4
   

Banning Guns: What Difference Would It Make?

 
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 9 Jan, 2013 08:38 am


Bat **** Crazy!

http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/Nancy-Pelosi1.jpg
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 9 Jan, 2013 08:50 am
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/3375_590653300951973_606125826_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 9 Jan, 2013 09:39 am


All of this talk about banning guns and no mention of disarming criminals.

What is Obama's plan to get guns out of the hands of criminals?
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 9 Jan, 2013 11:06 am


Utah town makes arming households a top priority
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2013 08:12 am


Ready To Rule From Day One

By Neal Boortz
Do you remember that phrase? It was uttered by Valerie Jarrett. Jarrett was the head of Obama’s transition team during the period from his election in 2008 to his inauguration in 2009. Now she is Obama’s chief advisor in the White House. It is said that no decision is made without input from Valerie Jarrett. As she was heading Obama’s transition team Jarrett famously said: “We will be ready to rule from day one.” Not “lead” …. RULE. Funny, isn’t it … all this time people thought they were electing a leader.
Now we have Obama’s point man on gun control telling us that that Barack Obama can take executive action to deal with gun control that “we believe is required." Of course he will. To hell with the Bill of Rights.
Fascist dictators, by the way, are generally well-liked by the population. Hitler was loved. What ever you do, don’t read the classic book “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.” It will ruin whatever good mood you have left.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2013 11:54 am
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2013/01/09/gun-control-could-gain-more-traction-as-a-public-health-issue/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+80beats+%2880beats%29

One's right to own a gun might become another "black swan" in the parlance of unexpected events?
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2013 12:04 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
One's right to own a gun might become another "black swan" in the parlance of unexpected events?


Now and then the Freedom Haters try to abuse medical care to violate our rights.

The NRA is aware of the threat, and has largely eliminated it. It's nothing to worry about.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2013 04:47 pm


NRA rips Biden task force for 'attack' on 2nd Amendment, as details of plan emerge

0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2013 09:33 pm


California testing limits of gun-control rules in wake of Newtown shooting
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2013 11:36 pm
@H2O MAN,


Their ban on .50 BMG rifles is already doomed to eventually be struck down by the courts, as is their ban on assault weapons.

And of course, we are only a couple years from the courts ruling that Americans everywhere have the right to carry guns when they go about in public.

If any of their new nonsense violates the Constitution, that will be struck down too.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Fri 11 Jan, 2013 07:55 am
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Jan, 2013 11:02 am


All of my firearms are for "journalistic purposes"
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 09:37 am
Liberal think tank vows national campaign to push for more gun control


The president of the Center for American Progress said Sunday the influential liberal think tank will mount a full-scale campaign to push for more gun control.
Neera Tanden told “Fox News Sunday” the Center for American Progress will “absolutely” launch a major campaign in states across the country.
Tanden also downplayed the fact that groups supporting more gun control were severely outspent during the 2012 election cycle in which the influential National Rifle Association spent $20 million in backing candidates.
“They had a really low return on their investment,” Tanden told Fox. “Still, the NRA is a very strong lobby.”
Tanden spoke after a report published by The Washington Post stated the group is recommending 13 new gun policies to the White House, including some that call for executive action that sidesteps congressional approval.
The proposals include requiring universal background checks, banning military-grade assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips and updating data systems to track gun sales and enforce existing laws, according to The Washington Post, which said the proposals “amount to the progressive community's wish list.”
Tanden said the idea of executive action would be on some of the smaller issues, such as federal employees giving gun-ownership information to the president.
She also argues that both sides can find common ground on tougher background checks.
Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, disagreed with that notion.
He argued that stolen guns were used in the fatal shootings last month at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed.
He called the ideas a “waste of time” and argued Washington should focus on ending gun-freeze zones because people who live within them cannot protect themselves.
President Obama has already expressed support for many of the group’s proposals.
And Vice President Joe Biden is leading a task force on possible changes to the gun laws. After speaking with groups on both sides, Biden purportedly could give the recommendations to the president as early as this week.
The Center for American Progress’ 11-page report was presented Friday to White House officials, according to The Post.


0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 09:43 am
Why Obama's Gun Control Proposals Already Seem Poised To Fail

After weeks of working with New York Gov. Michael Bloomberg, Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and others behind closed doors to draft an anti-gun wish list, Vice President Joe Biden is going to meet with the National Rifle Association (NRA) and a variety of other gun groups, a few victims of gun violence, video-game industry representatives and more this week. “Soon after” those meetings, according to the White House, Biden will give his task force’s recommendations to President Barack Obama. The Obama administration will then release a broad range of proposals as the first bombardment in a political battle to make them the law of the land.

No wait, that’s not quite right. The political offensive has already begun, as last-minute meetings with gun-rights groups, victims of criminals and more just before handing recommendations to the president is clearly a political maneuver. This strategy is surely designed to give the president cover to say his administration worked with everyone to come up with the best policy proposals possible as he nevertheless drops an anti-gun-rights salvo on Congress.


Clearly the Obama administration is of the opinion that when you have an emotion-based agenda you can’t allow time to pass lest reason might intervene. They’re hoping to overcome gun owners with an emotional assault when they should be bringing various parties to sensible agreements.

Now, though such a strategy seems likely to get Obama’s base in a mood to attach bayonets, it’s a poor plan.

First of all, politicians who support American’s right to bear arms are sure to deliberatively slow down one-sided gun-control legislation, as they should. This will give reason a chance to intervene. On CBS’ “Face the Nation” last Sunday Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said as much. “Clearly we will not be addressing [the gun] issue early, because spending and debt are going to dominate the first three months,” McConnell said.

Secondly, if the Obama administration’s proposals are anything like what Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) says her enhanced version of the 1994 Assault-Weapons Ban will look like, then it’s likely to get blown apart on the statist road to gun-owner registries, lists of banned guns and firearms databases—all things the president has said he wants.

Then there is the fact that, as sources tell me, there is still a clear bi-partisan majority in both houses of Congress supporting the Second Amendment. America’s gun owners are also well organized and politically active—in the face of such an attack they’d need to, and surely would, join and support the NRA, as NRA membership typically rises in adverse times.

To overcome all this President Obama will, as he’s done in other fights, use a populist-style campaign in an attempt to use public opinion to pound legislators into abandoning their stated principals. The problem for Obama will be that the American people cherish their right to bear arms—more are against gun-bans than for them.

To put this into perspective consider that, as of December 27, Gallup found that 54 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the NRA (38 percent unfavorable); meanwhile, across the country there are an estimated 100 million gun owners; more than eight million people have concealed-carry permits; about four million people are members of the NRA; and, according to Gallup, 47 percent of American households have guns in them; in fact, from 2009 to today the number of Democrats with guns in their homes rose from 30 percent to 40 percent.

To put this in more human terms, consider that as this is being debated, Americans continue to use guns to protect themselves. For example, on January 5 a Georgia mother of two retreated to a closet in her home as an intruder kicked in her front door. Police were on the way, but they didn’t get there fast enough. When the intruder opened the closet door where the mother was hiding with her children she used her handgun to shoot the burglar. She then escaped with her children. This mother proved once again that gun rights are women’s rights—the Second Amendment is also about equality.

That’s the fundamental freedom at stake in this debate and it shows one fundamental reason why so many Americans “cling” to their guns. It’s also something the president hasn’t shown he understands.

With all that in context, shouldn’t the Obama administration be working with the NRA and more to actually find common ground? And not just with superficial gestures either, but with real discussion leading to legislation. The safety of the American people hangs in the balance. Instead of treating gun owners as the opposition, President Obama should acknowledge that gun owners are also parents and grandparents who want schools and streets to be safe. For starters, his administration could take up the NRA on “The National School Shield” proposal to put a cop in every school; this is something Democrats have embraced before.

Remember President Bill Clinton’s “COPS in Schools” program? In 1998 Clinton established a $60 million grant program from the Department of Justice’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). Clinton explained at the time: “This initiative provides communities with a new tool to tackle crime and violence in our schools.”

COPS was established through a provision in the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. Since 1994 COPS has provided more than $11 billion in assistance to state and local law-enforcement agencies. According to the U.S. Department of Justice by May of 1999 COPS had funded more than “100,000 new community policing professionals” nationwide. However, after cuts in 2005, COPS stopped funding law-enforcement in schools.

Back in 1999 Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)—hardly a friend of the NRA—even supported the program. A press release still on her website says, “Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) today announced that the San Francisco Police Department will receive $3.25 million to pay for 26 additional police officers under the U.S. Department of Justice’s Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS program.”

In 2004, over in the U.S. Senate, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was also happy to get money from COPS. A press release on his website says, “US Senator Charles Schumer, author of the 1994 Crime Bill, today announced that several New York school districts will receive $125,000 federal grants under the bill’s Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program.”

Now Rep. Pelosi says, “For the NRA and others to sort of shield themselves by saying it’s the mentally ill or something and therefore we have to have more armed cops in the schools or more guns in the school, it just doesn’t make sense.” Meanwhile, Sen. Schumer doesn’t have anything good to say about the NRA.

Nevertheless, President Obama, who has often said he’d like to hire more teachers, police officers and other public-sector workers, has indicated he isn’t taking the NRA’s proposal seriously. President Obama said on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.”

An article in the Washington Post by Phil Rucker on January 5 spelled this out. The article cited “multiple people involved in the administration’s discussions” and reported that “the White House is developing strategies to work around the National Rifle Association.” So their strategy is to work around the NRA even when there has been a bipartisan agreement on the NRA’s chief proposal before?

Real solutions are right in front of them on neutral ground—ideas to protect students, shore up the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), find ways to diagnose and treat people with mental-health issues and more—yet the president seems poised to overreach.

If instead President Obama were to break precedent and seek common ground, he could lead the way to reasonable and helpful solutions right now. This issue needn’t be so divisive. It might be helpful for President Obama to learn that one thing John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon had in common was membership in the NRA.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 11:49 am
@H2O MAN,
In my opinion, you protesteth too much. The winds of change are blowing, with increased velocity, I believe. Probably because what trumps everything is that people that will be raising children need to feel their children are safe at school, or movies, etc.; since otherwise, the U.S. might wind up with no next generation to the degree we have had historically. In my opinion, the joys/need of target shooting, hunting, home protection, etc., are trumped by society's need to reproduce itself each generation with parents willing to expend a few decades of dedicated effort, without the fear of mass shootings of their children.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 01:46 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Back in 1999 Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)—hardly a friend of the NRA—even supported the program.


Nancy Pelosi does support some gun control, like a 10 round limit on magazines.

But she also fiercely opposes some gun control, like an outright ban on assault weapons.

It is likely that Nancy Pelosi is the single person most responsible for the fact that Obama has already given up on banning assault weapons.

She's a double-edged sword, certainly. But she deserves credit for protecting us from an assault weapon ban.

(I would not be surprised to find out that she is also responsible for quashing that gun registration nonsense that was being floated last week.)
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 01:47 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
In my opinion, you protesteth too much. The winds of change are blowing, with increased velocity, I believe. Probably because what trumps everything is that people that will be raising children need to feel their children are safe at school, or movies, etc.; since otherwise, the U.S. might wind up with no next generation to the degree we have had historically. In my opinion, the joys/need of target shooting, hunting, home protection, etc., are trumped by society's need to reproduce itself each generation with parents willing to expend a few decades of dedicated effort, without the fear of mass shootings of their children.


No, our Second Amendment rights stand undefeated and undefeatable.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 03:05 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

In my opinion, you protesteth too much.


It's is my opinion that the nation isn't yet protesting enough.

The winds of change may just blow up your skirt and show the world what you are hiding.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2013 03:15 pm
The last American Main Battle Rifle (MBR), in service since 1957.

http://i895.photobucket.com/albums/ac160/The_H2O_MAN/Come-what-may_zps6e9cfeac.jpg

Long live the American MBR
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2013 07:42 am

Panic Has Subsided. Democrats' Gun-Grabbing Plans in Jeopardy

By Neal Boortz

Like Rahm Emanuel said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”
I don’t have to map Rahm’s statement our for you, do I? Well --- considering how many of our neighbors are government educated, and thus un-schooled in such skills as logical thinking – perhaps I can map it out for them:
Let’s say you have a long-held goal. Let’s say that long-held goal has been to disarm the American public. Let’s say you’re a liberal Democrat politician, and as a good liberal you earnestly believe that most of the people who own guns are uneducated knuckle-dragging rednecks who don’t particularly like their superiors … Northeastern liberal intellectuals such as yourself.
So a horrible event like the Sandy Hook shootings occurs. You know that even illiterate Southerners love their children, and they’re probably putting down their moonshine and parking their pickup trucks long enough to dwell on the horror of what happened in Connecticut, and their emotions are on edge. It’s a crisis! Time to go to work! Now you know that you don’t have any legislative suggestions that, if they had been law, would have prevented this mass killing of children. That doesn’t matter. Emotions are raw. People are in crisis mode. You can get almost anything passed right now … so let’s get this show on the road!
Well .. they just didn’t move fast enough. The Congress was in a transition period. The holidays had many legislators at home and not ready to make instantaneous use of the tragedy. There’s an inauguration coming up. So we have some congressman introduce legislation to ban the ownership of handguns. That went nowhere and only served to alert and alarm those who believe in the Second Amendment. So Obama appoints Joe-the-dogwasher to form a panel and report on some ideas. Joe, actually being a bit smarter than his boss, understands that the panic is ebbing, and hurries up the report to Dear Ruler --- now scheduled to come out tomorrow.
And what will be Number 1 on Biden’s laundry list? Ending the private sale of firearms.
Now this used to be referred to as “ending the gunshow loophole.” But those damned right-wing nut-job talk show hosts and others finally managed to spread the word that there IS NO gun show loophole. The laws that apply to selling guns at a gun show are EXACTLY the same as the laws that apply everywhere else.
So the language has changed a bit. Now they’re simply saying that they’re going to require background checks on ALL firearm purchases, even from a private party to a private party. Now wait … are you telling me that we’re going to allow private individuals to check into the criminal history of other private individuals? Are we going to allow private individuals to access medical records – especially mental health records – to see if there are mental health issues that might make someone unfit to own a gun? I don’t’ see that happening, do you? So ... maybe we’ll have to have these background checks run through federally licensed firearms dealers! Maybe we’ll just have the FFLs handle the transaction! Well .. there you go! The end of private sales!
But wait! Will this really be the end of private sales? Sure! But only for people who chose to abide by the law! If you’re a gang-banging, drug-dealing thug; or if you are someone who wants a gun to use in committing an illegal act, you are simply going to find another criminal to sell it to you, or you are going to steal one. Maybe you’ll even go to the home of someone who has been identified by your local newspaper as owning guns! Just break into their homes and take theirs! This actually happened over the weekend in New York!
I’m proud of my fellow Americans here. They see Obama’s intentions, and they’re swarming the gun stores to buy handguns for their protection. Applications for concealed carry permits are at an all-time high. Criminals are approaching panic. They are realizing that the possibility of picking on someone with a weapon is going up. As a result, gun violence is going down.
But … help is still on the way. Maybe Obama and the Democrats in DC will succeed in making it tougher for law-abiding Americans to get their guns. So stand by. This story isn’t over.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/04/2020 at 12:45:58