bbhh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brian Shoenmanns reaction is exactly why we will
> no longer elect republicans who are ignorant and
> selfish, there goes the GOP down the toilet,
> because you NEVER learn

What is ignorant and selfish about my position? What am I not learning?

If there are things we could have done that would have prevented Newtown, I'd like to hear what they are. As far as I can tell, the investigation is still out, so all of these policy proposals are based on sand.

It is always a bad idea to legislate in the heat of an emotional moment. Yes, everyone wants something done about tragedies like Aurora and Newtown, but we need to figure out what could actually work rather than trying ideas that don't and didn't work.

Columbine happened in the middle of the 1994 assault weapons ban. The guns used in Virginia Tech were purchased legally. The guns used in Newtown were stolen.

If you look at the common thread that runs through the vast majority of these shootings, it isn't the weapon used. It's that the shooters were all mentally ill. So why are we going to waste time trying to ban "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines when there's no evidence that a ban on those weapons will stop these atrocities from happening again?

Even during the 1994 ban, those weapons still existed. They weren't confiscated. Nothing short of confiscation will get most of those guns off the street, and government can't confiscate anything without paying the owners for it. There are millions of weapons that would be characterized as assault weapons in this country, and ten times as many high capacity magazines. Buying all of those guns back would cost tens to hundreds of billions of dollars. We don't have that kind of money. It would be cheaper to put armed guards in every school in America than it would be to confiscate every "assault weapon."

This isn't selfish, it's reality. The solution to this problem isn't and shouldn't be restricting the rights of law abiding citizens who have done nothing and will do nothing wrong. We need to focus on the people who commit these kinds of crimes, not the devices they use to do them. That means a more focused look at the state of mental health services in America.

Is it selfish and ignorant to only want to spend resources and time on solutions that might actually solve the problem?

^^^^^^

Brian is exactly right here.


The Liberals accuse their opponents of being "stupid" simply because they refuse to accept the unproven articles of faith that constitute their arguments for gun control, in lieu of actual arguments.

Loughner used a glock, as did the VT shooter as well.

And what that means is that all the earnest protestations about "reasonable" restrictions on magazine size, or rifle configuration are nothing of the sort--they are pretexts--trying to get the camel's nose under the tent, or if you're to ignorant to see that they are platitudes, because they have nothing to do with the actual problem.

Americans like to kill. It's our nature. If you can't fuck it then kill it.
And put an extra round into 'em to make sure they stay dead.
Guns are as American as aplle pie. Who wants to be a responsible gun owner.
That doesn't sound like any fun.


As Gus McCrae said to Woodrow in Lonesome Dove:
"We killed all the interesting people so the bankers and lawyers could move in"

"if one moron has a gun then you have to arm all the morons.
Or it isn't good sport".

A history of violence Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you
> can't fuck it then kill it.
> And put an extra round into 'em to make sure they
> stay dead.
> Guns are as American as aplle pie. Who wants to be
> a responsible gun owner.
> That doesn't sound like any fun.
>
>
> As Gus McCrae said to Woodrow in Lonesome Dove:
> "We killed all the interesting people so the
> bankers and lawyers could move in"
>
> "if one moron has a gun then you have to arm all
> the morons.
> Or it isn't good sport".


More stupid liberal shit. If you don't have facts, make them up.

"Americans like to kill. It's our nature." Let's look at who actually likes to kill and who really has a history of violence:

61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill
20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist Regime
5,964,000 Murdered: Japan's Savage Military
2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey's Genocidal Purges
1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
1,585,000 Murdered: Poland's Ethnic Cleansing

Suspected
1,663,000 Orwellian North Korea
1,417,000 Barbarous Mexico
1,066,000 Feudal Russia

Get the facts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A history of violence Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If you
> > can't fuck it then kill it.
> > And put an extra round into 'em to make sure
> they
> > stay dead.
> > Guns are as American as aplle pie. Who wants to
> be
> > a responsible gun owner.
> > That doesn't sound like any fun.
> >
> >
> > As Gus McCrae said to Woodrow in Lonesome Dove:
> > "We killed all the interesting people so the
> > bankers and lawyers could move in"
> >
> > "if one moron has a gun then you have to arm
> all
> > the morons.
> > Or it isn't good sport".
>
>
> More stupid liberal shit. If you don't have
> facts, make them up.
>
> "Americans like to kill. It's our nature." Let's
> look at who actually likes to kill and who really
> has a history of violence:
>
> 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
> 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant
> Hill
> 20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
> 10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist
> Regime
> 5,964,000 Murdered: Japan's Savage Military
> 2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
> 1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey's Genocidal Purges
> 1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
> 1,585,000 Murdered: Poland's Ethnic Cleansing
>
> Suspected
> 1,663,000 Orwellian North Korea
> 1,417,000 Barbarous Mexico
> 1,066,000 Feudal Russia

+1
Liberals have to resort to quoting fiction from Lonesome Dove instead of fact. I remember well when the Brady Bill was coming up for a vote and the Violence Policy Center issued a press release saying that 65% of NRA members supported the bill. No way.

Get the facts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A history of violence Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If you
> > can't fuck it then kill it.
> > And put an extra round into 'em to make sure
> they
> > stay dead.
> > Guns are as American as aplle pie. Who wants to
> be
> > a responsible gun owner.
> > That doesn't sound like any fun.
> >
> >
> > As Gus McCrae said to Woodrow in Lonesome Dove:
> > "We killed all the interesting people so the
> > bankers and lawyers could move in"
> >
> > "if one moron has a gun then you have to arm
> all
> > the morons.
> > Or it isn't good sport".
>
>
> More stupid liberal shit. If you don't have
> facts, make them up.
>
> "Americans like to kill. It's our nature." Let's
> look at who actually likes to kill and who really
> has a history of violence:
>
> 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
> 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant
> Hill
> 20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
> 10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist
> Regime
> 5,964,000 Murdered: Japan's Savage Military
> 2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
> 1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey's Genocidal Purges
> 1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
> 1,585,000 Murdered: Poland's Ethnic Cleansing
>
> Suspected
> 1,663,000 Orwellian North Korea
> 1,417,000 Barbarous Mexico
> 1,066,000 Feudal Russia

Someone did their homework. But you didn't include native Americans and our little Civil War.
But I stand corrected. Everyone likes to kill and the US is multinational.

I like my guns Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Get the facts Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > A history of violence Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > If you
> > > can't fuck it then kill it.
> > > And put an extra round into 'em to make sure
> > they
> > > stay dead.
> > > Guns are as American as aplle pie. Who wants
> to
> > be
> > > a responsible gun owner.
> > > That doesn't sound like any fun.
> > >
> > >
> > > As Gus McCrae said to Woodrow in Lonesome
> Dove:
> > > "We killed all the interesting people so the
> > > bankers and lawyers could move in"
> > >
> > > "if one moron has a gun then you have to arm
> > all
> > > the morons.
> > > Or it isn't good sport".
> >
> >
> > More stupid liberal shit. If you don't have
> > facts, make them up.
> >
> > "Americans like to kill. It's our nature."
> Let's
> > look at who actually likes to kill and who
> really
> > has a history of violence:
> >
> > 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
> > 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant
> > Hill
> > 20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
> > 10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist
> > Regime
> > 5,964,000 Murdered: Japan's Savage Military
> > 2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
> > 1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey's Genocidal Purges
> > 1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
> > 1,585,000 Murdered: Poland's Ethnic Cleansing
> >
> > Suspected
> > 1,663,000 Orwellian North Korea
> > 1,417,000 Barbarous Mexico
> > 1,066,000 Feudal Russia
>
> Someone did their homework. But you didn't include
> native Americans and our little Civil War.
> But I stand corrected. Everyone likes to kill and
> the US is multinational.


True, the Civil War was in the hundreds of thousands, not sure about the Indians. I also didn't include U.S. abortions which is now over 50,000,000 and would certainly support A history of violence's claim that Americans like to kill.

We lost about 200,000 in the American civil war - those that were killed in combat or died of wounds (either from gunshot, cannon, blade, etc.).

However, we lost a good 400,000 additional soldiers from non-combat issues: disease, starvation, accidents, etc.

bbhh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brian Shoenmanns reaction is exactly why we will
> no longer elect republicans who are ignorant and
> selfish, there goes the GOP down the toilet,
> because you NEVER learn


You'll only elect republicans that vote like democrats!!?!?! Then why have republicans. The difference between the two parties is becoming blurred more and more every election. One will take us over the cliff sooner, but both are about power and getting reelected and don't give a damn about the Constitution.

There will almost certainly be a credible 3rd party to emerge from this. Hopefully, one based on libertarian ideas.

A history of violence Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who wants to be
> a responsible gun owner.
> That doesn't sound like any fun.


I don't understand your reasoning, you don't have to be irresponsible to use a gun for hunting or target shooting. Being stupid with your gun is a good way to NOT have fun, being responsible with it can be quite fun.

Jess1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "You do realize that's exactly what the law is now
> right?"
>
> BBBbbbbut we need moar laws NOW!!!
>
> (GB + assorted knownothings)...
>
> Love the "assault" definition earlier in the
> thread - by that "standard" so's my pair of Colt
> revolvers...


yr right

LESS LAWS
MORE GUNS!!

cause that always works out, right?

pic unrelated
Attachments:

@angelike, "The group is modeling itself after MADD". i got to laugh at that. so does that mean you will people belonging to this group will be arrested for possessing concealed firearms just like MADD woman got arrested for dwi? whata fucking joke of a group.

Since the Newtown shooting there have been a number of anti-gun organizations popping up.

ANRA: Anti-NRA

Students for Gun Free Schools http://www.studentsforgunfreeschools.org/ Run by students that go to the University of Virgina and want to keep licensed firearm carry off of any campus.

AFRS: http://americansforresponsiblesolutions.org/

Bradycampaign: www.bradycampaign.org/

National Gun Victims Action Council - http://gunvictimsaction.org/ Thinks that they can influence businesses by starting boycotts aginst certain businesses until they agree to ban firearm carry by their customers.


God Not Guns: - http://www.bradycenter.org/advocates/faith/ An organization to get Churches to join in the anti-gun crusade (Site no longer exists, now redirects to Brady Center)

STN - Stop The NRA - http://www.stopthenra.com/

International Association of Chiefs of Police - http://www.theiacp.org/ Grant given to expand membership of LEO's wanting to reduce gun violence

Third Way - http://www.thirdway.org/ This orgainization now does what Americans for Gun Safety tried to do on its own (some of the same leadership). Previously it gave funding to AGS from grants provided by the Tides Center.

Forgot the VATech organiztion against guns -

Keep Guns Off Campus - Campaign to Keep our Colleges and Campus guns free.
www.keepgunsoffcampus.org/ShareFollowing mass shootings at Virginia Tech in 2007 (32 students and faculty killed and 15 wounded) and Northern ... The case against guns on campus is strong.

Some of the VATech victims
Attachments:

Auroa mass shooting victims -
Attachments:

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> yr right
>
> LESS LAWS
> MORE GUNS!!
>
> cause that always works out, right?
>
> pic unrelated


Where guns were mostly outlawed. They also regularly used bombs which also were illegal. Laws didn't do anything at all to stop either.

The Newtown mass shooting victims
Attachments:

Columbine Victims
Attachments:

you stupid whores always think you have all the answers. Here's a solution, close your legs you filthy whores.

Stop shitting put these pathetic, dysfunctional creature amd commvincing them that they are special.

Newsflash .. ALL of you open minded, tolerant, enlightened, progressive liberal whores have FAILED to populate the world with viable, confident, independent spirited men that are willing and able to accept the challenge of life.

Congratulations !!!

Over 15million black babies have been aborted since 1964 in the US.(source-World health Org) I think this is good think (most do) but where is the moral outrage from all of the progressive women??? Where is obamas self righteous rage?

In 2012 alone there was over 500 dead niggers in Chicago. That's a lot of dead niggers.

kill slutty moms Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you stupid whores always think you have all the
> answers. Here's a solution, close your legs you
> filthy whores.
>
> Stop shitting put these pathetic, dysfunctional
> creature amd commvincing them that they are
> special.
>
> Newsflash .. ALL of you open minded, tolerant,
> enlightened, progressive liberal whores have
> FAILED to populate the world with viable,
> confident, independent spirited men that are
> willing and able to accept the challenge of life.
>
>
> Congratulations !!!

translation:
Attachments:

15mil dead monkey fetuses Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Over 15million black babies have been aborted
> since 1964 in the US.(source-World health Org) I
> think this is good think (most do) but where is
> the moral outrage from all of the progressive
> women??? Where is obamas self righteous rage?
>
> In 2012 alone there was over 500 dead niggers in
> Chicago. That's a lot of dead niggers.


Maybe it's just me, but this sure seems racist.

v8LK4 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 15mil dead monkey fetuses Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Over 15million black babies have been aborted
> > since 1964 in the US.(source-World health Org)
> I
> > think this is good think (most do) but where is
> > the moral outrage from all of the progressive
> > women??? Where is obamas self righteous rage?
> >
> > In 2012 alone there was over 500 dead niggers
> in
> > Chicago. That's a lot of dead niggers.
>
>
> Maybe it's just me, but this sure seems racist.


Ya think?

Regardless, it's still true. The bulk of 'child' firearm deaths are young black males 15-up as a result of gang and other criminal violence. It's the largest cause of death among black men in this age group and represents thousands/year.

The numbers for younger ages/races are in the range of a few hundred/year and roughly equivalent on a per capita basis to other countries with significantly stronger gun restrictions.

I think it is unknowing individuals like the OP who voted Obama, who are slowly destroying our nation, and the things that make it great. Let me tell you.33k people where killed last year in automobile accidents. But yet nobody is trying to ban muscle cars. Do Americans need a 400hp beast of a car? NO. But they have them because this is america. People like fast cars, hot chicks, guns and booze. You try and ban things, everyone wants one.

You are a mom OP, and what happens when you tell you kid they cannot have something?
Well, by god they will have it, one day.

Instead of fear mongering, why dont you actually look at these crimes. NONE of them were mentally stable. Instead of trying to ban something we already have, why dont try and advocate for more mental health research? Or even more presciption drug control from the FED? Both the Newtown and the Auro shooters were both on the drugs.

Guns do not a have a mind of their own.
Guns do not point themselves at people.
Guns do not load themselves.
Guns kill, yes that is true, but so do many other things. Knives kill. Axes kill.

The point is is that without a person wielding these things, they are harmless.


By the way, even if they dropped the magizine capacity to 10 rds, I can reload in less than 1 second. So whats next? Revolvers only? With enough practice and with speed loaders i could probably do it in the same timeframe.

The only thing that stops bad guys with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

sight picture Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Guns do not a have a mind of their own.
> Guns do not point themselves at people.
> Guns do not load themselves.
> Guns kill, yes that is true, but so do many other
> things. Knives kill. Axes kill.


I completely agree with you, but try telling this to a liberal nut job who will reject all of the above.

In fact, the liberal's style of arguing for gun control (from what I have experienced) is to win the argument by "framing the issue" to win on a narrow aspect of the issue, and then try to expand. This is such a childish and immature
way to win an argument.



Let me give you an example, the wording of the Second Amendment: "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."

Recently, I was debating gun control issues with a roommate of mine. He is a native New Yorker from Brooklyn, who has recently moved here to NoVA. He doesn't mind me having guns, but he is an advocate of strict gun control. Although the 2A states that right to bear arms "shall not be infringed", his argument for gun control rested upon a narrow interpretation based on the words "a well regulated militia" arguing that only the militia should have unfettered access to guns. This is an example of "framing the issue" to win his argument. He sounded so much like a soundboard for Michael Bloomberg.

Later, I sprung the following on him:

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C13.txt

His mind was totally blown by it!

What's amazing is these LIBBY'S want everything from our dearly beloved Government, they want to be just like the Cubans and the Venezualuans that have no freedoms, makes wonder huh.

What's amazing is these GUN NUTS want everything from our dearly beloved County, they want to be just like the Somalians and the Taliban that have no choices, ONLY GUNS AND THEIR POV! makes wonder huh.

pic unrelated



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2013 07:18AM by Gordon Blvd.
Attachments:

ROCKO MEATS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's amazing is these LIBBY'S want everything
> from our dearly beloved Government, they want to
> be just like the Cubans and the Venezualuans that
> have no freedoms, makes wonder huh.

I cannot take anyone who uses "ROCKO MEATS" as a name seriously.
The only one who taking your freedoms away is yourself.
Paranoia s not conductive to a free mind.

the problem is simple - people who feel that they need a gun are precisely the ones who shouldn't have them. Show me a mature and responsible human who wouldn't give up his toy penis, I mean gun, and I will show you a selfish liar. You can't have your toys if you want to be safe. Republicans will pay the price for selling out to extremists, no one will vote for you soon, if you keep up this behavior.

jeanu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the problem is simple - people who feel that they
> need a gun are precisely the ones who shouldn't
> have them. Show me a mature and responsible human
> who wouldn't give up his toy penis, I mean gun,
> and I will show you a selfish liar. You can't have
> your toys if you want to be safe. Republicans will
> pay the price for selling out to extremists, no
> one will vote for you soon, if you keep up this
> behavior.


Another example of a lib who, devoid of facts or any common sense, tries to justify their misguided, feel-good views by putting together a string of jibberish and hope it sticks. Jeanu, try putting some level of effort into your argument.

Lib Run on- well, that was a cogent argument. (sarcasm) Your mother apparently mated with her brother.

jeanu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the problem is simple - people who feel that they
> need a gun are precisely the ones who shouldn't
> have them. Show me a mature and responsible human
> who wouldn't give up his toy penis, I mean gun,
> and I will show you a selfish liar. You can't have
> your toys if you want to be safe. Republicans will
> pay the price for selling out to extremists, no
> one will vote for you soon, if you keep up this
> behavior.

You wouldn't vote for us even if we supportd banning guns, so why bother changing our stance?

This is a juvenile and immature opinion.

Oh, Executive Orders were constitution up the butt with Bush and his illegal wars, tho, you people are such low IQ, Low Lifes, especially all Schoenemanns, Darwin seems to take care of it tho, as gun owners kids get to play with guns and kill themselves

jeanu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the problem is simple - people who feel that they
> need a gun are precisely the ones who shouldn't
> have them. Show me a mature and responsible human
> who wouldn't give up his toy penis, I mean gun,
> and I will show you a selfish liar. You can't have
> your toys if you want to be safe. Republicans will
> pay the price for selling out to extremists, no
> one will vote for you soon, if you keep up this
> behavior.

I'll never give up my armed Secret Service agents.

hebag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh, Executive Orders were constitution up the butt
> with Bush and his illegal wars, tho, you people
> are such low IQ, Low Lifes, especially all
> Schoenemanns, Darwin seems to take care of it tho,
> as gun owners kids get to play with guns and kill
> themselves

Fruppie! Where are you?

hebag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh, Executive Orders were constitution up the butt
> with Bush and his illegal wars, tho, you people
> are such low IQ, Low Lifes, especially all
> Schoenemanns, Darwin seems to take care of it tho,
> as gun owners kids get to play with guns and kill
> themselves

Can somebody translate this into English please? Kthx.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hebag Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Oh, Executive Orders were constitution up the
> butt
> > with Bush and his illegal wars, tho, you people
> > are such low IQ, Low Lifes, especially all
> > Schoenemanns, Darwin seems to take care of it
> tho,
> > as gun owners kids get to play with guns and
> kill
> > themselves
>
> Can somebody translate this into English please?
> Kthx.


It's lib speak, never makes sense, just ignore it.

"the overwhelming and increasing gun violence in America"

I am hoping you include this in your meeting and help to alleviate the real problems in America.


***** Gun-related violent crimes drop as sales soar in Va. - Richmond ...

www.timesdispatch.com/ news/ local/ central-virginia/ gun-related-violent-crimes-drop-as-gun-sales-soar-in/ article_54cca13a-35ee-11e2-83f0-0019bb30f31a.html


***** Gun Crime Soars in England Where Guns Are Banned - Katie Pavlich

www.townhall.com/ tipsheet/ katiepavlich/ 2012/ 12/ 11/ gun-crime-soars-in-england-where-guns-are-banned-n1464528


***** FBI Crime in the us; Violent Crime Graph
Look how far down it has dropped in a five year period.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime

Do not take guns from the citizens if you wish crime to go down. That is like removing a bird's wings and setting it out to fend for itself... Are you crazy, on antidepressants (sorry, I am sure they actually could help some effectively.. but look at the rise) or just sadistic? Besides, the ones you do not want to have the guns will.
(((Obama signs law giving himself, Bush lifetime Secret Service guard - http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-signs-law-giving-himself-bush-lifetime-secret-184305122--politics.html))))

Do control the antidepressants passed out to children and citizens.

Do you want to really make a difference? Work on what the real problem is. Think for yourself instead of mimicing the media who twist and double twist the facts to death.

I object to you calling yourself moms against anything. Not all moms agree with you; are you only moms? or making a statement that mom's should not be prepared to defend their children? ... okay, you are a group looking at the problem, and it is just a name.., but understand it is not the gun, but criminal element in our midst. Learn to protect yourself and your children before it is too late.

SmartSpiritualMom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
blah blah blah... Learn to
> protect yourself and your children before it is
> too late.

just like this kid's family did!!

kid in the pic was in the house when dad murdered mom - cause gun nuts dont even really care about their own sometimes :(
Attachments:

Come and gett'm!
Attachments:

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SmartSpiritualMom Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> blah blah blah... Learn to
> > protect yourself and your children before it is
> > too late.
>
> just like this kid's family did!!
>
> kid in the pic was in the house when dad murdered
> mom - cause gun nuts dont even really care about
> their own sometimes :(

Who is the first person you shoot in this picture if you attack the soccer game? Talk about making yourself a target for a gunman.
Attachments:

No one is telling me to haggle about taking American's rights away... how about you?

Disarming America? Why not please take away the forks and spoons too? I mean without citizens being able to own a gun, they may take to forking or spooning each other violently while the criminals, who are the only ones now holding the guns sit back and enjoy... hmmm

Do you people realize what you are saying ... really? You are promoting the take over of criminals, enemies of the US, government, any damn one who wishes?

SquareOne Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No one is telling me to haggle about taking
> American's rights away... how about you?
>
> Disarming America? Why not please take away the
> forks and spoons too? I mean without citizens
> being able to own a gun, they may take to forking
> or spooning each other violently while the
> criminals, who are the only ones now holding the
> guns sit back and enjoy... hmmm
>
> Do you people realize what you are saying ...
> really? You are promoting the take over of
> criminals, enemies of the US, government, any damn
> one who wishes?

For the record I'm fine with the risk of a person trying to take out 26 kids and teachers with a spoon and fork. I'm willing to take that risk.

I don't see the need to regulate spoons and forks right now.

Spoon Attack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SquareOne Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No one is telling me to haggle about taking
> > American's rights away... how about you?
> >
> > Disarming America? Why not please take away
> the
> > forks and spoons too? I mean without citizens
> > being able to own a gun, they may take to
> forking
> > or spooning each other violently while the
> > criminals, who are the only ones now holding
> the
> > guns sit back and enjoy... hmmm
> >
> > Do you people realize what you are saying ...
> > really? You are promoting the take over of
> > criminals, enemies of the US, government, any
> damn
> > one who wishes?
>
> For the record I'm fine with the risk of a person
> trying to take out 26 kids and teachers with a
> spoon and fork. I'm willing to take that risk.
>
> I don't see the need to regulate spoons and forks
> right now

Forks and spoons in schools are regulated. You won't find any steak knives in a school lunch room. They have to use plastic pieces of shit.

School officials say the 5th grader was brown-bagging it. She brought a piece of steak for her lunch, but she also brought a steak knife. That's when deputies were called.

It happened in the cafeteria at Sunrise Elementary School. The 10-year-old used the knife to cut the meat.

"She did not use it inappropriately. She did not threaten anyone with it. She didn't pull it out and brandish it. Nothing of that nature," explained Marion County School Spokesman Kevin Christian.

But a couple of teachers took the utensil and called the sheriff. When deputies arrived, they were unable to get the child's parents on the phone, so they arrested her and took her to the county's juvenile assessment center.
"And we didn't handcuff her or treat her like a criminal. But, we took her to the assessment center to be assessed," said Capt. James Pogue, Marion County Sheriff's Office.

School officials said it doesn't matter what the knife was being used for. They said they had no choice.
"Anytime there's a weapon on campus, yes, we have to report it and we aggressively report it because we don't want to take any chances, regardless," Christian said.

But the sheriff's office said the extreme measures in what some may say was a harmless incident had to do with school policy, not theirs.
"But once we're notified, we have to take some type of action," Pogue explained.

The student now faces a felony charge for the possession of a weapon on school property and the principal suspended her for ten days. The parents of the girl could not be reached for comment.

The sheriff's office has turned the case over to the State Attorney's Office.

Has anyone of the gun owners called the gentleman in PA and inquired what type of cleaner he used for removing the childs brain off the interior of the truck?
Good to know for that "just in case". Accidents happen.
You know what a pain in the ass it is to explain to the old lady: hey honey, picked up the groceries, the gun got caught on the seatbelt and our son is really brainy now. Oh yea, one less plate for dinner.

Well, this has been such an amusing read. The number of strawmen, false equivalencies, non sequiturs, and just plain knee jerk conclusions here rivals any show on talk radio.

The NRA and its supporters are undeniably correct in their position that the constitution grants citizens the right to own guns. It's all there in 18th century black and white. But LaPierre et société's clear lack of any understanding of the 2nd admendment's historical context makes their preachy justifications a study in irony.

When the authors of the constitution wrote that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, they were addressing their concerns about a standing army in a free society, not the right of every American to own two Glocks and an AK-47. The contentious relationship between the Continental Congress and the Continental army during the Revolutionary War demonstrated, to them, the danger to a free people posed by a professional officer corps with troops loyal to it and not the government. They wanted to forestall this by providing the legal framework for the citizry to organize itself into "well regulated" militias for community protection. This wasn't much of a reach, since the tradition was well understood and ensconced in the American colonies. All eligible citizens (free, white, and male, of course) were morally obligated to participate, and since the federal and local governments weren't going to pay for their weapons, they had the right, in fact the duty, to furnish their own.

This is what makes the modern santimonious statements about the founding fathers securing people these rights as a bulwark against tyranny so risible. The consitution enshrined these "militas" as a means to have the people protect the government, with the government being too cheap to buy the weapons. Of course, in the 18th century, the government held no real technological advantage against the average citizen. So it was a workable solution. Today, "cold, dead, hands" would be about all that would be left of a citizen who challenged the tyranny of an F-15, an Apache gunship, or an Abrams main battle tank. You can test the limits of the 2nd amendment by getting the gang to scrape together $10 million and calling up General Dynamics to order one.

The current situation requires a reasoned and balanced approach. There is no need to pass more laws restricting gun ownership in this country. In fact, there is only one law that needs to be repealed: Mr. Bush's 2005 "The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act". This law absolved gun manufacturers from all tort liability. It was passed in response to the manufacturers' growing alarm at the number of lawsuits being filed against them, particularly by American cities beset with gun violence.

As any good Republican would agree, Mr. Bush's law was a distortion of market forces and an abrogation of every American's constitutional right to seek redress in the courts. Repeal it, and let the market bring a few wrongful death suits against Colt and ArmaLite before the good citizens of Newtown and Aurora. Adam Smith's "invisible hand" will play out as it should; and soon, there will either be an amazing jump in securing guns or the average Sig Sauer P226 will retail for $250,000 -- to cover the insurance. After all, subsidized guns are socialist guns!

KickedOutOfTheNRA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, this has been such an amusing read. The
> number of strawmen, false equivalencies, non
> sequiturs, and just plain knee jerk conclusions
> here rivals any show on talk radio.
>
> The NRA and its supporters are undeniably correct
> in their position that the constitution grants
> citizens the right to own guns. It's all there in
> 18th century black and white. But LaPierre et
> société's clear lack of any understanding of the
> 2nd admendment's historical context makes their
> preachy justifications a study in irony.
>
> When the authors of the constitution wrote that
> the right of the people to keep and bear arms
> shall not be infringed, they were addressing their
> concerns about a standing army in a free society,
> not the right of every American to own two Glocks
> and an AK-47. The contentious relationship
> between the Continental Congress and the
> Continental army during the Revolutionary War
> demonstrated, to them, the danger to a free people
> posed by a professional officer corps with troops
> loyal to it and not the government. They wanted
> to forestall this by providing the legal framework
> for the citizry to organize itself into "well
> regulated" militias for community protection.
> This wasn't much of a reach, since the tradition
> was well understood and ensconced in the American
> colonies. All eligible citizens (free, white, and
> male, of course) were morally obligated to
> participate, and since the federal and local
> governments weren't going to pay for their
> weapons, they had the right, in fact the duty, to
> furnish their own.
>
> This is what makes the modern santimonious
> statements about the founding fathers securing
> people these rights as a bulwark against tyranny
> so risible. The consitution enshrined these
> "militas" as a means to have the people protect
> the government, with the government being too
> cheap to buy the weapons. Of course, in the 18th
> century, the government held no real technological
> advantage against the average citizen. So it was
> a workable solution. Today, "cold, dead, hands"
> would be about all that would be left of a citizen
> who challenged the tyranny of an F-15, an Apache
> gunship, or an Abrams main battle tank. You can
> test the limits of the 2nd amendment by getting
> the gang to scrape together $10 million and
> calling up General Dynamics to order one.
>
> The current situation requires a reasoned and
> balanced approach. There is no need to pass more
> laws restricting gun ownership in this country.
> In fact, there is only one law that needs to be
> repealed: Mr. Bush's 2005 "The Protection of
> Lawful Commerce in Arms Act". This law absolved
> gun manufacturers from all tort liability. It was
> passed in response to the manufacturers' growing
> alarm at the number of lawsuits being filed
> against them, particularly by American cities
> beset with gun violence.
>
> As any good Republican would agree, Mr. Bush's law
> was a distortion of market forces and an
> abrogation of every American's constitutional
> right to seek redress in the courts. Repeal it,
> and let the market bring a few wrongful death
> suits against Colt and ArmaLite before the good
> citizens of Newtown and Aurora. Adam Smith's
> "invisible hand" will play out as it should; and
> soon, there will either be an amazing jump in
> securing guns or the average Sig Sauer P226 will
> retail for $250,000 -- to cover the insurance.
> After all, subsidized guns are socialist guns!

There is absolutely no reason to hold gun manufacturers liable in tort for the misuse of their products. The only reason to hold them liable would be if their product harmed the user. The fact that someone lawfully purchases a firearm and then uses it in an unlawful manner is not something that anyone could foresee. You might as well hold Ford or GM liable every time one of their vehicles is used in a DUI. Or Anheiser Busch liable anytime someone gets drunk and gets raped. It's a complete overreach.

The reason there was a contentious relationship between the Continental Congress and the Continental Army had nothing to do with concerns about standing armies. It had to do with the fact that the Continental Congress was completely incapable of keeping the Army fed, clothed and paid. After Valley Forge, Washington relied on the states, not the Congress, for support for the Army.

The 2nd Amendment was the codification of rights that pre-dated the founding of the United States and were fundamental in Great Britain for over a century before the Revolution. The use of firearms in colonial America was not simply as part of the militia or as part of the protection of the state - it was also for personal defense. This was in the period before organized police forces (they didn't really exist until 1821) and where the frontier was Indian country. People had to be able to defend themselves because there was no one to do it for them. Yes, government was cheap, but it also recognized it couldn't be everywhere and citizens were obligated to defend themselves.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, government was cheap, but it
> also recognized it couldn't be everywhere and
> citizens were obligated to defend themselves.


Do you believe that God gave people the right to own 30 round magazines?

Georgia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes, government was cheap, but it
> > also recognized it couldn't be everywhere and
> > citizens were obligated to defend themselves.
>
>
> Do you believe that God gave people the right to
> own 30 round magazines?

I believe there's a natural right to self defense. If someone wants to own a 30 round magazine, and they do so in a lawful way, there's no reason to prohibit them from doing so.

As I noted above, I am not aware of how many mass murders recently have been stopped in progress when the shooter had to reload. The only one I can recall is Colin Ferguson, and he was using 15 round magazines, which would still be considered high capacity under the bills I've seen suggested.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
> If someone wants to own a 30 round magazine, and
> they do so in a lawful way

So who decides what is lawful? Politicians?

KickedOutOfTheNRA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, this has been such an amusing read. The
> number of strawmen, false equivalencies, non
> sequiturs, and just plain knee jerk conclusions
> here rivals any show on talk radio.
>
> blah, blah, blah


Your post being a prime example.

All of you amateur Constitutional law experts can take the rest of the day off. The SCOTUS has already answered the question and affirmed the right to individual gun ownership under the 2nd Amendment (see District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v Chicago). As difficult as I know it will be for you to accept, their interpretation trumps yours.

Likewise, your analysis of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. First, it was not "Mr. Bush's" law. It was passed in both houses with bipartisan support including over 40 Dem cosponsors in the house.

Second, the issue is significantly more complex than you present it. It only protects manufacturers against legal actions resulting from illegal acts committed with products which function as they are intended. Not against defective products, manufacturer negligence, etc. At a practical level, it was introduced to counter abusive lawsuits both by, for example, a criminal who had been shot in the act of a crime as well as efforts by anti-gun advocates to use liability in exactly the way that you suggest rather than as legitimate tort actions. That's very different than pure market forces at work as you attempt to portray it. As Brian notes above, it opens up a very large can of worms which extends far beyond guns and ammo. Last, the government also relies on many of the same manufacturers of such materials as its suppliers, so there is a strategic value to the industry which could be significantly compromised otherwise (i.e., no ammo manufacturing industry, no ammo).

god given rights Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > If someone wants to own a 30 round magazine,
> and
> > they do so in a lawful way
>
> So who decides what is lawful? Politicians?

The elected representatives of the people. You know, the system of government we've had for 230 years.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2013 07:32AM by BrianSchoeneman.

A child's brain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Has anyone of the gun owners called the gentleman
> in PA and inquired what type of cleaner he used
> for removing the childs brain off the interior of
> the truck?
> Good to know for that "just in case". Accidents
> happen.
> You know what a pain in the ass it is to explain
> to the old lady: hey honey, picked up the
> groceries, the gun got caught on the seatbelt and
> our son is really brainy now. Oh yea, one less
> plate for dinner.

I hope this guy didn't get all baby like and denouce guns. Should go home and holster another one since the cops kept the one used for splattering his kids brains all over the truck. Anyone know what the make of the truck was? Trucks are expensive but poking the wifey is cheaper. Allways have another kid.
Bet you libitards are thinking about the kid not having to listen to his pop jacking his jaw about 2 amend. anymore. Anybody know what kind of gun?

Georgia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes, government was cheap, but it
> > also recognized it couldn't be everywhere and
> > citizens were obligated to defend themselves.
>
>
> Do you believe that God gave people the right to
> own 30 round magazines?

Yes.

I carry an AK-47 but my son prefers the M-4

http://lolgod.blogspot.com/2010/08/god-action-figure-now-with-ak-47.html

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The fact that someone lawfully purchases a firearm
> and then uses it in an unlawful manner is not
> something that anyone could foresee. You might as
> well hold Ford or GM liable every time one of
> their vehicles is used in a DUI. Or Anheiser Busch
> liable anytime someone gets drunk and gets raped.
> It's a complete overreach.
>


and here is where we disagree. You are confusing the word "weapon" with the word "tool".

A firearm is a weapon. And it is COMPLETELY IGNORANT for a weapons maker or weapons owner to not be able to foresee the possibility of a weapon being used in an unlawful manner. THis is kinda the same thing as the whole gun-knife banning argument. Y'all will always compare a gun to a knife. And that's COMPLETE and UTTER BS. Yes a knife can be a leathal weapon, but are not DESIGNED to be. They are DESIGNED to be tools just like hammers, pipe, rope, candlestick, and even the poison (too much Clue LoLz). All those things can be USED as weapons, but it is ONLY the pistol in the game that was made SPECIFICALLY BY DESIGN to be a weapon.

So yeah, to say that it's unreasonable to foresee an unlawful use of a weapon, when it's been happening EVERY SINGLE DAY since Abel bought it - I'm sorry, bro but that dog just dont hunt.

You sound like a group of concerned moms. Mom's who need to inform themself immediately, before it is too late to make rational choices about what your affect is going to be on this country.

PLEASE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING IN YOUR GUN CONTROL MEETINGS (for your own safety and your children's safety):


"The United States is #1 in the world in gun ownership, and yet it is only 28th in the world in gun murders per 100,000 people."

"The violent crime rate in the United States actually fell from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. During that same time period, the murder rate fell from 9.3 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. This was during an era when gun laws in the United States generally became much less restrictive.

"The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. So has this reduced crime? Of course not. ... the murder rate in Chicago was about 17 percent higher in 2012 than it was in 2011, and Chicago is now considered to be "the deadliest global city". If you can believe it, there were about as many murders in Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire nation of Japan."

Mama2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You sound like a group of concerned moms. Mom's
> who need to inform themself immediately, before it
> is too late to make rational choices about what
> your affect is going to be on this country.
>
> PLEASE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING IN YOUR GUN CONTROL
> MEETINGS (for your own safety and your children's
> safety):
>
>
> "The United States is #1 in the world in gun
> ownership, and yet it is only 28th in the world in
> gun murders per 100,000 people."
>
> "The violent crime rate in the United States
> actually fell from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to
> 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. During that same time
> period, the murder rate fell from 9.3 per 100,000
> to 4.7 per 100,000. This was during an era when
> gun laws in the United States generally became
> much less restrictive.
>
> "The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun
> laws in the United States. So has this reduced
> crime? Of course not. ... the murder rate in
> Chicago was about 17 percent higher in 2012 than
> it was in 2011, and Chicago is now considered to
> be "the deadliest global city". If you can
> believe it, there were about as many murders in
> Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire
> nation of Japan."


Only 28th? We are the #1 country in the world. We need to start killing more so we can be #1 in murders too. Come on people,let's go!!!

> Only 28th? We are the #1 country in the world. We need to start killing more > so we can be #1 in murders too. Come on people,let's go!!!

Looks like Chicago is one state working to get there.

Mama2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
If you can
> believe it, there were about as many murders in
> Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire
> nation of Japan."


speaking of which................

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

edit: tl/dr- A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths
: Almost no one in Japan owns a gun. Most kinds are illegal, with onerous restrictions on buying and maintaining the few that are allowed. Even the country's infamous, mafia-like Yakuza tend to forgo guns; the few exceptions tend to become big national news stories.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2013 12:53PM by Gordon Blvd.

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mama2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> If you can
> > believe it, there were about as many murders in
> > Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire
> > nation of Japan."
>
>
> speaking of which................
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2
> 012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually
> -eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/
>
> edit: tl/dr- A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has
> Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths
> : Almost no one in Japan owns a gun. Most
> kinds are illegal, with onerous restrictions on
> buying and maintaining the few that are allowed.
> Even the country's infamous, mafia-like Yakuza
> tend to forgo guns; the few exceptions tend to
> become big national news stories.

Then move to Japan.

.Rgr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Then move to Japan.


ROFLMAO at yr "get out of America we LOVE out murder rate" attitude

LoLz

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .Rgr Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Then move to Japan.
>
>
> ROFLMAO at yr "get out of America we LOVE out
> murder rate" attitude
>
> LoLz



WWII had a lot to do with that. You had an entire country and generation which who were disarmed by force and a generation which followed who had no access to arms.

They make up for it in suicides.





If you really want to look at the details of murder and crime rates (which I know you don't but I'll continue anyway) then you need to disaggregate the data more to show what's driving the numbers. In our case, taking young black males and urban violence which is centered mostly in our run down, second-tier cities, then our murder and gun-related death rates aren't out of line with any other country even given our much greater number of guns and comparing to countries with much tighter restrictions.

We obese, man-hating, big-government-loving libs never let facts get in the way of our menopausal-driven emotions.

I am an individual for MORE GUN CONTROL! JUST GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT AND NO ONE GETS HURT!! I have only been raped 3 times in the last year and redistributed $2000 to the have-nots. Small price to pay for SAFETY!

no matter how many fake arguments you make this country wants, needs and will have gun control, use your gun-penis on yourself you insecure low lifes, get treatment so you won't need a gun to be a man.

Too bad you can't see the writing on the wall.

"this country wants, needs and will have gun control"
This country meaning the THUGS on the street and in Washington, UK, etc. want you disarmed NOW, and they mean it. How else can you be put down where you belong and controlled properly?

Right on janeo.... you tell 'em... Disarm those Citizens right now...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&NR=1&v=bPW9mIrQcXA

Your 2nd Amendment rights are being taken away.
By lawmakers who only care about power... (not children; they are their pawns; don't let them be)

Famous Dictators first banned guns. Hitler, Stalin, Zedong, all banned weapons at the beginning of their rule to disarm the people and take away their right to protect themselves.

After that happened, all 3 leaders executed 10's of millions of people. (OPEN your eyes people; look at the patterns before you...)

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

When you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns.

Your rights were given to you to protect you and your family from a corrupt government and as self defense.

Interesting how so many people who want to disarm our citizens have guns themselves or bodyguards.

Facts123 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your 2nd Amendment rights are being taken away.
> By lawmakers who only care about power... (not
> children; they are their pawns; don't let them
> be)
>
> Famous Dictators first banned guns. Hitler,
> Stalin, Zedong, all banned weapons at the
> beginning of their rule to disarm the people and
> take away their right to protect themselves.
>
> After that happened, all 3 leaders executed 10's
> of millions of people. (OPEN your eyes people;
> look at the patterns before you...)
>
> Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
>
> When you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns.
>
> Your rights were given to you to protect you and
> your family from a corrupt government and as self
> defense.

translation: the gub-mint comin to take yr bay-BEES!!!!

pic unrelated
Attachments:

SenatorDiane Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting how so many people who want to disarm
> our citizens have guns themselves or bodyguards.


do you even know there are any other channels than fox news?

Angelike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Give me a break you gun nut crazy assholes, Im
> trying to stop gun violence in this country. Only
> farmers, police and the goverment should own a
> firearm.


Says the disck sucking, leg spreading whore.

Angelike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> One Million Moms for Gun Control is asking our
> elected officials to:
> 1) Ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines of
> more than 10 rounds.
> 2) Require background checks for all gun
> purchasers.
> 3) Report the sale of large quantities of
> ammunition to the ATF.
> 4) Limit the scope of concealed weapons laws at
> the state level.
>


1) Please define "assault weapon"

2) Background check are required for all gun purchasers from FFL dealers and shops.

3) Please define "large quantities of ammunition"

4) Do you know the scope of concealed weapons laws? Did you know in VA, it's a CHP - Concealed handgun permit, so you are allowed to carry a concealed handgun and it does require an application, proof of training, and a judge to approve. It's not a permit to conceal a rifle, shotgun, or knife.

1) In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.

2) Beautiful. Um, this aint Los Disneys - you DO realize that, right?

3) Please define "average quantity of ammunition purchased". Once that's defined, then we'll go with "any more than that level" - gun nuts would know this more than me.

4) well see, this is kinda the problem - we have more laws than we can deal with on the subject and a LOT of confusion. So let's just get it all uniform so we can LIMIT the scope (and number) of concealed weapons laws at the state level. in-CREDIBLE to me how many times you gun nuts talk about Gub-MINT having too many laws any now that there is discussion to try and streamline some of them, y'all get all balky LoLz

MORE GUN LAWS... apparently NOT the answer

446 School Age Children Shot in Chicago so Far This Year (2012)
http://crimeinchicago.blogspot.com/2012/12/connecticut-doesnt-have-shit-on-chicago.html

Are those who did this in jail?
If not, why not?
If this keeps up will parents be pleading for Government help
to be safe?
After all, that is a part of their plan…
to make things so bad We The People will
be crying for relief!

OR

we can keep our guns in order to fight back.

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1) In discussions about gun laws and gun politics
> in the United States, an assault weapon is most
> commonly defined as a semi-automatic
> firearm possessing certain features similar to
> those of military firearms. Semi-automatic
> firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the
> trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is
> ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the
> chamber, without the manual operation of a bolt
> handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault
> weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction
> with one, two, or more other features such as a
> pistol grip, a folding stock, a flash suppressor,
> or a bayonet lug.
>
> 2) Beautiful. Um, this aint Los Disneys - you DO
> realize that, right?
>
> 3) Please define "average quantity of ammunition
> purchased". Once that's defined, then we'll go
> with "any more than that level" - gun nuts would
> know this more than me.
>
> 4) well see, this is kinda the problem - we have
> more laws than we can deal with on the subject and
> a LOT of confusion. So let's just get it all
> uniform so we can LIMIT the scope (and number) of
> concealed weapons laws at the state level.
> in-CREDIBLE to me how many times you gun nuts talk
> about Gub-MINT having too many laws any now that
> there is discussion to try and streamline some of
> them, y'all get all balky LoLz

Fruppie!!! Where are you?

I already have one so let the banning begin.

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1) In discussions about gun laws and gun politics
> in the United States, an assault weapon is most
> commonly defined as a semi-automatic
> firearm possessing certain features similar to
> those of military firearms. Semi-automatic
> firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the
> trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is
> ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the
> chamber, without the manual operation of a bolt
> handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An assault
> weapon has a detachable magazine, in conjunction
> with one, two, or more other features such as a
> pistol grip, a folding stock, a flash suppressor,
> or a bayonet lug.
>
> 2) Beautiful. Um, this aint Los Disneys - you DO
> realize that, right?
>
> 3) Please define "average quantity of ammunition
> purchased". Once that's defined, then we'll go
> with "any more than that level" - gun nuts would
> know this more than me.
>
> 4) well see, this is kinda the problem - we have
> more laws than we can deal with on the subject and
> a LOT of confusion. So let's just get it all
> uniform so we can LIMIT the scope (and number) of
> concealed weapons laws at the state level.
> in-CREDIBLE to me how many times you gun nuts talk
> about Gub-MINT having too many laws any now that
> there is discussion to try and streamline some of
> them, y'all get all balky LoLz


Did you know that VA is an open-carry state. Did you know that anyone that is not forbidden from owning a gun in the state of VA can carry a gun in the open except those places banned by state and federal law. Did you know that in VA local guns laws are superceded by state law and VA is considered one of the gold standards of open-carry gun laws in the country. Why don't you take you liberal pussification and move to the already liberal and pussified Maryland. We don't want liberal pussies like you in VA.

Hidin' Biden Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon Blvd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 1) In discussions about gun laws and gun
> politics
> > in the United States, an assault weapon is most
> > commonly defined as a semi-automatic
> > firearm possessing certain features similar to
> > those of military firearms. Semi-automatic
> > firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the
> > trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is
> > ejected and another cartridge is loaded into
> the
> > chamber, without the manual operation of a bolt
> > handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. An
> assault
> > weapon has a detachable magazine, in
> conjunction
> > with one, two, or more other features such as a
> > pistol grip, a folding stock, a flash
> suppressor,
> > or a bayonet lug.
> >
> > 2) Beautiful. Um, this aint Los Disneys - you
> DO
> > realize that, right?
> >
> > 3) Please define "average quantity of
> ammunition
> > purchased". Once that's defined, then we'll go
> > with "any more than that level" - gun nuts
> would
> > know this more than me.
> >
> > 4) well see, this is kinda the problem - we
> have
> > more laws than we can deal with on the subject
> and
> > a LOT of confusion. So let's just get it all
> > uniform so we can LIMIT the scope (and number)
> of
> > concealed weapons laws at the state level.
> > in-CREDIBLE to me how many times you gun nuts
> talk
> > about Gub-MINT having too many laws any now
> that
> > there is discussion to try and streamline some
> of
> > them, y'all get all balky LoLz
>
>
> Did you know that VA is an open-carry state. Did
> you know that anyone that is not forbidden from
> owning a gun in the state of VA can carry a gun in
> the open except those places banned by state and
> federal law. Did you know that in VA local guns
> laws are superceded by state law and VA is
> considered one of the gold standards of open-carry
> gun laws in the country. Why don't you take you
> liberal pussification and move to the already
> liberal and pussified Maryland. We don't want
> liberal pussies like you in VA.

Psst, Virginia has voted liberal in every major state wide election for the past decade.

So yer dumb.

And dont bring up the governor, mid term elections with 10% of the voter turnout of normal elections are indications that the NRA has a good get out the quiet vote campaign.

Liberals cannot help themselves and frequently speak on things they know nothing about. They define a large amount of ammo as anything more than 100 rounds. Its not uncommon for a target shooter to go through a hundred rounds in an hour.

ffx taxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberals cannot help themselves and frequently
> speak on things they know nothing about. They
> define a large amount of ammo as anything more
> than 100 rounds. Its not uncommon for a target
> shooter to go through a hundred rounds in an hour.


k? So buy more than that at the shooting range... but you can't take home more than 100.

YEA! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Psst, Virginia has voted liberal in every major
> state wide election for the past decade.
>
> So yer dumb.
>
> And dont bring up the governor, mid term elections
> with 10% of the voter turnout of normal elections
> are indications that the NRA has a good get out
> the quiet vote campaign.

Brawwwwwwwwwwwhahahahahaahahaahaha,

"don't bring up" stuff that shows you're a lying dumbass. OK shithead. If you say so. You must win all your arguments since you get to decide everything up front. What a braindead asshole.

VoJj5 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> YEA! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Psst, Virginia has voted liberal in every major
> > state wide election for the past decade.
> >
> > So yer dumb.
> >
> > And dont bring up the governor, mid term
> elections
> > with 10% of the voter turnout of normal
> elections
> > are indications that the NRA has a good get out
> > the quiet vote campaign.
>
> Brawwwwwwwwwwwhahahahahaahahaahaha,
>
> "don't bring up" stuff that shows you're a lying
> dumbass. OK shithead. If you say so. You must
> win all your arguments since you get to decide
> everything up front. What a braindead asshole.

In full turnout elections (not BS mid terms where special interests control) this state has been solid blue.

Even if the state as a whole isnt, the area you live in... this websites name sake, is about as liberal of an area as any middle class region of the country outside of New England.

Sounds like you need to move to beautiful Wise County, get a nice trailer and enjoy your guns.

It's true, NOVA is filling up with liberal pussies. It's the natural order of things. Liberals trash their own states, which start to swell with illegals and welfare moochers. Taxes skyrocket to pay for all the new poor with liberal social programs that support them. Corporations flee the state to avoid the sky high taxes. Middle class implodes as fixed income seniors and the wealthy flee the state to avoid sky high taxes and errosion of quality of life. Liberals flee to adjoining states (i.e. from MD to VA) and start the trashing all over again. It's like a viral cancer, killing the host but moving to a new host just as the old one is dying. Anyone unde the age of 40 is fucked. No manufacturing, run away inflation/collapse of the dollar, second rate military, third rate educational system. But hey, at least the homos can get married. Thanks gosh for that.

mk you win king of guns Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> k? So buy more than that at the shooting range...
> but you can't take home more than 100.


thank you for proving my point about not knowing what you are talking about, only fools buy range ammo at the inflated price.

LMAFO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's true, NOVA is filling up with liberal
> pussies. It's the natural order of things.
> Liberals trash their own states, which start to
> swell with illegals and welfare moochers. Taxes
> skyrocket to pay for all the new poor with liberal
> social programs that support them. Corporations
> flee the state to avoid the sky high taxes.
> Middle class implodes as fixed income seniors and
> the wealthy flee the state to avoid sky high taxes
> and errosion of quality of life. Liberals flee to
> adjoining states (i.e. from MD to VA) and start
> the trashing all over again. It's like a viral
> cancer, killing the host but moving to a new host
> just as the old one is dying. Anyone unde the age
> of 40 is fucked. No manufacturing, run away
> inflation/collapse of the dollar, second rate
> military, third rate educational system. But hey,
> at least the homos can get married. Thanks gosh
> for that.


Tell that to NY State, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. Full of liberals, still better than every republican bastion state like Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, and other welfare states

Moh k there buddy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LMAFO Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's true, NOVA is filling up with liberal
> > pussies. It's the natural order of things.
> > Liberals trash their own states, which start to
> > swell with illegals and welfare moochers.
> Taxes
> > skyrocket to pay for all the new poor with
> liberal
> > social programs that support them.
> Corporations
> > flee the state to avoid the sky high taxes.
> > Middle class implodes as fixed income seniors
> and
> > the wealthy flee the state to avoid sky high
> taxes
> > and errosion of quality of life. Liberals flee
> to
> > adjoining states (i.e. from MD to VA) and start
> > the trashing all over again. It's like a viral
> > cancer, killing the host but moving to a new
> host
> > just as the old one is dying. Anyone unde the
> age
> > of 40 is fucked. No manufacturing, run away
> > inflation/collapse of the dollar, second rate
> > military, third rate educational system. But
> hey,
> > at least the homos can get married. Thanks
> gosh
> > for that.
>
>
> Tell that to NY State, Connecticut, and
> Massachusetts. Full of liberals, still better than
> every republican bastion state like Mississippi,
> Alabama, Louisiana, and other welfare states
Attachments:

mk you win king of guns Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ffx taxpayer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Liberals cannot help themselves and frequently
> > speak on things they know nothing about. They
> > define a large amount of ammo as anything more
> > than 100 rounds. Its not uncommon for a target
> > shooter to go through a hundred rounds in an
> hour.
>
>
> k? So buy more than that at the shooting range...
> but you can't take home more than 100.

Why not?

Moh k there buddy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LMAFO Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's true, NOVA is filling up with liberal
> > pussies. It's the natural order of things.
> > Liberals trash their own states, which start to
> > swell with illegals and welfare moochers.
> Taxes
> > skyrocket to pay for all the new poor with
> liberal
> > social programs that support them.
> Corporations
> > flee the state to avoid the sky high taxes.
> > Middle class implodes as fixed income seniors
> and
> > the wealthy flee the state to avoid sky high
> taxes
> > and errosion of quality of life. Liberals flee
> to
> > adjoining states (i.e. from MD to VA) and start
> > the trashing all over again. It's like a viral
> > cancer, killing the host but moving to a new
> host
> > just as the old one is dying. Anyone unde the
> age
> > of 40 is fucked. No manufacturing, run away
> > inflation/collapse of the dollar, second rate
> > military, third rate educational system. But
> hey,
> > at least the homos can get married. Thanks
> gosh
> > for that.
>
>
> Tell that to NY State, Connecticut, and
> Massachusetts. Full of liberals, still better than
> every republican bastion state like Mississippi,
> Alabama, Louisiana, and other welfare states


NY & Connecticut live off of Wall Street. Massachusetts lives off of the banks from Boston. Otherwise, they're shitholes. MS, AL, LA were all run by democrats until about 20 years ago. They are finally turning the corner after bringing in low-tax, business friendly policies.

Gordon is still a fag's fag. That is all.

Off you go now Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> VoJj5 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > YEA! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > Psst, Virginia has voted liberal in every
> major
> > > state wide election for the past decade.
> > >
> > > So yer dumb.
> > >
> > > And dont bring up the governor, mid term
> > elections
> > > with 10% of the voter turnout of normal
> > elections
> > > are indications that the NRA has a good get
> out
> > > the quiet vote campaign.
> >
> > Brawwwwwwwwwwwhahahahahaahahaahaha,
> >
> > "don't bring up" stuff that shows you're a
> lying
> > dumbass. OK shithead. If you say so. You
> must
> > win all your arguments since you get to decide
> > everything up front. What a braindead asshole.
>
> In full turnout elections (not BS mid terms where
> special interests control) this state has been
> solid blue.
>
> Even if the state as a whole isnt, the area you
> live in... this websites name sake, is about as
> liberal of an area as any middle class region of
> the country outside of New England.
>
> Sounds like you need to move to beautiful Wise
> County, get a nice trailer and enjoy your guns.


You're deluding yourself by attempting to extrapolate only the last two Presidential elections and living in NoVA to the broader case. Even limiting it as you want to try to do, it only marginally applies and then only on an aggregate basis, i.e., granting all to one choice or the other on an electoral basis, not reflecting magnitude or degrees of variance.

Obama won the last election by a grand total of only 116,000 votes state-wide. All of that was due to slightly higher marginal voting in a few key areas.

The total margin in Fairfax county was about 87,000 votes. For context, that's slightly more or less than the seating capacity of Fedex field (~90K). Not some overwhelming majority by any measure.

As can be seen below, the reality is much different than you attempt portray it. When you take it to the level of House, Senate, and State-level elections, even considering only those years where they coincide with Presidential elections, the results are even more skewed against your argument.

Meanwhile, in real life... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Off you go now Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > VoJj5 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > YEA! Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Psst, Virginia has voted liberal in every
> > major
> > > > state wide election for the past decade.
> > > >
> > > > So yer dumb.
> > > >
> > > > And dont bring up the governor, mid term
> > > elections
> > > > with 10% of the voter turnout of normal
> > > elections
> > > > are indications that the NRA has a good get
> > out
> > > > the quiet vote campaign.
> > >
> > > Brawwwwwwwwwwwhahahahahaahahaahaha,
> > >
> > > "don't bring up" stuff that shows you're a
> > lying
> > > dumbass. OK shithead. If you say so. You
> > must
> > > win all your arguments since you get to
> decide
> > > everything up front. What a braindead
> asshole.
> >
> > In full turnout elections (not BS mid terms
> where
> > special interests control) this state has been
> > solid blue.
> >
> > Even if the state as a whole isnt, the area you
> > live in... this websites name sake, is about as
> > liberal of an area as any middle class region
> of
> > the country outside of New England.
> >
> > Sounds like you need to move to beautiful Wise
> > County, get a nice trailer and enjoy your guns.
>
>
> You're deluding yourself by attempting to
> extrapolate only the last two Presidential
> elections and living in NoVA to the broader case.
> Even limiting it as you want to try to do, it only
> marginally applies and then only on an aggregate
> basis, i.e., granting all to one choice or the
> other on an electoral basis, not reflecting
> magnitude or degrees of variance.
>
> Obama won the last election by a grand total of
> only 116,000 votes state-wide. All of that was
> due to slightly higher marginal voting in a few
> key areas.
>
> The total margin in Fairfax county was about
> 87,000 votes. For context, that's slightly more
> or less than the seating capacity of Fedex field
> (~90K). Not some overwhelming majority by any
> measure.
>
> As can be seen below, the reality is much
> different than you attempt portray it. When you
> take it to the level of House, Senate, and
> State-level elections, even considering only those
> years where they coincide with Presidential
> elections, the results are even more skewed
> against your argument.
>
>
> src="http://umwgeography.org/files/2012/11/2012-re
> sults1.png">

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

hold on

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

You think that geographic size of red = a good way to determine political stance?

Oh no, watch out then I think with all this red in America we are about to turn into Nationalists we have swung so far right.



You are dumb. Fairfax has 1.1 million residents, of which 650,000 were voters based on this patch story http://annandale.patch.com/articles/early-voter-turnout

So the fact that the gap is 87,000, or 13%, is significant. Anything even close to 10% means solid one way or the other you tool. You are just sad because that is the case, and has been for 2 decades.

And as far as the rest of the state, just like the country, they will continue to have gerrymandering help them win legislative spots but the state for big elections will continue to be controlled by population centers.

Suck it

Remember Florida 2000?
Somedays you eat the bear.
Somedays the bear eats er...Conservatives
Always bet on blue

Meanwhile, in real life... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Off you go now Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > VoJj5 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > YEA! Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Psst, Virginia has voted liberal in every
> > major
> > > > state wide election for the past decade.
> > > >
> > > > So yer dumb.
> > > >
> > > > And dont bring up the governor, mid term
> > > elections
> > > > with 10% of the voter turnout of normal
> > > elections
> > > > are indications that the NRA has a good get
> > out
> > > > the quiet vote campaign.
> > >
> > > Brawwwwwwwwwwwhahahahahaahahaahaha,
> > >
> > > "don't bring up" stuff that shows you're a
> > lying
> > > dumbass. OK shithead. If you say so. You
> > must
> > > win all your arguments since you get to
> decide
> > > everything up front. What a braindead
> asshole.
> >
> > In full turnout elections (not BS mid terms
> where
> > special interests control) this state has been
> > solid blue.
> >
> > Even if the state as a whole isnt, the area you
> > live in... this websites name sake, is about as
> > liberal of an area as any middle class region
> of
> > the country outside of New England.
> >
> > Sounds like you need to move to beautiful Wise
> > County, get a nice trailer and enjoy your guns.
>
>
> You're deluding yourself by attempting to
> extrapolate only the last two Presidential
> elections and living in NoVA to the broader case.
> Even limiting it as you want to try to do, it only
> marginally applies and then only on an aggregate
> basis, i.e., granting all to one choice or the
> other on an electoral basis, not reflecting
> magnitude or degrees of variance.
>
> Obama won the last election by a grand total of
> only 116,000 votes state-wide. All of that was
> due to slightly higher marginal voting in a few
> key areas.
>
> The total margin in Fairfax county was about
> 87,000 votes. For context, that's slightly more
> or less than the seating capacity of Fedex field
> (~90K). Not some overwhelming majority by any
> measure.
>
> As can be seen below, the reality is much
> different than you attempt portray it. When you
> take it to the level of House, Senate, and
> State-level elections, even considering only those
> years where they coincide with Presidential
> elections, the results are even more skewed
> against your argument.
>
>
> src="http://umwgeography.org/files/2012/11/2012-re
> sults1.png">

Math is tough bud, stick to numbers you can understand like 7000 years old and 47%

true americans will never convince liberals that they(liberals) are the cause of the mass murders. the tough thing for real americans is that we have to watch our country being destroyed before our very eyes and voting is no longer a solution because the USA has been taken over by just too many of them. David Koresh was as sick as he was guilty of many crimes- but not firearms violations. It was only an armed overreaching invasion of his property by the clinton led US government that led to 4 swat guys being killed while trying to break in to his house on the second floor. ok now lets say Koresh is the only one responsible for those dead swats and no fault on the governments part. the liberal governments solution was to incinerate everyone in there including many woman and children. Enter Timothy Mcviegh(possible mispell), in retaliation not so much for the heinious murders committed by the government, but the lies used to cover up this terrible crime and literally make it so no one could be held accoutable. Janet Reno- The tank used to smash through walls and inject accelerants was no more than a good rent-a-car. Result- mura building and 179 people gone. now no one condones this kind of retaliation but it never would have happened had somebody in the government like say bill clinton had been held accountable for mass murder. as it stands Mcviegh is posthumously ahead by 99 murders. clearly the liberal government is responsible for a lot of murder and the American people are the losers. i would venture to say that no matter what gun legislation is shoved down the American peoples throats, murders will increase and the government doesn't give a damn. it will keep imposing more oppressive laws on us making it harder and harder for Americans to make a living thereby increasing the stress on society(WHICH IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THESE TERRIBLE EVENTS WHERE PEOPLE SNAP AND SHOOT.)

Gun free zones are a murders favorite hunting grounds.

HAHAHAHHA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
>
> hold on
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA
>
> You think that geographic size of red = a good way
> to determine political stance?
>
> Oh no, watch out then I think with all this red in
> America we are about to turn into Nationalists we
> have swung so far right.
>
> src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ddnPRwDHDww/UKUO8kA
> D7pI/AAAAAAAAKlw/fj5LIpNLhTk/s1600/red+blue+counti
> es.jpg">


Uh, no dummy. Just a handy graphic to demonstrate that your statement that "In full turnout elections (not BS mid terms where special interests control) this state has been solid blue" is complete BS.

And your dumbass comment re my understanding doesn't even make sense given that I used that graphic specifically because it shows degrees of variance versus painting anything one color as you attempted to do. You can't support your own dumb fucking argument so you then try to make it appear as if that's what I was saying. lmao


>
> You are dumb. Fairfax has 1.1 million residents,
> of which 650,000 were voters based on this patch
> story
> http://annandale.patch.com/articles/early-voter-tu
> rnout
>
> So the fact that the gap is 87,000, or 13%, is
> significant. Anything even close to 10% means
> solid one way or the other you tool. You are just
> sad because that is the case, and has been for 2
> decades.
>

No, a 13% variance totaling only 87,000 votes among a subset of a population of +1 million is not "solid" any one color or another beyond determining the specific results of a specific election. The advantage is further limited mostly to being concentrated in specific districts. And it very certainly does not extend to the the rest of the state as you claimed as above.

Turning to your claim that it's been the case "for 2 decades," on a state level you only have to go back to 2004 to see that's not the case:

Bush/Cheney Republican 1,716,959
Kerry/Edwards Democratic 1,454,742


For Fairfax county voting, you only have to go back to 2000:

Bush/Cheney Republican 202,181
Gore/Lieberman Democrat 196,501


And that's conveniently excluding State and local elections which further don't support your claim even as you limited it.

Furthermore, your "2 decades" range, while trying to portray that as a long period of time, only includes 4 (or 5 depending on how far you want to stretch it) Presidential elections, of which it holds true only for the last two. Both of which involved the same specific candidate in Obama. Which does not reflect "liberalism" or being "solid blue" as much as things like black vote, voting based on historical significance of a black candidate, specific opposing candidates, etc. Change a few of those specifics and you very likely change the results in ways much greater than in any incremental greater margin of votes for "liberalism" as you attempt to present it.


> And as far as the rest of the state, just like the
> country, they will continue to have gerrymandering
> help them win legislative spots but the state for
> big elections will continue to be controlled by
> population centers.
>
> Suck it


Of course it's controlled by population centers. Derp. A very few population centers and, in fact, mostly by a few relatively high-population districts. Even that being the case the margins still are not huge nor as homogenized as you tried to present it. Which very is far from your original claim of VA being "solid blue."