Giffords asks Congress for bold gun-control bill

PaulRevere says... January 30, 2013 at 10:33 a.m.

Warped logic. "I got shot, so we should ban all guns." "I got hurt in an accident so everybody should have to wear a seatbelt." "I backed over my own child, so all cars should have rear cameras." Why should all of society be saddled with more and more regulation, just because of the actions of a very small group?

( permalink | suggest removal )

LETSBEREALISTIC says... January 30, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.

Gifford, like most liberals, is totally out of touch with reality. The Democrats are focusing on guns when guns aren't the issue. It's a small segment of the population that have mental issues that drive them to do these killings, just like a suicide bomber except using different tools for destruction. I'm sorry but Gifford is just a pathetic poster child who has lost her mental faculties and is being used by the liberals to garner an emotional based response rather than dealing with the real problem!

( permalink | suggest removal )

rainbowharold55 says... January 30, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.

The next time I hear that tired comparison of reproductive choice and the culture od gun violence I'm gonna puke.

( permalink | suggest removal )

toddm76 says... January 30, 2013 at 12:52 p.m.

Only in Arkansas do you see the kind of comments that have been posted about this issue and Mrs. Giffords. You people are truely back woods, brain washed people. I pray nothing like this ever happens to YOU or YOUR family. YES, I did say "you people".

( permalink | suggest removal )

kalessin1977 says... January 30, 2013 at 1:48 p.m.

toddm76, I will gladly take my back woods folks any day over bleeding heart liberals who have a narrow and shallow view of human nature in relation to historical perspective. If liberals in Conneticut and other states want gun control then it needs to be enacted on the local level. National mandates are not the means of achieving anything but resistance, and distrust of the national mechanisms and thought processes. Conneticut already has state bans against all the kinds of weapons that the liberals are trying to push through Congress and it worked just great to defend those babies in Newtown didn't it? The harder the libs push for their great new world order the further they push us apart as a nation. When the world falls apart and the real criminlas are running around unfettered, Arkansas will stand on its own backed by people who you thought were backwards. Don't come asking for protection.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... January 30, 2013 at 2:27 p.m.

Yes, "you people" have been "brainwashed" into believing that the founders meant what they said. "You people" have been "brainwashed" into believing that the tyranny of the majority was one of the things the bill of rights was enacted to prevent. "You people" have been "brainwashed" into believing that individuals should be held accountable for their actions and not be allowed to blame inanimate objects or bogeyman corporations or shadowy "special interest groups." "You people" have been "brainwashed" into believing that you can and should defend yourself and your loved ones from threats. "You people" are clearly what's wrong with America...

( permalink | suggest removal )

Pobucker says... January 30, 2013 at 3:13 p.m.

Packman, the principles that provide the framework for liberty (say the constitution, for example) do hold a higher value than an individual life. These are things which people sacrifice their lives for. When so many willingly give themselves to establish such principles, those principles can't be held hostage to the threat of the loss of life. To say that because an innocent child died we should repeal the second amendment is to piss on the sacrifice of those millions who have died over the ages so we might have a second amendment. Here's another example: Turn back Roe v Wade or this innocent child will die. I am afraid the child must die.
~
I do feel sorry for Gifford. I am outraged the gun haters are using her like a meat puppet. haters gotta hate

( permalink | suggest removal )

Pobucker says... January 30, 2013 at 5:20 p.m.

Aimee, you are F o S.
The NRA speaks for ME. I send my dues just for that purpose. So does my partner. Today, NRA emailed a request for more lobby money. I will be sending it. It is my RIGHT to keep and bear ARMS. Millions have died across the ages so that eventually I might enjoy that RIGHT. You piss on the graves of heros with your cheap talk.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... January 30, 2013 at 5:27 p.m.

morebeer,where did you hear many thousands die from firearm misuse?in the usa last year all rifle deaths combined,thats single shot to assault barely broke 300 deaths.thats about a half of how many recorded hammer deaths there were in the usa.

( permalink | suggest removal )

inquire says... January 30, 2013 at 6:04 p.m.

Aimee was absolutely correct. According the the New York Times, ninety percent of gun owners do NOT belong to the NRA. The percentage may have been higher before the organization's leadership was the victim of a coup in 1977. That was when it started down the road to being the gun manufacturers' trade group and lobby that it is today.
Not being able to disagree without resorting to crudeness toward the other person is the hallmark of a person with a small vocabulary and a small mind.
The comments in these threads about Gabby Gifford and Jim Brady are a disrespectful new low.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... January 30, 2013 at 6:24 p.m.

Aimee .... So?

( permalink | suggest removal )

BillSmith says... January 30, 2013 at 6:38 p.m.

All of you right wing gun nuts had better enjoy mouthing off now, because common sense gun control IS coming to the US sooner than later. Your demographics and gun mentality is changing in this country, especially with young people, we know the old WASP dialog will only change when they reach room temp, but that to will happen sooner than later. More people are beginning to see through the NRA as a shill for the gun lobby. They are just like Romney, a flip flopper, and we all know where that got him. Keep whining, but your whines will become less heard in the future.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... January 30, 2013 at 7:17 p.m.

Keyboarding under the influence? Well it was not due to Koolaid.

( permalink | suggest removal )

BillSmith says... January 30, 2013 at 9:20 p.m.

Just in from NewsMax:
Fox News had its worst prime time ratings in January in the coveted 25-54 demographic since August 2001, a 12-year low, and its lowest total day ratings since June 2008, Politico reports.

The year started off badly for Fox’s “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” in particular, which suffered its worst month ever among the 25-54 demo. January also saw the channel’s lowest total viewership in the 10 p.m. hour since July 2008.

The numbers weren’t all bad. Fox still had nine out of the top 10 shows for the month. The only program to crack Fox' total dominance was MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show” which came in at the 10th spot.
*
Looks like what I have been talking about is already happening, I expect to see simular stats about the Tea Party as well. Ha, things are looking up libs.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... January 30, 2013 at 10:01 p.m.

Maddjack:
*
The site in the link you supplied contains the following statement:
*
"Because this armor is intended to resist “armor piercing” bullets, it often uses ceramic materials. Such materials are brittle in nature and may provide only single-shot protection since the ceramic tends to break up when struck. As with Level III armor, Level IV armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection."
*
Why should the police bear the burden of wearing such protective armour which can only protect them from one shot..??? How many shots can some of these clips fire..??? Doesn't it make more sense to eliminate the bullets that can pierce such armour..???
*
Whose side are you on..???
*
Sent via my iPhone.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... January 31, 2013 at 1:47 a.m.

Maddjack:
.
No one is suggesting the repeal of the Bill of Rights... We are only asking for a little common sense here... Assault rifles and clips with 30 bullets in them have no real purpose in society... Having them will not make you one iota safer... In fact, having them makes you more "unsafe" because the bad guys will be trying to break into your house to steal them...
.
The Bill of Rights gives you the right to have a gun, NOT an assault weapon or an arsenal..!!! Ask Supreme Court Justice Scalia..!!!!
.
And as is pointed out in the video below - the right to Life comes BEFORE the right to have a gun..!!!
.
Testimony the Senate Didn't Hear
nbcnews. com/id/45755883/ns/msnbc-the_last_word/#50648121

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... January 31, 2013 at 9:04 a.m.

BillSmith says

"Looks like what I have been talking about is already happening, I expect to see simular stats about the Tea Party as well. Ha, things are looking up lib"
~
BS boy is crowing because the tenth placed news program is no longer on Fox News, even though numbers 1-9 still are? That's like crowing about how great John L. Smith is because the Razorbacks didn't lose ALL their football games this season. Top 10 shows all on one channel and the other half dozen channels finally squeak ONE in there in LAST PLACE and you are doing a dance like a linebacker who tackled a running back after a fifteen yard gain when his team is trailing by six touchdowns in the fourth quarter. It is so pathetic it is laughable. It is even more pathetic that you think this is such great news you must post it all over.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... January 31, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.

BillSmith says
"Members of the Black Helicopter Club…………firandbalanced, packman, letsberealistic, lazybar, kalessin1977, whippersnapper, pobunker, DontDrinkDatKoolAid, T6, HM2….these guys think they need all the firepower they can muster to keep the government from coming after their guns. How often has that happened in the US?
BUT
In the last 24 hours:
"
~
Well, you ignore the fact that New York governor Andrew Cuomo actually advocated Gun Confiscation as an option recently as last month:
"Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.” - New York Times quoting Andrew Cuomo, December 20, 2012
In the sixties, New York City required the registration of many guns. They used the registration list to confiscate guns in the early nineties when they passed a ban on those guns.
There are other examples, but these things are "facts" which you like to ignore.
~
There is also the interesting statistic about defensive use of guns. Gun control opponents cite a study by Kleck and Gertz which claimed there may be as many as 2 million incidents per year where guns are used in self-defense (either fired or brandished to deter assailants). Gun control supporters didn't like that number, so David Hemenway evaluated the numbers for them and decided that guns are used in self-defense between 75,000 and 600,000 times a year in the United States instead of two million. Now, compare the minimum number there (75,000) annual self-defense incidents acknowledged by gun control advocates to the 10,000 murders committed with firearms and tell me which is a more likely use of a gun. I know, math is tough for you, but this one is pretty easy. According to gun control advocates' own research, a gun is more than seven times more likely to be used in self-defense than in a murder. Let that sink in for a minute, then pick up your jaw and slink away with your tail between your legs like a good little lib.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... January 31, 2013 at 6:06 p.m.

Aimee … Go back and read Pobuckers post on January 30, 2013 at 3:13 p.m.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... January 31, 2013 at 10:17 p.m.

Whipper:
.
Please give us a source so we "libs" can be assured this is not just a figment of your imagination, and therefore not worthy of "sinking" anything except your argument..!!!

( permalink | suggest removal )

PaulRevere says... February 1, 2013 at 8:18 a.m.

Aimee, Your comments and your avatar reveal what and who you are. You can report back to Dear Leader Obama that there are only a few weak-minded individuals in this state who are buying your manure. To everyone else: You may not agree with the NRA on every position, but join me and send as much money as you can right now to the cause. They are the only effective force against the evil Zombies, I mean, Aimees in Washington.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 1, 2013 at 10:11 a.m.

Aimee, you want a source on the self-defense statistics or the confiscations?
~
Self-defense statistics - go find "SURVEY RESEARCH AND SELF-DEFENSE GUN USE: AN EXPLANATION OF EXTREME OVERESTIMATES" by David Hemenway from the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern) published in 1997. He does a statistical analysis and concludes that the estimate of 2M+ annual self-defense number is overblown and runs the math and declares that the number is between 75k and 600k per year.
~
As for the New York gun seizures, an article in the New York Daily News from September 5, 1992 reported that "Police raided the home of a Staten Island man who refused to comply with the city's tough ban on assault weapons, and seized an arsenal of firearms. . . . Spot checks are planned [for other homes]." John Marzulli, "Weapons ban defied: S.I. man, arsenal seized, Daily News (September 5, 1992)
(and that ought to answer BS boy's question as well).
~
Good luck with your imagination now, libs. You'll need it to get around the cold, hard facts.

( permalink | suggest removal )

BillSmith says... February 1, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.

whipper.....do you not understand the difference of having your firearm seized for breaking the law as was the Stanton Island man, as opposed to having the police confiscate your fireare for no reason when you broke no laws?

( permalink | suggest removal )

Captialist12 says... February 1, 2013 at 2:32 p.m.

yes it is warped logic indeed. Over 200 people killed in one nightclub in Brazil, so we better ban nightclubs, right? That is liberal logic (what an oxymoron). How weary we are becoming of Giffords being trotted out everytime the gun control needs a spectacle. Same thing they used to do with Brady.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 1, 2013 at 2:52 p.m.

...and BS Boy and Aimless, why are you both ignoring the stats that show that a gun is over seven times as likely to be used in self-defense as in a murder? That whole thing about self-defense sticks in your craw, doesn't it? You expect the rest of the folks out there to be as hapless and witless and subject to victimization as you are, don't you? Oh well. Live and learn, and then buy a gun.

( permalink | suggest removal )

T6 says... February 2, 2013 at 8:49 a.m.

Aimless.....Ironic isn't it? The only growth in the economy is from gun manufacturing. The only jobs Obama has created in 4 years is from gun manufacturers? HA! HA!

( permalink | suggest removal )

Captialist12 says... February 2, 2013 at 11:12 a.m.

Jojn Lott did extensive research and the conclusion reached, based upon the research, was that more guns equal less crimes. But we already knew that anyway. Look at the draconian gun laws in Chicago and DC; both have extremely high murders by firearms despite their gun control extremists. Naturally, the mob, gangs, and political leaders do not have to conform to the laws passed by the latter.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 2, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.

rf,who says they have to poll progun people for thier opinion?where is the proof that both sides were equally repersented?because they said so?i bet i could research 10 cases across the nation that proves that guns in the home make them safer just as easy if my research was bias to prove that guns in the house make them less safe.if obozo and his cronies did not control the liberal media we would not be having this talk.now maybe you should try using a scatter gun and maybe you will hit something every once in a while.

( permalink | suggest removal )

cwbird says... February 2, 2013 at 4:34 p.m.

The first thing that has to be done if any gun control legislation is passed is to amend the US Constitution. The Second Amendment says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The phrase "shall not be infringed" means that the government cannot touch that right in any way, which also means that all existing gun control laws are unconstitutional and, of course, any additional gun control laws would be unconstitutional. This amendment could hardly be more clear. It has taken lawyers, judges, and politicians a lot of effort to muddy the water concerning this amendment to shift the argument to the issues of making gun control about emotional arguments and theoretical reasoning about whether gun control is good or not.

I'll say it again: Today, in the United States of American it is strictly unconstitutional to pass a control law, period. If a gun control law is to be passed, an amendment to the Constitution must be passed which repeals or alters the Second Amendment. No argument or reasoning will suffice. A ruling by a judge, even by the Supreme Court, might permit a gun control law, but the judges would be wrong if they did. The Congress or some state might pass a gun control law, but that would be unconstitutional. They might be successful, but they would be wrong in doing so.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 3, 2013 at 7:12 a.m.

RonalFos says... February 1, 2013 at 8:45 p.m.
"Research shows that access to guns greatly increases the risk of death and firearm-related violence. A gun in the home is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or visitor than an intruder."
~
So, these folks are choosing to ignore the statistics they want in favor of one that pushes their agenda. The stats they cite are that it is twelve times more likely to result in the "death" of a household member. But even if you include all gun deaths (~30k per year, of which about 10k are murder and the vast majority of others are suicides with a few accidents and justifiable homicides thrown in), the fact remains that the prevalence of defensive uses can't be disputed. 75k times a year, a gun prevents its owner or someone around its owner from being attacked, injured, and possibly killed. Even if all 30k of the gun deaths were of gun owners or someone in their family, the real statistic would be that a gun is 2.5 times more likely to be used to protect you than to kill you. See how nice statistics can be when evaluated properly?

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 3, 2013 at 1:24 p.m.

The problem with people who think (morebeer) and for the ones of us that know of what freedom is … Goes to a civil society. It has come out that the killer at Sandy Hook only used pistols. George Will is correct, gun free zones are nothing but an invitational to mass murder.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 3, 2013 at 6:19 p.m.

And Dana Kelley is correct in her whole column. Enjoy the youtube.
~
ww w.chicagonow.c om/uncommon-sense/2013/01/no-assault-rifle-used-in-sandy-hook-shooting-01232013/
~
ww w.youtube.c om/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HK8Z5K5M2Dw
~
“Doesn't change the premise, though which is if some people are free to keep arsenals, does it infringe on the rights of others?” The answer to your question would be NO.
~
You should really consider staying off that Kool Aid morebeer.

( permalink | suggest removal )

T6 says... February 3, 2013 at 7:28 p.m.

For all you anti-gun fanatics, do you think they would be having a funeral for the coach and the 2 female players in this story? Instead of the other way around?

(WXYZ) - Police sources tell 7 Action News that a women's basketball coach from Martin Luther King, Jr. Senior High School shot two men who attacked him as he was walking two basketball players to their cars in the school parking lot.

Police sources say the coach was walking the two girls to their cars when two men allegedly approached and one pulled out a gun and grabbed him by his chain necklace. The coach then pulled out his gun and shot both of them, according to sources.

The man who shot the attackers was 70 years old, according to police.

One of the attackers was found dead in the median on Lafayette Boulevard, and the other was taken to a local hospital, according to police sources. We've learned that both of the men had attended the high school, and one had been recently expelled.

Police sources say the coach has a Concealed Pistol License and is reportedly a reserve police officer. They say he is fully cooperating with authorities.
wxyz. com/dpp/news/man-shot-near-martin-luther-king-jr-high-school-in-detroit

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 3, 2013 at 11:27 p.m.

That video clip is a bit of a hoax, koolaid. Someone took that clip from Dec. 15 when the media was confused, and are making it look like NBC is backtracking a month later. You've been had. Lanza shot everyone in the school with a rifle and killed himself with a handgun. Hey, that could be your new handle: ivebeenhad

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 4, 2013 at 7 a.m.

Try again morebeer. ww w.chicagonow.c om/uncommon-sense/2013/01/no-assault-rifle-used-in-sandy-hook-shooting-01232013/

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 4, 2013 at 8:23 a.m.

Part of the same hoax, koolaid. You've been had. You need better info sources. Instead of looking for sources to tell you what you want to know, read widely. Some group is trying to muddy the waters on this to the extent that the official investigators have reiterated the facts. The medical examiner has stated that the Bushmaster was the primary weapon. Snopes makes special mention of the NBC clip that fooled you. And I repeat my point: Do people who maintain arsenals, like mama Lanza or the grandpa at Westside, endanger the lives of others, therefore infringing on their freedom.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 4, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.

Packman, suppose you were at a town hall meeting in Newtown, Conn., which included parents of some of the victims, and you used the analogy of people owning arsenals (mama Lanza had 8 guns) to people owning high-performance cars. Would the audience understand and accept the comparison as in, oh, yeah, he's right, let's all go home. Now, I know the Supreme Court in its wisdom said the government could impose reasonable limits on arms owned by the citizenry, and this country is still trying to find exactly where the line is. I suspect even Scalia knows that the Second Ammendment can't survive if it allows individuals or militia groups to have their own nuclear weapons, for example. So my hypothetical was aimed at what constitutes an excessive arsenal. I'm not sweating fast cars. Speed limits and troopers govern those rather precisely.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 4, 2013 at 4:26 p.m.

The Constitution never has promised anyone a rose garden.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 5, 2013 at 10:21 a.m.

Hey Morebeer,
Why is it that even ultra-lib anti-gun MSNBC claims that the AR was found in the TRUNK of the shooter's car, not in the school?
~
From an MSNBC article, LAST WEEK:
"Internet picture of a Bushmaster .223 caliber Remington automatic weapon, similar to the one found with a 30 round magazine in Sandy Hook Elementary School killer Adam Lanza’s car at the school in Newtown, Connecticut."
~
That's right, they keep saying he "used" it in the attack because he took it with him in his car, but even MSNBC can't avoid mentioning that the AR-15 was found in the trunk of the killer's car, not on his person. They no longer say he shot people with it, because that is factually incorrect. They are now trying for "guilt by association." He had one, so it must be the kind of scary gun that only evil people have/use.
ht tp://tv.msnbc. com/2013/01/30/the-gun-at-the-heart-of-the-assault-weapons-debate/

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 5, 2013 at 10:35 p.m.

morebeer, you're in deep denial.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 6, 2013 at 9:39 a.m.

Koolaid, I gotta apologize. I've occasionally been rude, but now I see you're the one, as we used to say on the farm, who gets the dull pitchfork.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 6, 2013 at 2:23 p.m.

morebeer says
"Whipper, a shotgun was found in the trunk; that was an early misreport, as are the video clips which are now being used to appear as if they're new information"
~
Check the date on the MSNBC link I posted - January 30th. "Early misreport" my foot. That was last week, a month and a half after the shootings. The fact is that he used handguns (which are the most prevalent gun used in murders in America) and folks aren't pushing to ban them because they haven't found a way to make them sound scary enough yet, so they are continuing the push to ban a weapon used in less than 5% of all gun murders. What is used more often in murders than an "assault rifle"? How about a knife, or a car? I'm pretty sure they all top the assault rifle, as do the ever scary "bare hands" and "assorted blunt objects."
~
Seriously, let's look at the FBI statistics on murder. In 2011, there were 8.583 murders with guns. If we combine all of the "rifles" and "other guns" and call that "assault rifles", we only get 420. Compare that to 1,694 murders with knives, 496 with "blunt objects" (bats, etc.), 728 with hands and feet and 853 with "other weapons or weapons not stated" and you see that assault rifles are NOT the problem. They're not even the problem in the category of gun murders. This is like trying to fix the deficit by eliminating pennies. Would that alleviate a tiny fraction of the deficit? Yes. Would it cause other problems? Yes. How would you go about removing all the existing pennies from circulation? Good question.
~
I know, you don't want pesky facts to get in the way of your uninformed ranting, so I'll step back for a moment and let casual observers read for themselves.

( permalink | suggest removal )

BillSmith says... February 6, 2013 at 6:34 p.m.

I would say probably 90% of the people shooting the machine guns in the above videos at
knobcreekrange. com/media/video are tea party and NRA members.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 6, 2013 at 11:44 p.m.

Look whipper, I didn't dispute that handguns are more dangerous, and that assault rifles aren't used to kill that many people in the U.S. I've note that in posts myself. But you and koolaid are dead-lying bleeping wrong when you purvey those bogus clips. Now, the medical examiner says the poor kids were shot multiple times and that the primary weapon was the Bushmaster. I don't think he's come out with a report stating whether Lanza went around and fired his handguns, too. I'm only disputing that the rifle was in the trunk. It was not. He carried it into the building and used it. Y'all have been fooled. Koolaid is a poor damaged soul and he has an excuse. What's yours, whipper?

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 7, 2013 at 1:15 a.m.

From the New York Times, Dec. 28
Adam Lanza shot 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., using a semiautomatic, military-style assault rifle made by Bushmaster. William Spengler Jr. used the same type of Bushmaster rifle to kill two firefighters last week in Webster, N.Y. The Washington snipers, John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, also used a Bushmaster in a spree that killed 10 people in 2002.
Bushmasters are by no means the only assault weapons of choice among mass killers (the Aurora shooter used a Smith & Wesson), but the brand’s repeated presence in murderous incidents reflects Bushmaster’s enormous popularity in the gun world, the result of a successful marketing campaign aimed at putting military firepower and machismo in the hands of civilians. Gun owners once talked about the need for personal protection and sport hunting, but out-of-control ad campaigns like Bushmaster’s have replaced revolvers and shotguns with the highly lethal paramilitary fantasies of liars like whippersnapper.

( permalink | suggest removal )

inquire says... February 7, 2013 at 2:10 p.m.

Thanks, morebeer for continuing to correct the misinformation.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 7, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.

ok,so what your saying is someone took the ar from the crime scene and planted in the trunk oh wait even though we all seen the sheriff get it out of the trunk on national tv it was a doctored film.now the me says no handguns were used only the ar,with hundreds of officers on the seen do you not think they would have reported that there were only 223 casings found?
i think your are all just a bunch of racist picking on bushmaster because its black.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 7, 2013 at 4:24 p.m.

Choose your medicine whipper, you're a dupe or a liar. The gun in the trunk was a shotgun, I don't get too exercised about bubble boys waxing idiotic about taxes and things. But really, 20 little kids and 6 educators slaughtered, and there's a whole conspiracy out there trying to fudge the facts. These folks have no moral code.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 7, 2013 at 5:46 p.m.

Hey morebeer,
You seriously are claiming that Wikipedia is more accurate than MSNBC? You might lose your liberal card over that. I am not a dupe or a liar, I am stating what MSNBC has repeated as recently as a week ago. If you choose to ignore news reports from the Liberals' favorite news source and demean anyone who dares to cite them, that's your choice. Don't try to claim that folks are dupes or liars for providing you a link to a legitimate news site that says something other than what you claim.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 7, 2013 at 10:28 p.m.

From The Daily Freeman, a Hudson Valley newspaper:
The Connecticut official who performed autopsies on seven victims of the Newtown shooting said Sunday that a rifle used by the killer has little application in hunting.
State Medical Examiner H. Wayne Carver was blunt in his assessment of the lethality of the Bushmaster semi-automatic weapon used by the killer along with two handguns.
"It is said that the most lethal thing on the battlefield is a Marine with one of these rifles and momma Marine Corps didn't raise no fools," he said Sunday. "I don't know of many people who hunt with (these weapons) because the bullets are so fast that they break up and spray the (targets) with bits of lead."

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 7, 2013 at 10:44 p.m.

fact-checker snopes dot com in a some mid- and late-january posts mentions the video clip that koolaidliar and whipperdupe are brandishing. Snopes says it was from Dec. 15 and contains confusing and false information, and snopes reiterates the facts of the case including a Jan. 23 statement by Trooper Vance repeating relevant facts about the rifle in the school and the shotgun in the trunk, which Vance says need reiterating because certain folks were spreading false information.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 8, 2013 at 1:43 a.m.

Koolaid, the only person you've roped into your despicable dupe game is whipperdupe, though you've confused lazybar and packman, which is no great accomplishment. I recognized the video clip as phony within 15 seconds because I'm well-informed. Meanwhile, you've completely shot whatever credibility you have by playing disinformation games over the bodies of innocents. Shame on you.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 8, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.

morebeer your a liberal lunatic,so what if a ar was used?i don`t really care.39 days into the new year and 42 deaths of arkansas roadways alone but no one is worried about that.all the liberals are worried about is a isolated incident with a firearm that accounts for very few deaths because it is capable of firing multiple rounds.you and your liberal agenda are no worse than king putt and his.you are using what could happen and the tragic death of children to push your agenda.the chances of a child dying for a drunk driver are much higher than getting shot and the chance of being shot in a shooting involving more than 10rds is so a low percent it can`t be counted when compared to dying in a auto accident.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Whippersnapper says... February 8, 2013 at 3:01 p.m.

Hey morebeer,
Did you actually go to the link I provided? At that link, from an article dated January 30th, MSNBC says that the AR-15 was removed from the trunk of the car. So, I am neither dupe nor liar. i am simply stating what MSNBC said last week.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 8, 2013 at 3:40 p.m.

Yawn ... in other news Nerf bullets to be issued to the L.A.P.D. in the future.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 9, 2013 at 9:02 a.m.

and 5 were killed in a head on crash in sw georgia,people die everyday.morebeer you listed 4 cases that span 10 years and your last case could have been done just as easily with a single shot.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 9, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.

no sir your the confused one.you want more laws and have them policed on law abidding citizens because of guns you have no personal need for.while on the other hand you only see car accidents as a need to the means of a more convenient lifestyle.why not just inforce the firearm and auto laws that are already on the books?oh wait that would be against your liberal agenda of disarming american citizens.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 9, 2013 at 2:41 p.m.

Sorry packman, but both the law of the land, my moral code and common sense rules out making women carry babies to term and then nurturing them for 18 years (or in lazybar's case, probably for the rest of his life) because they chose to have sex or were seduced by a silver-tongued devil like yourself. Your logic doesn't compute. The only philosophical points I've been making about gun control are these, and I've phrased them in the form of a question: When people like mama Lanza or the grandpa of the Westside shooter own multiple firearms, do they endanger others to the extent that they limit the freedom of others? I suspect the parents of the Sandy Hook kids are saying, yes they do. We already limit some of the "arms we can bear." We don't get to keep claymores, bazookas, shoulder-fire missiles or tactical nukes around the house, do we. As to the 2nd Ammendment, gun advocates better be careful. The Constitution can be changed, and the country is undergoing a sea change (that's a slow change but one that is hard to reverse) in which Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech, etc., etc., are piling up and weighing on the consciences of Americans. I suspect that if put to a vote in a general election, the nation as a whole would be quite willing to modify the 2nd Ammendment. If the country is not there yet, it's moving in that direction. If gun advocates want to stop this sea change, they'd be smart to join the movement to find ways to stop the massacres and some of the handgun violence.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 9, 2013 at 5:17 p.m.

Packmsn:
.
Not being required to carry and give birth to an unwanted child is not "a convenience"..!!! It's a freedom and a right that women will never give up...
.
If Repulicans were not so dead set against birth control, "unprotected sex" would be a relic of the past and abortions would be rare... Your desire to force women to have babies is just a result of your fear of losing control... The extinction of WASPs is not OUR fault and we REFUSE to become "the means" by which you can regain your majority..!!!

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 10, 2013 at 11:07 a.m.

Obviously Jesus couldn't pack heat, Bill, but you raise some questions. In the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus was taken, one of the Apostles drew a sword and cut off the ear of a Roman soldier. Then Jesus told his followers to desist. But at least one of his followers was armed. And recently, the Catholic Church, at the behest of the pope, changed some of its liturgy to read that Jesus was crucified with two rebels, not two thieves. The reason was to be more historically accurate. The Romans reserved crucifixion for insurgents; they wouldn't have done it to a thief. Some historians speculate that the insurgents were part of Jesus' troop. It would also explain why the Romans crucified Jesus if they thought he was a threat to the occupation. Perhaps Jesus was an armed insurrectionist? He, after all, did preach that God would come and restore the House of David to the throne of Israel. And Jesus was a proud descendant of David, Matthew says.

( permalink | suggest removal )

BarichMilhusseinObamaNixonPOTUS says... February 10, 2013 at 6:15 p.m.

arta the really sad thing is AIMEE claims to have been a teacher at some point. It explains a ton about Arkansas and their rank in education in our country.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 10, 2013 at 6:49 p.m.

Why does this fellow know more than a liberal?
~
ww w.youtube.c om/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NyYYgLzF6zU

( permalink | suggest removal )

T6 says... February 10, 2013 at 7:21 p.m.

RedWing.. Now that was funny right there, I don't care who you are!

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 10, 2013 at 7:48 p.m.

Redwing, sounds like you're a very angry and taking it out irrationally on liberals. Hope you don't have an arsenal. ...!!!

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 10, 2013 at 8:27 p.m.

Thanks for trying, packman, but you're not persuasive on abortion. Women have eggs in their ovaries. Every once in a while, one is introduced to a sperm. If that fertilized egg isn't aborted or miscarried a child will develop. But most eggs and most sperms aren't introduced. No one considers this a tragedy. As to my "falsehood," you must be referring to my roping you into koolaidliar's dupe job over the Bushmaster. You wrote "whether or not" the rifle was used in shooting... A principled person would have set the record straight right there on such a serious topic. Instead, you chose to help muddy the facts on the slaughter of 20 kids and 6 educators. Now, if you don't think those 26 people weren't put in danger by mama Lanza legally owning 6 or 8 guns, then why would my owning a tactical nuclear weapon put anyone in danger? Possessing it doesn't harm anyone, you said.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Packman says... February 11, 2013 at 11:53 a.m.

Hey morebeer - I'm not trying to be persuasive on abortion, but on the issue of life. You know the falsehood you spawned and the lack of character you exhibit in playing rope-a-dope with an apology. How could anyone "set the record straight" about the Bushmaster's use with all the media conflicts regarding its use? I wasn't there, morebeer, I have no first-hand knowledge which would be the only way I would conclusively say one way or the other. That's what a principled person does. And no, morebeer, those innocents in Newtown were no more put in danger by mama Lanza's ownership of guns than my uncle's ownership of a dozen pre-1900 LC Smith double barrel sotguns. As to defining an "arsenal", does my uncle's gun vault hold more of an arsenal than my neighbor who owns a single AR .223 and two 30 round magazines? And possessing does NOT infringe on anyone else's individual liberty or reasonably infer undue harm. Your logic is flawed in a plethora of ways.

( permalink | suggest removal )

2531USMC says... February 11, 2013 at 1:43 p.m.

No where in the wording of the second amendment is the word gun used, grant you this may seem to be nit picking to some, but the signer’s used the word Arms. They did not say how many Arms, what type of Arms, nor the capacity of the Arms. As for the who has the right, the Supreme Court answered that already “The people”. As anyone who has followed the debate on gun control can see, it is clearly a highly emotional debate which often sinks to the level of childishness on both sides of the issue. So long as people resort to insults, and name calling, nothing of any substance will ever rise above this immature drivel. As a veteran and someone who has lived with small arms 24/7. I am comfortable with citizens who are not convicted felons, mentally unstable, and who understand the inherent responsibilities that come with possessing a rifle, shotgun, or pistol, regardless of how many rounds it holds or what types of rounds these may be. In the end it is the individual who chose’s to exercise their second amendments right to be responsible in the use, storage and care of any arms they may have. If you do not wish to have any arms I respect your decision regardless of the reason, and I refuse to be drawn into immature, inaccurate, attacks on you or anyone else involved in this debate. But by all means feel free to disagree with me.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 11, 2013 at 4:21 p.m.

Lazybar:
.
Again, you have completely missed the point..!!! The !!! and ??? are mere feathers on the arrow... Directing the arrow to hit the target is what is important..!!!
.
A Liberal's sense of entitlement is for OTHERS..!!! Gun owners sense of entitlement is for THEMSELVES..!!! Republicans don't care for anyone else but themselves..!!!
.
What part of "WE the People" do they not understand..???

( permalink | suggest removal )

BillSmith says... February 11, 2013 at 7:51 p.m.

Ted Nugent, the gun-loving rock star who, during last year’s campaign, said, “I will either be dead or in jail” if President Obama gets re-elected, is attending the State of the Union address on Tuesday. Nugent scored an invite from Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman.
*
I hope Ted gets his wish one way or the other, he is really just an old has been rocker who is just a pussy and all mouth.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 12, 2013 at 1:16 p.m.

Maddjack:
.
mi·li·tia
/məˈliSHə/
Noun
.
1. A military force of civilians to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
2. A military force that engages in rebel activities.
.
Since when did "We the People" become a military force..???
.
Or is it that "You the Wing-nuts" are just planning on engaging "in REBEL activities"..???
.
We the People need to wake up and put stop to this..!!! And you Wing-nuts need to secede to somewhere "far, far away........."..!!!

( permalink | suggest removal )

Coralie says... February 12, 2013 at 2:10 p.m.

Aimee, I think some wannabes think that the Civil War was such great fun, they want to do it again.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 12, 2013 at 4:30 p.m.

Coralie:
.
Some of them probably need drones to get a deer..!!!
.
Lazy:
.
I believe the topic at hand is "gun control"... Did you get lost in the forest..???

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 13, 2013 at 2:29 p.m.

In other words you're supporting a revolution and using the 2nd Amendment as an excuse to arm it..!!! I believe the word "traitor" is appropriate in this situation...
.
Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution states: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them." and "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
.
archives. gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
.
You're 1 step away from treason, Maddjack... And HOW MANY witnesses do we have here..???

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 13, 2013 at 9:48 p.m.

Jeez, Koolaidliar, after your youtube debacle, I'm surprised you'd be questioning anyone's credibility ever again, at least on this thread. Trying to mislead on the tragedy of 20 slain children.

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 14, 2013 at 12:44 a.m.

Maddjack:
.
I'm not the one who said " It is We the People government should fear,"... YOU said it..!!!

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 14, 2013 at 10:43 a.m.

no bs,a fully auto and silenced are seperate items for which each makes a class 3 firearm.to sell you must be a class 3 dealer and to own you must pass a extensive background check that usually takes 6 monthes to clear.you are a typical liberal trying to be a wolf preying on sheep.there are very few legally owned fully automatic firearms and even fewer silenced,the combination of the two is almost unheard of.the idea of them being sold at gunshows or being passed down to heirs does not happen legally.

( permalink | suggest removal )

BillSmith says... February 14, 2013 at 1:37 p.m.

lazybar...this liberal thinks you need to Google "NFA Gun Trust" to upgrade your brain on this matter.
There are several ways to acquire (Title II) firearms under the National Firearms Act (“NFA”). Three of the most common are: (1) as an individual; (2) by using an entity such as a corporation or limited liability company; and (3) creating a trust.
Since a Texas NFA trust is intended to hold Class 3 items such as machine guns and suppressors good planning mandates that the trust last as long as possible. One object of the trust is to maintain continuity of ownership through several generations. This avoids unnecessary transfers upon the deaths of the grantor and some of the beneficiaries.
This sounds like to me that the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter could have owned fully automatic weapons or ay class iii weaponsand passed them on to her son the shooter.
No Fingerprint Cards Required – The ATF requirement that an individual supply two sets of fingerprint cards with every Form 4 transfer does not apply to transfers to a gun trust.
No Photographs Required – The ATF requirement that an individual supply two photographs with every Form 4 transfer does not apply to transfers to a gun trust.
Continuity of Ownership – Since a gun trust can last several generations the property in the trust (ie class 3 machine guns, suppressors, short barreled rifles, flamethrowers, etc.) remains in a single entity (gun trust) without the necessity to transfer each item upon the death of a single trustee or beneficiary, where several are named.
*
You say ".there are very few legally owned fully automatic firearms and even fewer silenced"
Go to this link and click on a machine gun shoot at which there were kids as young as 8 and nine shooting, but not in these videos. Those videos were on a TV documentary about this gun range.
knobcreekrange. com/media/video

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 14, 2013 at 3:16 p.m.

"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Packman says... February 14, 2013 at 3:33 p.m.

Hey morebeer - "Packman, you can't say the guns that were used to kill 26 people were no danger to them..." Of course I can say that. The 1st Amendment says I can and the 2nd Amendment exists to protect the 1st. Logically, those 26 innocents were no more in danger by mama Lanza owing guns that the 220 killed in the club fire in Brazil (?) were in danger because the band owned fireworks that night. As to this whole idea of "possess" of those other things illegal to possess, how many of them are protected by an amendment to the US Constitution? As to "chastity-belt morality" women forfeit their right to kill their unborn child when they choose to have unprotected sex. And what courts have ruled against future courts can change. As to confusion about the Bushmaster, you have been provided numerous media accounts showing such confusion. To continue to deny such accounts makes you look hard headed and self-inflicted ignorant. As I've stated before the debate about the Bushmaster is a red herring. The real issue is whether banning military platform rifles and high capacity mags would have prevented what happend at Newtown and reduce gun violence. All the evidence says it will not to any measurable degree reduce gun violence. Yet, such a law will deprive law-abiding citizens of certain consitutional rights with absolutely no benefit to society. Again, I wasn't there. The Bushmaster may very well have been the primary gun used by a madman who likely would have used a shotgun, deer rifle, squirrel gun, or homemade bomb as substitutes for his crazed carnage if mom hadn't had the Bushmaster. Based on a "bomb versus Bushmaster" comparison, many lives may have been saved because mom owned the gun. Were the 125 dead in Oklahoma City in "danger" because a farmer's cooperative sold large amounts of fertilizer to another madman?

( permalink | suggest removal )

Coralie says... February 14, 2013 at 5:02 p.m.

No evidence, according to the official Jefferson website, that Jefferson ever made this remark.
It was first noted in 1914 and first attributed to Jefferson in 1994.
monticello org/site/jefferson/when-governments-fear-people-there-libertyquotation

( permalink | suggest removal )

T6 says... February 14, 2013 at 7:27 p.m.

I'm not playing your gotcha game. It's truly a sad day when a person can't see a LIE when you read it and hear it.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 15, 2013 at 10:11 a.m.

bs with your warped logic it was the evil gun that caused the shooter to do the shooting not the evil man that caused the gun to do the shooting.guns don`t kill people people kill people,guns do not load themselves and sqeeze the trigger.one would be very foolish to believe that someone with the intent of hurting many would not resort to another means if a gun was not around.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 15, 2013 at 10:57 a.m.

ok,bs yes i feel the same about hillary and nancy but i still hold them as whores having more value than the pos obozo

( permalink | suggest removal )

Packman says... February 15, 2013 at 1:55 p.m.

Hey BillSmith - The logic I was following was yours, hence its warped nature. The illustration with McVey and fertilizer and supposition of bomb versus Bushmaster was only show the silliness of your arguments if carried to logical conclusion.

Hey Coralie - Please know the advice I'm about go give is because I have a certain amount of respect for you and do not want to see you engage in arguments of which you have little knowledge and will sooner rather than later be made to look silly. This statement proves my point: "Are you such bad shots you need a machinegun to hit a deer?" The 2nd Amendment says nothing about hunting. Machine guns are illegal for hunting in ALL states. Automatic action is not the same as automatic fire. Magazines are both detachable and fixed. Universal background checks are vastly different than closing the "gun show loophole. Many "good shots" prefer automatic action guns that are capable of firing numerous rounds in millisecond sequence, such as dove hunters, rabbit hunters, and hog hunters. Let BillSmith take the idiot spear on gun control. No need to put yourself out there like that.

( permalink | suggest removal )

lazybar says... February 15, 2013 at 3:01 p.m.

coralie if your aware the differance between a automatic rifle and a machine gun please explain the differance.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Coralie says... February 15, 2013 at 4:06 p.m.

The fully automatic machine gun is much heavier (may need to be supported), fires at a more rapid rate, and usually feeds by belt instead of magazine. Also it is designed to cover an area, not a single target.
And now, Lazy, please define hyperbole and give an example.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Packman says... February 15, 2013 at 4:34 p.m.

Hey Coralie - You were warned..... "The fully automatic machine gun is much heavier..." Not true. My duck hunting gun is much heavier than most full autos. Would you mind explaining what might make a fully auto any heavier than, say, a 12. ga. Browning pre-1985 Autoloader? "usually feeds by belt instead of magazine" A ridiculous statement, unless you've watched too many WWII movies. Would you mind explaining the difference between a "belt" and a "magazine"? "Also it is designed to cover an area, not a single target." Another lie. All guns are designed to hit what you aim at, and more spefically rifles fully auto or not. A hand grenade would be a weapon designed to cover an area. And you do know it's "machine gun" and not "machinegun", don't you????? Or is that some freakish literary device only known to liberals? Your answers, Coralie, are wrong to infinity. It's only hyperbole, Coralie, when the user understands the difference. Again, I tried to warn you....."machinegun" LMAO!

( permalink | suggest removal )

T6 says... February 15, 2013 at 7:28 p.m.

Hey Packman.... Pay Bill Smith no never mind it's probably been so long he doesn't remember what an orgasm's like.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DEMOCRATREPUBLICAN says... February 16, 2013 at 9:37 a.m.

Hey Aimee, If you believe that power comes from the people anymore, you need to quit drinking.

( permalink | suggest removal )

DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... February 16, 2013 at 1:41 p.m.

Then let us try John Basil Barnhill.

( permalink | suggest removal )

Coralie says... February 16, 2013 at 4:23 p.m.

John Basil Barnhill is...?

( permalink | suggest removal )

aimee says... February 17, 2013 at 1:16 a.m.

Coralie:
.
They must be trying to make themselves look legitimate... I don't think it's working..!!! When ever they open their mouths, they spout such nonsense that no one could take them seriously... They have gone from "mistaken" to "foolish" to "delusional"..!!!
.
Barnhill, as in Barnhill Arena..???

( permalink | suggest removal )

BarichMilhusseinObamaNixonPOTUS says... February 17, 2013 at 7:20 p.m.

Oh this is classic; coralie wants to know who someone is when she was railing on me on another thread about asking her to provide a source. The best thing is when she provided the source she was using the same one as me! The problem was she only used the headline to mislead, and I showed inside the article where she was wrong. Apparently liberals cannot count unless Aimee is counting the !!!! and ???? she uses. She knows there is a quota; liberals love their quotas.

( permalink | suggest removal )

morebeer says... February 18, 2013 at 9:30 p.m.

Inquire, koolaid's sources are the worst. He based his Bushmaster not used at Sandy Hook claims on a doctored NBC video clip and nonsense spewed by an internet columnist for an underground Chicago newspaper. Yet, he was able to rope-a-dupe whipper and packman into the charade. No wonder Lush Rimbaugh makes such a good living off these know-nothings.

( permalink | suggest removal )