# Pew Discredits Gun-Grabbers



## Flanders (Jun 26, 2017)

“As a nation, the U.S. has a deep and enduring connection to guns. Integrated into the fabric of American society since the country’s earliest days, guns remain a point of pride for many Americans. Whether for hunting, sport shooting or personal protection, most gun owners count the right to bear arms as central to their freedom,” reports a wide-ranging new poll from the Pew Research Center.

   It found that 74 percent of all U.S. gun owners say owning a gun is “essential to their freedom.” Another 73 percent of the owners say they could never see themselves “not owning a gun.” Half say that “all or most of their friends” also own guns. The survey, which also explores the political dimensions of gun ownership, says the nation has “a complex relationship with guns” for multiple reasons.​
74% of American gun owners say owning a gun is ‘essential to their freedom’: Poll
           By Jennifer Harper
           Saturday, June 24, 2017

74% of American gun owners say owning a gun is ‘essential to their freedom’: Poll​
*The Disarm Americans crowd focused on the impossible task of disarming criminals rather than make the case for abolishing a constitutional Right. That is why Democrat gun-grabbers spent decades trying to sell the lie that the Founders had criminals in mind when they included the Second Amendment in the Bill Of Rights. After decades of the lie, and numerous unconstitutional gun control laws, just to erase 27 words without Democrats once trying for repeal: *

*AMENDMENT II*​
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 Pew Research Center poll showed that Americans understand original intent “. . . most gun owners count the right to bear arms as central to their freedom . . . ”. *

Here is a fun question I have been asking for years:

   If you could make one of two organizations go away forever which one would you choose —— the NRA or the ACLU?​ 
Outgun them when you cant disarm them

*The gun-grabbers are united behind one political strategy. Criminals are the problem. Every anti-Second Amendment talking point paints gun-owners as the problem creating all of the violence. Hollywood created the false premise way back in the black & white movie era: *

There is not one Hollywood movie that I know of where the plot dealt with the reason for the Second Amendment; a screenplay where guns defended against the federal government. Turning the constitutional reason for guns into a defense against criminals was the message Hollywood Communists put out —— with great success I might add.​
*The lie did not escape the man who lies about everything: *

Taqiyya the Liar ——making a lot of noise for the press —— will be satisfied if he reinforces the lie that the Second Amendment is about criminals:​
Cowards In Hollywood Movies

*The fact is: Upholding the Second Amendment has priorities.

1. Defense against government tyranny.

2. Self-defense against native criminals.

3. Self-defense against foreign enemies who come here to kill. 

Notice that the very people who would disarm a free people want guns for themselves so they can overthrow a government they see as tyrannical!

Finally, Winston Churchill was talking about Nazi Germany, but his advice can be applied to defending the Second Amendment:
*
If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.​
What Are Democrats Doing About It?


----------



## guno (Jun 26, 2017)

Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Jun 26, 2017)

guno said:


> Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys



Indeed you will not.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.


input from the anti-gun crowd?

Perhaps that group should take advantage of their own mental health


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.
> ...


I'm not against guns, just against guns in the hands of paranoid people, among other mental misfits.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...





Mudda said:


> just against guns in the hands of paranoid people



paranoid?

Like Feinstein, Bloomberg, Everytown, etc?


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


More like you and Flanders.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...



Does having car insurance make you paranoid?

Does having medical insurance make you paranoid?

Does having a spare tire in the trunk of you car make you paranoid?

Neither does owning a firearm.


----------



## miketx (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.


All they have to do to fix that is ban liberals from getting guns. Problem solved. If it saves one child.....


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


You guys defend the first amendment because you think that the government is going to attack you. You need a well regulated militia and all that... THAT'S paranoid!


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

miketx said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.
> ...


If "liberals" agree to give up their guns, will you?


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

More interested in  defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> More interested in  defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government


So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > More interested in  defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government
> ...


Such as?

infringing on MY rights?


----------



## Flanders (Jun 26, 2017)

guno said:


> Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys


*To guno: Not as long as well-armed Americans are willing to fight for the Second Amendment.*


Mudda said:


> Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd.


*To Mudda: If they are paranoid explain why the gun grabbers push so hard to register every gun?*



https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...lwnDxjC8Ba0xG6FCxOoUtRJ6abRDApYNkiyF_qdl-C2q4

*BACKGROUND CHECKS IS DOUBLESPEAK FOR REGISTRATION. REGISTRATION IS THE FINAL STEP BEFORE CONFISCATION. *


WillHaftawaite said:


> paranoid?
> 
> Like Feinstein, Bloomberg, Everytown, etc?


*To Billy_Kinetta: Lobotomy is the only cure. Truth serum only makes them worse.*


WillHaftawaite said:


> Does having car insurance make you paranoid?
> 
> Does having medical insurance make you paranoid?
> 
> ...


*To Billy_Kinetta: Fantastic wipe out.*


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


No, just having more control over the guns and bullets, like, no lending your gun, serial numbers on bullets to trace them back to the actual owner... Closing all the gun show loopholes... There are other more radical things like fingerprint safety, meaning only the fingerprint belonging to the owner can activate the gun... I have no problem with legal gun owners, but we need to break the link between gun manufacturers and evildoers, because the evildoers always seem to have guns from legal manufacturers. Is there something we can do to break that link?


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

Flanders said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys
> ...


It's not paranoid to want some actual safeties on guns. It's paranoid to think that they're coming after YOU.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

WillHaftawaite said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


You're hero is a thug, Al Capone, so you laugh at any attempt to talk about making guns safer. The only thing you want to know is safe are your gun stocks. You don't care about people, especially children. I get it.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jun 26, 2017)

Know why the US has never been invaded?
(At least since 1812)

E'erbody got guns and knows how to shoot.

When I was a kid, the Boy's Club had a .22 rifle range.

I don't think that's the case anymore, they done been PC-ified. Thanks, Obama!


PS: That needs reversed. Kids need to know how to shoot guns and arrows.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

Marion Morrison said:


> Know why the US has never been invaded?
> (At least since 1812)
> 
> E'erbody got guns and knows how to shoot.
> ...


The US hasn't won a war since WWII, and we needed help in that one.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...





Mudda said:


> There are other more radical things like fingerprint safety, meaning only the fingerprint belonging to the owner can activate the gun



Great idea!

Then the wife, and others living in my house will all need their OWN firearms, because the fingerprint 'safety' will prevent them from using mine.



Mudda said:


> serial numbers on bullets to trace them back to the actual owner...



another great idea!

Drive the cost of bullets up from $25 a box to $500 a box.
(What do  you do about people that reload their own?)



Mudda said:


> , no lending your gun



at all?

Not to my brother, my son in law, the guy standing next to me at the range to see how it shoots?

Capone is not my 'hero', I just liked the saying.


----------



## usmbguest5318 (Jun 26, 2017)

It's not clear to me what "gun-grabber" means:

Does it mean people who "grab" a gun to shoot another individual in response to that individual's having, in the "grabber's" mind, committed against them great or small wrongs, real and/or imagined?
Does it mean people who want to "grab" the guns that are held in the public sphere?
At some points in your OP, it seems you mean the former, at others, the latter.



> Pew Discredits Gun-Grabbers


How the hell is it that you explicitly mention a Pew remark yet not one of your links in the OP takes one directly to original documentation of the alleged discrediting by Pew?



Flanders said:


> the impossible task of disarming criminals



The task of disarming (with regard to guns) criminals is impossible to achieve only if one defines the goal of doing so as disarming 100% of criminals of 100% of the access they might have to guns.  It does not take 100% disarmament to effect a reduction in gun-related crime, deaths and injuries.



Flanders said:


> Democrat gun-grabbers spent decades trying to sell the lie that the Founders had criminals in mind when they included the Second Amendment in the Bill Of Rights.



I haven't seen credible and sound arguments from Democrats that asserts crime prevention is what the Founders had in mind by including among the BoR the 2nd Amendment.  On the contrary, it's gun ownership advocates, typically conservatives, who proffer the crime and self-defense against it line of argumentation, most often of late citing _Heller_ as they do so.



Flanders said:


> The gun-grabbers are united behind one political strategy. Criminals are the problem.



I'm not sure how to respond to this because of the risibly ambiguous term "gun-grabber."

If "gun-grabber" means gun rights advocates, you are correct in that they near universally argue that crime prevention and self-defense is a key reason the general public and they in particular need to have guns.
If "gun-grabber" means gun control advocates, they are right in that criminal use of guns is the gun problem that needs to be attenuated.
In light of the above, there is no question that criminals are a problem cited by individuals and groups on both sides of the 2nd Amendment debate.



Flanders said:


> Hollywood created the false premise way back in the black & white movie era:
> 
> *There is not one Hollywood movie that I know of where the plot dealt with the reason for the Second Amendment*; a screenplay where guns defended against the federal government. Turning the constitutional reason for guns into a defense against criminals was the message Hollywood Communists put out —— with great success I might add.​


​
The emboldened clause is among the most balmy things I've seen written on USMB.  As a movie that directly, expressly and from a legal theory standpoint took on interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and the notion of "original intent," there probably aren't any widely viewed Hollywood movies of that nature.  There are quite a few Hollywood movies that tacitly extol the virtues of gun ownership and their responsible/just use:

_Red Dawn_ -- High school kids in Michigan fight off communist invaders from Cuba.
_Gran Torino_ -- An aging Clint Eastwood saves his neighbors from gangbangers.
_The Hateful Eight_ -- Tarantino’s newest. EVERYBODY will be armed to the teeth!
_The Alamo_ -- No gun control in the 1830s, especially for the Mexicans.
_Shooter -- _Arguably the best conspiracy theory movie since _Parallax View._
_Lawless -- _Essentially _Bonnie and Clyde _with even more guns.
_Justified_  -- A TV show.
_Dirty Harry_
_Zombieland _
Big Jake -- Yes, even John Wayne gets in on the game.
_Fallout _-- Another TV series, but it's clearly one that presents positively the use of guns against tyranny.
_The Last Ship_ -- A TV series that presents positively the use of guns against tyranny.
There is also no shortage of movies, including from the "black and white" era of film that portray the use of guns in the United States' seminal struggle against governmental tyranny.  Then there are the movies -- all of them from the "black and white" era -- that while fewer in number nonetheless positively portray gun use in various fights against governmental tyranny and excess in various contexts associated with the battles that solidified the Revolutionary War win.

The Buccaneer (1938)

Captain Caution (1940) -- In the midst of the war of 1812, a British frigate fires upon a peaceful, unwitting mercantile ship. In the attack, the trader's captain is killed and the British take the surviving crew prisoner, including sailor Dan Marvin (Victor Mature) and the late captain's willful daughter Corunna Dorman (Louise Platt). In captivity, Marvin and Corunna form an uneasy alliance and, along with the other prisoners, plot an escape. Their goal: Reclaim their ship and avenge the murder of their captain.

Mutiny (1952)

Brave Warrior (1952)

The Buccaneer (1958)

The scope of what you know of or don't know of is of no value to you or anyone one else.  You really need to do more of something -- read more, get out more, etc. -- something whereby you make an effort to find out whether what you know of or don't know of is in fact the limit of what exists or has ever existed.



Flanders said:


> The lie did not escape the man who lies about everything:
> 
> Taqiyya the Liar ——making a lot of noise for the press —— will be satisfied if he reinforces the lie that the Second Amendment is about criminals​


Who is Taqiyya the Liar?  I'm aware of the Islamic concepts of taqiyya -- a notion that allows for, in certain circumstances, lying to non-believers in God and Islam -- but I have no idea of what person you have in mind when you write "Taqiyya the Liar."  Whoever it is, they at least need to be Muslim for the "pseudonym" you've assigned to be fitting.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jun 26, 2017)

Xelor said:


> It's not clear to me what "gun-grabber" means:
> 
> Does it mean people who "grab" a gun to shoot another individual in response to that individual's having, in the "grabber's" mind, committed against them great or small wrongs, real and/or imagined?
> Does it mean people who want to "grab" the guns that are held in the public sphere?
> ...



It means subversive assholes trying to curtail American's gun rights. Clear enough? I hope so.

I should be coming through loud and crystal.

PS: Where did you get that shit in your post?
_"Red Dawn_ -- High school kids in Michigan fight off communist invaders from Cuba."



No, it's not about Cubans invading. They already had in 1981, for real.

The movie for that would be "Scarface" k?

The invaders are not from Cuba, and the defenders are not in Michigan.


----------



## usmbguest5318 (Jun 26, 2017)

From the the Pew study:



"44% of U.S. adults say they personally know someone who has been shot, either accidentally or intentionally, and about a quarter (23%) say they or someone in their family have been threatened or intimidated by someone using a gun. Half see gun violence as a very big problem in the U.S. today, although gun owners and non-owners offer divergent views on this.

"Gun owners and non-owners are also deeply divided on several gun policy proposals, but there is agreement on some restrictions, such as preventing those with mental illnesses and those on federal watch lists from buying guns. Among gun owners, there is a diversity of views on gun policy, driven in large part by party affiliation."

*"Two-thirds of gun owners say protection is a major reason they own a gun. *By comparison, about four-in-ten (38%) cite hunting as a major reason and three-in-ten cite sport shooting, including target shooting, trap and skeet. Fewer point to a gun collection (13%) or to their job (8%) as being central to why they own a gun. To be sure, for many gun owners, these reasons overlap: 44% offer more than one major reason for owning a gun."









​
"Of the many possible safety precautions gun owners could take when they live with children in the home, three receive majority support from both non-owners and those who currently own a firearm. Nearly all gun owners (95%) believe that talking to children about gun safety is essential, followed by 66% who say all guns should be kept in a locked place when there are children living in the home, and 59% who say gun owners who are parents should take a gun safety course...When asked about their own habits, roughly half of gun owners with children under 18 living at home say all of the guns in their home are kept in a locked place (54%) and all are unloaded (53%).  Many gun owners with children say at least some of their guns are kept unlocked and loaded. In fact, 30% of these gun owners say there is a gun that is both loaded and easily accessible to them all of the time when they’re at home."




​
"Solid majorities of both gun owners and non-owners favor limiting access to guns for people with mental illnesses and individuals who are on the federal no-fly or watch lists (82% or higher favor among each group). In addition, strong majorities favor background checks for private sales and at gun shows (77% among gun owners and 87% among non-owners)."



Other charts from the study.













​
Now out of all of that, particularly the red text, how do you arrive at the conclusion that criminals and protection from them and their deeds is an argument advanced by "gun-grabbers?"  You wrote, "The gun-grabbers are united behind one political strategy. Criminals are the problem."​


----------



## Flanders (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> No, just having more control over the guns and bullets, like, no lending your gun, serial numbers on bullets to trace them back to the actual owner... Closing all the gun show loopholes... There are other more radical things like fingerprint safety, meaning only the fingerprint belonging to the owner can activate the gun... I have no problem with legal gun owners, but we need to break the link between gun manufacturers and evildoers, because the evildoers always seem to have guns from legal manufacturers. Is there so


*To Mudda: The individual gun owner can make the choice. In short: You would give the choice to the government. That must end in MORE GOVERNMENT GUN CONTROL.

Incidentally, will Obama’s Ready Reserve Corps require fingerprints so no one can pick up the gun and use it should one his people be killed or wounded in a revolution?*

​
*Obama is out of office, but his personal goon remains loyal to him. No other president in history controlled  anything like that on tax dollars after they left office.

NOTE:  Obama’s goon squad was funded in the ACA. Does anyone know if Obama’s Ready Reserve Corps was removed from Paul Ryan’s Obamacare-lite? *


Mudda said:


> It's paranoid to think that they're coming after YOU.


*To Mudda: It is a death wish to believe otherwise.*


Mudda said:


> You don't care about people, especially children. I get it.


*To Mudda: Your kind cares so much about children they butchered close to 60 million since 1973 and still counting.*


Mudda said:


> The US hasn't won a war since WWII, and we needed help in that one.


*To Mudda: The US has not declared war after WWII, but lost one thanks to Democrats and Woodrow Wilson:* 

Had America defeated the Communists in Vietnam, and in Korea, instead of fighting Peace Without Victory wars China would not be building islands with two American allies on its borders.​
Abolishing The Presidential Oath Of Office


Xelor said:


> It's not clear to me what "gun-grabber" means:


*To Xelor: Keep reading the OP until you get it!*


Xelor said:


> How the hell is it that you explicitly mention a Pew remark yet not one of your links in the OP takes one directly to original documentation of the alleged discrediting by Pew?


*To Xelor: That is easy. I selected what I wanted to talk about.*


Xelor said:


> The task of disarming (with regard to guns) criminals is impossible to achieve only if one defines the goal of doing so as disarming 100% of criminals of 100% of the access they might have to guns. It does not take 100% disarmament to effect a reduction in gun-related crime, deaths and injuries.


*To Xelor: Local and state police forces are supposed to deal with criminals —— not the federal government. *


Xelor said:


> I haven't seen credible and sound arguments from Democrats that asserts crime prevention is what the Founders had in mind by including among the BoR the 2nd Amendment.


*To Xelor: Every talking point implies just that.*


Xelor said:


> On the contrary, it's gun ownership advocates, typically conservatives, who proffer the crime and self-defense against it line of argumentation, most often of late citing _Heller_ as they do so.


*To Xelor: See number 2 in my brief list of priorities.*


Xelor said:


> I'm not sure how to respond to this because of the risibly ambiguous term "gun-grabber."


*To Xelor: Do not try since it goes over your head!*


Xelor said:


> In light of the above, there is no question that criminals are a problem cited by individuals and groups on both sides of the 2nd Amendment debate.


*To Xelor: See number 1 in my list of priorities.*


Xelor said:


> The emboldened clause is among the most balmy things I've seen written on USMB. As a movie that directly, expressly and from a legal theory standpoint took on interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and the notion of "original intent," there probably aren't any widely viewed Hollywood movies of that nature. There are quite a few Hollywood movies that tacitly extol the virtues of gun ownership and their responsible/just use:
> 
> _Red Dawn_ -- High school kids in Michigan fight off communist invaders from Cuba.
> _Gran Torino_ -- An aging Clint Eastwood saves his neighbors from gangbangers.
> ...


*To Xelor: How come you did not include all of the Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Chuck Norris movies? Compare your choices to the countless touchy-feely movies about topics Democrats love so much. Hell, they even call many of those movies classics.  

The fact is: Not one movie or TV show plotline ever dealt with the primary reason for the Second Amendment, or a hero fighting to defend it.*


Xelor said:


> Who is Taqiyya the Liar?


*To Xelor: My friends know it evolved from this:*

From June of 2009 to this day he was Hussein in my messages. Happily, the number of liberals that flipped out was a bonus I never anticipated.

   Yesterday I said this in another thread:​
As I said in the OP “The Democrat party has been the party of liars since Woodrow Wilson.” That has been a fact for so long it has fallen off the radar screen. On the other hand nobody seems to notice that Hussein singlehandedly implemented Islam’s justification for lying ——Taqiyya, (telling an outright lie) and —— Kitman (lies of omission):​ 
The Curse Lives On​
From this day forward I will refer to the messiah as Barack Taqiyya.

   Just for the record the name change was prompted by the lies Democrats are telling in the fight over the immigration bill, plus the astronomical number of lies Democrats must tell to keep the Affordable Care Act from being repealed once that fight gets underway. Basically, repeatedly calling each Democrat a liar every time they lie is like water rolling off a duck’s back; so I thought I would bundle the liars under one name. After all, Barack Taqiyya is the biggest liar of them all.​
Name Change


Xelor said:


> Now out of all of that, particularly the red text, how do you arrive at the conclusion that criminals and protection from them and their deeds is an argument advanced by "gun-grabbers?"


*To Xelor: Your gun control statistics avoid one fact:*

Approximately 300,000,000 guns is the accepted number of guns in America. I don’t know how it breaks down, or how many of those guns the government has targeted for confiscation, but 300,000,000 is not enough guns in civilian hands. Here’s why:

   I’m pretty sure the government has the names of every member of the NRA, Gun Owners of America, gun clubs, and so on. That means the government knows where many of those 300,000,000 guns are located, while the Communists seized the opportunity to go all out for gun registration because of the school shooting in Connecticut. My point: It’s the number of guns the government does not know about from this day forward that count the most.

   Incidentally, if you are not a member of the NRA, but support that organization’s efforts, I would advise you to make anonymous contributions.​
300,000,000 Is Not Enough


Xelor said:


> "The gun-grabbers are united behind one political strategy. Criminals are the problem."


*To Xelor: Exactly so.*


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

Flanders said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > No, just having more control over the guns and bullets, like, no lending your gun, serial numbers on bullets to trace them back to the actual owner... Closing all the gun show loopholes... There are other more radical things like fingerprint safety, meaning only the fingerprint belonging to the owner can activate the gun... I have no problem with legal gun owners, but we need to break the link between gun manufacturers and evildoers, because the evildoers always seem to have guns from legal manufacturers. Is there so
> ...


First of all, I don't read long-winded copy&paste, if you have a point make it, and post a link underneath if I want to check what you're saying or read more.
Secondly, the government already controls what kind of guns you're allowed to have. So they outgun you by a massive amount. And best of all? You bought it hook, line and sinker. So when you feel all badass, remember that you can only be as a badass as the government lets you. So be a good boy and keep pretending that you have some kind of freedom over guns.


----------



## Flanders (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> the government already controls what kind of guns you're allowed to have. So they outgun you by a massive amount.


*To Mudda: Your lack of perspicacity is monumental. 

The government controlled the guns in every country before the start of revolution. Government control did not stop the Communists in Czarist Russia, China, or Cuba. What do you think will happen in this country should the well-armed American people decide to overthrow their ruling class?

I have often pointed out that all revolutions come from the middle class, and then only when something has been taken away from them. The poor do not have the organizational skills necessary to foment successful revolution.  The wealthy have no reason to revolt. In short: People never start a revolution to get something —— they always revolt to get something back.

All of the elements for revolution are there.

Parenthetically, I would not count on everybody in the US Military and local police forces killing fellow Americans on orders from the scum in the federal government. *


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > More interested in  defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government
> ...


So long as cops the military and the Government have firearms crooks will.


----------



## usmbguest5318 (Jun 26, 2017)

Flanders said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > No, just having more control over the guns and bullets, like, no lending your gun, serial numbers on bullets to trace them back to the actual owner... Closing all the gun show loopholes... There are other more radical things like fingerprint safety, meaning only the fingerprint belonging to the owner can activate the gun... I have no problem with legal gun owners, but we need to break the link between gun manufacturers and evildoers, because the evildoers always seem to have guns from legal manufacturers. Is there so
> ...





Flanders said:


> To Xelor: Local and state police forces are supposed to deal with criminals —— not the federal government.



I see.  From the statement above one can soundly infer that you favor abolishment of the FBI, the ATF, the Secret Service, the U.S. Park Police, ICE, and a host of other law enforcement arms of the federal government.  You're entitled to think that, but actually doing so is utterly absurd.



Flanders said:


> To Xelor: Every talking point implies just that.



I don't care about "talking points;" people can and will say damn near anything.  I care about soundly formed and presented premises, inferences and conclusions, and I care about and for the people who proffer them.



Flanders said:


> The fact is: Not one movie or TV show plotline ever dealt with the primary reason for the Second Amendment, or a hero fighting to defend it.



It appears you genuinely believe that despite that not at all being so.  So be it for it is your right to so believe.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 26, 2017)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


That makes no sense.


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jun 26, 2017)

miketx said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.
> ...




Watching threads and posts, I long ago noticed this -

The only ^^^ "gun grabbers"^^^ are the gun nuts who actually don't care about or want to protect any part of the US Constitution, including the 2A.

Read 2aguy and other nutters, and you'll see the same thing.




Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




It's true. 

Talk about keeping kids safe from guns and you get a lot of smoke screens about cars and swimming pools or abortion.

They truly do not care about the piles of dead children.

It's beyond sad and sick.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

guno said:


> Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys




Except the 9th circuit court, the 4th Circuit court, the leadership of the democrat party.....you mean except for them? ...Oh.....and every lefty on the supreme court, don't forget them...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Luddly Neddite said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...




No....you get the fact that 2nd Amendment supporters want gun safety education for kids in schools along with fire safety trainging.....and you guys refuse to allow it.....we want long sentences for actual, violent, repeat gun offenders...you guys fight it....

If anyone is endangering children, it is you.....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




If left wingers give up their guns we won't have to....and the gun crime rate will disappear over night...


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Really? Weapons are stolen from all military and police sources routinely. The National Guard is very much a target of firearms thefts. Further so long as other Countries make firearms they are easily smuggled into this Country across our porous southern border and by ship and aircraft.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > More interested in  defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government
> ...




We already have......we have laws that say they can't buy, own or  carry guns and they can be arrested if they commit a crime with one...then guys like you refuse to lock them up for 30 years when they get caught...the problem isn't on our end, the problem is on your end...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




Why should the government prevent you from lending legal property?  Also, criminals are not getting their guns from people lending them....

Serial numbers on bullets...twit......they already tried it...it failed..

Also, the guy shooting the gun at the innocent victim isn't the one who originally owned it....so knowing the bullet number does nothing but cost money and prevents no crime and solves no crime....

And again, they tried it...

Maryland Scraps Firearms "Ballistic Fingerprinting" Effort, Admits It Was a Complete Waste of Time - The Truth About Guns

But the system — plagued by technological problems — never solved a single case.

[…]

In a old fallout shelter beneath Maryland State Police headquarters in Pikesville, the state has amassed more than 300,000 bullet casings, one from each new handgun sold here since the law took effect. They fill three cavernous rooms secured by a common combination lock.

-----------
But the computerized system designed to sort and match the images never worked as envisioned. In 2007, the state stopped bothering to take the photographs, though hundreds of thousands more casings kept piling up in the fallout shelter.

The ballistic fingerprinting law was repealed effective Oct. 1, ending the requirement that spent casings be sent in. The General Assembly, in repealing the law, authorized the state police to sell off its inventory for scrap.

Did you catch that. The system never solved one…single…case.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Mudda said:


> WillHaftawaite said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




Gun show loophole?  There isn't one....every licensed dealer has to do a background check no matter where they sell guns.

Checks for private property sales.....one, it is none of the governments business, two, the felon already knows they can't buy the gun and if we catch them with the gun they can already be arrested, then you guys refuse to lock them up for 30 years.....three, crimnals steal their guns....so background check fails....criminals get guns from straw buyers who can pass background checks.....so the check fails wether it is from a licensed dealer or a private sale...

So you have no real solution.....

Smart guns...don't work......

The criminals steal guns moron........or they get them from straw buyers......


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...




When I was in the National Guard we had a remote assembly location....we had about 7 racks of M-16 Rifles, some with 203 Grenade Launchers, and M60 Machine guns.....guarded by unarmed national guardsmen.......ripe for the taking for anyone with the balls to do it....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Xelor said:


> It's not clear to me what "gun-grabber" means:
> 
> Does it mean people who "grab" a gun to shoot another individual in response to that individual's having, in the "grabber's" mind, committed against them great or small wrongs, real and/or imagined?
> Does it mean people who want to "grab" the guns that are held in the public sphere?
> ...



From your post....

It does not take 100% disarmament to effect a reduction in gun-related crime, deaths and injuries.

Answer these  questions then....

How do you lower the gun crime rate 75%?

How do you lower the gun murder rate 49%?

How do you lower the violent crime rate 72%?

Answer to all 3 ......you have more Americans buy and carry guns.....so....we already did what you wanted...

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400 million guns in private hands and over 15.7  million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...

-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.


----------



## Divine Wind (Jun 26, 2017)

guno said:


> Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys


Unless he moves to California.  Now that Hillary lost, we're safe for a few years.


----------



## guno (Jun 26, 2017)

2aguy said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...





2aguy said:


> National Guard


dress up guys on the weekend


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

Xelor said:


> From the the Pew study:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




From your post.....from the Pew poll...


"Solid majorities of both gun owners and non-owners favor limiting access to guns for people with mental illnesses and individuals who are on the federal no-fly or watch lists (82% or higher favor among each group). In addition, strong majorities favor background checks for private sales and at gun shows (77% among gun owners and 87% among non-owners)."
The problem with each one of those mentioned....the people are uninformed on what they are actually asking to be done...for example....

The federal no fly list....is a violation of due process......you can't just strip Rights away from people by having a burueacrat put them on a list......so anyone, gun owner or not.....who advocates this doesn't know what they are talking about...

Background checks?  Again, gun owners or not, it doesn't mean they understand the issue.  The only reason the anti-gunners want background checks for private sales is it makes banning guns in the future easier.....you will need to register all guns in order to track private gun sales....otherwise you will never know who the original owner of the gun was.....

Also....criminals steal guns or they use a straw buyer to get the gun...both methods make current federal background checks ....And checks on Private sales useless...since a stolen gun isn't getting a background check, and a straw buyer can pass any background check, licensed sale or private sale....

So these polls are pretty useless when the respondents don't understand the details...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2017)

guno said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...




Hey asshole...tell their families that ...

Fallen Heroes

SGT Roger D. Rowe, age 54, of Bon Aqua, 1174th Transportation Company, was killed by a sniper in Iraq on July, 9, 2003





SSG David L. Loyd, 44, of Jackson, 1175th Transportation Company, experienced severe chest pain while on a mission and was pronounced dead at a Kuwait hospital on August 5, 2003.





SSG Nathan J. Bailey, 46, of Nashville, 1175th Transportation Company, died in Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, from a non-hostile gunshot wound November 12, 2003.





SGT Paul W. Thomason, III, 37, of Talbot, G Troop, 2nd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when a roadside bomb was detonated near his heavy equipment truck in a supply convoy outside of Kirkuk, Iraq, March 20, 2005.





SFC Stephen C. Kennedy, 35, of Oak Ridge, D Troop, 1st Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed along with another Soldier when their patrol was attacked by enemy forces using small arms fire in Balad Rus, Iraq, on April 4, 2005.





SGT Alfred B. Siler, 33, of Duff, Support Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, died when his humvee hit another vehicle in Tuz, Iraq, May 25, 2005.





SFC Mark O. Edwards, 40, of Unicoi, 2nd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, died from a non-combat related cause at his forward operating base near Tuz, Iraq, June 9, 2005.





SGT James Dustin Carroll, 23, of McKenzie, Company A, 230th Engineering Battalion, was killed when an Improvised Explosive Device detonated near his vehicle, near Baghdad, Iraq, on July 31, 2005.





SSG Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35, of Lebanon, Troop I, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was attacked by hostile fire while on mounted patrol August 13, 2005, near forward operation base Bernstein, Iraq.





SGT Shannon D. Taylor, 30, of Smithville, Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was attacked by hostile fire while on mounted patrol August 13, 2005, near forward operation base Bernstein, Iraq.





SGT Gary Lee Reese, Jr., 22, of Ashland City, Company M, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was attacked by hostile fire while on mounted patrol August 13, 2005, near forward operation base Bernstein, Iraq.





SSG Victoir Patric Lieurance, 34, of Seymour, Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when a roadside bomb detonated near his humvee during patrol operations in Samarra, Iraq, on August 22, 2005.





SGT Joseph D. Hunt, 27, of Sweetwater, Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when a roadside bomb detonated near his humvee during patrol operations in Samarra, Iraq, on August 22, 2005.





SGT Robert Wesley Tucker, 20, of Hilham, Troop K, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when an improvised explosive device exploded near his vehicle while on a combat patrol near Ad Dujayl, Iraq, October 13, 2005.





CW3 William Timothy Flanigan, 37, of Milan, Troop R., 4th Squadron, 278th Armored Calvary Regiment, was killed in Kandahar, Afghanistan, when his AH-64 Apache helicopter crashed near the Kandahar Airport, July 2, 2006.





SGT Dustin Daniel Laird, 23, of Martin, 913th Engineer Company, was killed when an improvised explosive device exploded near his vehicle August 1, 2006, near Rawah, Iraq.





SGT Stephen R. Maddies, 41, of Elizabethon, 473rd Counter-Rocket Artillery and Mortar unit, died of wounds suffered from enemy small-arms fire in Baghdad, Iraq, July 31, 2007.





1LT William Eric Emmert, 36, of Fayetville, 269th Military Police Company, was killed in Mosul, Iraq, while participating in a local Iraqi Police function, February, 24, 2009.





SGT David Clay Prescott, Jr., 40, of Murfreesboro, 278th Armored Cavalry Regiment, died on February 4, 2010, at Camp Shelby, Mississippi while awaiting deployment to Iraq.





SSG Michael W. Tinsley, 49, of Jackson, 278th Armored Cavalry Regiment, died on February 10, 2010, at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, while awaiting deployment to Iraq.





CPT Marcus R. Alford, 28, of Knoxville, Troop C, 1/230th Air Cavalry Squadron, was one of two Soldiers killed when their OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter experienced a hard landing at Qayyarah Airfield West, 30 miles south of Mosul, Iraq, on February 21, 2010.





CW2 Billie Jean Grinder, 25, of Gallatin, Troop C, 1/230th Air Cavalry Squadron, was one of two Soldiers killed when their OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter experienced a hard landing at Qayyarah Airfield West, 30 miles south of Mosul, Iraq, on February 21, 2010.


2 Idaho National Guard soldiers killed, 1 severely wounded in Iraq

Two Idaho soldiers have been killed in Iraq and a third has been wounded, the U.S. Department of Defense said Saturday.

Spc. Nathan R. Beyers, 24, and Spc. Nicholas W. Newby, 20, died Thursday from injuries after insurgents attacked their convoy with an explosive in Baghdad.

Newby was from Coeur d'Alene, officials said. Beyers had been living in the Coeur d'Alene area before his deployment, but lived in Littleton, Colo. before that.



Officials said Staff Sgt. Jazon Rzepa, 30, of Idaho, suffered serious leg injuries in the attack. He has been taken to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany for treatment.

The soldiers were assigned to the 116th Cavalry Heavy Brigade Combat Team, based in Post Falls, Idaho.

Idaho National Guard spokesman Col. Tim Marsano said Beyers has been an Idaho resident for a number of years and that his wife, Vanessa Beyers, and daughter, born in November last year, live in the Coeur d'Alene area.


Pentagon calls up 10,000 National Guard for combat duty in Iraq - World Socialist Web Site

the Bush administration has been forced into the largest call-up of part-time National Guard troops for front-line combat operations since the Vietnam War. On September 26, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld authorised the Army to mobilise two 5,000-strong brigades of National Guard infantrymen for deployment to Iraq.

The North Carolina-based 30th Infantry Brigade (Mechanised), supplemented by a battalion from New York, was mobilised as of October 1. The Arkansas-based, 39th Infantry Brigade (Light), supplemented by a battalion from Oregon, will be mobilised on October 12.


----------



## Flanders (Jun 27, 2017)

Flanders said:


> Upholding the Second Amendment has priorities.
> 
> 1. Defense against government tyranny.
> 
> ...


*Listen to this guy Dave Ross doublespeak the primary reason the Founders gave us the Right to arm oiurselves. Ross turns the argument into a definition of tyranny. Ergo, today the Second Amendment is about criminals. You can bet that Ross puts original intent on the bottom of any list of priorities he creates:  

VIDEO   ▼*

Radio host: Scalise shooter radicalized by Constitution


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

2aguy said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


So that's a no, got it.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...


So you're not willing to try to keep guns out of criminals hands. Got it.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

2aguy said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > WillHaftawaite said:
> ...


I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian. 
So basically, you're not willing to try anything to stop criminals from getting guns. What's not working right now is good enough for you. Got it.


----------



## miketx (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


you're a criminal terrorist.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

miketx said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


How is that?


----------



## Divine Wind (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Childish straw man argument. 



Mudda said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Childish straw man argument #2

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.


And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.
> ...




The "status quo" lowered gun murder 49%.....gun crime 75%.....and violent crime 72%.......as Americans bought and carried more guns......

Locking up criminals would help lower it further.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

2aguy said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


We already went through this, the actual numbers are still extremely high and that doesn't bother you. You like being afraid so that you have a reason to pack. We get it.


----------



## Divine Wind (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


What was that number again and what percentage were suicides?  Black-on-black murders?  

For Libertarians, not LWLs claiming to be Libertarians:
*1.9 Self-Defense*
_
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights—life, liberty, and justly acquired property—against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. Private property owners should be free to establish their own conditions regarding the presence of personal defense weapons on their own property. *We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership, manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition*.

_


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> 2aguy said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




No...the numbers are this...9,616 gun murders....70-80% of the victims are criminals, and of the remaining, many are the friends and family of criminals....

400 million guns, 15.7 million people carrying guns...and the number of innocents actually murdered by criminals who can't buy, own or carry a gun is under 2,000.....cars killed 36,000 people in the same year......


----------



## Mudda (Jun 27, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > 2aguy said:
> ...


It's impossible to oppose all laws... because the government already restricts our right to small arms only, when they have much more powerful weapons that we're not allowed to have. So you can't own a bazooka because the government says you can't. So keep pretending that you have some Constitutional right that you don't actually have. Try not to be so gullible, that's how they want you.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


Passing laws that keep Law abiding people from owning possessing carrying and using firearms has NEVER and will NEVER stop firearms crime. In fact since 1993 we have proven the cure is to arm more people have little to no restrictions on concealed and open carry and to encourage firearms ownership. The data is clear on that.


----------



## Divine Wind (Jun 27, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


1) Once again proving you're a Libertarian in name only.
2) The rich can afford that bazooka if they pay the fees.  Again proving you support the elite, not the common man.
3) You obviously erroneously believe our rights are derived from the Constitution.  Sorry, son, but that just ain't so.


----------



## Mudda (Jun 28, 2017)

Divine.Wind said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


You can't own tons of weapons that the military has and that you're not allowed to have, making the second amendment no protection at all. Stop pretending that you can.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 28, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...




Tell that to Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and every other country that has pushed out better trained and armed invaders.......also tell it to the Swiss....their rifle armed citizens kept the nazis from invading their country during World War 2.......


----------



## Mudda (Jun 28, 2017)

2aguy said:


> Mudda said:
> 
> 
> > Divine.Wind said:
> ...


You're totally paranoid if you think another country is going to invade you. Well, except Mexico, they're taking back the southwest.


----------



## Divine Wind (Jun 28, 2017)

Mudda said:


> Divine.Wind said:
> 
> 
> > Mudda said:
> ...


LOL  Kid, you should stop pretending you know everything at 20.


----------

