Ban all guns?

[Wry Catcher]

You Betcha, as so many on this message board have claimed is the attempt by 'liberals' and The POTUS. Seems as is the case on most on all issues, the far right fringe is lying again. Over 2,200 firearms will remain legal if the Congress has the guts to pass responsible gun control/regulations.

Latest try at new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms - The Washington Post

Members of congress will be signing their retirement papers if they pass some of the proposed legislation.

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That particular law exempts police, retired police, government officials, government employees, and a lot of other people who are more privileged than the citizens.

Well, you'd never want to restrict people like Chris Dorner from getting weapons, just the peasants.

Dorner was fired, he was not a retired police officer. I can't speak to the other exceptions. IMO only active duty LE personnel should have legal access to high velocity high volume guns which are easily concealable.

Sure sign of someone that does not know what he is talking about.

 

[earlycuyler]

Efforts to derail this thread and obfuscate the LIE which has been posted by NRA fellow travelers and others whose gun is more important than the lives of children is duly noted.

No gun regulation that exist now, or in the past ever has or ever will protect the "chiren" from wackos with guns. To say regulations will is just as big a lie. The proof is in the fact that mass shootings happen frequently in other country's with stiff regulations on personal ownership of fire arms. It is disgusting how willing the political class is to use the killing of children to push an agenda to secure brownie points with voters. We have a people problem here, not a gun problem.

 

[Redbone]

OK .. I should be enabled, now, to post URL's.

This link is one showing the sequence of events involving Tony Martin, in the UK. Please study it, and see for yourself where a Socialist anti-gun culture can lead.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Norfolk | Timeline: The Tony Martin case

Who, here, can possibly believe that Mr Martin was treated justly ???

I have been here a bit longer than you have and trust me there are many here that will think Mr Martin was treated justly. This forum has it's share of anti-gun nuts and leftists. People that believe our government should have limitless powers.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You Betcha, as so many on this message board have claimed is the attempt by 'liberals' and The POTUS. Seems as is the case on most on all issues, the far right fringe is lying again. Over 2,200 firearms will remain legal if the Congress has the guts to pass responsible gun control/regulations.

Latest try at new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms - The Washington Post

Members of congress will be signing their retirement papers if they pass some of the proposed legislation.

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Vote their conscience? How about vote the Constitution way? How about voting to protect my rights as shown in the second amendment? After all they did take an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

The leftist no-gun ownership zealots just don't get it. There are over 200 million guns in the hands of over 70 million private owners and eventually, we're all going to unify and say: "Enough is enough. If you want our guns, come try and take them." And, when they come for them, Civil War II, starts.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Efforts to derail this thread and obfuscate the LIE which has been posted by NRA fellow travelers and others whose gun is more important than the lives of children is duly noted.

That was funny.

You lie, and complain when no one believes you,

Really? Thanks for sharing. To bad I don't care what you post or write. Stating that some on this board have discounted the victims at Sandy Hook is untrue makes you the liar. It's too bad you confuse complaining with a statement the facts.

I have yet to see anybody on this board "discount the victims of Sandy Hook" except for you libprogs who obviously love seeing children murdered en masse, for no other reason than it gives you loons the opportunity to exploit them, in an attempt to advance your loony libprog agenda.

Seriously Wry, you libprog loons aren't fooling anybody, and it's quite clear that you libprogs cheer murder en masse. And if children are involved, even better for ya'.....The examples are all over this board.

 

[martybegan]

Your second paragraph suggests you are too angry to read within context (feel good about that, your not as dumb as TN or Redbone).

I don't care that you don't care. Get it? BTW, all guns look scary when pointed directly at oneself.

The point of the thread was to expose the BIG LIE; it's unfortunate your emotions control you and retard your ability to respond with sagacity.

There is no big lie. The contention of gun rights people is that this is the first step towards further bans. What will happen is you will get your new shiny worthless gun control legislation, and then instead of reaching the proper conlcusion, that the laws don't work, you will next go with "well now we have to ban gun types X,Y and Z... THEN gun control will work, we promise!!!!"

My concern has always been the creation of two classes of citizens, one with rights, and one without. That is where my concern over police having access to weapons other cilvilans don't have comes from.

Also accusing someone's response as being soley based on emotion is the same copout as saying said person, "just doesnt UNDERSTAND" what the REAL concept is. Its the same typical progressive inability to fathom someones opposite opinion of something can be based on reasoning.

You didn't and don't understand. The thread is about the BIG LIE.

And again, there is no BIG LIE. The people who support the scary gun ban are the same people who want to, in general, restrict all firearm ownership by non governmental civilians.

 

[kwc57]

You Betcha, as so many on this message board have claimed is the attempt by 'liberals' and The POTUS. Seems as is the case on most on all issues, the far right fringe is lying again. Over 2,200 firearms will remain legal if the Congress has the guts to pass responsible gun control/regulations.

Latest try at new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms - The Washington Post

Members of congress will be signing their retirement papers if they pass some of the proposed legislation.

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Go sing your song to Harry Reid.......who will never let an assualt weapon ban bill go to a vote unless he knows it doesn't stand a chance of being passed. Why? The citizens of Nevada would boot his ass out at the next election.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Efforts to derail this thread and obfuscate the LIE which has been posted by NRA fellow travelers and others whose gun is more important than the lives of children is duly noted.

No gun regulation that exist now, or in the past ever has or ever will protect the "chiren" from wackos with guns. To say regulations will is just as big a lie. The proof is in the fact that mass shootings happen frequently in other country's with stiff regulations on personal ownership of fire arms. It is disgusting how willing the political class is to use the killing of children to push an agenda to secure brownie points with voters. We have a people problem here, not a gun problem.

Yes it happens in other countries: See recent list here:

List of deadliest mass shootings around the world | Nation/World | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

 

[Wry Catcher]

Members of congress will be signing their retirement papers if they pass some of the proposed legislation.

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Go sing your song to Harry Reid.......who will never let an assualt weapon ban bill go to a vote unless he knows it doesn't stand a chance of being passed. Why? The citizens of Nevada would boot his ass out at the next election.

My Senators are Feinstein and Boxer; both support some form of gun regulation. Feinstein and Boxer are secure and command solid majorities in every election. Most mass shootings happen in urban settings so why shouldn't Mayors and city councils be allowed some discretion on some forms of gun control?

 

[Britfire54]

Efforts to derail this thread and obfuscate the LIE which has been posted by NRA fellow travelers and others whose gun is more important than the lives of children is duly noted.

No gun regulation that exist now, or in the past ever has or ever will protect the "chiren" from wackos with guns. To say regulations will is just as big a lie. The proof is in the fact that mass shootings happen frequently in other country's with stiff regulations on personal ownership of fire arms. It is disgusting how willing the political class is to use the killing of children to push an agenda to secure brownie points with voters. We have a people problem here, not a gun problem.

Yes it happens in other countries: See recent list here:

List of deadliest mass shootings around the world | Nation/World | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

... and the answer to all of this, then, is to have tough gun laws, restrictive gun laws, laws which minimise the ability of ordinary citizens to defend themselves from harm by a crazed, homicidal, armed, nutter ???

Consider many of those cited cases. Well, let's pick the Breivik one, just for illustration. Imagine yourself at one of the locations Breivik used for a killing spree. Do you imagine that an effective counter to Breivik's murderous rampage would've been to say to him, 'Excuse me, but I demand you stop killing people. I don't have a gun I can stop you with, because our gun laws aren't friendly to the idea of ownership, so instead, will you just wait around for the police to get here and stop firing, until they do ?'

You think that Breivik would've done as suggested ?

Needless to say, the better alternative would have been to have a gun available, and shoot Breivik, and so stop him in his tracks !!!

What could be more obvious ?!??

 

[martybegan]

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Go sing your song to Harry Reid.......who will never let an assualt weapon ban bill go to a vote unless he knows it doesn't stand a chance of being passed. Why? The citizens of Nevada would boot his ass out at the next election.

My Senators are Feinstein and Boxer; both support some form of gun regulation. Feinstein and Boxer are secure and command solid majorities in every election. Most mass shootings happen in urban settings so why shouldn't Mayors and city councils be allowed some discretion on some forms of gun control?

Its comical you are using the same line of logic segregationists used during the Jim Crow era. "hey you rural folks dont have dem nigras by you, its a city problem, let us handle it the way we want ta"

 

[tjvh]

Efforts to derail this thread and obfuscate the LIE which has been posted by NRA fellow travelers and others whose gun is more important than the lives of children is duly noted.

And children are only important when they can be used as pawns to push an agenda, when they are an inconvenience Liberals have no problem disposing of children along with other medical waste in a dumpster behind an abortion doctor's office. Selective use of children to push certain agenda's duly noted.

 

[tjvh]

You Betcha, as so many on this message board have claimed is the attempt by 'liberals' and The POTUS. Seems as is the case on most on all issues, the far right fringe is lying again. Over 2,200 firearms will remain legal if the Congress has the guts to pass responsible gun control/regulations.

Latest try at new assault weapons ban would exempt more than 2,200 specific firearms - The Washington Post

Members of congress will be signing their retirement papers if they pass some of the proposed legislation.

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Last I checked conscience doesn't trump the Constitution. Yeah, fortunately our Nation's Laws are not subject to compromised emotions, and knee jerk political reactions to every tragedy that comes down the path, or we'd all be Slaves living in protective bubbles by now... For our own good of course.

 

[kwc57]

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Go sing your song to Harry Reid.......who will never let an assualt weapon ban bill go to a vote unless he knows it doesn't stand a chance of being passed. Why? The citizens of Nevada would boot his ass out at the next election.

My Senators are Feinstein and Boxer; both support some form of gun regulation. Feinstein and Boxer are secure and command solid majorities in every election. Most mass shootings happen in urban settings so why shouldn't Mayors and city councils be allowed some discretion on some forms of gun control?

Well yeah, they represent the out of touch land of fruits and nuts.

 

[Uncensored2008]

She's a dumb bitch.

She's an evil slum lord. A 1%er, like all our leftist overlords are.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So. Members of Congress who cast their vote only to protect their job are the problem. It would be nice if some members of Congress voted their conscience.

Go sing your song to Harry Reid.......who will never let an assualt weapon ban bill go to a vote unless he knows it doesn't stand a chance of being passed. Why? The citizens of Nevada would boot his ass out at the next election.

My Senators are Feinstein and Boxer; both support some form of gun regulation. Feinstein and Boxer are secure and command solid majorities in every election. Most mass shootings happen in urban settings so why shouldn't Mayors and city councils be allowed some discretion on some forms of gun control?

Newspapers are more likely to be political in urban settings, why shouldn't mayors and city councils be given more discretion in dealing with them?

 

[Redbone]

No gun regulation that exist now, or in the past ever has or ever will protect the "chiren" from wackos with guns. To say regulations will is just as big a lie. The proof is in the fact that mass shootings happen frequently in other country's with stiff regulations on personal ownership of fire arms. It is disgusting how willing the political class is to use the killing of children to push an agenda to secure brownie points with voters. We have a people problem here, not a gun problem.

Yes it happens in other countries: See recent list here:

List of deadliest mass shootings around the world | Nation/World | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

... and the answer to all of this, then, is to have tough gun laws, restrictive gun laws, laws which minimise the ability of ordinary citizens to defend themselves from harm by a crazed, homicidal, armed, nutter ???

Consider many of those cited cases. Well, let's pick the Breivik one, just for illustration. Imagine yourself at one of the locations Breivik used for a killing spree. Do you imagine that an effective counter to Breivik's murderous rampage would've been to say to him, 'Excuse me, but I demand you stop killing people. I don't have a gun I can stop you with, because our gun laws aren't friendly to the idea of ownership, so instead, will you just wait around for the police to get here and stop firing, until they do ?'

You think that Breivik would've done as suggested ?

Needless to say, the better alternative would have been to have a gun available, and shoot Breivik, and so stop him in his tracks !!!

What could be more obvious ?!??

Answer to the school problem is increased security at the schools. Let qualified and vetted teachers conceal carry and be paid to protect the kids. For that extra pay they are contracted to step in and defend against intruders. When no teachers volunteer use armed security from outside school personnel.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes it happens in other countries: See recent list here:

List of deadliest mass shootings around the world | Nation/World | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

... and the answer to all of this, then, is to have tough gun laws, restrictive gun laws, laws which minimise the ability of ordinary citizens to defend themselves from harm by a crazed, homicidal, armed, nutter ???

Consider many of those cited cases. Well, let's pick the Breivik one, just for illustration. Imagine yourself at one of the locations Breivik used for a killing spree. Do you imagine that an effective counter to Breivik's murderous rampage would've been to say to him, 'Excuse me, but I demand you stop killing people. I don't have a gun I can stop you with, because our gun laws aren't friendly to the idea of ownership, so instead, will you just wait around for the police to get here and stop firing, until they do ?'

You think that Breivik would've done as suggested ?

Needless to say, the better alternative would have been to have a gun available, and shoot Breivik, and so stop him in his tracks !!!

What could be more obvious ?!??

Answer to the school problem is increased security at the schools. Let qualified and vetted teachers conceal carry and be paid to protect the kids. For that extra pay they are contracted to step in and defend against intruders. When no teachers volunteer use armed security from outside school personnel.

Idiocy.

This would place children in greater danger, not less.