The attempt to refrain the gun control debate

[Quantum Windbag]

“Nobody questions the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms, but we don’t think the founding fathers had the idea that every man, woman and child could carry an assault weapon,” Bloomberg said.




And? Not every one does...

So? It is not your "right" to own an assault weapon...

Meanwhile, the White House expressed its continued commitment to an assault weapons ban, reflecting a 2008 and 2012 campaign pledge by Obama.

When President Bill Clinton signed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act into law in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the measure was popular and enjoyed broad public support and the blessing of law enforcement. The ban on semiautomatic pistols, rifles and shotguns expired in 2004 under the Bush administration due to a sunset provision in the law.



Since that time, the gun control debate has subsided, and numerous attempts to reinstate the ban in Congress have failed. Typically, the proposals have failed to get out of committee due to the lack of political will among Democrats and Republicans alike.

Further, in 2011, following the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, the Justice Department developed a list of measures to expand background checks to reduce the risk of criminals and the mentally ill obtaining guns. The proposals also called for enhanced sentences for people who act as straw purchasers for those who cannot pass a background check. But the department shelved the proposals as the 2012 election campaign season approached, and the Republican-controlled Congress began investigating the Operation Fast and Furious gun trafficking case.


This resistance to enacting even the most modest gun control reforms is the result of the power and influence of the pro-gun lobby in U.S. politics, and its ability to frame the terms of the debate. Gun control advocates have lost control of the narrative because their advocates in Congress fear retaliation from the National Rifle Association, or the NRA.

Backed by conservative lawmakers and judges, the NRA has succeeded in promoting an uncompromising interpretation of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. The amendment states: “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.”

And the gun lobby—which opposes all forms of gun control, assault weapons ban, firearms registration and background checks—spends overwhelmingly to support Republican candidates and defeat Democratic candidates. According to OpenSecrets.org, of the $17.6 million the NRA spent on the 2012 federal election cycle, $11.4 million was spent to vote Democratic candidates out of office, and $5.9 million to support Republican candidates. In 2010, the NRA spent at least $100,000 to support or oppose 11 different candidates, with over $1.43 million to help Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) win a Senate seat against Democrat Joe Sestak.

During the 2012 election, the NRA ran ads in battleground states accusing Obama of chipping away at the right to bear arms. And four years earlier, gun sales surged after the president was elected, amid concerns that Democrats would restrict gin ownership.

In July of this year, one week after the Aurora, Colorado mass shooting, the NRA halted U.S. ratification of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty to prevent the illicit flow of arms to war-ravaged regions of the world.

The NRA has spent over $2 million on lobbying this year. Of the organization’s 28 lobbyists, 15 have previously held government positions.

Mother Jones reports that in the past four years, the NRA has passed 99 laws in 37 states making it easier to own guns and carry them in public, and more difficult for the government to track these guns.



How the assault weapons ban has been assaulted | theGrio

Thank you spineless dimwits of the GOP.

You want to tell me what an assault weapon is? Are you aware that there is not a single firearms expert on the planet that uses that term to describe anything manufactured anywhere in the world?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I hope they reinstate the ban on assault weapons...

And? It won't stop incidents like this.

No, but it'll make the emotion-driven vaginas on legs feel like they've "done something", which is all that really matters. Solutions? Improvements? We don't need any of that shit. Just DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING! Make us feel less helpless!

Obama wants to do something meaningful, which probably means he will name the law after the New Town children in order to score political points.

 

[beretta304]

And?

I hope they reinstate the ban on assault weapons...

The only difference that would have made is that he would have had to reload, or switch weapons, more often. The fact is that, if the ban had still been in effect, and the weapons he were using were bought under the ban, he could have accomplished the exact same thing and only had to reload once or twice.

Want to explain why you think it would have made a difference?

There is a rumor and it is unconfirmed, that he never used the rifle. It was found in the trunk of the car and he used only the 2 handguns.

Again...right now, reported but UNCONFIRMED.

And before you make shit up when you see this "Valerie"...I said..TWICE...unconfirmed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

“Nobody questions the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms, but we don’t think the founding fathers had the idea that every man, woman and child could carry an assault weapon,” Bloomberg said.




And? Not every one does...

So? It is not your "right" to own an assault weapon...

Meanwhile, the White House expressed its continued commitment to an assault weapons ban, reflecting a 2008 and 2012 campaign pledge by Obama.

When President Bill Clinton signed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act into law in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the measure was popular and enjoyed broad public support and the blessing of law enforcement. The ban on semiautomatic pistols, rifles and shotguns expired in 2004 under the Bush administration due to a sunset provision in the law.



Since that time, the gun control debate has subsided, and numerous attempts to reinstate the ban in Congress have failed. Typically, the proposals have failed to get out of committee due to the lack of political will among Democrats and Republicans alike.

Further, in 2011, following the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, the Justice Department developed a list of measures to expand background checks to reduce the risk of criminals and the mentally ill obtaining guns. The proposals also called for enhanced sentences for people who act as straw purchasers for those who cannot pass a background check. But the department shelved the proposals as the 2012 election campaign season approached, and the Republican-controlled Congress began investigating the Operation Fast and Furious gun trafficking case.


This resistance to enacting even the most modest gun control reforms is the result of the power and influence of the pro-gun lobby in U.S. politics, and its ability to frame the terms of the debate. Gun control advocates have lost control of the narrative because their advocates in Congress fear retaliation from the National Rifle Association, or the NRA.

Backed by conservative lawmakers and judges, the NRA has succeeded in promoting an uncompromising interpretation of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. The amendment states: “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.”

And the gun lobby—which opposes all forms of gun control, assault weapons ban, firearms registration and background checks—spends overwhelmingly to support Republican candidates and defeat Democratic candidates. According to OpenSecrets.org, of the $17.6 million the NRA spent on the 2012 federal election cycle, $11.4 million was spent to vote Democratic candidates out of office, and $5.9 million to support Republican candidates. In 2010, the NRA spent at least $100,000 to support or oppose 11 different candidates, with over $1.43 million to help Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) win a Senate seat against Democrat Joe Sestak.

During the 2012 election, the NRA ran ads in battleground states accusing Obama of chipping away at the right to bear arms. And four years earlier, gun sales surged after the president was elected, amid concerns that Democrats would restrict gin ownership.

In July of this year, one week after the Aurora, Colorado mass shooting, the NRA halted U.S. ratification of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty to prevent the illicit flow of arms to war-ravaged regions of the world.

The NRA has spent over $2 million on lobbying this year. Of the organization’s 28 lobbyists, 15 have previously held government positions.

Mother Jones reports that in the past four years, the NRA has passed 99 laws in 37 states making it easier to own guns and carry them in public, and more difficult for the government to track these guns.



How the assault weapons ban has been assaulted | theGrio

Thank you spineless dimwits of the GOP.

You want to tell me what an assault weapon is? Are you aware that there is not a single firearms expert on the planet that uses that term to describe anything manufactured anywhere in the world?

"Assault weapons", apparently, are in contrast to all the weapons that do something OTHER than assault . . . whatever those might be.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And? It won't stop incidents like this.

No, but it'll make the emotion-driven vaginas on legs feel like they've "done something", which is all that really matters. Solutions? Improvements? We don't need any of that shit. Just DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING! Make us feel less helpless!

Obama wants to do something meaningful, which probably means he will name the law after the New Town children in order to score political points.

It makes my spine chill and my skin crawl to hear leftists say, "We need to do something! SOMETHING has to be done!" You just know it's going to be something symbolic, useless for solving the problem, and damaging to civil liberties.

 

[Valerie]

So? It is not your "right" to own an assault weapon...









Thank you spineless dimwits of the GOP.

You want to tell me what an assault weapon is? Are you aware that there is not a single firearms expert on the planet that uses that term to describe anything manufactured anywhere in the world?

"Assault weapons", apparently, are in contrast to all the weapons that do something OTHER than assault . . . whatever those might be.

You guys want to play word games now? Look it up, the law defined the weapons...





When President Bill Clinton signed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act into law in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the measure was popular and enjoyed broad public support and the blessing of law enforcement. The ban on semiautomatic pistols, rifles and shotguns expired in 2004 under the Bush administration due to a sunset provision in the law.




I'd like to see someone articulate a convincing rationale to not re-institute what President Clinton implemented in 1994. Something other than Clint Eastwood and the NRA told me it's for the best...?

 

[beretta304]

You want to tell me what an assault weapon is? Are you aware that there is not a single firearms expert on the planet that uses that term to describe anything manufactured anywhere in the world?

"Assault weapons", apparently, are in contrast to all the weapons that do something OTHER than assault . . . whatever those might be.

You guys want to play word games now? Look it up, the law defined the weapons...





When President Bill Clinton signed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act into law in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the measure was popular and enjoyed broad public support and the blessing of law enforcement. The ban on semiautomatic pistols, rifles and shotguns expired in 2004 under the Bush administration due to a sunset provision in the law.




I'd like to see someone articulate a convincing rationale to not re-institute what President Clinton implemented in 1994. Something other than Clint Eastwood and the NRA told me it's for the best...?

You keep repeating it but who is arguing that? You never seem to want to say.

 

[Valerie]

"Assault weapons", apparently, are in contrast to all the weapons that do something OTHER than assault . . . whatever those might be.

You guys want to play word games now? Look it up, the law defined the weapons...





When President Bill Clinton signed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act into law in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the measure was popular and enjoyed broad public support and the blessing of law enforcement. The ban on semiautomatic pistols, rifles and shotguns expired in 2004 under the Bush administration due to a sunset provision in the law.




I'd like to see someone articulate a convincing rationale to not re-institute what President Clinton implemented in 1994. Something other than Clint Eastwood and the NRA told me it's for the best...?

You keep repeating it but who is arguing that? You never seem to want to say.

So you're going to support attempts to re-institute the ban? Excellent.

 

[Valerie]

In the wake of Friday's mass killing at an elementary school in Connecticut, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Sunday that she plans to introduce an assault weapons ban bill on the first day of the new Congress.

"I'm going to introduce in the Senate, and the same bill will be introduced in the House -- a bill to ban assault weapons," Feinstein said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Dianne Feinstein To Introduce Assault Weapons Ban On First Day Of Congress

 

[beretta304]

You guys want to play word games now? Look it up, the law defined the weapons...





When President Bill Clinton signed the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act into law in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, the measure was popular and enjoyed broad public support and the blessing of law enforcement. The ban on semiautomatic pistols, rifles and shotguns expired in 2004 under the Bush administration due to a sunset provision in the law.




I'd like to see someone articulate a convincing rationale to not re-institute what President Clinton implemented in 1994. Something other than Clint Eastwood and the NRA told me it's for the best...?

You keep repeating it but who is arguing that? You never seem to want to say.

So you're going to support attempts re-institute the ban? Excellent.

Nice try but I didn't say yes or no so that will not get you a pass on who is saying it. You can repeat it until the cows come home but you made a comment but as usual can't back it up.

Now we going to play the NYCarbineer game...that being replies like "So you're saying", "so you mean", "so you want to".

Try replying to what people say.

Where are the people here who said they were against it. Whether they indeed are or aren't, where are those posts?

I'll save you the trouble...you pulled it out of your ass.

 

[Valerie]

Dance Beretta, dance.

 

[beretta304]

Dance Beretta, dance.

You lead. I'll follow. Oh, I'm sorry you are leading.

So let's play your game.


So you're saying that had the ban been in place this wouldn't have happened.

P.S. You can try (and fail) at wit but you're forgetting one thing...everyone can see your lack of a reply multiple times.

 

[beretta304]

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired on September 13, 2004, as part of the law's sunset provision. There have been multiple attempts to renew the ban,[1] but no bill has reached the floor for a vote.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Obammy had both Houses for a while. Why didn't he reinstitute it?

Shortly after the November 4, 2008 election, Change.gov, the website of the office of then President-Elect Barack Obama, listed a detailed agenda for the forthcoming administration. The stated positions included "making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent." This statement was originally published on Barack Obama's campaign website, BarackObama.com. The agenda statement later appeared on the administration's website, WhiteHouse.gov, with its wording intact. As of October 9, 2012, the statement appeared within the Urban Policy section of Change.gov, under the heading "Address Gun Violence in Cities".

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Assault weapons bans in other statesIn addition to New York (see above), Massachusetts and New Jersey have enacted similar bans. Cook County of Illinois has enacted a similar, but more restrictive ban. California enacted one of the first bans on semi-automatic rifles in 1989, adding stricter measures to the law several times since. Connecticut has enacted a partial ban that focuses on assault weapons with certain characteristics.




Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[beretta304]

Connecticut gun laws among the nation’s strictest


Connecticut is one of just a few states with at least a partial ban on assault weapons.


But gun rights advocates — once they start speaking out more publicly — will note that the state in which the tragedy took place has among the most stringent gun control laws on the books.

Below, we look at a few different maps comparing Connecticut to the other 49 states by the strictness of their gun laws.

Here’s a map from February from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which is in favor of gun control. As you can see, Connecticut is ranked as having one of the strongest gun control regimes in the country, ranking in the second tier behind only California.

Connecticut gun laws among the nation’s strictest

 

[beretta304]

What's that Valerie? You can't find the words....

I'm done! You were done 5 posts ago.

Let me know when your coherent and have a counter...and bring the list of all those posters you claimed don't want the ban reinstated.



You like to put words in people's mouth, maybe you can alter my posts to make them say what you claim they say.

Wipe the egg off your face and have a Merry Christmas, Val.

 

[Valerie]

Dance Beretta, dance.

You lead. I'll follow. Oh, I'm sorry you are leading.

So let's play your game.


So you're saying that had the ban been in place this wouldn't have happened.

P.S. You can try (and fail) at wit but you're forgetting one thing...everyone can see your lack of a reply multiple times.

I'm thankful my posts are still there for anyone who cares to look, but I don't imagine myself playing to an audience, dear sniveler... That's all you.



I posted two news articles this morning about the political movement to re-institute the ban and when you brilliantly responded "and?" I simply stated I hope the ban is re-instituted. You began arguing with me with a few trite comments and ran away from my relating your position to everyone else who typically makes similar such comments...


Are you for the ban or against the ban, Fred Astaire...???

 

[beretta304]

Dance Beretta, dance.

You lead. I'll follow. Oh, I'm sorry you are leading.

So let's play your game.


So you're saying that had the ban been in place this wouldn't have happened.

P.S. You can try (and fail) at wit but you're forgetting one thing...everyone can see your lack of a reply multiple times.

I'm thankful my posts are still there for anyone who cares to look, but I don't imagine myself playing to an audience, dear sniveler... That's all you.



I posted two news articles this morning about the political movement to re-institute the ban and when you brilliantly responded "and?" I simply stated I hope the ban is lifted. You began arguing with me with a few trite comments and ran away from my relating your position to everyone else who typically makes similar such comments...


Are you for the ban or against the ban, Fred Astaire...???

I'll stand on what I posted and "re-note" again that you haven't proven a thing. Still haven't provided a list of posters but now that you realize that you can't...it's trite words. All you're now trying to do is get me to give you my position on the issue which is not what you and I got into this over. When I get my answer, you'll get yours. I just posted 5 different posts and not one did you address...relating to your topic. I'm not going to play your little game. That shit might work in the Flame Zone but not with me.


The only dancer is you Ginger. Carry on with your personal attacks...it's how you started the thread early on anyway.

 

[Valerie]

Funny, but the topic of this thread is not "Beretta's delusions"...


Let's try the OP topic which is "The attempt to refrain gun control". There is a surging public sentiment to re-institute certain bans on certain types of weapons and I'd like to understand any rationale against doing so... I can't get passed the fact that there is no other lawful purpose for them than to kill lots of people very rapidly.

 

[beretta304]

Funny, but the topic of this thread is not "Beretta's delusions"...


Let's try the OP topic which is "The attempt to refrain gun control". There is a surging public sentiment to re-institute certain bans on certain types of weapons and I'd like to understand any rationale against doing so... I can't get passed the fact that there is no other lawful purpose for them than to kill lots of people very rapidly.

Well when you get past that, let me know. I'll be waiting. If they're delusions then they're concrete ones and no amount of denial on your part will erase them off the thread.


"I can't get passed the fact that there is no other lawful purpose for them than to kill lots of people very rapidly."


Maybe so. Until it's illegal, you'll just have to adjust to the fact that you can't impose your will on those with other views.

 

[Valerie]

Funny, but the topic of this thread is not "Beretta's delusions"...


Let's try the OP topic which is "The attempt to refrain gun control". There is a surging public sentiment to re-institute certain bans on certain types of weapons and I'd like to understand any rationale against doing so... I can't get passed the fact that there is no other lawful purpose for them than to kill lots of people very rapidly.

Well when you get past that, let me know. I'll be waiting. If they're delusions then they're concrete ones and no amount of denial on your part will erase them off the thread.


"I can't get passed the fact that there is no other lawful purpose for them than to kill lots of people very rapidly."


Maybe so. Until it's illegal, you'll just have to adjust to the fact that you can't impose your will on those with other views.

It's not like I ever expected a rational response from you, but why would you respond to my posting an article about the assault weapons ban, if you are incapable of taking a position on the assault weapons ban...??? You act as if you object but then apparently disown the objection. Very strange, but evidently that's par for your sniveling course.