deadly weapons to counteract that threat to them. Now we have civilians who demand more deadly weapons to so they can defend themselves. Supposedly against those same police that they spent taxpayer money in arming. This is nothing more than a round robin and a circular firing squad. One side spreads fear and panic for their safety and then the other side does the same. Gun owners of all persuasions are not making us safer quite the opposite. They are just upping the ante!

      • ranger09

        Eddie, This post was pretty much right far a change Only problem is the police have access to rocket launchers and Grenades, The people have been outlawed from having them since 1934 I think. But if you look at the way things are today I would not mind owning a RL and a Case of Grenades, But they are still illegal, so i guess im out of luck. But i remember a time the Govt gave me all i wanted as long as i used them againest the people they ordered me to.Or for my own safety and the safety of my fellow soldiers

    • Chocopot

      Perhaps you should read some of Sarah Brady’s comments over the years, the ones she makes when her guard is down and she thinks no one is really listening… http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2803353/posts
      http://beta.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=896256
      Look for more of her remarks on your own.

    • http://HOME Hobert Davis

      if they find they can take your assult rifle today tommorow it will be your hand guns then your bb gun and then sling shot, they never give up.

      • firefight

        Did you know that in England there was proposed legislation to ban aluminum baseball bats? That’s right! Those wonderful super civilized Brits who no longer have firearms have begun using aluminum baseball bats to kill their bretherin. If someone wants to kill another person, not having a gun will not be a deal breaker. As for the protests in those countries like Egypt where the people proststed in mass, many of them were killed by government forces. The government forces had guns but the citizens did not. What the hell is fair about that? Our founding fathers fully intended us to be armed equally to any government forces that might want to supress us. The second amendment is NOT about hunting. It is not about shooting ducks or deer. It’s about defending our lives, our homes, our country against a tyrannical government. When will you left wing morons wake up to that fact?

      • eddie47d

        Gee name caller Firefight! I don’t think bringing up aluminium bats helped your cause. Last year in England 3 people were killed and 26 wounded by those bats. Hardly a comparison to what goes on in our nation where 34,593 died from guns. !

    • Ted Crawford

      ” The goal is an ultimate ban on all guns, but we have to take a step at a time and go for limited access first” Jayner Sims

    • JC

      George says:
      December 31, 2012 at 8:08 am
      I use to hunt for years, i own guns for that purpose. i fail to understand why anyone would need to own an assault rifle,
      ___________________________________________________________________

      Assault rifles have been illegal for a very long time. And the right to keep and bear arms outweighs your “opinion” and for damned good reason.

      • Terry

        For many of the reasons above and below !

    • ranger09

      George, MEXICO has had the rules pertaining to to its people owning firearms just like the female dork from ca is Proposing, NOW tell me do you want us to be like MEXICO. Or should we remain AMERICA.

    • Fieldmaster

      George the sole purpose of us haveing military grade or type of firearms is one of the main factors of our checks and balences system to keep a tyrant Goverment in check keep them working for the people buy the people

    • eddie47d

      Hobert; No one needed an AR-15 50 years ago and they still don’t! Why does the pro gun groups push for more and more lethal weapons? Why has their agenda allowed for those 3 million semi-automatic weapons to proliferate our land? Especially when they are the weapon of choice for mass shootings.

      • ranger09

        A lot of things have changed in 50 years, if i remember right 78 years ago Americans could own Machine Guns, But very few did, It seems like the only ones buying them and using them was the Criminals, And of course the police. The Thompson also the BAR. was very big with the Crooks.When the crooks and Police rearm So needs the Public. i have used most all kinds in my time, But my best was the 12 Ga semi-auto at combat range, 54 bullets in the time it takes to unload a 30 round Magazine. Weapons are Weapons depends on who is holding and using them.
        Look back to VietNam, or current times, Afganistan and Iraq, How many americans have been killed or wounded with nothing but home made items. Now remember these people are fighting the best equipped Military in the World, In my time the worst man i ever run across used a bolt action and scope, was responsible for over 30 -50 kills all americans. See its not the weapon its ththe person using it. How good he or she is with it and what his goal is. In the Past 60 plus years more people have been killed and wounded with Bombs than any firearm.

      • Rod

        Eddie this will be the last time I make a comment about any puke you keep putting out. An AR15 is a .223 or 5.56 basically a large 22. It is a caliber that most people use to shoot prariedogs and other squirrel size animals it is not nearly as lethal to humans as a .308 or even a . 357 revolver. The civilian model of the AR15 is a simiauto pull the trigger and one bullet comes out. A lever action rifle in .357 would be much more lethal than the AR it just would not hold as many bullets. A large magazine does not make you a more skilled shooter and when you go over about 30 round magazine they have a tendency to jam.
        Recently I watched a shooter fire a six shot revolver into a target fifteen feet away, reload and fire another six rounds and in a group I could have covered by my hand and he did it in less then two seconds. The nut in CT after killing the adults could have killed all the children with a two shot derringer as the kids would not have escaped or attacked him while he calmly reloaded. Please do a little research before you do anymore comments about guns. “It is better to not speak and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt”

      • eddie47d

        Being “smart” about weapons doesn’t make you smart about our proliferation. You as another commenter make a good case for going after all guns since you like to clamour about how deadly they all are. You’d make a good poster boy for total gun control because you may be “smart” but not necessarily sensible.

    • Frank Kahn

      No, George, it is not crap, it is what it is. The attempt to INFRINGE on our RIGHT to BEAR ARMS, is unconstitutional. THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS was never intended for the use of HUNTING. The desire for having more than 10 rounds in a MAGAZINE (clip) is not an extreme one, it does not indicate a desire to kill lots of people. If you want to designate something as CRAP then you should apply it to the insane and ignorant positing of the radical left politicians. To, somehow, equate mass murder with the legal ownership of guns is preposterous. To think that someone cant have more than 100 rounds of ammunition in multiple 10 round magazines is also ignorant.

      If there is civil unrest, and gangs of marauders are attacking citizens for their food and water, what weapon do you want? What weapon will you use do defend your family and supplies? If we live next door to each other, and these gangs know you have a 5 shot .308 or .30-06, and I have an AR-15 with many 30 round magazines, who do you think will survive their attacks? The same holds true with an attempted government (police state) take over of your possessions, who will fare better?

      Now, expand that scenario to include the entire nation, who has even a small chance of surviving a government take over of personal liberties and property?

      • http://yahoo.com Ron

        Want to know WHO would win your little gun fight? ME! YES ME! For I was an American Sniper and really damn good at it! Care to take the challenge my soon to be gone friend? Yeah! Didn’t think so! Let’s move on to the taht idiot, FIENSTIEN! She’s democrat, and she lies just like the rest of the Dummy Demos! I’m one of the GOOD GUYS they talk about, I will give the first shot, but then……………oh well grab onto your ass, cause it’s going for a ride!

        • Frank Kahn

          I was gone for a few days so I am slowly catching up with the emails of blog responses.

          I am not sure if you were aiming your response at me with your challenge of a gun fight, but I dont think your sniper ability would be that much of an advantage. I am, of course, assuming that you are not equipped with a .50 cal sniper rifle with a computerized auto correction sighting apparatus. I am well aware of the difference between overt direct assault and covert stealth of an attack. I am not going to march up towards your position firing random shots hoping to hit you, I aint stupid. Actually, I dont see any reason why I would be confronting you in the first place. I am for defending against government aggression. I only see the need for multiple fire capability in the event of multiple target presentation.

          Actually, I prefer the AR-15 for defense, not for its stopping power (it really was not designed for that), I like its ability to disable someone without killing. I get a real kick out of reading these moronic politicians that spout the extreme killing power of such a weapon. They obviously dont know what they are talking about.

          But, back to sniping. I will agree that a hidden sniper (with silenced weapon) can eliminate an oncoming threat with minimal risk, considering you can pick off the advancing members of the threat without them discerning your location.

    • Charles

      There is no such thing as a 60 round “clip”. If you do not know the difference between a magazine and a clip, you have no business handling firearms.

      • ranger09

        Charles, Just what is the Differance, between a Mag and a Clip

    • posttime

      HISTORY says they do indeed want to take all guns away. Why? So they can KILL your silly ass. Wait, you’ll see.

      • eddie47d

        All guns wouldn’t be taken away unless you keep pushing your idiocy! Australia banned multiple magazines and mass murders disappeared. Citizens are also still allowed to defend home and property. Not everything is about you and your love affair with weapons of mass killings.

      • JC

        That is entirely false eddiot. Australian citizens are allowed to defend their homes?
        With what? A cricket bat?
        Mind you, now that guns have been banned there…the criminals won’t have them either…yeah, right, sure….

  • Right Brain Thinker

    More food for thought…..

    Akhil Reed Amar, a professor at Yale Law School, one of the nation’s leading authorities on the Constitution, offers some thoughts about the Second Amendment.

    “Originally, the Second Amendment is very much about local militias keeping check on a federal military establishment. It’s about Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill. It’s a product of the American Revolution. The motto at the founding is when guns are outlawed only the king’s men will have guns.”

    “In a nutshell, almost everything ordinary Americans think they know about the Bill of Rights, including the phrase ‘Bill of Rights,’ comes from the Reconstruction period. Not once did the Founders refer to these early amendments as a bill of rights. We read everything through the prism of the 14th amendment — including the right to bear and keep arms.”

    “The reconstruction Republicans didn’t love local militias. They believed in Grant’s army. So they recast it. It becomes an individual right. The NRA is founded after the Civil War by a group of ex-Union Army officers. Now the motto goes, when guns are outlawed, only klansmen will have guns. Individual black men had to have guns in their homes because they couldn’t count on the local constabulary. It’s in the text of the Freedman’s Bureau Act of 1866 that we actually see the reinterpretation of the original Second Amendment. It becomes about original rights.”

    “The reconstructionists had had four bloody years trying to suppress bloody coups. So they tried to tame the Second Amendment. We moved from an insurrectionary reading of the amendment to an individual one.”

    “Instead of obsessing over the wording of the amendment, which doesn’t fit anymore, we need to talk about unenumerated rights in America,” he replied. “Having guns in homes for self protection is a very deep part of American culture. You couldn’t even get rid of those guns if you tried. It would make prohibition look like a day in the park. Today, almost everywhere in America you can have a gun in your home and that should be respected. But that doesn’t mean you need guns that can mow 26 people down. We can talk about reasonable regulation.”

    • roger

      “But that doesn’t mean you need guns that can mow 26 people down. We can talk about reasonable regulation.”

      b.s., it has nothing to do with “need”. there are no exceptions to the second amendment, we all had that right long before it was ever written.

      • JC

        RBT like most communists is quite convinced the government will keep him safe.
        What a complete fool.

      • eddie47d

        So Roger is saying there is no need for the Second Amendment because we had that right before it was written. You already had the right to defend yourself since the beginning of time so I will agree with that. It seems you are also saying that anyone can possess anything they want to even if it knowingly will cause harm to someone else. That is where these rights have to be either monitored or controlled. Since you have the right to defend yourself with lets say a handgun (which is generally more than enough) then society also has the right to limit your access to a weapon of multiple killings. Beyond self defense no one out there has a RIGHT to endanger my family no matter where I go and I don’t need to feel threatened by any weapon that can take my whole family out along with others.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        JC says, “RBT, like most communists, is quite convinced the government will keep him safe. (commas inserted where they should have been inserted by JC to promote clarity)

        JC takes a QUOTE that I inserted into the thread to provoke THINKING and somehow infers several things:
        1) That I agree with everything that was said in the quoted piece (although I DO think he makes some excellent points, particularly about the change in “definition” of the meaning of the Second Amendment after the Civil War and the need to recognize that).
        2) That I am a communist. JC needs to cite some evidence for that idiotic statement (other than it SOUNDS to JC like I don’t agree with him, therefore I MUST be a communist-Marxist-socialist whatever.
        3) That I am convinced that the government will keep me “safe” from something (unspecified). DUH!

        Why do folks like JC waste our time with such mindless commentary? Do they have a need to “show off” and seek attention through their mindlessness?

        What a complete fool JC is.

      • JC

        Right Brain Thinker says:
        December 31, 2012 at 1:44 pm
        JC says, “RBT, like most communists, is quite convinced the government will keep him safe. (commas inserted where they should have been inserted by JC to promote clarity)
        _______________________________________________________________________

        Ah! Punctuation…and correction of grammar…the last refuge of someone who has nothing real to say but wants to feel superior. A “Pseudo Intellectual” as are most communists…

        Blather on Commie Boy…we know who you are. :)

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Actually, JC, I threw that in there just in passing—-if you can call me a communist, I can certainly point out your shortcomings in using the written word. No big deal, but I AM glad that it proves my point when YOU go to the “last refuge of someone who has nothing real to say but wants to feel superior”—-feigned smugness and condescension without answering anything I said that mattered.

        You again make unwarranted assumptions when you accuse me of being a.pseudo Intellectual (grammar lesson—-no caps or quotation marks necessary in this usage). In fact, am an ACTUAL intellectual, at least when compared to you. And you throw in “as are most communists…”—-as proof of what I just said. Pray tell where you came up with that bit of knowledge? I speak primarily to the use of “most”—-how many communists do you know anyway?

        “You say, Blather on Commie Boy…we know who you are”, and put an idiotic smiley face on the end. Yep, a real fool, and can’t help proving it to all.

        • Frank Kahn

          Intellectual would not be used to describe you, even pseudo intellectual would be stretching it.

      • eddie47d

        Still relying on name calling JC?

      • JC

        Not at all eddiot….
        I can make points good and bad…but the only part you’ll notice is the really simple stuff.
        That’s you level of perception….how’s the corn flakes and scotch this morning?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        JC once again shows how clueless he is by maintaining that he is capable of “making good points”. Self-delusion wins out over rationality yet again.

        A suggestion, JC?—–ask those of us who must read your “points” whether they are “good” or not. I agree that the one thing you show some small talent for is name calling. I am still waiting for you to address any of the thoughts and ideas that I put forth with real ideas or thoughts of your own.

      • JC

        Oh come on RBT…you ARE a communist and you should be proud enough of your convictions to stand by them. Everything you post is pro-government and anti liberty and freedom. You are the atypical statist. Now, why don’t you show that you’ve got a pair and at least admit what your convictions add up to….a “communist”. Or….just keep masquerading as something else, because you know that real Americans despise communists….slither on my low life friend.

    • TML

      “Not once did the Founders refer to these early amendments as a bill of rights”

      “A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse” – Thomas Jefferson Dec. 20, 1787

      The Yale Law School professor is either dishonest, or just plain stupid.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        TML says, The Yale Law School professor is either dishonest, or just plain stupid.

        I don’t feel a particular need to defend the Yale professor. I must point out to TML, however, that he may be the one who is “just plain” overreaching here in his need to strike out against thoughts that obviously cause him some pain. Perhaps he didn’t know about the 14th. Amendment and the court decisions that extended the Bill of Rights to the state level AFTER the Civil War. That SC was able to deny “free speech” to those who wanted to publish anti-slavery literature in the 1820′s and 30′s because the 1st. Amendment had no power in SC at that time. That the Second Amendment WAS interpreted two different ways pre- and post Civil War. Look up “selective incorporation” as it pertains to this discussion.

        “Not once did the Founders refer to these early amendments as a bill of rights”, says the professor. My limited knowledge of history tells me that the professor is correct and TML is overreachinhg when he comes back with “A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse” – Thomas Jefferson Dec. 20, 1787

        Small problem—-the Constitution was ratified in 1789, the Bill of Rights in 1791, a full two years later. Jefferson made this statement four years before that in 1787, probably during the heated debates that were raging between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists at the time.

        Jefferson was NOT talking about the SPECIFIC Bill of Rights that are the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution but rather to the general concept of a “bill of rights” from his position as an Anti-Federalist thinker. He perhaps made these remarks around the time of the Philadelphia convention of 1787.

        PS Did anyone know that Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Georgia apparently did not vote to ratify the Bill of Rights, until 1939. They were urged to do so on the 150th anniversary of adopting the Bill of Rights, and finally did it then.

      • TML

        If you don’t feel the particular need to defend, then why do you try?

        The bill of rights already extended to the states, which is why all states had to conform their constitutions upon ratification. That some of the violated those rights is evidence only of tyranny.

        The 2nd was not interpreted differently as it secures an individual right to bear arms same now as it did then and for the same purposes.

        You’re limited knowledge and evidence presented should allow logic to dictate that not only the professor, but you also, are exceedingly over-reaching. I referenced the exact debates regarding the addition of a bill of rights which were the early amendments including the 2nd. To say no foundere even mentioned a bill of rights in reference to what we have is utterly intellectually dishonest, to serve your own subjective purpose.

        You, and the professor, are wrong by any objective judgement.

    • Average Joe

      RBT,

      As passed by the Congress:

      A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

      The statement: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state,”
      is often misunderstood to mean that you need to be in a militia in order to own firearms. Well, point in-fact, every male of draft age who is of sound body and mind is considered a member of the “unorganized militia” according to the law, but that’s irrelevant, because the second statement:
      “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
      is the important part.
      This statement is the crux of the amendment and ensures that the individual right to bear arms is not infringed upon. Now, the way this sentence is constructed (in total), the right of the people allows for the well-regulated militia. The militia is a byproduct of the right to bear arms, not a prerequisite.
      Here is the grammatical break down from the prof:[ Copperud:]
      The words “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,” contrary to the interpretation cited in your letter of July 26, 1991, constitute a present participle, rather than a clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying ” militia,” which is followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject “the right,” verb “shall”). The right to keep and bear arms is asserted as essential for maintaining a militia.
      In reply to your numbered questions:

      [Schulman: (1) Can the sentence be interpreted to grant the right to keep and bear arms solely to "a well-regulated militia"?;]
      [ Copperud:] (1) The sentence does not restrict the right to keep and bear arms, nor does it state or imply possession of the right elsewhere or by others than the people; it simply makes a positive statement with respect to a right of the people.

      [Schulman: (2) Is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" granted by the words of the Second Amendment, or does the Second Amendment assume a preexisting right of the people to keep and bear arms, and merely state that such right "shall not be infringed"?;]
      [ Copperud:] (2) The right is not granted by the amendment; its existence is assumed. The thrust of the sentence is that the right shall be preserved inviolate for the sake of ensuring a militia.

      [Schulman: (3) Is the right of the people to keep and bear arms conditioned upon whether or not a well-regulated militia is, in fact, necessary to the security of a free State, and if that condition is not existing, is the statement "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" null and void?;]

      [ Copperud:] (3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence.
      [Schulman: (4) Does the clause "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," grant a right to the government to place conditions on the "right of the people to keep and bear arms," or is such right deemed unconditional by the meaning of the entire sentence?;]

      [ Copperud:] (4) The right is assumed to exist and to be unconditional, as previously stated. It is invoked here specifically for the sake of the militia.

      [Schulman: (5) Which of the following does the phrase " well-regulated militia" mean: "well-equipped," "well-organized," "well-drilled," "well-educated," or "subject to regulations of a superior authority"?]

      [ Copperud:] (5) The phrase means “subject to regulations of a superior authority”; this accords with the desire of the writers for civilian control over the military.
      [Schulman: If at all possible, I would ask you to take into account the changed meanings of words, or usage, since that sentence was written two-hundred years ago, but not to take into account historical interpretations of the intents of the authors, unless those issues can be clearly separated.]

      [ Copperud:] To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written today, it might be put: “Since a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.”

      [Schulman:] As a “scientific control” on this analysis, I would also appreciate it if you could compare your analysis of the text of the Second Amendment to the following sentence,
      “A well-schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.”

      My questions for the usage analysis of this sentence would be,
      (1) Is the grammatical structure and usage of this sentence, and the way the words modify each other, identical to the Second Amendment’s sentence?; and
      (2) Could this sentence be interpreted to restrict “the right of the people to keep and read Books” only to “a well-educated electorate” – for example, registered voters with a high-school diploma?]

      [ Copperud:] (1) Your “scientific control” sentence precisely parallels the amendment in grammatical structure.
      (2) There is nothing in your sentence that either indicates or implies the possibility of a restricted interpretation.

      The proper use of the English language is a wonderful thing…learn to use it….

      Got it? Good.

      AJ

      • posttime

        Ha! By George, I think he’s got it, A.J.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        So AJ puffs out his chest and pats himself on the back over how clever he is in lecturing us—-”The proper use of the English language is a wonderful thing”—-And saying “…learn to use it….”. He then smugly asks. “Got it? Good”. And some other self-delude individual says to AJ—-”Yeah, he got it!”

        Yep, AJ, I wish you HAD used just a BIT more of the English language here rather than copy for us a word-for-word piece from Schulman’s right wing pro-gun site. All that shows us is that you know how to highlight a passage, hit “copy”, switch to another screen, and hit “paste”. Not too impressive, although I suspect it took you quite a while to master that “trick”. I would much rather have heard some real thoughts and arguments from you rather than more of the same from the circular firing squad.

        Apparently you think Shulman’s little “word logic” exercise with a GRAMMAR AND USAGE EXPERT is in some way extremely meaningful and somehow counters the thoughts (NOT MINE) in the piece I posted to “provoke thought”? I wonder how many GRAMMAR AND USAGE EXPERTS are called to testify before the Supreme Court? (Would anyone care to look that up?) I will go out on a limb and say VERY VERY VERY FEW, since the interpretation of the law DOES go a bit beyond the simple meaning of the words and how they are strung together in the grammar sense. The judges have their own dictionaries and clerks to look things up when needed but I suspect they spend nearly all of their time looking at intent, precedent, context, etc. as they decide the meaning of a law. You know, like the things that the clip I posted mentioned—the things that apparently caused a CHANGE in the way the 2nd. was lpooked at and dealt with as time passed?

        To paraphrase a bit, “The proper use of the human brain is a wonderful thing—-you should learn to use it—-Got it?—-No?—–Too bad”

  • http://yahoo gail

    By the way for about 60 years of politics has produced a bunch of New World Order Presidents but George Sorros and Barack Obama take the cake. Dianne Fienstine and Sandra Fluck one a radical Commie and the other a Lesbian promotting birth control. Dont you assume that anybody that watched the Democratic Convention would have thought about the way they wanted to vote/

    • eddie47d

      Your too funny Gail and ignorant! Why would a Lesbian have a need for birth control? I didn’t know a woman could impregnate another !

      • Warrior

        edda, you progressive types just love to use “props” like all the dopes dressed up like health care workers and todays showing of “middle class” individuals used to “push” the progressive agenda. And the frosting today was at the end when mcduffus declared the cliff negotiations involve what’s “fair” for the “hard working folks” in this country right after he stated it will take more “investment”. Let me be the first to say, What a complete bozo! THE HARD WORKING FOLKS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM AND DID NOT CAUSE THIS SITUATION.

        WHAT in the world does SS and Medicare have to do with increasing income tax on the perceived wealthy? Nothing. Those programs are funded by their own set of taxes.

        Progressives must GO!

      • eddie47d

        That was desperate Warrior and made no sense to what I said!

      • posttime

        Eddie, she didn’t say lesbians “need” birth control. She said she was promoting it. You are really silly (“ludicrous” as pseudo-intellectuals like you put it).

      • eddie47d

        I got it the first time Posttime so why don’t you stop being the “ludicrous” one!

  • Motov

    And I also blame our lib-tard media for showing incidents that occur that support their claims for banning of guns. They rarely if ever show someone who saved the day by shooting a some loony toon running amuck in the streets,…Those stories are either hidden deep inside the newspapers or just ignored completely.
    It is obvious the party with the jackass, for their mascot, are out to take control of every aspect of our lives and dictate to us how to live.

    • eddie47d

      There is no more a strictly liberal media than there is a strictly a conservative media. Its all nothing more than a Corporate Media out to make money.

      • Motov

        There are far more liberal media than true conservative types, the so called conservative media are more likely neo-con type, and have liberal traits.
        I no longer watch any TV “news” because of their sensationalism to promote their one world government agenda.
        Political Correctness has effectively got their way, and are leading this nation down a path to its own demise.

    • posttime

      Exactly, Motov. It’s government micro-management. Michele even wants to tell us what to eat! (As if she really cares a rat’s A** about our health.) It really about putting honest businesses OUT of business with insane rules and regulations. Communists are INSANE.

  • http://yahoo gail

    When they talk about crimillizing us for guns lets talk about the 537 Washington gluttons that raided the frige and now want to tell us its Chinas fault or Bushes fault. No its the American peoples fault so obsessed with sex drugs and alcohol which are all promoted by The Federal Government They are all Lawyers Doctors Bankers and Politicians what happened to The Indian Chief

  • janderson

    First, assault weapons, then, others Till ALL weapons are gone. Then the Government can control us all, like communism.

    • Steve E

      “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States” (Noah Webster in `An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution’, 1787, a pamphlet aimed at swaying Pennsylvania toward ratification, in Paul Ford, ed., Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, at 56(New York, 1888))

    • eddie47d

      Janderson; Is that like saying “first they will take away our nukes” then we’ll have to fight with cheap non nuclear rockets instead? By golly maybe the world can regain its sanity if that would ever happen!

    • Chocopot

      The reason why the only history taught anymore to our kids is either left-wing revisionist or total fabrication is so the new generations will not know the truth that history is about to repeat itself. Look at the history of every totalitarian government from its beginning: one of the first acts was to go to all the local police stations, where privately-owned firearms were registered, and to then confiscate those firearms. In many cases, the owner was murdered as well since he/she might be considered a future troublemaker. Doubt me? Read about the early history of the Soviet Union, Mao’s China, Hitler’s Germany, Castro’s Cuba, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and others. Had these new governments not disarmed the population, they would never have been able to murder the untold millions they did. If you doubt it could ever happen here, I suggest you take a good, hard look at the events of the last 10 years or so. I am very scared – as you should be…

      • posttime

        Well said Chocopot. But try pounding that history through the thick skull of a “progressive.” They’ll believe it only after they’re lined against a wall.

    • ranger09

      Not only does other countries that would like to control us. Fear us, not because of our Military BUT because Every House is A Fort. Politicials as the Powers to Be fear us for the same reason, And as for personel protection THEY have their Guns plus they also have the Police And Military to Protect themselves. People its about time we replaced these UnAmerican Usless Politicians with Real Americans. And Voting will not do it, For they are only replaced by People like themselves. Its a Club folks and THEY decide who you vote for and who wins. But they have had us where they want us for a very long time. We are just Sheep following the Bell
      And we will remain like this until WE REMOVE THE BELL.

      • eddie47d

        The pro gun groups have put a bell around your neck and you are scared to take it off. They also have you where they want you for it is good for their business. They sell fear (and guns) and you have bought into their spiel line hook and sinker!

      • JC

        Right on ranger. Keep fighting the good fight.

  • JimH

    Criminals don’t obey the law. If we hinder the law abider even more, how is this going to help?
    Gun control isn’t really about stopping crime. It is however about control.
    Be wary of the politician who is afraid of you owning a gun. There is an ulterior motive.

    • eddie47d

      Could be the possibility of saving 20 kindergartners! Your proliferation of weapons in society has done nothing to lessen the carnage of these mass shootings. You can advocate for more school security but saying more weapons in this country will stop these mass shooting is ludicrous.

      • JimH

        Hi eddie, Do you think another silly law that a criminal will just ignore, and hinder only law abiders(not the ones you need to worry about) would have saved those children?
        To say that is what is just ludicrous.
        Don’t be so willing to give up a freedom that you will never get back if it doesn’t work, or you change your mind.
        It really isn’t about protecting the children. Number of guns used in a mass killing on Dec 14th, one. Number of guns in the U.S. that did no harm on Dec 14th-over 80 million.
        Gun ownership doesn’t equal crazed killer.
        Because I support the 2nd amendment don’t try to make me out to be a crazed baby killer.
        I’ve owned guns since I was 18 years old.(37 years) and haven’tkilled anyone or anything.
        I think of my firearms like a fire extiguisher or a first aid kit. If I never need it I’ll be happy, but if I need it it’s there.
        You’ve been busy typing this morning, time to cut back on the caffene.

      • eddie47d

        I’ve never been against the Second Amendment and see its importance. I also see the dangers that the NRA has pushed for such lax laws which allow the future criminal elements to easily get their hands on weapons. They actually write laws for state legislators and I don’[t agree with some of those. The GOA is even worse in allowing rouge gun dealers to sell their wares. So where is the clamour for greater punishment when they get caught? Gun owners also have an obligation to take on those dealers who bring the arm of the law down on folks like you. Its easy to pick on the failed fast & furious debacle but there is more to the story.

      • JimH

        Hi eddie, up until the mid to late 60′s, all you had to do was go to the sporting goods store, and buy the gun.
        No background check, no waiting period, no paperwork, no state firearms owners identification card. Talk about easy.
        We also had a lower crime rate. No mass shootings.
        There is something else going on and it isn’t because of easy access to firearms.
        It isn’t the NRA’s or GOA’s fault.
        The root of the problem is we have people that are willing to kill other people.
        If they can’t get a legally obtained firearm, they will get one illegally, if they can’t get one of those they will find another weapon.
        To blame shootings on guns is like blameing arson on Bic lighters or Ohio Bluetip matches.
        Murder is already illegal. No more laws are needed. It even covers non-gun realated murder.
        Don’t blame an inanimate objects on evil behavior by people. And don’t penalize responsable people because of the behavior of evil people.
        Have a Happy New Year.

      • JC

        eddie47d says:
        December 31, 2012 at 9:15 am
        Could be the possibility of saving 20 kindergartners! Your proliferation of weapons in society has done nothing to lessen the carnage of these mass shootings.
        _______________________________________________________________________

        And gun free zones have?
        Laws already in place have?

        You’re obviously an idiot, but I think it would take an entire team of psychiatrists working 24/7 for months on end to determine exactly what kind of an idiot you are…
        I can do it one word…”Communist”.

      • posttime

        My definition of ‘ludicrous’ is “really silly.” That’s the way I would define you.

      • eddie47d

        The problem with gun free zones is that they are advertised. Now if businesses or schools want to hire security or have someone with CC permit then that is fine by me. Its the wise use of guns not the proliferation of weapons in society. You are the one who keeps proving to be the “idiot” (your word) JC! You resort to the same old name calling in every comment which makes you nothing more than a cheap coward.

      • JC

        El Eddioto rants again….

      • http://www.nraila.org/ Mike

        Eddie I am the NRA. And the laws we help push also help us keep more than the Second Amendment alive and well. If they take it next will be freedom of speech then other parts of our Bill of Rights. You need to read what all the NRA stands for and does. There are other Amendments to the Bill of Rights that our government have walked all over. The current administration and the Bush administration both have abused theirs powers.. If our leader hides behind Presidential immunity and Bush takes us to war without consent from Congress there is something wrong with our government. We all can sit here and argue about gun violence all day, If another country decides to attack us do you thinks our military will be enough to help everybody. THAT IS WHY I WANT TO KEEP MY GUN. America has made a lot of enemies over these years and one day some one will get the balls to try us out on our home land. We are now stuck in a war that has been going on since the beginning of time and will always go on. The Russians fought them for years and lost I don’t think we are going to do any better in the end.
        God Bless America and Long Live the Republic.

        http://www.nraila.org/

  • http://www.facebook.com/gmallast Gary Mallast

    While I bit more extreme than I actually support–sometimes to get what you want you have to support something much more extreme.

    Therefore I am advocating the submission to Congress of a bill which copies Switzerland’s Militia laws and, in spirit, the U.S. Militia Act of May 1797.

    • eddie47d

      Okay I’ll possibly buy that! Then American can also abolish its standing army and reauthorize the draft of those 18-30 years old. Then each civilian of that age group can be obligated to defend this country from foreign invasion as they have in Switzerland. It also may keep us from our own foreign invasions and false flag wars which those Swiss don’t get involved with. You may have a win win answer there Gary! Remember that the Swiss government distributes those weapons to the appropriate age group and all weapons are registered along with accountability of all ammunition.

    • ranger09

      Why do you think switzerland is a free Country. Its free because it has always been Absent of War, Why because its the Money Country, All your Politicians have been hidding their Ilgotten gains here since it became a free safe zone. Thats why during any war no country has invaded, Switzerland is Protected by just about every Country in this World. Its all about the money Stupid.

  • http://www.gov-truth.com Ed

    We all know that the reason for gun control (and confiscation) espoused by Weinstein is to clear the way for total control of our population. Children have nothing to do with it except to provide a sad event to seize upon and emote. We just had a school bus crash in Oregon, killing 9 and wounding another 20. Why is no one crying for school buses to be eliminated. Certainly more are injured each year by school buses than by guns. Oh, the hypocrisy of it all!

    • eddie47d

      Where’s the hypocricy Ed? School buses,cars and even airplanes are built to transport people and are never intended for killing someone. Guns are bought for killing and oh yes, target shooting. Why do we have severe restrictions on boarding a plane these days? Too make sure they aren’t used for killing people! Why do you think we have seat belts on cars? So fewer people are killed. (school buses are quite often exempt from the seat belt laws). So maybe more restrictions would have saved some of those lives. We don’t deliberately make dangerous and deadly buses or planes but we keep upping the ante with weapons. Making sure they have greater killing power and more casualties. While some industries try to improve their safety record the weapons industry goes in the opposite direction.

    • Bill

      Ed right on. Anti gun advocates concentrate only on one thing, guns. They don’t see all of the killings that are taking place with other devices. This tell me one thing, i.e they don’t want to have safer society they want a slave society. They don’t they ban doctors, doctors are the second or third leading cause of death in America. (check it out with their own AMA journal) yet hundred of thousands killed and still our Feinsteins refuses to address this mass killings. Thousands of babies are put to death by abortion and still she refuses to acknowledge that government policies are the cause. A death at a school children by a school bus gets no national attention, the death of a school child by a gun get months of attention in the media. We will find out that these killings are practically all related to the pharma industry in some way.

      • eddie47d

        Maybe doctor errors or killings have been addressed Bill. Do you know for sure? Apparently they have a large lobbying group in the AMA as does the NRA. We know how these lobbying organizations work for an agenda and protects their own.

      • posttime

        Good points Bill.
        http://personalliberty.com/2012/12/31/the-gun-grab-cometh/
        The truth is that of the 12,664 murders committed in the United States in 2011, rifles were used in only 323 of them.
        “Knives or other cutting instruments” were used in 1,694 murders; hands and feet in 726; and blunt objects like clubs
        and hammers were used in 496. A ban on knives and hands and feet would be far more effective in reducing murders,
        which Nadler claims is the goal.

      • eddie47d

        Repeating lies doesn’t enhance your standing Posttime! Look up the real rate of death by a gun!

  • Guy Waukcinebar

    Keep in mind that 56 million people – 56,000,000! – had their weapons confiscated and then were murdered by their own government in the 20th century.

    • http://HOME Hobert Davis

      thanks Guy for trying to explain this to the dumb bunnies but they do not have brains enough to understand.

    • eddie47d

      Yes 56 million died but how many of them actually had weapons that were confiscated? That is unrelated to the American gun culture anyway since each legitimate citizen here is guaranteed the right to defend themselves. Nowhere does that right say that a automatic or semi-automatic has to be in the home in order to do that. More importantly they are not needed and have only increased the scope of these killings. There are way too many extreme gun owners who are also trying to set policy and those policies are not making us any safer.

      • Frank Kahn

        eddie47d, nothing you propose will make us safer either, it will only make your little child scardy cat whimpering mind more at ease.

      • posttime

        Eddie47d, tell that to the inner-city gangs who are armed to the teeth. I’m sure they’ll listen to your “reasonable” conclusions. NO ONE is addressing the MILLIONS of illegal weapons in the hands of these gangs who shoot each other 24/7. Just how in the hell will more stringent laws against legal gun owners make anybody safer? Obviously. it WON’T. You want to stop shootings? Really? Then go after THEIR guns, dummy.

      • eddie47d

        “millions of guns”? There you go again lying to enhance your “complaint”. I would love to lessen the killings in big city neighborhoods but folks like you demand they have the same gun carrying rights as you do. You make sure they have the same weapons that you have so the gang bangers don’t have to take any responsibility either. Besides most guns in the inner cities come from rouge dealers or just plain theft. Those rouge dealers is something else the likes of you won’t do nothing about so they keep funneling their weapons into the big cities. The problem with you is that you won’t do anything about the problem!

      • posttime

        In Tsarist Russia, there were guns all over the country. It was normal and necessary to have guns just as in rural America. But as usual, you miss the POINT (on purpose?): They were slaughtered by the “progressives” of that day — the Bolshevik commies — BECAUSE THEY WERE UNARMED. It doesn’t matter how many were disarmed, you ninny. And your mentioning it doesn’t apply here in another age and culture is BS. Communists are the same yesterday, today, and forever. It seems you are just one more deluded dummy that thinks communism has “improved” somehow. Hey, its “cool” now. ;)

        And to address another of your non-sequitur responses (you know, the one where you couldn’t refute the Democrats’ CRIMINAL FRAUD election activities, and you sidestepped by referencing the Watergate break-in), I say that Nixon was RIGHT to try to break into the Watergate Hotel safe. It contained DAMNING EVIDENCE on the Democrat Party’s TREASONOUS activities against America, and especially the players in the JFK assassination. So, Nixon was a “crook” after all. But he was a saint compared to Wilson, FDR (Stalin’s buddy), “crypto” LBJ, Clinton. and our current commie, BO. Please don’t try to defend them; you’ll only get more hash-marks on you. You can’t pick up a turd by its “clean” end.

  • Don

    why should innocent who will never use theeir weapons against others be robbed of having what they desire. it would help to vote out the royalty in congress like fienstien and pelosi and bunches of others. in the original constitution these people were meant to be representatives and servants of the people. now they are called lleaders whjo have the power to decide what everyone can have and can do with or with out the royalty permission. what happened to power of the people, for the people , by the people. trouble is we vote in these people and keep voting them in. they have more power than the people people. they decide what is best for the people. leaders do that. its time for the people to take it back. can you imagine what it would be like if the people had it back? what we have now in congress is our downfall. i wish we had more ron pauls, pat buchanans, and jfks. we’d be better off.

    • eddie47d

      You do have the power of the vote and you refuse to admit it. When you lose you make every attempt to sabotage that vote. Not everyone wanted George Wallace to be governor of Alabama but it was accepted even though he went against the principles of our laws that all men are created equal. Obviously enough people liked his prejudices and kept voting him in. Obviously enough people in California like Dianne Feinstein’s style and keep voting her in. If you can’t or won’t accept a vote then apparently you want and demand chaos yourself.

      • grschoeller

        You are such an idiot as well as the other anti American idiots when cain slew Able did you blam the club too. O suggest you take a little history lesson Hitler the early years these weapons in the hands of Americans is the only thing that stands between FREEDOM AND INSLAVERY. All a gun ban will do is deam law abiding people criminals. we will NOT obey an unlawful law period nor are we obligated to. the only way this ban could be inforced would be a door to door search violating yet antoher civil right. If they try and pass this they will declaring war on the American people. The gun owning American citizens are still the largest standing army in the world I suggest you think twice before you declare war on an army of over 150 million people.

      • eddie47d

        Your right about one thing we do have too many standing armies and no more safer!

      • posttime

        The conservative vote (the majority) was squashed by Democrat CRIMINALS in the most FRAUDULENT election in US history. And EVERYBODY knows it. It was much the same in ’08. WTF’s wrong with you? How did you get so SILLY?

        • Motov

          Why is it we also hear all about wall street loony-toons, making a mess of everything, “if they don’t get their way attitudes” but never hear about conservative when they gather and march? Is it because when the conservatives leave, they don’t leave evidence of their presence like the liberals do? I always thought liberals fought against pollution, in truth they pollute with their ideal world of blissfull people wandering around free from responsibility, so they can be in tune with nature,…. while us vile working people support their lazy arses. And why is it the majority of Democratic politicians were lawyers in their former lives?

      • eddie47d

        Posttime or is it Pasttime? Why don’t you go back to breaking into Democrat political offices which you Republicans are good at. Take care of your “criminal” element then you can cry about Democrats.

    • ranger09

      And just think People, WE pay them with our hard earned Money For what they do to us and our Country. Because they are the smart ones, and we are the dumb ones. I was always taught to be Proud of my Country and Its People. But to day i only feel sadness, And wonder where and what my Kids and Grandkids will have to face in there life. I sometimes wonder why so many of my family Fought, Bled and died, Plus all the other Americans and for what, Just to become another 3rd world country, So many of our Dreams will never be passed on. And i fear for the years ahead because I did Not teach my Kids to wear a Bell around their Neck. I taught them the way my family taught me and that was to be Proud,Honest and respect you fellow man, So i know what side my Kids will side with. But will there be another side.

  • diderot

    Heres the plan: before they collapse the economy, confiscate what assests u have left, dissolve the constitution, morph into the third world New World Order, they need to get anything which will prove an impediment to the reconstruction, i.e., your guns and your hunting and exmilitary “types.”

  • Liberterian

    If you can’t trust the government to protect you, how can you expect an naive idiot like Feinstein to differ from the mold of deceiving politicians. More of the same is not always the solution, maybe fixing what you already have and providing the teeth for enforceing the existing laws can help more.

  • doorguy

    It all Comes Down to are we willing to stand up for the constitution and tell these jokers to stick it!!!

  • JC

    “Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announced recently that she will introduce legislation early in 2013 that will essentially criminalize millions of law-abiding American gun owners.”

    Diane Feinstein is the criminal.

    • eddie47d

      James Holmes was a law abiding legal gun owner. How did that work out? Maybe you are the problem JC and can’t see the forest through the trees.

      • JC

        So “more ineffective gun control laws” are the answer?
        How did you work that one out?

        Rant on my little raving lunatic friend. :)

      • eddie47d

        Yes all those laws are mixed within all 50 states and one state may be totally different than another. First of all maybe we need to abolish some or all of those state laws that aren’t working and enact one or two good laws so everyone is on the same page. Then that could clear up your confusion about what works and what doesn’t work.

      • alicia

        Eddie, I read these postings and shake my head from right to left, wondering if most of these inhabitants are mostly psychos or brained washed. Then I read your postings and you say everything I want to and you make my life more easy and pleasant. THANK YOU!

      • Bill

        Eddie, the quote is “for” the trees, not “through” them. How old are you? There you go again with half truths, not very good, thought out and researched quotes. This makes you seem not very reliable in what you say.

      • http://yahoo.com Ron

        The answer to eddie’s problem are! He is a Democrat! Nough said!

      • JC

        And as always, eddiot thinks that the individual states should have no right to make their own laws. As always…he’s against sovereignty on any level. So much for individual rights eh eddie? Goose step onward … NAZI Boy! ;-)

      • eddie47d

        Not much difference in the meaning is their Bill you nit picking dweeb!

      • eddie47d

        Its hard to battle with goose stepping gun owners! Are there any sane ones out there? I said if states can’t get their act together then maybe there should be one or two solid laws. Enough of your excuses to keep the confusion flowing!

    • http://yahoo.com Ron

      Now we have the reason Fienstien is who and what she is! She is from California! Those people have worst inbreeding than Appallacia! I’m surprised she still has her teeth! Oh yeah she can afford new teeth, we OUR tax money pays for them! I forget that part!

  • http://HOME Hobert Davis

    Cars kill more people than guns will the crazies want to ban car sales! Yes I think obama will along with his crazies.

    • eddie47d

      The only thing “crazy” is your statement. BORING!

      • Hobert Davis

        eddie i have not said that about your statements. never will.

      • eddie47d

        Who in the real world has advocated the ban on car sales? Never heard that before so yes that is rather crazy. Besides my real point was that cars are not bought to kill anyone people just happen to die by careless use. Guns on the other hand are mostly bought to kill someone. Whether they do or not is because of Deliberate recklessness of the person holding the weapon.

    • Motov

      Actually people kill more people than by any other means,…
      So if we pass laws restricting,….oh,…yeah,…they did that,…but people are still killing people! Will this madness ever end? I have yet to see a gun that magically gets up, point itself at a human being, (or anything else for that matter) and pull its own trigger.
      But we gotta pass laws so evil people can kill more people without fear of of getting shot at! So we can prove the weapon killed people! Never mind the people using those weapons, We must pass laws against the weapons!!!

      Hey you bleeding heart pansy liberals

      Ever heard of common sense?

    • http://yahoo.com Ron

      A bus accident yesterday (according to the NEWS) killed 5 and “wounded” 20 others! MY GOD man! What kind of weapon did the bus use? And was it an illegal legal Assault Rifle? No one on the bus tried to stop it? No heros this time. Any way, Obamanation will now ban buses, for carrying illegal whatevers! YOU KNOW! If they ban the buses the drive by shooting will now be done with buses and “AUTOMATIC” Uzi’s. The bad guy wins, the good giys lose! Where is Gene Autry, Hopalong Cassidy, Roy Rogers, Tom Mix, Audie Murphy? They will save us!

      • eddie47d

        School buses aren’t regulated or mandated to have seat belts which would have save most Ron.

  • Bill

    Just remember the names of all of the polititians that support this bill. This should be a rallying cry to unite us against the progressives

    • eddie47d

      I will vote for someone who takes a common sense approach to these mass shootings. If its taking away multiple round magazines or registration of assault :type” weapons so be it. If they increase funding for mental health then I will listen to them. If they want to arm school administrators (not teachers) then I will listen to them. I will also listen to politicians who take on Big Pharma and their distribution of drugs that are causing more harm than good. Better accountability for illegal drugs would be better for us also. Some need to be legalized and others need to be controlled and to get users into treatment centers faster. I’m tired of this country being doped up on dangerous pharmaceutical drugs and equally dangerous semi-automatic weapons. To me its all of the above not either or!

      • Rod

        Eddie you appear to be one of those who appears to say “my mind is made up, please don’t try to confuse me with the facts” In a twelve year period I was a police officer in three different cities that were so dangerous that even we were not allowed to carry guns in most areas as we would be attacked by roving gangs and have our weapons taken away and used on us. In each of these cities we averaged three to four murders a week a number of attacks and suicides. San Quentin, CMF Vacaville and North Kern Delano.
        It is not the gun but the person behind the gun. Unless you attack me or mine you will never need to fear me or my guns. I have owned guns since I was eight years old and haver only shot people that the government armed me and told me who to shoot. It is not the gun but the person behind the gun, a normal law abiding is going to become a murderer or criminal just because they own a gun. Criminals decide what law they want to violate and then get the gun.

      • Ronny D.

        I agree with about about voting for someone who will take a common sense approch to shootings or crime in general, but banning guns is no where near any kind of common sense. You people need to stop worrying about guns and worry about fixing the real problem, which is getting the criminals off our streets. Swift and Harsh punishment is what it is going to take. why do we have criminals sitting on death row for 15 to 20 years, which WE have to pay for, before they are finally executed if they ever are executed at all. Criminals like that shouldn’t be breathing any more than 6 months. That’s plenty of time to make their appeal. Swift and very harsh punishment is the ONLY thing that will have an affect on crime. And that is the common sense approch. How anybody as uninformed about what’s going on as Senator Feinstein can get into politics is beyond me. The sad thing about it is the United States Of America is getting an abundance uninformed people. So call all the polititions and demand that they stop trying to pumish law abidding citizens and do something about the CRIMINALS. Quit worrying about being politically correct and trying to get re-elected and get the criminals off of OUR streets

    • fatboy57

      Hey Bill, the 112 Congress should leave a bad taste in all of our mouths. They have been deemed the worst Congress we have ever had. This was the do nothing Congress. So the ones left in there should be voted out on their next election.

      • steve carroll

        Everyone need to go look up The (Dick Act of 1920) and then send to Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) And tell her to read what is already inthe law.

        On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Personal Liberty Digest™ wrote:

        > ** > fatboy57 commented: “Hey Bill, the 112 Congress should leave a bad > taste in all of our mouths. They have been deemed the worst Congress we > have ever had. This was the do nothing Congress. So the ones left in there > should be voted out on their next election.” >

  • Bill

    We need to have gun classes in all schools. Showing gun safety and marksmanship

    • JC

      Not a bad idea at all.

  • brand inspector

    Schools are were stopped by the socialist airy fairy democraps, after the mentally sick phyco head clowns who operate iff of theories and BS Diane and Hillary are as most dumbocraps, softheaded and never tell what type of handgun they carry or why the have armed escourts when they are wasting air and space.. Guess the Wellessee girl though a clot, must not had her legs high enough in the air, or wasn’t moving aaround enough.

    • http://yahoo.com Ron

      How convenient Hillary got sick so she wouldn’t have to testify before the Congressional Board investigating the Embassy killings, how convenient!

      • eddie47d

        She was seriously injured (concussion) and now has another internal problem. Good grief Ron why are you so negative? Next time your in that way I suppose we should laugh our arses off,Right!

  • Bill

    Private gun ownership should be the main point for us to regroup, and unite to throw out the socialist bums

    Do not be side tracked by any other issues except economics and personal freedoms

    • eddie47d

      Well Bill if the likes of Brand Inspector is running the show then his insane drivel will cause you to lose more than your guns rights. If he wants to ramble on like a lunatic then everyone will think gun owners belong in the asylum in which he escaped!. I agree that economics and other personal freedoms are far more urgent.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dan.mancuso.56 Dan Mancuso

    Any body know where a law abiding, responsible fire arms owner, who likes to practice by target shooting to keep my skill level up, can purchase body silhouette targets with the images of the gun grabbers and other American communists on them?

  • forrest r.stidham

    feinstein should be locked up and shipped out of the u.s.a. as an enemy of the american people.

  • Charles

    More children die on bicycles every year than gun deaths in a decade. Time to confiscate those child killing bicycles.

  • Charles

    More children die in swimming pool accidents annually than gun caused deaths. Time to fill all those child killing pools with dirt.

    • http://yahoo.com Ron

      AGREED!

    • eddie47d

      Swimming pools and bicycles have nothing to do with this issue Charlie! If you want swimming pool safety then bring it up at an appropriate time or talk to you city council!

      • Motov

        Ever heard of statistical process control Eddie? By taking raw data and applying it, you will find the leading cause of what’s wrong in any given process. And seeing “guns” are NOT the number one killer of this nation, We should do better on focusing what is causing a greater harm,….BTW increase of gun sales in California have caused crime to drop.
        So I guess the problem is being addressed.

  • http://yahoo.com Ron

    From the time I was 12 years old, I had guns in my hands! My Dad taught us kids the good and the bad of holding a gun! The safety, and the dangers! While I went to school each day and had the “bullies” take my lunch money day after day, and my paper route took me thru a bad section of Town and the Big Kids would steal my route money, NOT ONCE, YES NOT ONCE did I think of going home and getting one of my guns and fixing the matter! NOT ONCE! It would have been so easy, but good Family traits, good training by Dad, and belief in GOD, took away the sting! So what went wrong with this hideous World we live in? Violent Video games, vilolent movies, no Parents at home to supervise, no morals, a lot of insanity, and list goes on……….

  • http://yahoo.com Ron

    Did everyone look at the EVIL picture of Feinstein above in this article? Has anyone CHECKED her background? Has anyone checked her mental status? Has her mug been shot and placed on a CCW license along with ALL your data, If she bought a gun, was she asked for her CCW? Filled out 10 pages of paperwork? Well if she lived here in Connecticut where all this trouble started, she would have gotten thrown out of the gun store JUST LIKE the insane brat did when he tried to buy a rifle the week before the shootings! We have the toughest gun laws in the Country, SO tough that 30 other States recognize the CT STATE CCW license while traveling! Now THAT’S TOUGH! But the kid wasn’t of age to hold a gun, he wasn’t licensed to have a gun! And he didn’t take a NRA gun course, required in this State before you are even interviewed by the State Police when applying! If you make the 20,000 plus written guns laws work, we might have a chance to stop all this carnage and the [expletive deleted] against LEGAL GUN CONTROL!

    • Bimbam

      There is another picture of her. If you look closely she seems to be a deranged. You have to look carefully. I swear she looks deranged when examind carefully. I thought it was me, but looks like maybe not!

      • posttime

        I see the same deranged expressions in both Polosi and Sharpton.

  • someone who cares about the USA

    How many people will the police shoot when all these people show up at their local sheriffs office or police station to see if their weapon in “legal” to own?

    • posttime

      The Bolsheviks did just that to the Russians. They invited the officers of the opposition to come in and register their weapons. After complying, they were shot on the spot. That’s a commie for you.

  • Bimbam

    Why we must fight? (And how to fix it very easily).

    I have a theory and I think it’s true. I have been mulling over what a liberal is and why they do what they do.

    It may sound sophomoric and trite but I think it has to do with “spoilt-child” syndrome and I’m not kidding.

    They actually want to be arrested, they actually want a beating! You see, if you look at most liberals they had life easy, too easy. Everything was handed to them, most hardly worked hard at all. They cannot believe what is so easily lauded on them while the rest of us trudge through life. Honor, riches, come so easy so they develop a certain guilt. A guilt that makes them wonder why they have not been punished like the rest of us. So they do the most outrageous things. Things that people like you and me cannot uderstand the eventual SELF-DESTRUCTIVE behavior they want to give everyone.

    They actually want you to give them a beating so much that they impose this behavior on the rest of us. The more the merrier.

    I read somewhere once that teenagers said they actually wanted their parents to discipline them when they went awry. Thus the outrageous behavior. The proof of love was needed in the discipline.

    If you examine most, if not all liberals, you will see most had vastly privilged lifes. They cannot believe how stupid people are to put them in such underserved positions in life! Thus, the typical adolescent and seemingly atrocious, ungrateful behavior they display for all to see.

    Look at your typical teenager. Is that not a liberal life? Everything is handed to you? No worry about food or shelter? No need to find work? See the similiarities between liberal behavior and a teenager?

    Understanding this, you can see liberals were born to be a thorn on the side of society. Their behavior need not rile you anymore if you look at it as “spoilt child” syndrome even though they are adults now.

    NOW YOU KNOW THE REMEDY. Give them the beating they want and they deserve to preserve THEIR SANITY! Poking them so they see this is not a fairy tale to them (the good underserved life.)

    So, by beating I mean we must fight all their nasty agendas and put up with when we realize it is not stupid at all or unexplainable, only that they want the beating they never got in life and NOW WANT because of, yes guilt!

    So be mean, be firm, never give in, but most of all give them the secular whacking they want and you need not feel no guilt or anger about. It does take getting off that couch, however.

    LET’S DO IT! There is a march taking place on November 5, 2013 to ARREST ALL OF CONGRESS, A CERTAIN MR. BARRY SAETORO, AND THE SUPREME COURT. IT IS NOT A PROTEST BUT A SIMPLE CITIZEN ARREST ACTION FOR THE CRIMINAL
    BEHAVIOR OF INDIVISUALS WHO HAVE USURPED THE CONSTITUTION WHICH THEY TOOK AN OATH TO DEFEND AND PRESERVE AND HAVE NOT FULFILLED THAT OBLIGATION OR DUTY AND HAVE COMMITTED TREASON.

    Do not be afraid. Remember they all are liberals with spoil-child syndrome and actually want to be arrested. We must carry through and do our duty lest we all suffer under this common but easily corrected malady. And by not doing nothing we are being complicit in their outrageous behavior and may even show we approve of it! And they will keep carrying this outrageous behavior if nothing is done about it. Thus, it is OUR right to remove a government that is no longer serving the people and destructive.

  • Dee

    This administration is becoming a bunch of theives.

  • Steve

    miss finstine need to read the (Dick Act 1902) After you look it up send it to all your friends

  • ONTIME

    I suggest that many millions of you use your power of representation(while you got it) to ask the Senator from Ca to foregoe her tax paid security to achieve parity and stop the moral duplicity of the left….She wants to take away your ability to keep your security intact but we pay for her security, now if she has to pay for her own then we have parity and both share the need of the 2nd amendment……This moral duplicity is the left’s favorite tool, progressive tax, ciggarette ban, climate crisis arguments with no basis in fact but sounds so rightgeous and moral until they happen and then you realize the left has nabbed another of your freedoms.
    Now if the left can rassle you out of this gun amendment, then you must realize that all the other amendments that protect your rights will be taken away over time also and there will be nothing you can do because the government, criminals and terrorist will all have weapons..you will just be target practice…Comprende’ amigos?

    Keep in mind that the use of parity can go a long ways…think about it.

  • dan seymore

    Marine1
    I have a couple of questions that are bothering me right now.
    If the all knowing Feinstein has her way, if we are not allowed to hand down our firearms to our family members and you have to turn them in to the authorities, isn’t that a form of confiscation.
    The Founding Fathers were very intelligent individuals as they had already experienced the oppression of government over it’s citizens and looked ahead at what the future might hold.
    If you look at the government now they’re already deceiving us with the coverup of what happened in Benghazi, the coverup of Fast and Furious, the Susan Rice debacle. the bailout of GM , which still owes the billions to the tax payers.
    So I;m kind of curious as to what happens to the citizenry when govt. goes awry? How do we defend ourselves? I’m not saying it’s going to happen but it seems as though govt thinks that we can’t figure out what we want out of life and that they do.
    Can somebody help me with this. I don’t have any firearms but I don’t think that it right to deprive those who wish to have them.
    Feinstein kind of looks like the lady ridind the bike in the wizard of oz.
    just a thought

  • ibcamn

    most of all liberal or progressive thought’s are handed down through generation’s of liberal thinking and hatred to the US..just as we were taught to follow the constitution!most of the politicians were taught at liberal collages and between that and being brain washed at home,you get these guys and the idiot in the white house!Feinstein is just one of them who happens to be as ugly as the day is long,that’s all!and when one liberal get’s up to voice his/her belief’s,then like minded liberal’s do the same,they,jump on the band wagon!they see an oppertunity to get what they want,listen to Obama speak,every time he does,it’s always,”i”wanted this,”i”believe,”i”made this happen!!then he’ll tell you that,”you don’t need this,or”you”believe that to be true-”i”don’t believe that to be true!he say’s this is the way of the future that “i”believe we need to be!!..it’;s all a cover up to make us sheep,or ‘”homers”as they(liberals)call us!!if your not with them your the enemy,period!!….they will use every bit of power they grabbed to beat us to there will,the more you protest the more they tax and penalize you for being American….this gun grab is one more step to further there end game,and sad to say,a lot of people are jumping on that band wagon…..stand up and hold the line!

  • posttime

    She wants to “criminalize” legitimate gun owners? What about those millions of illegal weapons in the inner cities? Is she going after them too? Absolutely not. They’ll NEVER give up their guns. After all, they’ll need them when they invade unarmed suburbia.

  • Rod

    Folks you can’t argue with Eddie. If you look at all his posts they are all personal. It matters not that Eddie and his family is unknown to us. We do not know where he lives or anything about him other than the trash he posts, but.. according to him us owning guns somehow threatens he and his family. Most of his garbage is like he believes that just the act of owning a gun will cause a normal law abiding person to someday turn into a mass killing machine.
    The tool designed to kill will whisper in our ear like the Son of Sam’s neighbor’s dog telling us to kill until we can no longer resist and we will go and murder women and children. It is the gun that makes us killers. We need to ban knives and forks because they make us fat.
    I have owned guns since I was eight years old and now in my sixties I can honestly say that the only people I have ever shot were those the government told me to shoot in my fourteen months in VietNam and to save a life when I was a Correctional Officer at San Quentin Prison.

  • JUSTIFIED

    1. Feinstein is an “F” ing old Croan, and everyone should pray she dies a perfectly natural death, SOON. (We certainly don’t want another martyr, now do we?) There will be great celebration throughout this Nation, and jigs of joy danced especially in Kalifornia, when the Wicked Old Witch is finally dead. Feinstein is an ignorant, incompetent, dishonest and dangerous Politician, and everyone would benefit from her sudden departure. 2. Guns are tools, yet it is the human who applies the tools that kill, be it blades, chemicals, vehicles, arson, explosives, biological agents, garrote, guillotine, or whatever is handy to accomplish the job. There have always been Killers since Cain’s fall from Grace, and there always will be Killers amongst the sheep. Why would the sheep allow themselves to be disarmed and placed at a serious disadvantage, when their fathers fought and bled to earn them the right to defend themselves as Free Sheep? 3. Only Free-men and Free-women own and possess personal firearms and sufficient ammunition to defend their lives and personal property, whereas Slaves are always denied that right for obvious reasons. The wolves, of course, will arm themselves with anything they are offered on the Black Market of stolen or illegally imported contraband arms. Some of you truly ignorant A_ _Holes think the responsibility for your safety and property rights are securely protected by uniformed Police Officers, but many of you will find out differently when you become victims. Each and every Citizen in this Nation has both the moral God given right, and the guaranteed legal right to an armed self defense and the right to preserve their personal, legally owned property from theft or damage by others. 4. Feinstein’s $200 per gun tax proposal certainly means that the RICH people will be able to afford whatever level of firearm protection/defense they desire, but the poor people will certainly be at a financial disadvantage. 5. There is a serious liability involved in gun ownership that the public is NOT addressing. All firearms must be secured under lock and key when they are not being used, and very strict access control must be imposed by the OWNERS at all times. Negligence in access control should make the firearm owner legally liable for any misuse or abuse incidental to the unsupervised use of a personal firearm employed in the commission of a crime. We have sufficient LAWS on the books concerning firearms, how about enforcing them with some common sense? Why are we not pushing the RESPONSIBILITY OF GUN OWNERSHIP to the forefront? 6. Instead of fewer guns on the street, we should have more concealed carry permits issued to people of good character who have been properly vetted, and trained, and who qualify at the range on an annual basis. These secretly armed volunteers could be as much of an anonymous and effective deterrent to criminal activity as our “Air Marshalls” are on the Airlines. We need more armed Sheepdogs mixed-in, throughout the various habitat that sheep tend to congregate in. (Schools, Malls, Churches, etc.). They should look like, sound like, and behave like ordinary sheep, unless they are fortunate enough to be in the right place, at the right time, in order to rise to the “call of duty” in an emergency and put a stop to the madness. We have volunteer Fire Departments all over this nation, and our Law Enforcement use to deputize volunteer citizens as Posse Members, so I don’t know why our neighborhood watch couldn’t have a “Plain Clothes” division of vetted, trained, qualified, certified, armed citizens with concealed carry permits. 7. Nearly all of the individuals who decide to manifest their aberrant behavior by perpetrating a public massacre, know that it is a suicide mission, want to communicate some injustice they have witnessed or suffered, and they ALWAYS bring more than one gun, usually several handguns because they are easier to conceal and transport. Feinstein is stupid if she does not recognize that an 18 round, tubular magazine fed 22 long rifle will certainly kill you as dead as any “assault weapon” can. What do you think all the Farmers use to harvest livestock? These so called assault weapons are mislabeled because they do not have any selective fire switch and so they are far from military grade weapons. Your military and police agencys have the real assault weapons. These gun grabbing politicians have a piece meal approach to fulfilling their compliance agreement with the NWO United Nations US Civilian Disarmament Treaty. Is your bath water getting too hot little froggies? Incremental Enslavement. Every one of these elected politicians took a sworn oath of office to uphold, honor, and enforce the US Constitution and it’s Amendments, and most of them are LIARS and TRAITORS. Are we the trusted citizens who elected these scoundrels to serve us, or are we no longer trusted free men and women, but rather something much less in their eyes?

  • Ab

    No freaking idiot from ca. or obamanation from tx city will ever take my guns.I will die fighting for the right God gave me to defend myself and family.Take that to the bank.

  • Gary

    Worth a look and its’ relevance today…

    Below is a verbatim summary of the proposed Senator Feinstein legislation as it appears on her website:

    Stops the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of more than 100 specifically-named firearms as well as certain semiautomatic rifles, handguns and shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
    Stops the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of large-capacity ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
    Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
    grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
    exempting more than 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting and sporting purposes; and
    exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.

    Here is the 1968 Gun Control Law…. and its previous connections and ultimate relevance today!

    http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/GCA_68.htm

    Richard Stevens is a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and author of Dial 911 and Die (Mazel Freedom Press, 1999).
    Underlying all “gun control” ideology is this one belief.” “Private citizens don’t need firearms because the police will protect them from crime.” That belief is both false and dangerous for two reasons.
    First, the police cannot and do not protect everyone from crime. Second, the government and the police in most localities owe no legal duty to protect individuals from criminal attack. When it comes to deterring crime and defending against criminals, individuals are ultimately responsible for themselves and their loved ones. Depending solely on police emergency response means relying on the telephone as the only defensive tool. Too often, citizens in trouble dial 911 . . . and die.

  • http://yahoo.com Joann Flanagan

    One only has a right to selfpreservation if one has a right to live in the 1st place.
    When the Supreme Court ruled we do not have a Right To Life it ruled we do not have a right to selfpreservation.
    Untill Roe vs Wade is overturned none of us have any rights including those listed in the Constitution.
    John Lock explains this quite clearly in his Secound Treatise on Civil Libertys-written before the American Revolution much less Roe Vs Wade.
    Learn from the Past or repeat it!
    Joann Flanagan

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Joann Flanagan,”

      WHY ARE OLDER CONSERVATIVE-WOMEN NOT TELLING THEIR DAUGHTERS TO TEACH THEIR DAUGHTERS ABOUT “PRO-LIFE” VALUES? IN ORDER TO GET Roe-vs-Wade OVERTURNED, CONSERVATIVE FEMALES HAVE A DEFINITE ROLE TO PLAY.

      SINCE PEOPLE THINK “DOOMS-DAY” IS NEAR, THE TIME HAS COME FOR CONSERVATIVES TO BE PROACTIVE IF THEY SEEK THE “Kingdom of Heaven.”

  • http://contact@nationalgunrights.org Mike

    Every one needs to go here and sign this petition. I see we already have enough members to oust Frankenstein but more would help.
    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/impeach-sen-diane-feinstein-violating-her-oath-support-and-defend-constitution-united-states-re-awb/sdKKkKJ5#thank-you=p

  • http://liberty Joesph Galarza

    we the people” We The People” not the goverment, my love for this country goes beyond my personal ideas, we must not look at the Goverment regulating Guns as a party thing, it is the first move for other rights, to be in question, I live in a state that say’s that a drug that has an effect on a person good judgment, and inhabitions is good and will not have a bad effect on our society, we the people must stand for commom sence and open our eye’s to our moral downfall, I am not talking for a group or party,but for our future, where are we heading,when a Pelosi say’s to the Pres. to bypass the congress, a part of the goverment that repersents the people, or should, the congress is our last line of the defence of the people.Pelosi should be removed from office for her wanting to tell a standing President to ignore the Constitution and rules that the President swore to protect, no President, Judicial or legislator has the right to over look the Constitution, you(politician’s and judges) swore to protect the Constitution, not change it. WE THE PEOPLE

  • Mrs. Z

    CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON and EDDIE47D…you two crack me up. You have no concept as to how important our freedoms are and you will not until the day you realize that you are a prisoner of BIG government.
    Arming guards at schools seems to be necessary at Obama’s kid’s school(s) [uh, they are negro as you put it] so why would you not want everyone else’s kids protected? Plus, shouldn’t parents have the right to protect their own families in self-defense? Or would you lie down for a criminal and allow them to beat, rape and kill your kin while you watch and wait for your turn. Do you see how idiotic you sound? Maybe you have not yet become a victim so that is why you do not have compassion for others. Your do-goodie bull will not help you when you are being attacked by some crazy lunatic coming at you with a butcher knife because he wants your money or watch or to just kill you for the fun of it. Maybe you are both wackjobs and can relate to the criminal mind and that is why you want the innocent left defenseless. What is your deal? Are you insane or just plain stupid because any sane person knows that if you give evil an inch they will take mile after mile and you will be a slave with no freedoms and no way back.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Mrs. Z,”

      YES – BEING NEGRO MALE MEANS I GREATLY UNDERSTAND THE CRIMINAL MIND; IT IS VITAL FOR BEING ABLE TO MANEOUVER IN THE MIDST OF NEGROES WHO MAY BE LIFELONG ASSOCIATES – EVEN, DISTANT FAMILY MEMBERS – YET, FIND THEMSELVES ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LAW.

      THAT IS WHY I KNOW ARMED SECURITY IN SCHOOLS WILL NOT WORK. NEGROES – EVEN, CHILDREN – UNDERSTAND THEIR SURVIVAL MAY DEPEND ON KNOWING HOW TO ACT WHEN SOMEONE HAS A GUN.

      CAUCASIANS FEAR CRIMINALS BECAUSE THEY KNOW PEOPLE OF COLOR “HOLD” THEM RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OF THE PROBLEMS IN THEIR LIVES. CAUCASIANS ONLY “SAVING GRACE” IS NEGROES’ FEAR OF RECEIVING HARSHER PENALTIES FOR HARMING A CAUCASIAN.

      • Frank Kahn

        I pay close attention to the things you say, sometimes I feel confused, and other times simply appalled.

        I dont doubt your statements about how twisted blacks social structure is. In fact, I wish your statements could be used to help correct the massive problem we have with blacks in this country without it being seen as racist.

        At first, this set of statements are confusing, but when I remember how you made the comment that seeing authority with guns would bring out the criminal actions in them.

        “THAT IS WHY I KNOW ARMED SECURITY IN SCHOOLS WILL NOT WORK. NEGROES – EVEN, CHILDREN – UNDERSTAND THEIR SURVIVAL MAY DEPEND ON KNOWING HOW TO ACT WHEN SOMEONE HAS A GUN.”

        White kids understand the same thing, so they act respectfully and with caution. But that is not what you mean is it? They see it as a personal threat that has to be neutralized or eliminated. They automatically think that they are the target. Who taught them this twisted view of civilization? And dont try to tell me it is all because of white racist actions against them, because I have ran into this same mentality in small rural communities that dont have that problem. It comes from their social structure, their friends and family. We may have started it but they are not going to let it end.

        “CAUCASIANS FEAR CRIMINALS BECAUSE THEY KNOW PEOPLE OF COLOR “HOLD” THEM RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL OF THE PROBLEMS IN THEIR LIVES.”

        Where did you get the silly notion that we fear criminals because blacks hold us responsible for their problems? If someone is trying to kill me I am not going to be thinking, “OH CRAP, NOW THE BLACKS ARE GOING TO BLAME ME FOR THEIR PROBLEMS”. I will be totally focused on doing whatever it takes to take them out before they take me out. And, quite frankly, I could care less if ignorant black people blame me for the problems they are causing themselves.

        “CAUCASIANS ONLY “SAVING GRACE” IS NEGROES’ FEAR OF RECEIVING HARSHER PENALTIES FOR HARMING A CAUCASIAN.”

        Now, if this is true, it is a good reason to eliminate all blacks from the country.

        Maybe I am naive, I live in a place where there is something called justice. If a black man kills a black man he gets the same punishment as if he killed a white man. Of course it is lopsided, considering that a white man gets a bigger prison sentence for killing a black man that if he killed a white man. You see, in this screwed up country we have what is called MINORITY PREFERENCE. If you do it against a minority it is a bigger crime. If I slap a white man I get charged with assault / battery (misdemeanor), if I slap a black man I am charged with a HATE CRIME (felony). Now, I am wondering if you made this statement to explain why blacks kill blacks. They just have to kill someone so they kill the person that results in the lesser punishment?

        I will get a smaller sentence for killing a white man but I dont kill them just for that reason.

        Are you saying that BLACKS want to kick my butt just because I am WHITE? SAVING GRACE? What kind of statement is that anyway. I am lucky there are harsh penalties for black crimes against whites or my life would be in jeopardy?.

        Are all blacks militant racists or just insane criminals? I dont care what they THINK someone did to them because of their color, I did not do it and wont be punished or pushed around because of it. When the black culture learns how to act in a civilized manner in society most of our problems will melt away. As long as they keep pushing this black racist BS and claiming whites owe them something because 200 years ago someone in this country owned slaves, there will be problems for them. I dont blame and hate all modern day Germans just because of what they did to my Jewish brothers in WWII. I dont hate all Japanese because of the mass slaughter of Americans at Pearl Harbor.

        I know you have said you dont like Negros, so I am not unloading on you as a person. I just cant fathom why you seem to defend their pathetic asocial attitudes in this country. Personally, I dont give a rats behind how armed security will affect black students, if they dont like it they can just drop out of school earlier than they planned. Or maybe they can get good home schooling from their family that taught them this racist hate for us.

  • http://christianhistoryandtheology.com Xuong

    Gun Control is illegal, it is high crime against human freedom, it is tyranny and oppression in the making. America was born out of the 2nd Amendment and we must keep it that way. No one has the right to take away another’s guns, magazine, and ammunition because he/she wants to do it. Defend your 2nd Amendment now before you have nothing left to defend. Our Founding died to create the 2nd Amendment another tyranny and oppression like they faced and they know future generations do not have to go through what they went through. The 2nd Amendment is not about deer or duck hunting either as those law maker people claimed. Ask the people in North Korea if they like to have their 2nd Amendment, people in Communist China facing government oppression. People in Russia, Cuba, Syria, Egypt, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, Africa, Asia, and Middle East countries where their government are slaughtering their own people like nothing. Over 100 millions of people have slaughtered in the past under Communism, we must not let history repeat itself.Mass shootings were not done by responsible gun owner citizens. Assault weapons has less than 1% of gun incident every year. Everyone is responsible for his/her own action, it is illegal to penalize everyone because of another’s action. It is moral break down in our country not guns. Gun does not kill, people do and the Devil is in the thick of it. The Devil wants to put the mark of the beast on everyone like the Holy Spirit in Christian believers so he is ratcheting up Gun Control in these last days before he show up the scene to provide false peace and begin to control the world by deadly force.
    According to the Center of Disease Control report, Tues Sept 04, 2012, 67 million people in the U.S. have high blood pressure, 36 million are not treated for their high blood pressure, an estimated 14 million are not even aware they have the disease. Another 6 million know they have the disease but were not on medication, and an estimated another 16 million were being treated but still had persistent high blood pressure. This health problem contributes to nearly 1,000 deaths per day which is about 3.65 million of people die annually of this disease alone and about $131 billion dollars in direct health care costs annually and this ailment also contribute to other health issues. About 1000 people died every day on this health issue alone, where is the congressional people drafting legislation to stop people from what they can eat and how much they can eat? If the Law Makers in Washington D.C. concern about dead, they need to tackle health related issues that kill so many millions in the U.S. every year. It is the Anti-Christ, folks behind the scene is doing this so if you fight, you need supernatural power of God to intervene. Law makers who are for gun control are Communist and doing the work of the Devil on this issue, not Americans who fought for the freedom we stand for from the beginning. “What we attain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.” I served 2 tours in Afghanistan and almost got killed. Now I am coming back for the freedom I died for and have someone taking it away just because they want to do it? This is madness. America, we must rise up to fight now on the legislative front before it is too late.

  • http://kellienicholson.wordpress.com kellienicholson

    It’s understandable that we all want to create an environment that is safe for our children. We would all love to believe that we have done everything we can to assure that our world is safe from tragedy. But that is an unrealistic and immature fantasy. From the minute we are born, we are gambling. Born in the ghetto, your odds of dying from lack of health care are far greater than being born to parents of wealth and privilege. Regardless of our economic situation, we can’t stop advanced forms of cancer and we can’t guarantee that our children won’t end up in a fatal car crash. We can’t be sure that they won’t be abducted on the way to school, we can’t carry them around in our pockets to prevent them from drowning in the neighbor’s swimming pool or from lighting a pack of matches. Life is a gamble and there is nothing we can do about it, except be diligent in teaching safety and creating a world where people want peace over conflict.

    The risk of giving up Second Amendment rights are far too great to even consider.

    My further thoughts are here: http://kellienicholson.wordpress.com/

    • Frank Kahn

      Read your article, disagree with most of what you think you know about Obama. Romney was bad but voting for either one was wrong.

      Second article on the site, wrong again, dont classify Romney as slick and fail to do the same for the COOL SLICK IDIOT we have for a current president. He has a plan is not a good reason to keep him around. A plan is only valid for that if it works for the betterment of the majority of the people. Obama does none of that.

      I am not a sit on the sidelines quietly nor do I agree with someone just to go along. If you want a yes man, find someone else. If you want facts, lets go for it.

      You were right about gun control, the people advocating that are using false logic and scare tactics.

      However, I find it hard to fathom why you are so enamored with Obama if you really want a peaceful world. Obama is the most atrocious class and race warfare advocator that I have ever seen given control of a major nation. His anti-white pro black attitudes and policies make me sick. He is so racist that it is blinding. And the insanity that you buy into about taxing the wealthy into being better job creators is absurd. It is just another class warfare tactic that Obama is using to its fullest. You talk about liberals being wrong about guns, well they are just as wrong about taxing the rich. Obama got his way totally in the fiscal cliff solution, all tax increases and no significant spending cuts. Well that aint going to fix a damn thing. It wont touch the deficit, and it wont create any jobs. You want me to cut loose with a few of my millions to create jobs, get out of my business and let me do it my way. And I am not speaking figuratively, I wont spend my money to create jobs until the federal government gets out of the way. Hell, I wont even bring it back into the country till that happens.

      So, maybe you can be more specific about his plan. Forcing people that dont want it to buy health insurance? Forcing us to accept amoral homosexual conduct? Forcing us to accept the murder of unborn babies? Forcing us to accept gun control? Taking money from everyone with higher taxes (it doesnt just affect the rich)? Refusing to reduce spending? Using drones to murder foreign nationals in their countries? Wasting taxpayer money to save the pensions of union members? Wasting money on failing GREEN energy companies? Hiding his past? Lying about the cause and response for attack on our consulate? Claiming that I didnt build my business? Claiming that we are not #1 in our education system because we dont give blacks the right kind of opportunities? Forcing religious organizations to support contraception against their religious beliefs?

      Please, tell me which one of those things is the great plan he has for this nation.

  • AllenQ-Atlanta

    Feinstein’s proposed legislation is un-American and against all that I was raised to believe to be American. I have the right to choose what weapons I will use to protect myself and family. Leave my 2nd amendment rights alone or I will use my 1st amendment rights to shut your 1st amendment rights down. Our forefathers afforded us that right through the right to vote.

  • REG

    Each public servant took a oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America and also the Constitution of the state they are in if state rep. The Bill of Rights are restrictions to the govt and protections against encroachment of govt against rights. Rights are natural rights and come from God not from the Constitution of from any govt. Govt was created to protect life, liberty and property, now govt attacks life, liberty and property. Govt has reversed it’s purpose. Govt was created by the people and can be dissolved or corrected by the people if the people are awake. So many are not. The problem is the people, we have not policed the govt and the problem is easy to understand, go look in the mirror. I have found the problem and it is us. Since the public servants are violating their oath of office which is a contract to the people and they are in breach of contract that is a tort claim against each one that proposes any restriction in violation of 2nd amendment of Bill of Rights. Anyone that restricts guns ownership in violation of 2nd amendment is performing treason. The killings show a pattern established to promote gun control, every time gun control talk and legislation attempts start crazy unexplainable tragic killings happen. This cannot be by accident, one must use logic to understand this. Each person should read “The Law” by Frédéric Bastiat [1850]. ”
    The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!”
    http://www.constitution.org/cmt/bastiat/the_law.html
    We must start filing Title 42 1983 tort claims against these traitors and fill up the federal court rooms with thousands of complaints. We must push for impeachment of all of these involved with treason all the way to the top. We must act! many are but our numbers are too small as the rest watch baseball and football and just want to be amused while our country falls apart from traitors within. We are dealing with corporations impersonating govt. Look up the clerk of court in each county across America on dunn and bradstreet, each one is shown as a private corporation trading on the stock market. The county is a corp, the cities are corps, the states are corps, the United States is a corp. All overlaying the real cities, counties, states and the United States of America. The IRS is not part of the govt either and it too is an imposter on the people by placing excise tax regs on voluntary income tax reporting. And all the tax leaves the country and does not stay here. Fraud! Treason! How many will take time to research and become educated and become responsible by taking action. The ball is in our court and always has been but only a few are carrying the load, we have been asleep at the wheel. If we wake up we can do anything and remain free. Kept the faith, ask for divine protection and guidance and always project the energy of love and lack of fear around you.

  • REG

    Also why are police violating peoples rights? Why do they go along with the fraud involved with these killings? They too are scared of the very system they work for. They are being forced to by the same people we call politicians to attack and violate rights. they must give tickets and arrest people or they are fired or killed. The system is out of wack. Law enforcement is given quotas and told to violate their oath of office, law enforcement too must stand tall and reject this lawlessness and correct and remove the criminals. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGc505WuxpE They too should turn around and sue the chief of police, mayor or sheriff or whoever is at the top pushing this agenda.

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.