# Gun control (thread inspired by recent mass shootings.)



## Sonal

EDIT Formerly titled: Shootings in Connecticut School

CBS News: 27 Dead, Including 14 Children, In Elementary School Shooting « CBS Connecticut

Breaking news, more details to come.


----------



## CubaMark

Who the hell kills children in an elementary school? What kind of grudge must you have? Inconceivable...


----------



## keebler27

Few things catch me speechless, but this is one. omg. what a pathetic coward.

children!!!! It is inconceivable beyond words. They are so innocent.

poor families.


----------



## macintosh doctor

keebler27 said:


> Few things catch me speechless, but this is one. omg. what a pathetic coward.
> 
> children!!!! It is inconceivable beyond words. They are so innocent.
> 
> poor families.


its unfortunate that he is dead, they should of caught him and tortured him for the of his life.
so upsetting the children who were killed and the families who have to live with that.


----------



## eMacMan

For the life of me I have never been able to comprehend mass killing of children.

It makes no sense whether the killer is a deranged individual or a well oiled war machine. 

Why would anyone do it?


----------



## John Clay

Crazy.

They're saying the shooter was a father of a student, too.


----------



## Joker Eh

Its their culture. It is part of them now. The way they think. They call it freedom. You want to end your life, you take someone out with you. I call it lunacy. Sad for those parents because with the sorrow will come anger and who do they take their anger out on? Their lives are ruined forever. What a shame, it makes me mad thinking about.


----------



## John Clay

Joker Eh said:


> Its their culture. It is part of them now. The way they think. They call it freedom. You want to end your life, you take someone out with you. I call it lunacy. Sad for those parents because with the sorrow will come anger and who do they take their anger out on? Their lives are ruined forever. What a shame, it makes me mad thinking about.


Bull****.

Sane people don't do this, and there are plenty of sane Americans. To place the blame for this on all Americans is cowardly in and of itself.


----------



## SINC

Inconceivable beyond words. Such pain for all.


----------



## Dr.G.

eMacMan said:


> For the life of me I have never been able to comprehend mass killing of children.
> 
> It makes no sense whether the killer is a deranged individual or a well oiled war machine.
> 
> Why would anyone do it?





SINC said:


> Inconceivable beyond words. Such pain for all.


Both sentiments sum it up quite well for me. There is never a reason for these sorts of tragedies, and it is "inconceivable beyond words". :-(


----------



## Joker Eh

John Clay said:


> Bull****.
> 
> Sane people don't do this, and there are plenty of sane Americans. To place the blame for this on all Americans is cowardly in and of itself.


I am talking about those who decide to take their own life. If you take your own life are you sane? Nope. They don't take their own they take someone else with theirs.

And not on all Americans as I know many but every year almost every month we get a report from the US that has this sort of tragedy.


----------



## CubaMark

Shooter identified: Ryan Lanza.

*The Facebook profile pic that is circulating is apparently not the right guy... * The name, though, comes from media with law enforcement sources.


----------



## steviewhy

sudo rm -rf /


----------



## Joker Eh

steviewhy said:


> *Stereotype much?*
> 
> I wonder what his motives were.


I can only go by history.


----------



## steviewhy

sudo rm -rf /


----------



## MacDoc

How about we try this instead....

5,000 kids died by firearms last year in the US

more than all the other first world nations combined......


----------



## bmovie

Shooter was one of two brothers, that killed their Mother (who worked at the school) and their father. 
Apparently the girlfriend is missing too.

This is just horrible!


----------



## Joker Eh

steviewhy said:


> Right. Here's a quick calculation on notable school shootings per capita between Canada & the US.
> 
> Canadian Incidents 11/34,482,779(Population) = .00000031899981
> 
> US Incidents 122/311,591,917(Population) = .00000039153776
> 
> Huge statistical difference there. But hey, whatever gets you through the day.
> 
> School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


see below, and you are looking at school shootings my comments weren't towards school shootings, it was toward someone who is going to commit suicide, they want to take someone else out as well either out of anger of for some other stupid reason.



MacDoc said:


> How about we try this instead....
> 
> 5,000 kids died by firearms last year in the US
> 
> more than all the other first world nations combined......


----------



## FeXL

MacDoc said:


> How about we try this instead....
> 
> 5,000 kids died by firearms last year in the US
> 
> more than all the other first world nations combined......


How about we try a link to back up your far-reaching statements?


----------



## Joker Eh

FeXL said:


> How about we try a link to back up your far-reaching statements?


Thousands of children are killed by guns in the U.S. - journal-news.net | News, sports, jobs, community information for Martinsburg - The Journal



> Canada is concerned because in the latest reported year, *153* Canadian children were killed by guns while France had only *109* children killed. In Japan, the number was *zero*.
> 
> The United States had *5,285 *childhood gun deaths that same year, the Center for Disease Control reports.


For a study looking at 2008 and 2009

http://www.childrensdefense.org/chi...tions/data/protect-children-not-guns-2012.pdf



> The 5,740 children and teens killed by guns in 2008 and 2009:
> • Would fill more than 229 public school classrooms of 25 students each;
> • Was greater than the number of U.S. military personnel killed in action in Iraq and
> Afghanistan (5,013).2


I didn't even try that hard to look. You could have checked FexL instead with that common comment insinuate that someone is making something up.

Shall we go on about not being in their culture? if it is not culture based than what is it?


----------



## Macfury

Leading cause of death for children in 2012:

Abortion = 1.2 million

CDC puts gun related deaths at fewer than 2,000 in 2005--however, they include people up to 19 years old.

Injury & Violence Fact Sheet - DASH/HealthyYouth


----------



## Joker Eh

Macfury said:


> Leading cause of death for children in 2012:
> 
> Abortion = 1.2 million
> 
> CDC puts gun related deaths at fewer than 2,000 in 2005--however, they include people up to 19 years old.
> 
> Injury & Violence Fact Sheet - DASH/HealthyYouth


Well from fewer than 2,000 in 2005 to more than 5,000 in 2010 or 2011, that is a big jump an not in a good way.

And another quote from my link



> The Center also reports that the number of firearm deaths of kids younger than 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in the next 25 industrialized countries combined.


----------



## Macfury

Joker Eh said:


> Well from fewer than 2,000 in 2005 to more than 5,000 in 2010 or 2011, that is a big jump an not in a good way.
> 
> And another quote from my link


I'm not going to downplay child dwaths, but they don't appear to be comparing the same things. They add in 19-year-olds who I believe constitute more than half of the deaths.


----------



## CubaMark

BACK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND (COAS).... 

I wondered how Fox News would cover this... and found this "gem". Turned my stomach in record time...

Why does God allow evil? | Fox News Video

Watching these guys dance around the issue would have been funny under different circumstances. And that Johnny fella... somebody should clue him in that his default facial expression here is seriously inappropriate. Sickening.


----------



## Joker Eh

CubaMark said:


> BACK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND (COAS)....
> 
> I wondered how Fox News would cover this... and found this "gem". Turned my stomach in record time...
> 
> Why does God allow evil? | Fox News Video
> 
> Watching these guys dance around the issue would have been funny under different circumstances. And that Johnny fella... somebody should clue him in that his default facial expression here is seriously inappropriate. Sickening.


Ya generally don't watch that channel.


----------



## CubaMark

> Guns used in Connecticut school rampage were legally purchased and registered to the suspected shooter's mother, law enforcement officials told NBC News.





> The suspected shooter, Adam Lanza, is autistic, or has aspergers syndrome and a “personality disorder,” his elder brother Ryan Lanza told authorities, ABC reports.


(RT.com)


----------



## Sonal

Joker Eh said:


> see below, and you are looking at school shootings my comments weren't towards school shootings, it was toward someone who is going to commit suicide, they want to take someone else out as well either out of anger of for some other stupid reason.


Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the USA, and the 3rd leading cause of death among young people. 

Most of them aren't taking out someone else when they go. If they did, then the homicide rate would be a lot higher.... CDC has it at about half the suicide rate, and not all homicides are part of a murder-suicide scenario.

To be honest, I don't think committing suicide means you are crazy. Certainly, there's a link between mental disorders and suicide, but if you believe your life is terrible, it's a rational to want it to end. 

But putting that aside, to dismiss the causes of why people do things like this (that is, shoot a bunch of children, though this argument applies generally to suicide as well) as 'Well they are crazy, crazy people do crazy things!" misses the opportunity to attempt to understand why and how such things happen, and possibly find ways to deal with the root causes better. 

FASTSTATS - Suicide and Self-Inflicted Injury
Teenage suicide in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> BACK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND (COAS)....
> 
> I wondered how Fox News would cover this... and found this "gem". Turned my stomach in record time...
> 
> Why does God allow evil? | Fox News Video
> 
> Watching these guys dance around the issue would have been funny under different circumstances. And that Johnny fella... somebody should clue him in that his default facial expression here is seriously inappropriate. Sickening.


Do you go trolling for items that you find offensive so you can be publicly outraged on EhMac? I could just as easily go searching for references to all manner of let wing kookery in response to this. However, this is a tragedy—not the American politics thread. Show some restraint.


----------



## macintosh doctor

Macfury said:


> Leading cause of death for children in 2012:
> 
> Abortion = 1.2 million
> 
> CDC puts gun related deaths at fewer than 2,000 in 2005--however, they include people up to 19 years old.
> 
> Injury & Violence Fact Sheet - DASH/HealthyYouth


Please don't start with another topic, no comparison of the two. 
This not fair to those who died. 

I am pro choice and always will be. 
Another thread perhaps but not here.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> However, this is a tragedy—not the American politics thread. Show some restraint.


----------



## Macfury

macintosh doctor said:


> Please don't start with another topic, no comparison of the two.
> This not fair to those who died.
> 
> I am pro choice and always will be.
> Another thread perhaps but not here.


It has nothing to do with being pro-choice and I cam certainly not trying to convince you to change your position. It's just the leading cause of death. It was in response to MacDoc's statistic. I had other statistics about bicycling, but I ultimately didn't trust them.


----------



## eMacMan

It really bothers me that even as the bodies are still warm, the gun control balloons are being floated. I find it equally unsettling that Obama showed none of that compassion for the children killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> It really bothers me that even as the bodies are still warm, the gun control balloons are being floated. I find it equally unsettling that Obama showed none of that compassion for the children killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Although the grief expressed by some people is real, it is selective grief.


----------



## MacDoc

typical defense of the indefensible crap from the right wing...

let's see real world



> *Firearms Regulation in Australia*
> 
> *In Australia, access to firearms is limited to persons with a genuine need.* This includes government and police, sporting shooters with valid membership of an approved club, recreational shooters or hunters that produce proof of permission from a landowner, primary producers, pest controllers and bona fide collectors. All governments have agreed that self-protection is not a genuine need.
> 
> The key elements of Australia’s regulatory controls on firearms are:
> 
> * *prohibitions on fully and semi automatic long arms,* with their use restricted primarily to military, police or government purposes;
> ** prohibitions on sporting shooters possessing, owning, using, purchasing or importing high powered, concealable handguns;*
> ** mandatory registration of all firearms *on State and Territory firearms registry systems;
> ** mandatory licensing of all firearm owners;* and
> * strict licensing requirements, including age limitations, undertaking firearms safety training, and compliance with firearm storage standards.


start there......

This was a direct result of a shooting in Tasmania with an semi-automatic firearm

did it work....damn right it did....



> Guns killed more than 5000 people in Australia in the past decade. Nine out of 10 of the victims were male and most of them killed themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The number of deaths caused by firearms dropped almost 50 per cent between 1991 and 2001, with the biggest yearly fall in deaths coming after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.*


so stop with the nit picking ****e about statistics and get behind a sensible control policy and give it teeth....

It's not like Aussies are milk toasts - the are rowdie they drink it's a hard driving sports and fishing culture....
and when common sense controls were put in place and enforced the death from firearms was cut in half.
and the crocodile tears - oh the poor kids and take cheap shots at Obama - do nothing for anyone if you still support handgun and semi-automatic rifle ownership of any sort.


----------



## kps

Firearms ownership is highly defensible, McDoc, but this thread isn't the place for gun politics. Start a new thread.

*An unfortunate Canadian connection to this tragedy:*

Connecticut school shooting victim lived in Winnipeg: reports - Manitoba - CBC News



> One of the 20 children who died in a shooting massacre at a Connecticut elementary school on Friday had recently moved to the U.S. state from Winnipeg, according to reports.
> Jimmy Greene moved his family — including two school-age children, Isaiah and Ana Marquez Greene — from Winnipeg to Newtown, Conn., in July, according to family and friends in the Manitoba capital.
> A number of local media reports have said Ana died in Friday's shooting, but the family has not confirmed this. One report said the information is based on an internal note sent by administration at Linden Christian School in Winnipeg, where the girl used to be a student.
> Reached by phone on Friday, Greene's family told CBC News that one of their children, a boy, was fine. However, they would not confirm the status of the girl.
> Whyte Ridge Baptist Church, a Winnipeg church that the family used to attend, held a vigil to honour Ana's life on Friday evening.
> Terry Janke, the church's senior pastor, told CBC News that Greene confirmed Ana's death to a congregation member.
> "Through these times it rocks anybody's world, losing a child, and so we're holding ourselves up in grief but holding them up that their faith be unshakable," Janke said.
> Greene is a U.S. jazz musician who was a faculty member at the University of Manitoba's school of music for three years before his family moved to Newtown.
> Winnipeg musician Steve Kirby, who is close friends with Greene's family, described the children as "really bright" and talented.
> "Really talented, beautiful children. Picture-book children, and obedient and spiritual — you know, the kind of kids you want moving in next door," he said.
> Janke said many of the children at the Whyte Ridge church quickly became friends with Isaiah and Ana, and some continued their friendships as penpals after the family moved to Newtown.
> "Ana was just a sweet little girl," he said. "I mean, she just had a big smile on her face."


----------



## FeXL

Joker Eh said:


> I didn't even try that hard to look. You could have checked FexL instead with that common comment insinuate that someone is making something up.


Blah, blah, blah.

MacDoc's typical MO is to dump a great, steaming load in the middle of a thread, cobbled together from outhouse walls and other notable sources and lay it down as some sort of gospel. I was simply looking for clarification. 

Was my tone accusatory? Probably. After many years on these boards, I'm quite familiar with his methodology, which rarely holds up under scrutiny.

I spent over half an hour looking for info, thankyouverymuch. Interesting thing is, I wasn't looking for newspaper articles, I was searching CDC, US statistics, etc. I couldn't find anything newer than several years old.

MacDoc's post specifically stated "last year". I was looking for data from 2011, of which I could find none. I could also find no statement anywhere about first world countries.

Before you go flying off the handle, perhaps you could seek a bit of clarification yourself.

Apologies to the OP for the diversion.


----------



## macintosh doctor

THIS THREAD IS ALL OVER THE MAP OF TOPICS 

I hang my head in my hands and shake... I guess there will always be individuals who turn a tragedy into a politic forum, wrong place and time..

If you want to run for office or be a Cliff Clayven from cheers and of useless info- start a new thread..


----------



## MacDoc

Same argument the NRA makes....well done. :clap:

Has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with working to prevent some future killings by getting sensible laws passed restricting gun ownership.....*as Australia has done successfully *after a similar incident. If it makes you uncomfortable tough...

A number of states have also done so successfully and reduced the carnage by enacting stricter controls. One can hope this time it engages a stronger national response in the US to 5,000 kids dying from firearms annually.


----------



## imnothng

macintosh doctor said:


> THIS THREAD IS ALL OVER THE MAP OF TOPICS
> 
> I hang my head in my hands and shake... I guess there will always be individuals who turn a tragedy into a politic forum, wrong place and time..
> 
> If you want to run for office or be a Cliff Clayven from cheers and of useless info- start a new thread..


Well what should we stick to then? A bunch of boohoo's and RIP's? What does that do?


----------



## macintosh doctor

imnothng said:


> Well what should we stick to then? A bunch of boohoo's and RIP's? What does that do?


Well then - start a new thread and beat the gun control to death there. 
Would be better.


----------



## Macfury

imnothng said:


> Well what should we stick to then? A bunch of boohoo's and RIP's? What does that do?


Agreed. There are issues that can be discussed around a tragedy.


----------



## FeXL

MacDoc said:


> A number of states have also done so successfully and reduced the carnage by enacting stricter controls.


Yup. Detroit and DC would be shining examples of this "success"...


----------



## SINC

So, what are average people who live in Newtown talking about online?

This might help give you some insight:



> I was raised in newtown from aged 8 until my graduation from N.H.S. I walked the hallways of Sandy Hook Elementary school and have nothing but positive memories of the place. I remember Mrs. Chard in the library, always smiling and never having a bad thing to say about us. I remember when, in 4th grade, the teachers decided to let us have a bit of fun during lunch and they brought in a karaoke machine for anyone to use. I remember seeing the same sign you've seen on tv every morning before I entered a school full of love, happiness and innocence. Like you, I always considered my hometown a bit special, a bit above the violence and carelessness of the world; a safe haven for my development into the young man I am today.
> 
> I was torn apart, as was the rest of the world, when I awoke Friday morning to the news. My best friends mother was freaking out, I knew I had to be with them, and I stayed with them all day.Bit by bit our neighbors and friends chimed in, letting us know their children were safe. Some stayed quiet, and we knew why.
> 
> We all gathered, at Saint Rose to mourn the death of children so young, and the teachers who saved them. If you can imagine what it's like mourning the death of the little neighbor you used to babysit, or the kids you watched hop up on the bus every morning, you can understand that it's a solitary moment. As a community we gathered, forgoing the feuds (and trust me, we're human, we aren't perfect to one another at all times in this town, just like in yours) all the bitterness and anger, and we came together in love.
> You can comprehend my anger at hearing cameras go off as I watched my best friends father break down. You can relate you wanting some alone time to be able to talk about how to get over this as a community without the intrusion of public opinion, reporters, and all the like. To the reporters hoping to get a Pulitzer prize for their efforts yesterday I ask: Is your soul worth it?
> 
> Are you happy, 24 hours news media? You've got what you wanted, right? You've got something to talk about for days, and every December 14th you can remind us of a day that will haunt Newtown until the earth shatters into the emptiness of space (although for us that happened yesterday). Now you can have 25 pieces of fodder to discuss mental illness, gun control, safety regulations, and what ever else you need. You have a list of 20 children and 5 heroes and you can call up every one of their names, hardcore atheists and Christians, when trying to convert people. Wonderful!
> 
> Come on, let's keep talking about Adam, a kid who I went to school with. Let's give more psychopaths a folk hero to rally to when this happens again in another state. Good job media, people who can't shut down their opinions for 5 f***ing seconds, and camera man looking for prizes. Don't patronize us, you don't care about the deaths, you just want ratings. And everyone will keep watching. As if you deserve to toss out your opinions.
> 
> I'm glad we can become another Columbine, (to you residents there, I never understood until now, and we are in a morbid club, inexplicably intertwined by violence) another cold useless fact. You can do all of this and be happy, because you wanted it.
> 
> For the record, no one in Newtown was talking about gun control laws, mental health issues, or anything. We were just holding each other, trying to make sense of the senseless. We are ok with you grieving with us, but put down the camera and help us try to piece back together our lives. We need that more than media coverage of this sad day in our history. Thanks for reading.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

30 years after John Lennon was murdered by gun, USA is status quo. 

Imagine!


----------



## Macfury

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> 30 years after John Lennon was murdered by gun, USA is status quo.
> 
> Imagine!


You can't compare a single killing to a mass murder. The comparison is inept.

The greatest school tragedy in American history occurred in 1927 and involved no guns--although they were more widely available then:

Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> The Bath School disaster is the name given to three bombings in Bath Township, Michigan, on May 18, 1927, which killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, four other adults and the bomber himself; at least 58 people were injured.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Macfury said:


> You can't compare a single killing to a mass murder. The comparison is inept.
> 
> The greatest school tragedy in American history occurred in 1927 and involved no guns--although they were more widely available then:
> 
> Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Sorry but the author of Imagine was killed by a gun. Completely senseless. If the moron had killed 10 or 30 people at the time the USA would still be status quo. 30 years later I keep hoping for citizen pressure on politicians to introduce stricter controls. But it ain't going to happen. 

Please listen to Imagine when you have a moment and share with others.


----------



## Macfury

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Please listen to Imagine when you have a moment and share with others.


Never liked that song.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Macfury said:


> Never liked that song.


Your loss.


----------



## Macfury

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Sorry but the author of Imagine was killed by a gun. Completely senseless. If the moron had killed 10 or 30 people at the time the USA would still be status quo. 30 years later I keep hoping for citizen pressure on politicians to introduce stricter controls. But it ain't going to happen.


You thought the death of John Lennon would be the touchpoint for some sort of legislative shift?



skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Please listen to Imagine when you have a moment and share with others.


Never liked that song.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Macfury said:


> You thought the death of John Lennon would be the touchpoint for some sort of legislative shift?
> 
> 
> 
> Never liked that song.


I did. And I'm not the only one.


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> You can't compare a single killing to a mass murder. The comparison is inept.
> 
> The greatest school tragedy in American history occurred in 1927 and involved no guns--although they were more widely available then:
> 
> Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So what you're saying is, we should be controlling guns as strictly as we do bombs. Right?


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> So what you're saying is, we should be controlling guns as strictly as we do bombs. Right?


What are our current bomb control laws like"


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> What are our current bomb control laws like"


According to wiki, the Bath School disaster was done using pyrotol and dynamite.

Pyrotol was a substance made from military surplus material, and its production dwindled after the disaster, though it would have likely dwindled anyway. 

The dynamite was purchased from a sporting goods store. As best as I can tell, to purchase dynamite these days, you require a permit and a license, though requirements vary by location.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> According to wiki, the Bath School disaster was done using pyrotol and dynamite.
> 
> Pyrotol was a substance made from military surplus material, and its production dwindled after the disaster, though it would have likely dwindled anyway.
> 
> The dynamite was purchased from a sporting goods store. As best as I can tell, to purchase dynamite these days, you require a permit and a license, though requirements vary by location.


Since this thread is derailed anyway...

Who needs dynamite when you can get diesel fuel and fertilizer.

Explosives in Canada, including ammunition, is controlled by the MNR. (Min. of Natural Resources)


----------



## kps

More interesting commentary...





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






And speaking of the NRA, McDuckie, it was pure idiocy of sport writer Jason Whitlock when he said that the NRA is todays KKK when discussing the murder suicide of NFL's Jovan Belcher and his girlfriend.

View the response because it also offers a good look at other issues being discussed.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## MacDoc

> *If there was anything as loud as the gunfire that erupted on a sunny morning in Connecticut Friday, it was the roar of disapproval — and disbelief — that issued after White House spokesman Jay Carney told a news briefing that “today is not the day” to discuss U.S. gun control.*
> 
> Social media lit up with sparks of anger and rage, and the world was left wondering: What will it take for America to tackle its devastating gun problem? If not the slaughter of 28 people, including at least 20 children, then what?
> 
> It was the seventh mass shooting of the year and the second deadliest in U.S. history, behind only the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre in which 33 died.
> 
> It is America’s haunting, recurring nightmare.
> 
> Last year alone, more than 30,000 Americans died from gunfire.
> 
> The magnitude of the tragedy moved President Barack Obama to tears as he told the nation, “our hearts are broken today.”
> 
> “They had their entire lives ahead of them,” the president said of the children who died, “birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own.”
> 
> He said the time had arrived for America to take “meaningful action.” But he did not say what form that action might take.
> 
> Even in the face of a devastating national tragedy, it seems a recently re-elected president of the United States must tread carefully on an issue so embedded in American life — and the Second Amendment guarantee that grants Americans the right to bear arms.
> 
> America’s gun lobby, led by the National Rifle Association, declined comment following the horror, saying it would make no statement, “until the facts are thoroughly known.”
> 
> But what facts did emerge Friday were that 20-year-old Adam Lanza brought three weapons, two handguns — a Glock and a Sig Sauer — as well as a .223-calibre semi-automatic rifle, all of which were recovered. The weapons require a permit by law, but it is not known whether he had one.
> 
> Law enforcement officials told NBC News the guns were registered in the name of his mother, Nancy Lanza, a school teacher. Lanza shot her to death before taking his own life.
> 
> Reports said Lanza was dressed in black and wore a bulletproof vest.
> 
> In the Aurora, Colo., massacre, gunman James Holmes used the popular AR-15 to kill 12 and wound 58 in just 120 seconds at a packed screening of a Batman movie in July. He had also donned a bulletproof vest.
> 
> Lanza’s massacre was more than twice as deadly, apparently confined to two classrooms. It is not yet known how much ammunition he used or how long the gunfire lasted.
> 
> But it provoked pity and sorrow for the families of the slain, and demands for action.
> 
> *New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was perhaps the most eloquent in framing the frustration of many Americans.
> 
> The president talking about “meaningful action” did not go far enough, the mayor said.
> 
> “The country needs him to send a bill to Congress,” he said.*
> 
> “With all the carnage from gun violence in our country, it’s still almost impossible to believe that a mass shooting in a kindergarten class could happen,” he observed. “Not even kindergarteners learning their ABCs are safe.
> 
> _“We heard after Columbine that it was ‘too soon’ to talk about gun laws.
> We heard it after Virginia Tech.
> After Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek.
> And now we are hearing it again.”_


go make your case to Mayor Bloomberg and the thousands of others that declare "it's not too soon....it needs to be now!! ".....

Connecticut school shooting: As America mourns, action demanded on gun control - thestar.com


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> What are our current bomb control laws like"


You can't buy them in sporting goods stores, and you sure aren't allowed to keep them in your house.

It is possible to buy materials that could potentially be used to MAKE a bomb, if you have that much forethought and actually know how to do it. Sounds exactly like the type of firearm controls we need -- so strict that only people so determined that they have the knowledge and resources to build them from scratch could possibly follow through.


----------



## eMacMan

heavyall said:


> You can't buy them in sporting goods stores, and you sure aren't allowed to keep them in your house.
> 
> It is possible to buy materials that could potentially be used to MAKE a bomb, if you have that much forethought and actually know how to do it. Sounds exactly like the type of firearm controls we need -- so strict that only people so determined that they have the knowledge and resources to build them from scratch could possibly follow through.



Hmmm CIA and a couple of other 'Good Guys' would top that list.


----------



## kps

Three mass stabbings of children in a month. What the hell is going on in China?

Three mass stabbings of children in a month. What the hell is going on in China? – Telegraph Blogs

How about Morgan Freeman's take? Media responsible for these lunatics.

Surprising message from Morgan Freeman. He blames the media for CT shooting. | Peace . Gold . Liberty


----------



## kps

MacDoc said:


> go make your case to Mayor Bloomberg and the thousands of others that declare "it's not too soon....it needs to be now!! ".....
> 
> Connecticut school shooting: As America mourns, action demanded on gun control - thestar.com


Ha,ha,ha, Bloomberg is a raving anti and has been for years...ask him how his gun ban is working our in New York City. Ask Obama how the tough gun laws and bans have worked out in Chicago. How about all the bans and restrictions in California sure stopped gun violence in LA, Oakland and Stockton.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> Ha,ha,ha, Bloomberg is a raving anti and has been for years...ask him how his gun ban is working our in New York City. Ask Obama how the tough gun laws and bans have worked out in Chicago. How about all the bans and restrictions in California sure stopped gun violence in LA, Oakland and Stockton.


Obama and Bloomberg are typical statists who believe in top-heavy government. They will trot this out during every tragedy to see if it sticks.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


>


Potential tyrants willing to attempt takeover of a well-armed populace: 0.


----------



## kps

Macfury said:


> Potential tyrants willing to attempt takeover of a well-armed populace: 0.






> "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." is a quote by Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II. Of course it was originally stated in Japanese, this is the English translation.


There are detractors of the quote, but considering Yamamoto studied in the US, it's possible. It was certainly true then and it's certainly true now.


----------



## margarok

I was in college in a journalism class (here in Oklahoma City area) when it was announced that the Murrah Building had been bombed. I was home preparing to go to class when I watched the WACO debacle unfold and played hooky. I had just dropped my 8 year-old son at school and came home in time to see the planes fly into the WTC. All three of those events were horrifying to watch and mindnumbing, but at least those had political overtones that we all know and understand make people commit acts of senseless violence.

Yesterday, I was busy wrapping and mailing Christmas gifts and did not turn on the news or radio until I'd mailed all the packages. I arrived home to discover the horror of this and immediately the last two lines of this poem learned some 30 odd years ago in a high school literature class began to echo in my mind.

*The Second Coming by William Butler Yeats*

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.

The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
_And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?_


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Macfury said:


> Potential tyrants willing to attempt takeover of a well-armed populace: 0.


Somalia - lots of tyrants - lots of guns on all sides. The innocent pay each and every day. Not a good life.


----------



## Dr.G.

margarok said:


> I was in college in a journalism class (here in Oklahoma City area) when it was announced that the Murrah Building had been bombed. I was home preparing to go to class when I watched the WACO debacle unfold and played hooky. I had just dropped my 8 year-old son at school and came home in time to see the planes fly into the WTC. All three of those events were horrifying to watch and mindnumbing, but at least those had political overtones that we all know and understand make people commit acts of senseless violence.
> 
> Yesterday, I was busy wrapping and mailing Christmas gifts and did not turn on the news or radio until I'd mailed all the packages. I arrived home to discover the horror of this and immediately the last two lines of this poem learned some 30 odd years ago in a high school literature class began to echo in my mind.
> 
> *The Second Coming by William Butler Yeats*
> 
> Turning and turning in the widening gyre
> The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
> Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
> Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
> The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
> The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
> The best lack all conviction, while the worst
> Are full of passionate intensity.
> 
> Surely some revelation is at hand;
> Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
> The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
> When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
> Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
> A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
> A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
> Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
> Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
> 
> The darkness drops again; but now I know
> That twenty centuries of stony sleep
> Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
> _And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
> Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?_
> 
> View attachment 25924


That Yeats poem is appropriate in this situation, margarok. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> So, what are average people who live in Newtown talking about online?
> 
> This might help give you some insight:


This is a moving testimony, Don. Sounds very much like what Morgan Freeman said as well.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Three mass stabbings of children in a month. What the hell is going on in China?
> 
> Three mass stabbings of children in a month. What the hell is going on in China? &#150; Telegraph Blogs
> 
> How about Morgan Freeman's take? Media responsible for these lunatics.
> 
> Surprising message from Morgan Freeman. He blames the media for CT shooting. | Peace . Gold . Liberty


On the same day as the Newtown shootings, 22 children were stabbed in China by Ana with a knife. The big difference is that those children lived. Guns may not kill people, but they sure make it a lot easier for a person with an urge to hurt others.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> On the same day as the Newtown shootings, 22 children were stabbed in China by Ana with a knife. The big difference is that those children lived. Guns may not kill people, but they sure make it a lot easier for a person with an urge to hurt others.


I know the difference, just pointing out that the US is not alone in this kind of antisocial personality disorder leading to psychopathy. Guns or no guns. There are plenty of these kind of incidents from Tim Kretschmer in Germany, to Thomas Hamilton in Scottland, to incidents in Finland, to the mass murder in Norway by Breivik and other mass stabbings where the victims were not as lucky.

This probably isn't anything new and has been around for centuries with the one exception and that being that there was no opportunity for infamy. That has changed with the media feeding frenzy over such incidents and consequently we have more copycat killings. Sinc's earlier post is spot on.


----------



## MacDoc

and armed to the teeth - there is no valid excuse whatsoever - note the multiple guns 62% and 68% with handguns.










what's 5,000 kids killed a year by firearms....collateral damage I guess


----------



## margarok

Harming children to feel powerful doesn't require a gun.

Child Sex Slave Trade - YouTube


----------



## CubaMark

A rather scary, sad read from a mother of a child who could have been (or may become) Adam Lanza:

*"I Am Adam Lanza's Mother" - Let's Talk About Mental Illness*


----------



## eMacMan

Something that will no doubt get lost or suppressed is that the shooter was being given SSRI style meds.

These have rather unique side effects, one of which is amplifying the mental health problems they attempt to treat. A bonus is that stopping the meds can also do the same thing.


----------



## kps

> *The key facts are:*
> 
> • The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
> • *But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people*
> • Puerto Rico tops the world's table for firearms murders as a percentage of all homicides - 94.8%. It's followed by Sierra Leone in Africa and Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean


Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | guardian.co.uk


----------



## margarok

An interesting article indeed. When my nephew demonstrated anti-social behavior at age 6, he was put on some form of psychotropic medicine that calmed him down most of the time. After a few outbursts landing him in juvenile hall for varying lengths of stays, he was removed from the home where two small girls (sisters) lived. At age 17, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for a violent rape of a twelve year old girl.

I'm not bragging here. I don't know what caused it or how it could have come out otherwise. Oh, wait a minute... yes I do. But it requires some real Faith and some real adherence to conditioning a child's behavior from birth.

My brother is a jerk of a father. When he could have made a difference, he didn't even try.


----------



## kps

CubaMark said:


> A rather scary, sad read from a mother of a child who could have been (or may become) Adam Lanza:


Scary read is right...lot of issues with big pharma and the medical community regarding these psychotic drugs, etc.


----------



## MacDoc

Now Israeli's of all peoples have a legit need - lets see how it goes there....



> Gun owners in Israel are limited to owning one pistol, and must undergo extensive mental and physical tests before they can receive a weapon, and gun owners are limited to 50 rounds of ammunition per year.
> 
> Not all Israelis, however, may own guns. In order to own a pistol, an Israeli must for two years have been either a captain in the army or a former lieutenant colonel. Israelis with an equivalent rank in other security organizations may also own a pistol.


Despite militarized society, Israel has strict gun laws | JTA - Jewish & Israel News

Let's see what happened in Britain



> After a couple of horrible mass shootings in Britain, handguns and automatic weapons have been effectively banned. It is possible to own shotguns, and rifles if you can demonstrate to the police that you have a good reason to own one, such as target shooting at a gun club, or deer stalking, say. The firearms-ownership rules are onerous, involving hours of paperwork. You must provide a referee who has to answer nosy questions about the applicant's mental state, home life (including family or domestic tensions) and their attitude towards guns. In addition to criminal-record checks, the police talk to applicants’ family doctors and ask about any histories of alcohol or drug abuse or personality disorders.
> 
> Vitally, it is also very hard to get hold of ammunition. Just before leaving Britain in the summer, I had lunch with a member of parliament whose constituency is plagued with gang violence and drug gangs. She told me of a shooting, and how it had not led to a death, *because the gang had had to make its own bullets*, which did not work well, and how this was very common, according to her local police commander. Even hardened criminals willing to pay for a handgun in Britain are often getting only an illegally modified starter’s pistol turned into a single-shot weapon.
> 
> And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. *In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America’s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008*.


Even the NRA knows enough to shut up just now....maybe the gun lovers here should take a hint.


----------



## kps

MacDoc said:


> Even the NRA knows enough to shut up just now....maybe the gun lovers here should take a hint.


Perhaps someone with no practical knowledge of firearms and suffers from Hoplophobia should take the same hint.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> Perhaps someone with no practical knowledge of firearms and suffers from Hoplophobia should take the same hint.


MacDoc is probably the most frightened man I've ever encountered online.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> I know the difference, just pointing out that the US is not alone in this kind of antisocial personality disorder leading to psychopathy. Guns or no guns. There are plenty of these kind of incidents from Tim Kretschmer in Germany, to Thomas Hamilton in Scottland, to incidents in Finland, to the mass murder in Norway by Breivik and other mass stabbings where the victims were not as lucky.


True, and I don't believe that gun controls stop violent behaviour from occurring. 

But at the same time, I do think a reduction in the availability of guns or at least guns that are capable of firing a lot of bullets fairly quickly is a good idea as a harm reduction strategy.


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> True, and I don't believe that gun controls stop violent behaviour from occurring.


MacDoc conveniently ends his "study" of British gun deaths in 2009 to avoid the 2010 Cumbria massacre:

Cumbria shootings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.



Sonal said:


> But at the same time, I do think a reduction in the availability of guns or at least guns that are capable of firing a lot of bullets fairly quickly is a good idea as a harm reduction strategy.


I would also agree that some weapons require stricter controls.


----------



## FeXL

MacDoc said:


> Now Israeli's of all peoples have a legit need - lets see how it goes there....


Perhaps a bit more Israeli trivia is appropriate at this time.

Children lining up outside an Israeli elementary school...


----------



## FeXL

"What America can learn from Switzerland is that the best way to reduce gun misuse is to promote responsible gun ownership."



> In the right to bear arms debate, pro-gun Americans point to Switzerland, where *almost every adult male is legally required to possess a gun*. One of the few nations with a higher per capita rate of gun ownership than the United States, *Switzerland has virtually no gun crime.*





> Swiss guns...are not even a trivial crime problem domestically. Despite all the guns, the murder rate is a small fraction of the American rate, and is less than the rate in Canada or England, which strictly control guns, or in Japan, which virtually prohibits them. *The gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.*





> *Suicides have little to do with gun availability.* Japan has no guns, while Switzerland is deluged with every gun in the book, and both nations have the same suicide rate.





> What have we learned from Switzerland?' *Guns in themselves are not a cause of gun crime*; if they were, everyone in Switzerland would long ago have been shot in a domestic quarrel.





> *Cultural conditions, not gun laws, are the most important factors in a nation's crime rate.* Young adults in Washington, D.C., are subject to strict gun control, but no social control, and they commit a staggering amount of armed crime. Young adults in Zurich are subject to minimal gun control, but strict social control, and they commit almost no crime.





> *What America can learn from Switzerland is that the best way to reduce gun misuse is to promote responsible gun ownership.*


All bold mine. 

There's much more, just go read it.


----------



## FeXL

Chicago Shootings Spike 49% In November Despite Strict Gun Laws



> Despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel plans on restricting gun ownership further by banning individuals with a violent misdemeanor conviction from getting a gun permit for five years. The mayor also hopes to ban convicted felons from ever owning a gun.


<snort>

I wonder just how many of those 192 shooters in November actually had permits for their weapons? Any bets? I'll give long odds on "any".

Is anybody really so stupid as to believe that banning felons from gun ownership will, in any way, shape, or form, hinder them from obtaining another forearm? 

Really?


----------



## CubaMark

Since it's pretty obvious that gun control in the USA is a non-starter, why not take this approach: let the gun nuts have their toys, but do something in an attempt to ameliorate the problem. You know, like actually providing decent mental health care. The curative, not preventative, approach to medicine in the USA is a big part of the problem here.... especially when, with deaths by shooting, there is no cure for death.


----------



## kps

CubaMark said:


> Since it's pretty obvious that gun control in the USA is a non-starter, why not take this approach: let the gun nuts have their toys, but do something in an attempt to ameliorate the problem. You know, like actually providing decent mental health care. The curative, not preventative, approach to medicine in the USA is a big part of the problem here.... especially when, with deaths by shooting, there is no cure for death.


I believe some of us are trying to get that across. I know I have. 

You know laws regulating civilian gun ownership and gun control doesn't work where you currently reside, now does it. Especially with US government sponsored gun running.


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> Perhaps a bit more Israeli trivia is appropriate at this time.
> 
> Children lining up outside an Israeli elementary school...


I like the Israeli beaches better...funny I don't see any concern over the scary black rifle.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> True, and I don't believe that gun controls stop violent behaviour from occurring.
> 
> But at the same time, I do think a reduction in the availability of guns or at least guns that are capable of firing a lot of bullets fairly quickly is a good idea as a harm reduction strategy.


Fair enough, I can accept that reasoning, but I don't believe it would stop a determined and dented individual. If crazed psychopath is determined enough he could set the school on fire or plant pipe bombs all over the place causing more horror than a 9mm handgun.

The stats thrown around are 12,000 gun deaths in the US, but the FBI's own stats also indicate 990,000 deaths prevented due to firearms. Huge difference. I guess in a firearms saturated country like the US, more guns... works.


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> Something that will no doubt get lost or suppressed is that the shooter was being given SSRI style meds.
> 
> These have rather unique side effects, one of which is amplifying the mental health problems they attempt to treat. A bonus is that stopping the meds can also do the same thing.


Came across this comprehensive article discussing the exact same issue. Someone's at least making the connections.

Psychiatric drugs and violence - federal investigation long overdue « CCHR International


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Fair enough, I can accept that reasoning, but I don't believe it would stop a determined and dented individual. If crazed psychopath is determined enough he could set the school on fire or plant pipe bombs all over the place causing more horror than a 9mm handgun.


True, but the crazed psychopath is not the perpetrator of most gun-related death and injury... even if he gets the most media time.

Still... why make it easy? Some may not be determined enough, some may not be intelligent enough, and some may make enough errors along the way to get caught. At the very least, it's buying time.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> True, but the crazed psychopath is not the perpetrator of most gun-related death and injury... even if he gets the most media time.
> 
> Still... why make it easy? Some may not be determined enough, some may not be intelligent enough, and some may make enough errors along the way to get caught. At the very least, it's buying time.


Okay, but this thread started life discussing a crazed maniac so that't the context in which I was replying. Anyway, I hear what you're saying, but that country is so saturated with firearms that to establish any sort of control would be very difficult and would not change many of the statistics even if they did get some controls in place. Firearms are the state's purview and as such will continue to vary greatly from state to state and the criminal element and their use of firearms would not change in the slightest.


----------



## CubaMark

*Mother of Sandy Hook school gunman Adam Lanza was a "prepper" survivalist preparing for economic and social collapse*



> The mother of Adam Lanza, the gunman who killed 20 children and six adults in one of America’s worst ever school massacres, was a “survivalist” preparing for economic and social collapse, it has emerged.
> 
> According to reports, Nancy Lanza was a so-called 'prepper', a part of the survivalist movement which urges individuals to prepare for the breakdown of society by training with weapons and hoarding food and other supplies.





> Mrs Lanza is thought to have trained her sons, Adam and Ryan to shoot, even taking them to local ranges.





> Friends and family have portrayed Mrs Lanza as a paranoid ‘survivalist’ who believed the world was on the brink of violent collapse.
> 
> Despite initial reports that she was a kindergarten teacher at the school her son attacked, she had no connection with it and was described by a neighbour as ‘a stay-at-home mom’.


(IndependentUK)


----------



## CubaMark

And speaking of the terrible lack of mental health care in America...

Comic (_Victoria Jackson, Tea Partier Extraordinaire_) Links Adam Lanza to Women Who Have Abortions


----------



## margarok

Hmmmm..... I saw Victoria Jackson at a couple of our tea party rallies. I think she has a right to her opinion about abortion. And she really isn't the only person to use the circumstances of this horrible tragedy to promote and support her own opinion. Proponents for gun control do it, opponents of gun control do it, even I have done it. She is anti-abortion and anti-killing children... I think she uses an extreme form of satire that sometimes misses the mark, but at least she is willing to stand on her convictions. 

So am I.


----------



## Macfury

margarok said:


> Hmmmm..... I saw Victoria Jackson at a couple of our tea party rallies. I think she has a right to her opinion about abortion. And she really isn't the only person to use the circumstances of this horrible tragedy to promote and support her own opinion. Proponents for gun control do it, opponents of gun control do it, even I have done it. She is anti-abortion and anti-killing children... I think she uses an extreme form of satire that sometimes misses the mark, but at least she is willing to stand on her convictions.
> 
> So am I.


I agree with Jackson's point. There's too much of a disconnect between deaths caused by guns and a million caused by surgical suction hoses. The first evokes horror and the second evokes: "Don't talk about it."


----------



## Dr.G.

Listening to the array of moving prayers and statements by the various religious leaders at yesterday's service in Newtown, I told my wife that I was thinking of Lincoln's Gettysburg address, specifically that part where he says ""The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to (their) great unfinished work." In their honor, he concluded, "we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain ...."

She wanted to know the process as to how the 2nd amendment might be changed, and was astounded at the complexity of the process. I told her that it would easier for Pres. Obama and Congress to try and restrict the ammunition that is used in the various assortment of guns that are used in these acts of senseless violence against innocent men, woment and children. Not sure if he will take on this cause, but as he said in his first campaign for the presidency, "Hope". We shall see.

Paix, mes amis.


----------



## FeXL

Further on that shining beacon of gun control, Australia...

Australian Gun Ban Led To Massive Crime Increase

Trend in sexual assault



> Reported sexual assaults have increased by 51 percent since 1995, at an average of four percent each year.


Nice. Just the kind of statistic you'd like to foist on your female partner, your mother, your daughters...


----------



## FeXL

Europe Has Same Rate of Multiple Victim Shootings as the United States



> Europe has a lot of multiple victim shootings. If you look at a per capita rate, *the rate of multiple-victim public shootings in Europe and the United States over the last 10 years have been fairly similar to each other*. A couple of years ago you had a couple of big shootings in Finland. About two-and-a-half years ago you had a big shooting in the U.K., 12 people were killed.
> 
> You had Norway last year [where 77 died]. Two years ago, you had the shooting in Austria at a Sikh Temple. There have been several multiple-victim public shootings in France over the last couple of years. Over the last decade, you’ve had a couple of big school shootings in Germany. _Germany in terms of modern incidents has two of the four worst public-school shootings, and they have very strict gun-control laws._ *The one common feature of all of those shootings in Europe is that they all take place in gun-free zones,* in places where guns are supposed to be banned.


All emphasis mine.

Seems like big, bad, America has company in big, bad, Europe...


----------



## FeXL

The author addresses 6 gun control myths.

Factual weaponry for the stalwart foot soldiers fighting on behalf of the 2nd Amendment in the cause of Common Sense

One snippet:



> Collating gun ownership rates with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) homicide data underscores the above conclusions:
> 
> * States with the lowest firearms ownership average the highest firearm and non-firearm homicide rates.
> * As firearms ownership rates increase, homicide rates generally decrease.
> * States with the highest gun ownership have the lowest firearms homicide rates.


----------



## kps

Dr.G. said:


> She wanted to know the process as to how the 2nd amendment might be changed, and was astounded at the complexity of the process. I told her that it would easier for Pres. Obama and Congress to try and restrict the ammunition that is used in the various assortment of guns that are used in these acts of senseless violence against innocent men, woment and children. Not sure if he will take on this cause, but as he said in his first campaign for the presidency, "Hope". We shall see.
> 
> Paix, mes amis.


Hmmm, that's like saying Americans need to restrict gasoline for certain GM models because they're involved in a disproportionate number of vehicular deaths.

Dehumanizing this incident by putting so much blame on an inanimate object is denial of the underlying issues which drove this deranged and clearly mentally ill individual to perpetrate this tragedy.

Could the Americans benefit from stricter controls? Probably, but it needs to be done right and bans and restrictions do not work. Bans on alcohol and drugs have proven that.


----------



## Rps

Dr. G, I think any talk of gun control in the U.S. is useless. It has become apart of their culture and all culture changes take generations. The U.S. is a nation that lives in fear.....probably fear of itself. The only way for the situation of change is that the population has to become consensual on the restricted ownership and use of guns..... all the naval gazing will do nothing unless the general population truly believes it doesn't need to arm itself.


----------



## Sonal

Discussions I'm having about this issue a more US-dominated board (complete with very strong pro-gun rights advocates) are showing that more and more people seem to think it's reasonable to have some limits on types of weapons or ammunition available--that is, more limits than what is currently available.

There probably will not be agreement as to what those limits should be, but if there is a trend towards some further limits, that at least creates some common ground. A good thing, IMO.


----------



## Rps

Agreed. This a small town has now become a date. But there is a flow to these things: shock, then media overload, sorrow and some flags at half mast, then hours on hours of "news about nothing", then the righteous indignation, the change the law crowd, followed by the "if everyone had guns they would have shot the shooter", then...................... it floats off into distance with nothing be actually done.........until it happens again, usually within a month or two.


----------



## Sonal

Signs of change?
Connecticut school shooting: Pro-gun lawmaker calls on NRA to discuss gun law changes - thestar.com


----------



## MacGuiver

Macfury said:


> I agree with Jackson's point. There's too much of a disconnect between deaths caused by guns and a million caused by surgical suction hoses. The first evokes horror and the second evokes: "Don't talk about it."


Agreed.


----------



## John Clay

Mass shootings like this are only symptoms of a larger issue.

Restricting firearms just treats the symptom - it doesn't go after the root cause(s). I'd oppose any further restrictions on firearms, especially here. You already have to jump through a ton of hoops to get one. Adding any more is just unfair to the thousands of responsible firearms owners, who already make safety the #1 priority.

It's the politically easy solution to the much larger issue of unobtainable mental health care.


----------



## Macfury

John Clay said:


> Mass shootings like this are only symptoms of a larger issue.
> 
> Restricting firearms just treats the symptom - it doesn't go after the root cause(s). I'd oppose any further restrictions on firearms, especially here. You already have to jump through a ton of hoops to get one. Adding any more is just unfair to the thousands of responsible firearms owners, who already make safety the #1 priority.
> 
> It's the politically easy solution to the much larger issue of unobtainable mental health care.


The problem is cultural and has almost nothing to do with weapons. People would be slavering to have legislators sign a gun ban bill, but won't lift a finger to stop junior from spending 6 hours a night playing a sniper killer on his X-Box.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Signs of change?
> Connecticut school shooting: Pro-gun lawmaker calls on NRA to discuss gun law changes - thestar.com


Good ol' Star, they have to throw in their bias and ignorance.

What the hell does this mean?



> ... loosening restrictions on some *high-powered combat weapons* originally intended for military use.


What's their definition of high-powered? Pure fear mongering. Any hunting rifle is much more powerful than the .223 Lanza used. The .223 is a medium sized cartridge designed to drop a 150 lbs man, while a .300 Winchester Short Mag is deigned to drop a 1200 lbs moose, so which would you consider "high-powered"?

Combat weapon? More fear mongering, semi-auto rifle is no different than any other semi-auto rifle, In order for it to be a combat (assault) rifle it has to be capable of select fire: semi, burst and full auto.

The majority of these firearms are not "assault weapons". Fully automatic firearms are, even in the US, tightly controlled. You need s federal license and a valid reason to have them.

They're not banning "assault rifles" just semi-auto rifles for nothing less than pure optics.

ABC's take on this:
Pro-Gun Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin Suggests New Gun Laws - ABC News

EDIT: figure I'd add the video.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## margarok

Rps said:


> Agreed. This a small town has now become a date. But there is a flow to these things: shock, then media overload, sorrow and some flags at half mast, then hours on hours of "news about nothing", then the righteous indignation, the change the law crowd, followed by the "if everyone had guns they would have shot the shooter", then...................... it floats off into distance with nothing be actually done.........until it happens again, usually within a month or two.


Is a horrid fact. I am, quite astoundingly, speechless in the aftermath of this horror.


----------



## Dr.G.

kps said:


> Hmmm, that's like saying Americans need to restrict gasoline for certain GM models because they're involved in a disproportionate number of vehicular deaths.
> 
> Dehumanizing this incident by putting so much blame on an inanimate object is denial of the underlying issues which drove this deranged and clearly mentally ill individual to perpetrate this tragedy.
> 
> Could the Americans benefit from stricter controls? Probably, but it needs to be done right and bans and restrictions do not work. Bans on alcohol and drugs have proven that.





Rps said:


> Dr. G, I think any talk of gun control in the U.S. is useless. It has become apart of their culture and all culture changes take generations. The U.S. is a nation that lives in fear.....probably fear of itself. The only way for the situation of change is that the population has to become consensual on the restricted ownership and use of guns..... all the naval gazing will do nothing unless the general population truly believes it doesn't need to arm itself.





Sonal said:


> Discussions I'm having about this issue a more US-dominated board (complete with very strong pro-gun rights advocates) are showing that more and more people seem to think it's reasonable to have some limits on types of weapons or ammunition available--that is, more limits than what is currently available.
> 
> There probably will not be agreement as to what those limits should be, but if there is a trend towards some further limits, that at least creates some common ground. A good thing, IMO.


I agree. Personally, I feel that it should be more difficult to buy certain types of guns (e.g., assault rifles), to buy the ammunition for any sort of gun, to get this gun registered and ME registered and to help try to end some of the root causes of crime. I agree that a total ban is pointless, just like Prohibition. However, I would support limits on obtaining this sort of weapon. We shall see.

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

FeXL said:


> Europe Has Same Rate of Multiple Victim Shootings as the United States
> 
> 
> 
> All emphasis mine.
> 
> Seems like big, bad, America has company in big, bad, Europe...


Why is it I feel safe in the streets of most European cities? Not the case in many US cities.


----------



## Macfury

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Why is it I feel safe in the streets of most European cities? Not the case in many US cities.


Because you have a false sense of security.


----------



## margarok

The Two Charts That Matter From Smith And Wesson's December Investor Presentation | ZeroHedge

I stopped by a local sporting goods store this morning to see if my husband's Christmas present is in (not a gun, by the way... a bow and arrow). The line to talk to a salesman about a handgun purchase was about 25 people deep 15 minutes after opening. In the article above, there is a comment following that says "It looks like the American people are arming for war." Hmmmm.


----------



## smashedbanana

There exists today a gun culture in the United States.

It didn't happen overnight and gun control is only one part of possibly changing it.

The U.S. needs men and women of influence to brave the established culture to stand up and begin to dissasemble the idea that gun ownership some sort on inalienable right.


----------



## kps

margarok said:


> The Two Charts That Matter From Smith And Wesson's December Investor Presentation | ZeroHedge
> 
> I stopped by a local sporting goods store this morning to see if my husband's Christmas present is in (not a gun, by the way... a bow and arrow). The line to talk to a salesman about a handgun purchase was about 25 people deep 15 minutes after opening. In the article above, there is a comment following that says "It looks like the American people are arming for war." Hmmmm.


I don't doubt it. Lot of Canadian firearm owners are worried about a shortage of ammo and price increases as they're expecting a run on it in the states. It happens every time there's talk of bans. It happened with the Clinton ban, then again when Obama got elected and it will happen again now.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> ...The U.S. needs men and women of influence to brave the established culture to stand up and begin to dissasemble the idea that gun ownership some sort on inalienable right.


It is a _right_ within the Constitution. It is not simply an idea.


----------



## kps

smashedbanana said:


> There exists today a gun culture in the United States.
> 
> It didn't happen overnight and gun control is only one part of possibly changing it.
> 
> The U.S. needs men and women of influence to brave the established culture to stand up and begin to dissasemble the idea that gun ownership some sort on inalienable right.


There's also a culture of violence which has nothing to do with the "gun culture". Guns just happen to facilitate the culture of violence much easier.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> There's also a culture of violence which has nothing to do with the "gun culture". Guns just happen to facilitate the culture of violence much easier.


Yes, gun violence continues despite efforts to control them. However, little of such violence occurred post WWII when the majority of the male population had been exposed to guns.


----------



## SINC

Anyone who seriously proposes a workable gun ban in the U.S. has no idea of what that would take to accomplish. It is impossible. And even if attempts were made in that direction, the number of long guns driven underground with the Canadian long gun registry fiasco, would pale in comparison to the arsenals that would be created underground in America. Worse yet, it could erupt in armed conflict if the gun lobby is pushed too far. No matter how hard they might try, America will live and die by the gun for many more centuries.


----------



## margarok

Macfury said:


> It is a _right_ within the Constitution. It is not simply an idea.


It is indeed.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> It is a _right_ within the Constitution. It is not simply an idea.


I think you understood my point. The idea that it should be a right is what is at the heart of it.


----------



## margarok

Ideas are dangerous things. Maybe someone should outlaw them.

Connecticut Police Spokesman Newtown Will Prosecute Independant Journalist Whistleblowers - YouTube


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> I think you understood my point. The idea that it should be a right is what is at the heart of it.


To me that's like saying Canada is great, except for its elections or its maple leaves. These are intrinsic rights.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> To me that's like saying Canada is great, except for its elections or its maple leaves. These are intrinsic rights.


What are you talking about?


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> What are you talking about?


The U.S. Constitution--it's not as if though you can pull the right to bear arms out of the constitution and discard it without fundamentally changing the nature of the country. This is not just some regulation that you repeal.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> The U.S. Constitution--it's not as if though you can pull the right to bear arms out of the constitution and discard it without fundamentally changing the nature of the country. This is not just some regulation that you repeal.


Given that Bush II and Bush III have pretty much shredded all the rest of Constitution, I don't see the second as any sort of impediment.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The U.S. Constitution--it's not as if though you can pull the right to bear arms out of the constitution and discard it without fundamentally changing the nature of the country. This is not just some regulation that you repeal.


That's the whole point. The fundamental nature of the country needs to be changed. When you regard carrying a weapon as a privilege as opposed to a right, it changes your perspective on your right to be able to kill things. Really, at its root, the right to bear arms really means the right to be able to kill stuff if you choose to. We do not have this right in Canada, except in very extreme circumstances like self-defense. And even then, it's questionable.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> That's the whole point. The fundamental nature of the country needs to be changed.


No, it doesn't need to be changed. You only want it to change because you want to impose your values on another country.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> No, it doesn't need to be changed. You only want it to change because you want to impose your values on another country.


No, I only want it to change because I don't want to see innocent citizens and children regularly killed in cold blood in movie theatres and temples and schools. And apparently 60% of the US population would agree with me on this.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> No, I only want it to change because I don't want to see innocent citizens and children regularly killed in cold blood in movie theatres and temples and schools. And apparently 60% of the US population would agree with me on this.


They agree with you on what?


----------



## eMacMan

As mentioned earlier if you want changes it has to be the culture of violence that changes. Difficult to do when violence is a prime policy plank of both political parties.


----------



## heavyall

eMacMan said:


> Given that Bush II and Bush III have pretty much shredded all the rest of Constitution, I don't see the second as any sort of impediment.


It's been further shredded under Obama too, see the most recent NDAA.

Besides, despite what some people think the constitution says, guns are NOT an absolute right in the US. It's a privilege, and has been for some time. There are restrictions of what type of arms you can have, there are restrictions on where those weapons can and can't be taken, there are restrictions on concealment, there are restrictions on who is allowed to have these guns, and in order to legally get one, you still need to apply for permission.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Maybe just maybe there is a consensus developing in the US on further restrictions. At the time the constitution was written it took 10 or 15 seconds to load a rifle. Times have changed. To further complicate matters states have a say on guns too. I'm thinking of the differing concealment laws in N.Y. Vs. Arizona for example. 

Anyway with Republicans calling for changes and the NRA and gun lobby cabal being silent for once, there a appears to be an opportunity for change.


----------



## SINC

Interesting read:

The Facts about Mass Shootings - John Fund - National Review Online


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Entrepreneurs cashing in on the murders -
BulletBlocker | Bulletproof Protective Products Against Gun Violence


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> It's been further shredded under Obama too, see the most recent NDAA.
> 
> Besides, despite what some people think the constitution says, guns are NOT an absolute right in the US. It's a privilege, and has been for some time. There are restrictions of what type of arms you can have, there are restrictions on where those weapons can and can't be taken, there are restrictions on concealment, there are restrictions on who is allowed to have these guns, and in order to legally get one, you still need to apply for permission.


No, it is a right. There may be some burden of responsibility to be met, but it is not a privilege.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

This is a clever infographic detailing gun laws and how they vary from state to state.
Needless to say, that Republican states are less likely to have constraints on gun ownership.
I particularly love the bring your gun to work part! Who would have thunk?

Gun control in America: A state-by-state breakdown - The Globe and Mail


----------



## margarok

*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.

*

Some people try to argue that the words imply that military, thus government approved officers of the law, should keep and bear arms. However, it is the government's control over those officers that causes the people worry about losing their free state.

I was raised in an area where men with loaded rifles and pistols were commonly seen on the street. Where high school boys had a gun rack on the back window of their pickup truck displaying their favorite hunting rifle. However, there were no video games teaching anyone that blowing people up with a high-powered rifle would earn you points. And, there were still public mental institutions locally where teen boys who were violent were sent for treatment. There are multiple issues to be addressed regarding this sad and horrifying event.


----------



## SINC

Who knew? California school teachers own 6% of the arms company that made the Newton shooter's weapon:

The money behind the Newtown massacre - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

SINC said:


> Who knew? California school teachers own 6% of the arms company that made the Newton shooter's weapon:
> 
> The money behind the Newtown massacre - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet


The start of a new divestment movement similar to pre-Mandela South Africa? Perhaps.


----------



## FeXL

A piece you won't see in MSM...

Man Attempts to Open Fire on Crowd at Movie Theater, Armed Off-Duty Sheriff’s Deputy Drops Him With One Bullet



> With one shot, an off-duty sheriff’s deputy took down a gunman who attempted to opened fire at a crowded movie theater lobby during a late night showing of “The Hobbit” in San Antonio, WOAI reports.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> That's the whole point. The fundamental nature of the country needs to be changed. When you regard carrying a weapon as a privilege as opposed to a right, it changes your perspective on your right to be able to kill things. Really, at its root, the right to bear arms really means the right to be able to kill stuff if you choose to. We do not have this right in Canada, except in very extreme circumstances like self-defense. And even then, it's questionable.


"Right to kill"? That has got to be the most twisted view of the 2nd amendment I have ever seen. Seriously, what possessed you to write that drivel, usually your posts are firmly grounded in reality. I'm quite surprised.


----------



## partsguy

It's interesting that the off-duty sheriff's deputy was actually _working_ as a _security guard_ at the theatre.

So those who point to this as justification of 'arming everyone' ... no. A few well trained professionals in the appropriate places at the appropriate time is WAY better than a bunch of untrained people pulling handguns out and killing a bunch of innocent bystanders.


----------



## kps

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Maybe just maybe there is a consensus developing in the US on further restrictions. At the time the constitution was written it took 10 or 15 seconds to load a rifle. Times have changed. To further complicate matters states have a say on guns too. I'm thinking of the differing concealment laws in N.Y. Vs. Arizona for example.
> 
> Anyway with Republicans calling for changes and the NRA and gun lobby cabal being silent for once, there a appears to be an opportunity for change.


What has any of that have to do with the 2nd amendment? Where does it mention the type of technology? The founding fathers purposely left out such details knowing that technology would advance.

The meaning is clear, if the people are to rise against a tyranny and oppression, they would need the same type of arms as the oppressor...so if in the 18th century it was muskets, and repeating arms in the 19th century, then semi-autos in the 20th century, the people's right to bear those arms will not be infringed.


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> A piece you won't see in MSM...
> 
> Man Attempts to Open Fire on Crowd at Movie Theater, Armed Off-Duty Sheriff’s Deputy Drops Him With One Bullet


Kudos to the female deputy and kudos to the theatre.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> The U.S. Constitution--it's not as if though you can pull the right to bear arms out of the constitution and discard it without fundamentally changing the nature of the country. This is not just some regulation that you repeal.


You are stuck talking about a piece of paper. You seem to think that I am only talking about the second amendment even though I didn't mention it in my post.

I am talking about the culture that has arosen around it, becuase of it, inspite of it.

I am not talking about simply changing the second amendment, but that will be part of it one day for sure. It will start with a will to change, it will continue to a gradual erosion of standing beliefs that it is an inalienable right, it will continue on to more regulation and control, and maybe one day a outright repeal of the second amendment. 

It will not happen overnight, but it starts with a will to change.

And I think this has to be a bottom up process to be successful. Simply changing the second amendment will be viewed as big governement and would produce susbtantial blowback (pun intended). The government needs to be involved but consultation and key people from media, and the piblic sphere need to be involved to.


----------



## FeXL

partsguy said:


> A few well trained professionals in the appropriate places at the appropriate time is WAY better than a bunch of untrained people pulling handguns out and *killing a bunch of innocent bystanders.*


As opposed to, say, some fruit loop or whacko showing up and killing a bunch of innocent bystanders.

I see your point...


----------



## screature

smashedbanana said:


> You are stuck talking about a piece of paper. You seem to think that I am only talking about the second amendment even though I didn't mention it in my post.
> 
> I am talking about the culture that has arosen around it, becuase of it, inspite of it.
> 
> I am not talking about simply changing the second amendment,* but that will be part of it one day for sure. It will start with a will to change, it will continue to a gradual erosion of standing beliefs that it is an inalienable right, it will continue on to more regulation and control, and maybe one day a outright repeal of the second amendment. *
> 
> It will not happen overnight, but it starts with a will to change.
> 
> And I think this has to be a bottom up process to be successful. Simply changing the second amendment will be viewed as big governement and would produce susbtantial blowback (pun intended). The government needs to be involved but consultation and key people from media, and the piblic sphere need to be involved to.


I think you fail to understand the *will* of millions upon millions of Americans who own 300 million guns in a country of 350 million people to continue to have the right to own those guns and have the Constitution, i.e. the law to back them up. Sorry I think you are dreaming in technicolor.


----------



## Rps

smashedbanana said:


> And I think this has to be a bottom up process to be successful. Simply changing the second amendment will be viewed as big governement and would produce susbtantial blowback (pun intended). The government needs to be involved but consultation and key people from media, and the piblic sphere need to be involved to.


First, the U.S. Constitution is not just a piece of paper .... it is the head of the governmental flowchart and, more to your point I think, when the U.S. was in its nation building stages, the Constitution became the "national bible" of the religion of the "nation". It is more than just a cultural change in that it is really the essence of the American identity.

That said, there needs to be a critical mass to make these type of changes. One need only look at the history, there hasn't been that many changes to it in its life time..... one reason is the almost universal acceptance of anything written in that document must be "true". This has been fuelled by generations of dogma by what we would call lobby groups.....and that is were the trouble lies.....no President would survive if he/she tried to change any part of that document unilaterally.....not being a constitutional lawyer here, but I think it is legally impossible for this to be done..... so you must rely on the houses to do this and the lobby groups have more critical mass. Take a look at the romanticism in the movies, literature, and now music......the gun culture is entrenched....it invades our lexicon. So it will be a major effort to make this change, and one I don't see happening unless more of these Sandy Hook ( and they will come as we have young people killing young people ) incidents arise.

Sadly, the more these incidents happen the more people feel the need to arm themselves....and thus the circle continues. What is really required is for the U.S. to take a step back and just stop fearing itself. It's fear that drives this.....almost a fear of being.....and that will be hard to break.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> And I think this has to be a bottom up process to be successful. Simply changing the second amendment will be viewed as big governement and would produce susbtantial blowback (pun intended).


It would not only look like big government--it would BE big government removing a major stumbling block to achieving almost total power.


----------



## screature

Rps said:


> First, the U.S. Constitution is not just a piece of paper .... it is the head of the governmental flowchart and, more to your point I think, when the U.S. was in its nation building stages, the Constitution became the "national bible" of the religion of the "nation". It is more than just a cultural change in that it is really the essence of the American identity.
> 
> That said, there needs to be a critical mass to make these type of changes. One need only look at the history, there hasn't been that many changes to it in its life time..... one reason is the almost universal acceptance of anything written in that document must be "true". This has been fuelled by generations of dogma by what we would call lobby groups.....and that is were the trouble lies.....no President would survive if he/she tried to change any part of that document unilaterally.....not being a constitutional lawyer here, but I think it is legally impossible for this to be done..... so you must rely on the houses to do this and the lobby groups have more critical mass. Take a look at the romanticism in the movies, literature, and now music......the gun culture is entrenched....it invades our lexicon. So it will be a major effort to make this change, and one I don't see happening unless more of these Sandy Hook ( and they will come as we have young people killing young people ) incidents arise.
> 
> Sadly, the more these incidents happen the more people feel the need to arm themselves....and thus the circle continues. What is really required is for the U.S. to take a step back and just stop fearing itself. It's fear that drives this.....almost a fear of being.....and that will be hard to break.


The constitution does not need to be changed for there to be restrictions brought to bear on what types of guns one is lawfully allowed to own. This is the point that is being missed by the all or nothing crowd. Regulations limiting certain gun types and the amount of ammunition capable of being fired is all that is required for the US to adopt some form of gun control. 

That is the kind of change that can realistically be achieved, the notion of changing the Constitution is a non-starter.


----------



## Dr.G.

screature said:


> The constitution does not need to be changed for there to be restrictions brought to bear on what types of guns one is lawfully allowed to own. This is the point that is being missed by the all or nothing crowd. Regulations limiting certain gun types and the amount of ammunition capable of being fired is all that is required for the US to adopt some form of gun control.
> 
> That is the kind of change that can realistically be achieved, the notion of changing the Constitution is a non-starter.


I agree, screature. The complexity to change or amend the 2nd Amendment is far too cumbersome. Still, making it more difficult to buy an assault rifle that would be the prize of any army, or armour-piercing bullets that would bring down the most heavily protected police officer, should be greatly restricted, if not banned. That would leave room for the legitimate hunter to own guns for the sport of hunting.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

kps said:


> What has any of that have to do with the 2nd amendment? Where does it mention the type of technology? The founding fathers purposely left out such details knowing that technology would advance.
> 
> The meaning is clear, if the people are to rise against a tyranny and oppression, they would need the same type of arms as the oppressor...so if in the 18th century it was muskets, and repeating arms in the 19th century, then semi-autos in the 20th century, the people's right to bear those arms will not be infringed.


Except that government (on behalf of society) has already imposed some regulation and restrictions and they vary from state to state. Society votes for policy changes. The 2nd amendment can remain the same.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> This has been fuelled by generations of dogma by what we would call lobby groups.....and that is were the trouble lies.....no President would survive if he/she tried to change any part of that document unilaterally.....not being a constitutional lawyer here, but I think it is legally impossible for this to be done..... so you must rely on the houses to do this and the lobby groups have more critical mass.


Even talking about unilateral changes to the Constitution makes no sense. Each amendment requires the following:

"Before an amendment can take effect, it must be proposed to the states by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a convention called by two-thirds of the states, and ratified by three-fourths of the states or by three-fourths of conventions thereof..."

It was made difficult to do precisely because of the type of reactions we see today--demands to do something immediately in the heat of a terrible moment.


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> What has any of that have to do with the 2nd amendment? Where does it mention the type of technology? The founding fathers purposely left out such details knowing that technology would advance.
> 
> The meaning is clear, if the people are to rise against a tyranny and oppression, they would need the same type of arms as the oppressor...so if in the 18th century it was muskets, and repeating arms in the 19th century, then semi-autos in the 20th century, the people's right to bear those arms will not be infringed.


We do need to keep in mind that over the past 10-12 years all of the tools to create a United Police State of America have been put in place. We have our very own Gestapo (Secret State Police), AKA Homeland Security. The TSA makes the Nazi phrase; "Papier Bitte" look positively benign. People can be indefinitely incarcerated simply because someone points a finger accusing them of being a terrorist, fair trial or any trial at all not included. Throw in every phone call and email being stored in giant data banks. How about a military machine which after years of warfare is totally desensitized to violence and therefore ready and willing to suppress their own country men?

In short the tools are there. The fact that they are there at all indicates a willingness or even desire to fully implement them. The US has everything in place to create a police state that, thanks to modern technology, would make Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union pale by comparison.

Like it or not those wing nuts toting modern weaponry, may be all that is keeping Americans from losing the tattered remains of their rights and freedoms. 

Most interesting that the media has been programmed to prominently label the shooter's family as Survivalists. Are they next in line behind the Jews and Muslims?


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> Even talking about unilateral changes to the Constitution makes no sense. Each amendment requires the following:
> 
> "Before an amendment can take effect, it must be proposed to the states by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a convention called by two-thirds of the states, and ratified by three-fourths of the states or by three-fourths of conventions thereof..."
> 
> It was made difficult to do precisely because of the type of reactions we see today--demands to do something immediately in the heat of a terrible moment.


Agreed, and this is how it should be, Macfury. Changing the Constitution should not be an easy matter. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## screature

eMacMan said:


> We do need to keep in mind that over the past 10-12 years all of the tools to create a United Police State of America have been put in place. We have our very own Gestapo (Secret State Police), AKA Homeland Security. The TSA makes the Nazi phrase; "Papier Bitte" look positively benign. People can be indefinitely incarcerated simply because someone points a finger accusing them of being a terrorist, fair trial or any trial at all not included. Throw in every phone call and email being stored in giant data banks. How about a military machine which after years of warfare is totally desensitized to violence and therefore ready and willing to suppress their own country men?
> 
> In short the tools are there. The fact that they are there at all indicates a willingness or even desire to fully implement them. The US has everything in place to create a police state that, thanks to modern technology, would make Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union pale by comparison.
> 
> Like it or not those wing nuts toting modern weaponry, may be all that is keeping Americans from losing the tattered remains of their rights and freedoms.
> 
> Most interesting that the media has been programmed to prominently label the shooter's family as Survivalists. Are they next in line behind the Jews and Muslims?


Oh boy...


----------



## Rps

screature said:


> The constitution does not need to be changed for there to be restrictions brought to bear on what types of guns one is lawfully allowed to own. This is the point that is being missed by the all or nothing crowd. Regulations limiting certain gun types and the amount of ammunition capable of being fired is all that is required for the US to adopt some form of gun control.
> 
> That is the kind of change that can realistically be achieved, the notion of changing the Constitution is a non-starter.


Oh I most certainly agree screature . The problem that I see is that there are two camps ( three if you include the "do not change" crowd ) there are those who think they need to interpret it ( as things are different now than 300 years ago ) then there are those who say we should take it literally. Both are fraught with problems. But I do think the answer to this is a critical mass of the populace which will then influence the Supreme Court to make a logical decision.....I mean really, allowing tactical weapons for consumers.......... the next thing you know is we can have atomic bombs as I have a right to bear arms........


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> But I do think the answer to this is a critical mass of the populace which will then influence the Supreme Court to make a logical decision.....I mean really, allowing tactical weapons for consumers.......... .


One could simply make the safety procedures required to own a tactical weapon extremely onerous without banning them--for example, some sort of locked room with steel safe of a certain spec and alarm system, etc..


----------



## John Clay

Macfury said:


> One could simply make the safety procedures required to own a tactical weapon extremely onerous without banning them--for example, some sort of locked room with steel safe of a certain spec and alarm system, etc..


Except that the "tactical" stuff is no different than the regular stuff, except that it has the appearance of being police/military.

I assure you, a surplus SKS (going for around $150) is just as deadly as a tacticooled AR-15 in the hands of a lunatic.

Banning "tactical" stuff, aka scary looking guns, doesn't actually make anyone safer. Kinda like the TSA.


----------



## Andrew Pratt

Agreed. They'd be better off looking at restricting the size of clips etc rather then focus on the appearance of this weapon over another.


----------



## John Clay

Andrew Pratt said:


> Agreed. They'd be better off looking at restricting the size of clips etc rather then focus on the appearance of this weapon over another.


That also doesn't stop a bad guy.

Most high capacity magazines (not clips) are pinned with a rivet blocking the addition of more than X cartridges. Punch out the rivet, which is VERY easy to do, and you've got a full capacity magazine again.


----------



## kps

Rps said:


> Oh I most certainly agree scripture. The problem that I see is that there are two camps ( three if you include the "do not change" crowd ) there are those who think they need to interpret it ( as things are different now than 300 years ago ) then there are those who say we should take it literally. Both are fraught with problems. But I do think the answer to this is a critical mass of the populace which will then influence the Supreme Court to make a logical decision.....I mean really, allowing tactical weapons for consumers.......... the next thing you know is we can have atomic bombs as I have a right to bear arms........


The intent behind the 2nd amendment hasn't changed in 300 years, so what you're attempting to get across to us doesn't make sense. I also find it amusing how so many have bought into the scare mongering by calling these firearms "tactical weapons" and "assault Weapons" A weapon is not a weapon unless used as such. A knife or a hammer could ve a weapon in the wrong hands, yet it's a tool used by chefs and carpenters. I've already explained what an assault rifle is and that it comes under federal jurisdiction in the US and you'd need a special license to own it. In Canada they are prohibited and all semi-automatic AR styled rifles are classified as restricted.

Semi automatic rifles that look like scary "assault" rifles function in the same manner as a hunting semi auto rifle which no one has any issue with (in this context anyway). The function is identical. Round capacity, that's a different issue and the modern AR pattern rifles can take large capacity magazines while the hunting rifles do not. In Canada all (and I mean ALL) semi automatic centre fire rifles are limited to 5 rounds...period.

Another myth concerns hunting with these firearms. The semi-auto AR is commonly used in feral boar hunting or coyote and other small game hunting. My CZ 858 in 7.62x39mm could be easily suitable for deer if I so choose.

A lot of you folks need to stop buying into the FUD and downright lies regarding these firearms.

Edit:I see John Clay beat me to some of it.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> The intent behind the 2nd amendment hasn't changed in 300 years, so what you're attempting to get across to us doesn't make sense.


Agreed. I find it painful to see people so willing to sell even more freedom to the government, in exchange for false security.



kps said:


> I also find it amusing how so many have bought into the scare mongering by calling these firearms "tactical weapons" and "assault Weapons"


Also agreed. If you went into a gun store and asked for a "tactical" or "assault" weapon they'd wonder what you'd been smoking. The distinction would be meaningless to them.


----------



## Rps

kps said:


> The intent behind the 2nd amendment hasn't changed in 300 years,
> Edit:I see John Clay beat me to some of it.


Whether you will agree with it or not, I think your comment has supported my point.


----------



## kps

Rps said:


> Whether you will agree with it or not, I think your comment has supported my point.


How? Perhaps I misinterpreted your post.


----------



## Rps

My post follows along on constitutional change and the unlikely prospect that it will come. Currently there are two groups who are using the constitutional approach for gun control. This does not recognise, of course, those who think that the constitution is fine the way it is and there is no need to change it.

There are those who feel that the 2nd amendment should be changed due to the context of the thing in light of today's reality. These are the people who will keep the Supreme Court busy for years to come as it requires an interpretation of the law, so this I call the context side. Then there is the content side, who feel that the content is fine and we should follow it literally. I call this the content side. There are numerous legal cases where both sides have "won" over the years. Basically, the question to ask is "under what circumstances should the constitution be changed". Recently in Michigan, during the last Presidential election, Michiganers were give 6 propositions to change the State Constitution and they voted all 6 down...meaning they chose not to change. Constitutional changes are very difficult to do, and some wonder if indeed there should ever be a need to do so..... I think the proof of this is in the limited number of them to the U.S. Constitution over the life of the document. However, one has to wonder about the role of the Supreme Court in this discussion, whether it has the political will to enforce a "national" view or a "state" view ...... an example are the differences in ruling with respect to Civil RIghts years ago and, now, Abortion...... Makes for interesting discussion don't you think kps.


----------



## kps

Macfury said:


> Also agreed. If you went into a gun store and asked for a "tactical" or "assault" weapon they'd wonder what you'd been smoking. The distinction would be meaningless to them.


The media which generally has issues with firearms ownership loves to perpetuate this along with other pet terms like "high powered" yeah, like let me go and clean my high powered Glock.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> However, one has to wonder about the role of the Supreme Court in this discussion, whether it has the political will to enforce a "national" view or a "state" view ...... an example are the differences in ruling with respect to Civil RIghts years ago and, now, Abortion...... Makes for interesting discussion don't you think kps.


Abortion was different in that it is not explicitly described in the Constitution. 

However, the right to bear arms is explicit.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> The media which generally has issues with firearms ownership loves to perpetuate this along with other pet terms like "high powered" yeah, like let me go and clean my high powered Glock.


:lmao:


----------



## kps

Rps said:


> My post follows along on constitutional change and the unlikely prospect that it will come. Currently there are two groups who are using the constitutional approach for gun control. This does not recognise, of course, those who think that the constitution is fine the way it is and there is no need to change it.
> 
> There are those who feel that the 2nd amendment should be changed due to the context of the thing in light of today's reality. These are the people who will keep the Supreme Court busy for years to come as it requires an interpretation of the law, so this I call the context side. Then there is the content side, who feel that the content is fine and we should follow it literally. I call this the content side. There are numerous legal cases where both sides have "won" over the years. Basically, the question to ask is "under what circumstances should the constitution be changed". Recently in Michigan, during the last Presidential election, Michiganers were give 6 propositions to change the State Constitution and they voted all 6 down...meaning they chose not to change. Constitutional changes are very difficult to do, and some wonder if indeed there should ever be a need to do so..... I think the proof of this is in the limited number of them to the U.S. Constitution over the life of the document. However, one has to wonder about the role of the Supreme Court in this discussion, whether it has the political will to enforce a "national" view or a "state" view ...... an example are the differences in ruling with respect to Civil RIghts years ago and, now, Abortion...... Makes for interesting discussion don't you think kps.


The second amendment does not stop the government nor individual states from passing firearms laws, restrictions or anything of that nature. California is an interesting experiment in firearms regulations.


----------



## Rps

kps said:


> The second amendment does not stop the government nor individual states from passing firearms laws, restrictions or anything of that nature. California is an interesting experiment in firearms regulations.


Yes, but Heller and now McDonald are two cases that may change that as the State Constitution may be held as a violation of the U.S. Constitution...... more fun and games.


----------



## kps

Rps said:


> Yes, but Heller and now McDonald are two cases that may change that as the State Constitution may be held as a violation of the U.S. Constitution...... more fun and games.


Sorry had to rush off for a doc's appointment...yearly physical.

Well considering both DC and Chicago are high gun crime areas even though they have/had tough gun laws and even bans it's difficult to blame them for wanting to protect themselves.


----------



## SINC

Newton was awful, but far from the worst:

Bath School bombing: Remembering the deadliest school massacre in American history.


----------



## FeXL

None of the 5 Worst Shooting Rampages Were Carried Out By An American



> The deadliest shootings have occurred in Japan, in Colombia, in the Belgian Congo, in South Korea, Norway and in Australia, along with the United States. The only thing that all the shooters had in common was mental illness. In many cases there had been early warning signs.


----------



## FeXL

why the gun is civilization.



> There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. *A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.*


More:



> When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. *The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid.* It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.


Bold mine.

A thought provoking piece from 2007.


----------



## Rps

FeXL said:


> A thought provoking piece from 2007.


Yes it is, but also flawed.


----------



## FeXL

Well, I s'pose we could turn this in to a "No, it's not", "Yes, it is" kind of thing or you could actually elaborate on what you disagree with.

Either way...


----------



## smashedbanana

screature said:


> I think you fail to understand the *will* of millions upon millions of Americans who own 300 million guns in a country of 350 million people to continue to have the right to own those guns and have the Constitution, i.e. the law to back them up. Sorry I think you are dreaming in technicolor.


Wow

Can you be more demeaning?
How about some fridge magnets or sock puppets.

May you can elaborate on how you have such a better insight into the entire American populace.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> "Right to kill"? That has got to be the most twisted view of the 2nd amendment I have ever seen. Seriously, what possessed you to write that drivel, usually your posts are firmly grounded in reality. I'm quite surprised.


Drivel? I think not. Ask yourself: at its fundamental level, what is the purpose of a gun? If it's not to kill or seriously injure something, then I'm not sure why a gun is necessary. You can do damage, even kill, with many other weapons. But a gun is the most expedient and easy to conceal. If the second amendment is so necessary to a country's survival, then that country is going to have to endure a whole lot of collateral damage. And that appears to be exactly what's happening. If you don't want the collateral damage of innocent civilians and children lives lost, you have to re-examine the very root of the "right to kill" or "right to bear arms" philosophy. And good luck with that.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Apparently Obama will be bringing some solutions forward. I hope he doubles his security.
Lotta wackos with guns down in the US.


----------



## screature

smashedbanana said:


> Wow
> 
> Can you be more demeaning?
> How about some fridge magnets or sock puppets.
> 
> *May you can elaborate on how you have such a better insight into the entire American populace.*


You seem to be better in touch despite the facts, you should be the one to explain.  I mean seriously.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Drivel? I think not. Ask yourself: at its fundamental level, what is the purpose of a gun? If it's not to kill or seriously injure something, then I'm not sure why a gun is necessary. You can do damage, even kill, with many other weapons. But a gun is the most expedient and easy to conceal. If the second amendment is so necessary to a country's survival, then that country is going to have to endure a whole lot of collateral damage. And that appears to be exactly what's happening. If you don't want the collateral damage of innocent civilians and children lives lost, you have to re-examine the very root of the "right to kill" or "right to bear arms" philosophy. And good luck with that.


As easily as a gun can be used to take a life, it can just as easily be used to save a life. Even in Japan, where carpenters have to register nail guns and _legal_ firearms are pretty much non existent the cops still carry guns. It's a tool that is used in a greater number of peaceful ways than not.

And it's not the second amendment that is responsible for America's culture of violence or crime or firearms misuse.

In view of the tragic events in Connecticut, I can understand people's emotions getting in the way of rational thinking. But change is coming, even the evil and dreaded NRA has broken it's silence and is pledging to help prevent future shootings. In a statement the NRA said: “The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again,” So let's see what the Americans will do.


----------



## smashedbanana

screature said:


> You seem to be better in touch despite the facts, you should be the one to explain.  I mean seriously.





screature said:


> You seem to be better in touch despite the facts, you should be the one to explain.  I mean seriously.


My point here was that there exists a gun culture in the U.S. and that needs to change. Period. I do believe it will. You don't have to agree. Events since the shooting are a positive start. People are enraged and change is happening.

The traction may not carry, or maybe it will. Maybe the next shooting will be the catalyst. Who knows. Maybe it will take a dozen shootings.

I believe gun control will further influence the strength of the gun culture. Hopefully the ban on weapons like the AR-15 is re-instated. Again seems like it will. Hopefully more restrictions follow. Hopefully Biden is the man and the parties can cross party lines. Several prominent ones have already, publicly. 

Key figures like Bloomberg, the California teachers union, CEO of Cereberus, etc. etc. are stepping up.

The NRA's statement on Friday will also likely be a softer stance. How much we will see.

My post was not about the second amendment. I really didn't need to have it explained to me or how difficult a process it would be to change it. I tried to further explain this by saying if the government removed the second amendment now (by some miracle) it wouldn't change the culture overnight. Which is why it is not solely the cause and effect.

Screature your post is infuriating because you think you are more right than I am and you can just shut down my posting. You have a 15000 post arrogance about you. So you know that there are 288 million guns in the U.S. and 350 Million Americans, super. What does that mean in reality? What do you really know? You are painting the entire nation with one brush. 

This is all discussion anyway as we are Canadians and for some reason have no vote in U.S. politics (this is sarcasm in case Macfury is about to type an explanation about why Canadians can't vote in the U.S.) so why not consider every point of view? Present something better that "you are failing to understand". Consider what you REALLY know on the topic.

The difference between confidence and arrogance is whether or not you really consider what the other person is saying before you argue with them.


----------



## kps

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Apparently Obama will be bringing some solutions forward. I hope he doubles his security.
> Lotta wackos with guns down in the US.


Yeah, like the whacko second in command..





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

It's well known that tourists are targeted in Florida...


----------



## margarok

I have been intentionally NOT watching/listening to news, opting for some nice music while I prepare for our family Holiday. But, I was scanning a few sites and saw this on American Thinker... 

Articles: Lindisfarne To Sandy Hook: The Tragedy of Wishful Thinking

For those who may have missed it: Adam Lanza Learned His Mother Was Preparing To Commit Him To A Mental Health Care Facility

Nancy Lanza knew her son, Adam Lanza, to be spiraling out of control. She could no longer manage him on her own. She had filed a petition with the courts for conservatorship so that she could have her son committed to a mental heath facility as an adult, against his will, so that he could get the care and treatment that he desperately needed.

Nancy Lanza had volunteered at the Sandy Hook school for several years, working with kindergarten children. Adam Lanza, in his delusional state, believed that his mother loved the school and the children at the school more than she loved him. He flew into a rage, and snapped. The first grade children who were killed were kindergartners whom Nancy Lanza had worked with last year. The principle and psychologist at Sandy Hook school were good friends of Nancy Lanza, and they were killed in the attack.

This is not an issue of gun law, gun control, or assault weapons bans. This is an issue of mental health care.

Adam Lanza needed intensive care and treatment at a mental health facility and his mother was trying to get that for him. Unfortunately, the ACLU and others sued the state of Connecticut a few years ago, and the result was legislation that makes it far more difficult, and far more of a lengthy process, to have an adult committed for care and treatment in Connecticut.

We don’t need to discuss gun control. We need to discuss giving the mentally ill effective care and treatment in a timely manner.


Read more: Articles: Lindisfarne To Sandy Hook: The Tragedy of Wishful Thinking


----------



## eMacMan

Interestingly well over half of the US firearms deaths are suicides, yet the US is a good deal below many other countries in suicide rates. BTW Japan with its extreme gun control regs tops the suicide list.

So no matter how much the anti-gun lobby would like to believe, it is extremely unlikely that any sort of gun control would have any on suicide deaths. So please if you must quote firearms deaths stateside do exclude suicides when trying to argue for gun controls.

Also heard over the radio that Connecticut has a statewide ban on most automatic weapons. Too tired to verify that at the moment but certainly over the 10 years that the US did ban automatic weapons they could not prove any statistical reduction in deaths, which was one of the reason the ban was not renewed.


----------



## kps

margarok said:


> I have been intentionally NOT watching/listening to news, opting for some nice music while I prepare for our family Holiday. But, I was scanning a few sites and saw this on American Thinker...
> 
> Articles: Lindisfarne To Sandy Hook: The Tragedy of Wishful Thinking
> 
> For those who may have missed it: Adam Lanza Learned His Mother Was Preparing To Commit Him To A Mental Health Care Facility
> 
> Nancy Lanza knew her son, Adam Lanza, to be spiraling out of control. She could no longer manage him on her own. She had filed a petition with the courts for conservatorship so that she could have her son committed to a mental heath facility as an adult, against his will, so that he could get the care and treatment that he desperately needed.
> 
> Nancy Lanza had volunteered at the Sandy Hook school for several years, working with kindergarten children. Adam Lanza, in his delusional state, believed that his mother loved the school and the children at the school more than she loved him. He flew into a rage, and snapped. The first grade children who were killed were kindergartners whom Nancy Lanza had worked with last year. The principle and psychologist at Sandy Hook school were good friends of Nancy Lanza, and they were killed in the attack.
> 
> This is not an issue of gun law, gun control, or assault weapons bans. This is an issue of mental health care.
> 
> Adam Lanza needed intensive care and treatment at a mental health facility and his mother was trying to get that for him. Unfortunately, the ACLU and others sued the state of Connecticut a few years ago, and the result was legislation that makes it far more difficult, and far more of a lengthy process, to have an adult committed for care and treatment in Connecticut.
> 
> We don’t need to discuss gun control. We need to discuss giving the mentally ill effective care and treatment in a timely manner.


It's much easier for society to pacify the knee jerk by blaming an inanimate object rather than deal with something more complex, such as its failure do provide adequate mental health care. The anti's want action and action they will get.


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> Interestingly well over half of the US firearms deaths are suicides, yet the US is a good deal below many other countries in suicide rates. BTW Japan with its extreme gun control regs tops the suicide list.
> 
> So no matter how much the anti-gun lobby would like to believe, it is extremely unlikely that any sort of gun control would have any on suicide deaths. So please if you must quote firearms deaths stateside do exclude suicides when trying to argue for gun controls.
> 
> Also heard over the radio that Connecticut has a statewide ban on most automatic weapons. Too tired to verify that at the moment but certainly over the 10 years that the US did ban automatic weapons they could not prove any statistical reduction in deaths, which was one of the reason the ban was not renewed.


Doesn't matter the antis don't let the facts get in the way of a good banning.

When you say "automatic" do you mean full auto or semi-auto?


----------



## fjnmusic

.


----------



## SINC

NRA Says Membership Has Increased Since the Newtown Shootings - Politics - The Atlantic Wire


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> Doesn't matter the antis don't let the facts get in the way of a good banning.
> 
> When you say "automatic" do you mean full auto or semi-auto?


Full I believe. Semi auto would include almost every weapon made today. Like I said it was something I was listening to and with the very low calibre of modern lame stream media the info is perhaps a bit dodgy.


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> Full I believe. Semi auto would include almost every weapon made today. Like I said it was something I was listening to and with the very low calibre of modern lame stream media the info is perhaps a bit dodgy.


Well dodgy it is as full auto is not easily obtained even in the US. It's prohibited in Canada although there are some grandfathered individuals who possess collector items like "Tommy " guns and some WWII firearms. However no new firearms on the prohibited list may be imported into Canada for sale to the civilian market. Those which are grandfathered will likely be destroyed upon the permit holder's death. The whole full auto issue is pretty much moot as it's never used in crime or in any other criminal endeavour.


----------



## kps

Fixed it for you fjn.


----------



## Sonal

The conservative case for an assault weapons ban - latimes.com


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> The conservative case for an assault weapons ban - latimes.com


The "assault weapon" ban expired because there was no difference in gun violence using those weapons during the time the law was in force.


----------



## kps

Macfury said:


> The "assault weapon" ban expired because there was no difference in gun violence using those weapons during the time the law was in force.


Very true, more than 10years.

It's all about the "assault weapon" stimulus package don't you know. As predicted.

Guns Out of Stock at Wal-Mart as Magazine Prices Surge on - Bloomberg


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

This Dick is finished with guns -

Dick’s Sporting Goods Suspends Gun Sales In Newtown Area Mall


----------



## heavyall

kps said:


> Doesn't matter the antis don't let the facts get in the way of a good banning.


If anything, it's the exact opposite. The pro-gun faction's primary arguments are outright fiction, and their secondary ones are questionable at best. As soon as you exhaust debunking their long list of nonsense, they invariably come back with; "but, but... HITLER!"


----------



## kps

heavyall said:


> If anything, it's the exact opposite. The pro-gun faction's primary arguments are outright fiction, and their secondary ones are questionable at best. As soon as you exhaust debunking their long list of nonsense, they invariably come back with; "but, but... HITLER!"


Really? What qualifies you to make that statement without substantiating it? Be specific.


----------



## heavyall

kps said:


> Really? What qualifies you to make that statement without substantiating it? Be specific.


What qualifies you to question my statement without substantiating it? Be specific.


----------



## kps

heavyall said:


> What qualifies you to question my statement without substantiating it? Be specific.


You know if you're going to act childish then I have no time for you. I have numerous posts in this thread alone discussing the topic(s) at hand. In the 10 years that I have been here I have participated in numerous other threads in here where this topic was discussed with intelligent people on both sides of the issue. that do not act like a smart ass punk.

You made a statement why are you now afraid of explaining it?


----------



## screature

heavyall said:


> What qualifies you to question my statement without substantiating it? Be specific.


kps is a responsible gun owner and has posted voluminously here with first hand experience of the laws and regulations of gun ownership, not only in Canada but in the US as well.

At the very least you need to know who you are trying to deride before you make such posts...

You haven't been around here very long so your ignorance is forgivable. 

All I can suggest is that you educate yourself.


----------



## kps

Thank You.


----------



## heavyall

screature said:


> kps is a responsible gun owner and has posted voluminously here with first hand experience of the laws and regulations of gun ownership, not only in Canada but in the US as well.
> 
> At the very least you need to know who you are trying to deride before you make such posts...
> 
> You haven't been around here very long so your ignorance is forgivable.
> 
> All I can suggest is that you educate yourself.


The ignorance is yours. I've been here for a long time, I'm very familiar with KPS' argumentative style.

He asked me what my qualifications were to have an opinion. It's an improper appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.


----------



## kps

heavyall said:


> The ignorance is yours. I've been here for a long time, I'm very familiar with KPS' argumentative style.
> 
> He asked me what my qualifications were to have an opinion. It's an improper appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.


Perhaps I should have phrased it differently, but all I wanted from you was an explanation of this:


> The pro-gun faction's primary arguments are outright fiction, and their secondary ones are questionable at best.


There's no appeal to authority, no logical fallacy...you're avoiding and deflecting just like you're hiding behind your new persona...if as you say, you've been here a long time and know all about my "style".Truth is you have no answer, truth is you have nothing to offer this thread except your antagonism.


----------



## SINC

kps said:


> There's no appeal to authority, no logical fallacy...you're avoiding and deflecting just like you're hiding behind your new persona...if as you say, you've been here a long time and know all about my "style".Truth is you have no answer, truth is you have nothing to offer this thread except your antagonism.


You know kps, with new ownership, there seems to have come a few obvious 'new' members who claim long term knowledge and begin posting aggressively very early on since joining the board. It certainly gives one food for thought, or am I imagining things?


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> You know kps, with new ownership, there seems to have come a few obvious 'new' members who claim long term knowledge and begin posting aggressively very early on since joining the board. It certainly gives one food for thought, or am I imagining things?


I've been wondering about some of this myself.


----------



## heavyall

SINC said:


> You know kps, with new ownership, there seems to have come a few obvious 'new' members who claim long term knowledge and begin posting aggressively very early on since joining the board. It certainly gives one food for thought, or am I imagining things?


I have no idea about any of that. I introduced myself when I rejoined, and explained the reason for the new username:

http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else...mac-ca-community-post1229559.html#post1229559

The mayor announced he was selling the site after I (re)joined.


----------



## kps

SINC said:


> You know kps, with new ownership, there seems to have come a few obvious 'new' members who claim long term knowledge and begin posting aggressively very early on since joining the board. It certainly gives one food for thought, or am I imagining things?


Yup. Noticed quite a few new members in the last week or so, perhaps Vertical Scape is marketing this board someplace, who knows. We'll see where it all ends up.


----------



## eMacMan

I find it quite curious that the anti-gun lobbyists could not even wait till the bodies were cold to start their campaign. Also seems a bit strange that the mother was a Survivalist and that seems to be being played up as well in the propaganda mill. 

Not quite ready to buy into the false flag camp, but the above combined with the extremely contradictory initial reporting certainly has me looking very closely.


----------



## screature

heavyall said:


> The ignorance is yours. I've been here for a long time, I'm very familiar with KPS' argumentative style.
> 
> He asked me what my qualifications were to have an opinion. It's an improper appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.


Nov 2012 isn't very long. If you have been a lurker that is something else altogether.

Anyone can have an ill informed opinion he was asking what are your "qualifications" so that your opinion could be validated as being an informed opinion. Rather obvious I think.


----------



## screature

SINC said:


> You know kps, with new ownership, there seems to have come a few obvious 'new' members who claim long term knowledge and begin posting aggressively very early on since joining the board. It certainly gives one food for thought, or am I imagining things?





Macfury said:


> I've been wondering about some of this myself.





kps said:


> Yup. Noticed quite a few new members in the last week or so, perhaps Vertical Scape is marketing this board someplace, who knows. We'll see where it all ends up.


Noticed it myself as well...


----------



## screature

heavyall said:


> I have no idea about any of that. I introduced myself when I rejoined, and explained the reason for the new username:
> 
> http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else...mac-ca-community-post1229559.html#post1229559
> 
> The mayor announced he was selling the site after I (re)joined.


Ahh so according to your "reintroduction" you haven't been here a long time, you were here a long time ago, not the same thing. Seems odd that you can't remember your userrname... must have been very long ago indeed.


----------



## Dr.G.

Audio | The Sunday Edition with Michael Enright | CBC Radio

A very moving audio commentary from our own Michael Enright of CBC Radio One.


----------



## kps

Dr.G. said:


> Audio | The Sunday Edition with Michael Enright | CBC Radio
> 
> A very moving audio commentary from our own Michael Enright of CBC Radio One.


He had me until the last 30 seconds. Then he sounded like an idiot.


----------



## SINC

Yep, his so-called understanding of gun ownership in the US is in as sorry a state as the rest of the CBC and their agenda. That was the first tabloid pod cast I ever heard.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the pointlessness of gun control...

An opinion on gun control



> I didn’t want to post about this, because frankly, it is exhausting. I’ve been having this exact same argument for my entire adult life. It is not an exaggeration when I say that I know pretty much exactly every single thing an anti-gun person can say. I’ve heard it over and over, the same old tired stuff, trotted out every single time there is a tragedy on the news that can be milked. Yet, I got sucked in, and I’ve spent the last few days arguing with people who either mean well but are uninformed about gun laws and how guns actually work (who I don’t mind at all), or the willfully ignorant (who I do mind), or the obnoxiously stupid who are completely incapable of any critical thinking deeper than a Facebook meme (them, I can’t stand).


Long, good read.


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> Further on the pointlessness of gun control...
> 
> An opinion on gun control
> 
> Long, good read.


Ran across that article yesterday on another site, was going to post it actually, but got distracted. LOL

It was definitely worth the read.


----------



## heavyall

screature said:


> Ahh so according to your "reintroduction" you haven't been here a long time, you were here a long time ago, not the same thing. Seems odd that you can't remember your userrname... must have been very long ago indeed.


There was a gap where I didn't post, but still lurked. Previously, I was fairly active for several years.

I'm on a lot of forums, and I generally use the same username for all of them. That name is not available here, it's registered to a different user. I've changed ISP's more than once in the last 6 years, so even getting the info emailed to me isn't an option either.


----------



## FeXL

So, in 2000, after Columbine, Clinton wanted to place more police officers in school. All the leftys loved it.

In 2012, after Sandy Hook, the NRA proposed the same thing. Guess the reaction...

The Clinton Plan To End School Shootings


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> So, in 2000, after Columbine, Clinton wanted to place more police officers in school. All the leftys loved it.
> 
> In 2012, after Sandy Hook, the NRA proposed the same thing. Guess the reaction...
> 
> The Clinton Plan To End School Shootings


A sad state for sure, makes me glad I live in Canada. This view is echoed by the terrible statement from the NRA on Friday. 

Arm more people, yes that is the answer.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Arm more people, yes that is the answer.


Agreed.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> So, in 2000, after Columbine, Clinton wanted to place more police officers in school. All the leftys loved it.
> 
> In 2012, after Sandy Hook, the NRA proposed the same thing. Guess the reaction...
> 
> The Clinton Plan To End School Shootings


An idiotic idea no matter who is pimping it.  Only possible purpose would be to get kids used to seeing authority figures carrying weapons, every time they turn around. Buy into the need for that and next up is troops with machine guns on every downtown street corner.



A couple of things are waving caution flags that this may have been a false flag. Still not ready to buy that one but it does raise an interesting thought.

One would tend to believe if this were a false flag then the anti-gun gang is behind it. However following the money trail it is entirely possible that the weapons dealers may be the ones that put the idea into the anti-gun bums brains. 

Seems a little far fetched but nothing is more predictable than the knee-jerk reaction; "We need gun control", whenever a mass shooting occurs. Equally predictable when faced with gun control legislation, a lot of people who never previously saw the need to buy guns or thought they had enough guns, will go out a buy a whole lot of guns. Adequately illustrated buy gun dealers selling out with in hours or days of the commencement of the gun control propaganda mill.

Since the US populace is already more than sufficiently armed, I suspect gun sales are rather stagnant without that sort of fear stimulus. Sort of like trying to sell computers during the two years after Y2K.

Like I said just a thought.............


----------



## kps

As I mentioned earlier, this is a recent trend. Each time there's talk of bans, there's a run on the firearm in question as well as the ammunition. Happened prior to the Clinton ban, and happened again prior to the 1st Obama election win (because Obama mentioned a ban during the TV debates) and it's happening now. Great for business and great for political sound bites. Some go as far as calling it the "weapons ban " stimulus plan.


----------



## MacDoc

sue the bastids....

We hardly need to see further proof of negligence and against the common weal



> In 2005, President George W. Bush signed into law the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which prohibits lawsuits against gun manufacturers for the damage their products do. “It does so in the name of the hoary concept that freedom of gun commerce is more important per se than freedom from gun violence,” writes Andrew Cohen, at The Atlantic.
> 
> The law worked. “It’s led to the dismissal of plenty of cases that were fully supported by civil justice law but were dismissed because this act provides special protections to the gun industry that no other industry or no other people in America enjoy,” said Jonathan Lowy, director of the Legal Action Project at the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence. In 2009, for example the U.S. Supreme Court tossed out a lawsuit by the City of New York against gun manufacturers that a lower court had supported, citing the PLCAA. The law actually makes an exception for negligence on the part of gun makers, which has allowed at least one lawsuit to proceed. But for the most part, Lowy said, “it has been abused, it’s totally unnecessary, and it has been destructive.”
> 
> If we as citizens want to make a big noise about gun control (and we should), it makes sense to focus that noise on changing one flawed law rather than instituting a host of unspecified new ones.* Do away with that special protection for gun makers, and give people the power to use the courts to try to enact the kind of change Washintgon won’t*.


Can We Sue Our Way to Gun Safety? (At Least Let Us Try) | News on GOOD


----------



## John Clay

Sue them for what? Guns don't kill people, people kill people. It'd be like suing the makers of Bacardi because people drink and drive.

Most firearms sold have some sort of safety, either from a physical safety lever or a decocking lever and a heavy trigger pull. While it's still possible for a negligent discharge to occur, it's far from the fault of the manufacturer (assuming no defects in manufacture).



MacDoc said:


> sue the bastids....
> 
> We hardly need to see further proof of negligence and against the common weal
> 
> 
> 
> Can We Sue Our Way to Gun Safety? (At Least Let Us Try) | News on GOOD


----------



## kps

I'm surprised MacDoc endorses frivolous litigation, I would have thought there was enough of it in the courts already.

But, okay, lets also sue Toyota for getting the criminal to the neighbourhood, lets sue Stanley for making the crowbar and hammer the criminal used to break into the house and lets sue Henkells for making the 8" chef's knife the criminal used to dispatch the house's occupants.


----------



## kps

I like how the author of this video edited it. Really shows the hypocrisy of some of these celebrities who make millions off of the gun culture.

WARNING: Contains some foul language at the end of the video and in the title. Hence the reason for not embedding.

Demand A Plan? Demand Celebrities Go F*ck Themselves. - YouTube


----------



## MacDoc

Mores change - it's time


----------



## MacGuiver

kps said:


> I like how the author of this video edited it. Really shows the hypocrisy of some of these celebrities who make millions off of the gun culture.
> 
> WARNING: Contains some foul language at the end of the video and in the title. Hence the reason for not embedding.
> 
> Demand A Plan? Demand Celebrities Go F*ck Themselves. - YouTube


Great video KPS! I can't stomach hollywood hypocrisy. I'm sure all of those actors will be saying "enough" when the next script lands on their desk involving senseless violence.


----------



## MacDoc

Funny - same movies play everywhere in the world.
Complete diversion.
The problem is that 300 million guns - of which many are handguns are casually available in the US and are responsible for 500+ deaths and injuries a day.

Take away the availability and hold buyers, owners and manufacturers liable for the consequences of the "product" on society.

The costs of 1/4 million killed and injured annually is in the tens of billions...just who is paying for that.

Censorship of movies and other art will not resolve anything.
There are car chases in movies too 

It's just crap diversion from the real issue which is availability and guns as a profit scheme.
That's why Bush passed legislation to specifically protect the manufacturers - no other person or organization enjoys similar protection from liability with the odious exception of the fracking industry .....
At least that specific industry is not killing many at the moment. Guns are.


----------



## MacGuiver

I'm not opposed to tighter gun laws in the US. Never have been. Nobody needs an assault weapon to hunt deer.
But you'd be extremely naive to think the violence in our culture and entertainment industry doesn't inspire nut jobs to do crazy things. A gun can do nothing without an unstable individual looking through the sites.
one example:
List of alleged Natural Born Killers copycat crimes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## groovetube

Let me get this straight.

The US, a country where the population is literally armed to the teeth, and with the murder stats to show for it, and we're now blaming the actors and movies?

srsly?

I've heard the phrase, guns don't kill, people do often enough. Well neither do movies. What does kill, is an actual person, and a gun. Separate the 2, and they'll be left with options less likely to kill larger numbers.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult to grasp. And I hear the luna... er NRA is suggesting more armed guards in schools? That sounds like ramping things up. What's next, a platoon assigned to each school once the crime leaps above the armed guards?

People are just suckers.

Surely with brilliant minds we can come up with gun control solutions that work. Ramping things up, is far more brainless than gun control ever was.


----------



## BigDL

MacDoc said:


> Mores change - it's time...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 98% of Doctors who have tried camels, prefer women.


----------



## Macfury

MacDoc said:


> Mores change - it's time....


That's about the saddest effort at an argument i've seen in some time. Even Christmas charity can't allow it to pass, 

And while we're at charging gun owners for gun deaths, let's start charging computer retailers for promulgating malicious messages that the users of those computers can access on the Internet.

Ready for the bill, MacDoc? In the new year, please reslolve to craft better arguments.


----------



## FeXL

I think disarmament is a wonderful idea. As such, the leader of the free world should set an example.

BO can start by taking the firearms away from the raft of Secret Service men surrounding him on any given day.

Progressive hypocrite...


----------



## eMacMan

You mean lead by example instead of pounding the drums of fear?

That seems about as likely as Al Gore dropping his own electrical consumption to a mere 10 times the national average. Just ain't gonna happen.


----------



## SINC

And so it continues . . .

Gun sales surge; 3 1/2 years of ammunition magazines sold in 72 hours - latimes.com


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And so it continues . . .
> 
> Gun sales surge; 3 1/2 years of ammunition magazines sold in 72 hours - latimes.com


Looks like the old "forbidden fruit" story is alive and well after all these years, even if the fruit isn't even forbidden yet. Great marketing ploy, even if unintentional. If America is the home of the free, why so many guns for protection?


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> f America is the home of the free, why so many guns for protection?


Your question is a non sequitur.


----------



## eMacMan

fjnmusic said:


> Looks like the old "forbidden fruit" story is alive and well after all these years, even if the fruit isn't even forbidden yet. Great marketing ploy, even if unintentional. If America is the home of the free, why so many guns for protection?


I think the very existence of the TSA, NSA, Homeland Security, Patriot Act and of course FATCA have driven an impressive set of coffin nails into the myth; "Land of the Free". The founding fathers believed an unarmed populace would inevitably lead to tyranny. They were also aware that an armed populace might not prevent that progression but would at least have a better chance of turfing the tyrants. Still waiting to see if/how that part works.


----------



## FeXL

School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards 



> Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed.


Nice...


----------



## groovetube

Because the president of the united states and their families don't require protection?

Sheer stupidity...


----------



## heavyall

groovetube said:


> Because the president of the united states and their families don't require protection?
> 
> Sheer stupidity...


If you read the article, it's both. The president's daughters are getting secret service protection, AND the school is displaying sheer stupidity by having armed guards all over the place anyway.


----------



## kps

MacDoc said:


> Funny - same movies play everywhere in the world.
> Complete diversion.
> The problem is that 300 million guns - of which many are handguns are casually available in the US and are responsible for 500+ deaths and injuries a day.
> 
> Take away the availability and hold buyers, owners and manufacturers liable for the consequences of the "product" on society.
> 
> The costs of 1/4 million killed and injured annually is in the tens of billions...just who is paying for that.
> 
> Censorship of movies and other art will not resolve anything.
> There are car chases in movies too
> 
> It's just crap diversion from the real issue which is availability and guns as a profit scheme.
> That's why Bush passed legislation to specifically protect the manufacturers - no other person or organization enjoys similar protection from liability with the odious exception of the fracking industry .....
> At least that specific industry is not killing many at the moment. Guns are.


Ummmm. it wasn't about the movies, I myself watch the same movies and own lots of guns and I nor the guns have ever killed or hurt anybody. Oooh, i play Call of Duty the odd time too. 

The post and the video was was about the hypocrisy of these Hollywood stooges. At least try and understand the message before you spout off about censorship and such. Oh, and remember without the 2ND these moviemakers wouldn't be enjoying their rights in the 1ST.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Your question is a non sequitur.


You're a non sequitur. But in a nice way, of course.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Because the president of the united states and their families don't require protection?
> 
> Sheer stupidity...


Is their protection more, or less, important than anybody else's on this planet? Are they more, or less, valuable than anyone else in this world? Why should they, and their cronies, rate protection with firearms all the while they deem it fit to strip that selfsame protection from others? Could it be because they realize that when guns are outlawed, outlaws will still have guns?

HELLO! That doesn't sound stupid to anybody here? Does none of this smack of hypocrisy? Does this make sense to anyone with enough brainpower to generate the heat to melt the snowflakes off their forehead? Jeezuz, people, are you listening to yourselves?

The problem with far too many of these progressive idiots condoning gun control is that they maintain a very Orwellian, 1984, perspective: All are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Like this guy, for instance...

So how does Journal – News reporter Dwight R. Worley rate a NYC pistol permit?


----------



## smashedbanana

heavyall said:


> If you read the article, it's both. The president's daughters are getting secret service protection, AND the school is displaying sheer stupidity by having armed guards all over the place anyway.


First,

The school is a private school not a public one.

Second,

It is full of the who's who's children.

It is literrally a kidnappers candyland. So yes there are guards, they are private and paid for by the enormous tuition. 

It has no value in the arguement about arming teachers...


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> First,
> 
> The school is a private school not a public one.
> 
> Second,
> 
> It is full of the who's who's children.
> 
> It is literrally a kidnappers candyland. So yes there are guards, they are private and paid for by the enormous tuition.
> 
> It has no value in the arguement about arming teachers...


So, what's the thrust here?

If you can afford to send your children to a private school that hires armed guards, that's perfectly acceptable. If not, you're screwed?

BO's children are no more special than anyone else's. Why do his "deserve" special treatment? The children that died in the massacre...did they not deserve to be protected, too?


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Is their protection more, or less, important than anybody else's on this planet? Are they more, or less, valuable than anyone else in this world? Why should they, and their cronies, rate protection with firearms all the while they deem it fit to strip that selfsame protection from others? Could it be because they realize that when guns are outlawed, outlaws will still have guns?
> 
> HELLO! That doesn't sound stupid to anybody here? Does none of this smack of hypocrisy? Does this make sense to anyone with enough brainpower to generate the heat to melt the snowflakes off their forehead? Jeezuz, people, are you listening to yourselves?
> 
> The problem with far too many of these progressive idiots condoning gun control is that they maintain a very Orwellian, 1984, perspective: All are equal, but some are more equal than others.
> 
> Like this guy, for instance...
> 
> So how does Journal – News reporter Dwight R. Worley rate a NYC pistol permit?


First of all, no one has suggested the president's kid's lives are more valuable than other kids lives. But I think it's pretty obvious what the difference here is, though in this discussion no one seems to want to recognize it. Since it seems too difficult to grasp... the president's kids obviously are major targets. So of course there are guards, just as I'm sure in other countries, top politicians and their families are protected.

Now this situation is serious. My feeling is, outright bans isn't going to solve things. The US is a very different place than Canada, or the UK, they are armed to the bleepin teeth, and they aren't about to give that up, certainly not very easily. Now freedom and having guns and shootin people when they come on yer property, that may have been well and fine back in the old days when things were drastically different. But now in 2012, the US has serious problems, and it's only going to get worse. Far worse.

I don't think putting armed guards in schools will solve much either, it's only going to escalate things. The people who want to shoot up schools, will only come in more numbers, and have greater firepower. If you don't think this will happen, you're truly naive.

I don't know what the solution is. But I do know one thing. We will be inundated with all sorts of posturing, screeches of 'hypocrites!', and lunatic ideas that will result in pretty much nothing in terms of saving lives, while the US, being armed to the teeth and stubbornly defending it's right to be, will continue to lead everyone in gun murders by a massive degree. And the continued assault by corporations to squeeze more and more profits and leave more and more people with less and less, results in an armed to the teeth population with less and less to lose. No bans are going to fix that.

The math is simple. lots of people, becoming more and more desperate, with lots of guns, is going to equal more and more people getting killed.

Mark my words.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> So, what's the thrust here?
> 
> If you can afford to send your children to a private school that hires armed guards, that's perfectly acceptable. If not, you're screwed?
> 
> BO's children are no more special than anyone else's. Why do his "deserve" special treatment? The children that died in the massacre...did they not deserve to be protected, too?


Don't be sensationalist. 

I'm sure celebrities and famous people would rather not have to have their kids watched. But they really have no choice.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> ...the president's kids obviously are major targets. So of course there are guards, just as I'm sure in other countries, top politicians and their families are protected.
> <snip>


And we have a winnah!

So, the lesson we can learn here is that no one is going to try anything because BO's children are NOT in a gun free zone...

Stop providing gun free zones and you'll stop providing targets.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> Don't be sensationalist.
> 
> I'm sure celebrities and famous people would rather not have to have their kids watched. But they really have no choice.


I wasn't. I asked a couple questions, which you have not bothered to answer. 

Do your and my children not deserve the same protection?


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> I wasn't. I asked a couple questions, which you have not bothered to answer.
> 
> Do your and my children not deserve the same protection?


Of course you were:

"If you can afford to send your children to a private school that hires armed guards, that's perfectly acceptable. If not, you're screwed?"

That is to say that every other kid in America is at risk because they don't enjoy the same security as the Obama's children. Ridiculous.

Those kids are at more risk even with protection that other kids. There is more motivation to get at them than normal children. For harm but more likely for ransom.

And let's not forget normal parents have a choice to send their kids to public or private schools. Famous people have to hide their kids.

You are just promoting this further distraction that once again it's Obama's fault. Everything is in the U.S. is apparently.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> And we have a winnah!
> 
> So, the lesson we can learn here is that no one is going to try anything because BO's children are NOT in a gun free zone...
> 
> Stop providing gun free zones and you'll stop providing targets.


good luck with that. And having to pay for that...

Enjoy your winnah!

lol.

Then let's put armed guards in every shopping mall, apartment complex, anywhere where someone might commit gun crimes.

Guns, guns, and more guns! The lunacy of this sort of thinking is mindblowing.


----------



## SINC

The thing is that all the geniuses with their anti-gun rhetoric have no idea how to go about eliminating firearms in U.S. society. Their failure to even remotely understand the issue is what is more mind boggling. Talk is cheap, but ineffective in dealing with the real issue that FeXL realizes does exist. In short those who holler about getting rid of guns in America are denser than the problem itself, because they have no idea how to accomplish it.


----------



## groovetube

wellllll, enlighten us.

Because the idea of putting armed guards in every location all across America for shootings is even crazier than trying ban guns in a country like America.

I'd like to hear some smarter ideas, and I ain't hearing any.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I wasn't. I asked a couple questions, which you have not bothered to answer.
> 
> Do your and my children not deserve the same protection?


In fact, much could be achieved by merely allowing teachers to arm themselves. This wouldn't require a teacher to be armed, but put enough doubt into a shooter's head about heading for a school or school board with such a policy--where any teacher or principal might stop them.


----------



## groovetube

Macfury said:


> In fact, much could be achieved by merely allowing teachers to arm themselves. This wouldn't require a teacher to be armed, but put enough doubt into a shooter's head about heading for a school or school board with such a policy--where any teacher or principal might stop them.


Brilliant. So all they have to do is blow away some teachers first.

Man the brilliance is simply blinding.

Let;s remember that many of these shooters shoot themselves in the end, so it isn't as if they're afraid of being shot themselves!

Why is this so difficult to grasp!


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Brilliant. So all they have to do is blow away some teachers first.
> 
> Man the brilliance is simply blinding.
> 
> Let;s remember that many of these shooters shoot themselves in the end, so it isn't as if they're afraid of being shot themselves!
> 
> Why is this so difficult to grasp!


If you'd read the statistics about these type of "infamy seekers", it is that they blow their heads off when either the cops arrive or someone confronts them with a firearm. Those are real facts with respect to these kind of incidents.

What MF is suggesting is to get rid of what is knows as "Gun Free Zones" which include schools. Anyone considering making an attack there may think twice about perpetrating it and if they carry it out, it just might end sooner or not at all if there is someone armed at the scene. It's not a solution, but it may limit what is already a rare event to begin with.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> If you'd read the statistics about these type of "infamy seekers", it is that they blow their heads off when either the cops arrive or someone confronts them with a firearm. Those are real facts with respect to these kind of incidents.
> 
> What MF is suggesting is tot get rid of what is knows as "Gun Free Zones" which include schools. Anyone considering making an attack there may think twice about perpetrating it and if they carry it out, it just might end sooner or not at all if there is someone armed at the scene. It's not a solution, but it may limit what is already a rare event to begin with.


I don't think a cop with a gun or armed guards for that matter has stopped people before.

I think that's wishful thinking. Simplistic at best. Do you really think a teacher with a gun is going to stop someone with assault rifles? :lmao:

riiiight.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I don't think a cop with a gun or armed guards for that matter has stopped people before.
> 
> I think that's wishful thinking. Simplistic at best.


These mass murderers are not "people" don't confuse the issue. Vulnerability plays a major part in the selection of their targets. The facts are the facts, look them up. Pretty much at the first sign of an armed opponent these psychos do themselves in.


----------



## groovetube

Thats funny. The armed guard at columbine didn't stop them from going into the school and killing those kids.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> These mass murderers are not "people" don't confuse the issue.


Oh, I'm sorry.... are they cows? Pigeons? Decorative kale?


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Oh, I'm sorry.... are they cows? Pigeons? Decorative kale?


Please, follow the posts, or is it me not expressing my thought coherently?. It was in reference to Groove's post and "people" was put in quotes to distinguish the irrational and psychotic mass murders from perceived normal rational people even if involved in some form of criminal activity involving guns. There is a difference and if that eluded you I'm sorry, but I'm not going to go into detail with every nuance and reference I may make.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> These mass murderers are not "people" don't confuse the issue. Vulnerability plays a major part in the selection of their targets. The facts are the facts, look them up. Pretty much at the first sign of an armed opponent these psychos do themselves in.





kps said:


> Please, follow the posts, or is it me not expressing my thought coherently?. It was in reference to Groove's post and "people" was put in quotes to distinguish the irrational and psychotic mass murders from perceived normal rational people even if involved in some form of criminal activity involving guns. There is a difference and if that eluded you I'm sorry, but I'm not going to go into detail with every nuance and reference I may make.


Ah yes... the good guys/bad guys argument.

Still, given that you see this as particularly abnormal psychology, it's amazing that you know so much about their thought processes in selecting targets and exactly how and why they 'do themselves in'. (I can think of counter examples without even searching for them.)

Truly, I love how everyone becomes an expert on the psychology of mass murder, even when the people studying this for years don't have these kinds of simple answers. And it so conveniently fits your position too!


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Ah yes... the good guys/bad guys argument.
> 
> Still, given that you see this as particularly abnormal psychology, it's amazing that you know so much about their thought processes in selecting targets and exactly how and why they 'do themselves in'. (I can think of counter examples without even searching for them.)


I'm all ears...



Sonal said:


> Truly, I love how everyone becomes an expert on the psychology of mass murder, even when the people studying this for years don't have these kinds of simple answers. And it so conveniently fits your position too!


Didn't realize this is a battle between my experts (because they fit my position) and your experts.(because they don't)..perhaps we need to bring in more experts, like all those studying GHG and weather changes. There's a consensus amongst them isn't there?

What I have brought up has been wildly reported, does it mean it's false or is it just you who thinks it's false because it does not fit your view?


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> These mass murderers are not "people" don't confuse the issue. Vulnerability plays a major part in the selection of their targets. The facts are the facts, look them up. Pretty much at the first sign of an armed opponent these psychos do themselves in.


They're not mass murderers until they actually pull the trigger. So are they still "people" up until that moment?


----------



## groovetube

groovetube said:


> Thats funny. The armed guard at columbine didn't stop them from going into the school and killing those kids.


ha ha. Dead silence.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> ha ha. Dead silence.


So what do you want me to say, that's just one incident and there were two of them. Different psychology at work there.


----------



## John Clay




----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> So what do you want me to say, that's just one incident and there were two of them. Different psychology at work there.


what?

I'm mocking the ones who thought having an armed guard onsite would solve things.

Pssst... They're already doing this. This isn't the only incident at all.

If the NRA wants armed guards in every American school, fine, they can pay for it.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> I'm all ears...


Columbine.
Fort Hood.
U of Texas clock tower sniper.
Bath School Disaster.

At Columbine, police did not enter the building until all the shooting had stopped, i.e., the two perpetrators had already shot themselves.

At Fort Hood, armed police arrived and engaged in a shoot out with the perpetrator. He did not kill himself, but instead several shots were exchanged with two different officers... one he wounded and disarmed, the other wounded and disarmed him.

At the UTexas Clock tower, the perpetrator exchanged shots several times with police, heard a shot from someone approaching him up the tower, and was later shot and killed.

At the Bath School Disaster, the perpetrator had loaded his car with explosives, and detonated them without anyone armed approaching him.

There's also incidents like Aurora CO where the shooter did his damage and left, though considering he was dressed protective gear it seems likely that he was prepared to be fired upon.... in any case, it seems odd that he would go to the trouble of wearing protective gear and then kill himself if someone armed arrived.



kps said:


> Didn't realize this is a battle between my experts (because they fit my position) and your experts.(because they don't)..perhaps we need to bring in more experts, like all those studying GHG and weather changes. There's a consensus amongst them isn't there?
> 
> What I have brought up has been wildly reported, does it mean it's false or is it just you who thinks it's false because it does not fit your view?


Not at all. Though many things that are not actually factual get widely reported.

You bring up a widely reported supposed correlation and start making claims about what that means in terms of a mass murderers motivations and decisions-making. I point out that said correlation, if it exists, doesn't actually tell us anything about that. As far as I can tell, people who do study these events have NOT come to a consensus as to how and why these events happen, who is chosen, or how to end them. 

Sure, some people kill themselves when the police arrive, though it's not always clear whether they killed themselves because the police arrived or whether they were going to kill themselves anyway. Others shoot the police. 

I also point out that it's convenient for you to think it tells us something. But this is very simplistic reasoning.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> Of course you were:
> 
> "If you can afford to send your children to a private school that hires armed guards, that's perfectly acceptable. If not, you're screwed?"


It was a simple question to establish a baseline, a point from which we can further the discussion. It's obvious you are not interested in discussion, so I won't bother continuing with you after this post. 

Sensationalism would have been repeating the screeching from the MSM...



smashedbanana said:


> That is to say that every other kid in America is at risk because they don't enjoy the same security as the Obama's children. Ridiculous.


What is ridiculous is the hypocrisy illustrated in such statements.



smashedbanana said:


> Those kids are at more risk even with protection that other kids. There is more motivation to get at them than normal children. For harm but more likely for ransom.
> 
> And let's not forget normal parents have a choice to send their kids to public or private schools. Famous people have to hide their kids.


I brook no issue with anyone who wants to send their children to a school with armed security. 

But not all "normal" parents can afford the luxury of a private school with its own security detail. So, what options do the rest of us have? Thousands of gun free zones guaranteed to attract the next whacko?

As well, it tacitly acknowledges the futility of gun control. No way BO's gonna pull his kids after he disarms America. If he, and others like him, don't believe in the system, why should we?



smashedbanana said:


> You are just promoting this further distraction that once again it's Obama's fault. Everything is in the U.S. is apparently.


I have no idea where the hell this comes from. I guess when you can't defend your argument or don't have anything salient to add to the discussion, out comes the old lefty victim card.

As such, I'm done with you here.


----------



## groovetube

It seems, it's difficult to understand that the president's family may require more security than the general population.

It also seems difficult, to grasp that more guns in schools isn't going to deter anyone, who is well aware that a swat team with a full tactical team armed with automatic weapons and well trained will be there to kill them within minutes.


----------



## eMacMan

groovetube said:


> It seems, it's difficult to understand that the president's family may require more security than the general population.
> 
> It also seems difficult, to grasp that more guns in schools isn't going to deter anyone, who is well aware that a swat team with a full tactical team armed with automatic weapons and well trained will be there to kill them within minutes.


Look the president is a politician. Politicians are somewhat lower on the evolutionary ladder than Bankers<lawyers<bums on the street. From a purely Darwinian perspective, does it make any sense at all to take extra steps to preserve the lineage? <insert sarc emoticon here>


----------



## SINC

A ban is not very likely according to this with 74% opposing any ban on handguns.

Record number of Americans oppose handgun ban


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Columbine.
> Fort Hood.
> U of Texas clock tower sniper.
> Bath School Disaster.
> 
> At Columbine, police did not enter the building until all the shooting had stopped, i.e., the two perpetrators had already shot themselves.
> 
> At Fort Hood, armed police arrived and engaged in a shoot out with the perpetrator. He did not kill himself, but instead several shots were exchanged with two different officers... one he wounded and disarmed, the other wounded and disarmed him.
> 
> At the UTexas Clock tower, the perpetrator exchanged shots several times with police, heard a shot from someone approaching him up the tower, and was later shot and killed.
> 
> At the Bath School Disaster, the perpetrator had loaded his car with explosives, and detonated them without anyone armed approaching him.
> 
> There's also incidents like Aurora CO where the shooter did his damage and left, though considering he was dressed protective gear it seems likely that he was prepared to be fired upon.... in any case, it seems odd that he would go to the trouble of wearing protective gear and then kill himself if someone armed arrived.
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all. Though many things that are not actually factual get widely reported.
> 
> You bring up a widely reported supposed correlation and start making claims about what that means in terms of a mass murderers motivations and decisions-making. I point out that said correlation, if it exists, doesn't actually tell us anything about that. As far as I can tell, people who do study these events have NOT come to a consensus as to how and why these events happen, who is chosen, or how to end them.
> 
> Sure, some people kill themselves when the police arrive, though it's not always clear whether they killed themselves because the police arrived or whether they were going to kill themselves anyway. Others shoot the police.
> 
> I also point out that it's convenient for you to think it tells us something. But this is very simplistic reasoning.


Simplistic or not, one thing they all have in common is that they wish to die on that day...and infamously. Either they choose to do it themselves or choose suicide by cop is almost irrelevant. This whole discussion has been what pushes them to the final moment. That, we may never know or even care. I sure don't care when that moment came as long as the bast*rd is dead.

I was going to leave it there, but I must comment on your choices. Not that I'm an expert, but certain things stand out.

Bath...85 years ago by a disgruntled school board employee.

UTexas...46 years ago by an ex-marine. Different psychology I would think. Doubt he was being bullied.

Ft Hood...by a Muslim fanatic. Painfully clear it was a terrorist attack. 

Columbine...by two individuals working as a team. Different psychology yet again.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Simplistic or not, one thing they all have in common is that they wish to die on that day...and infamously.


I'm not convinced that's true.... at least not in the sense that not every event was necessarily thought through to that point. It may seem obvious that the only way out of this kind of a thing is to either kill yourself or be killed, but I don't necessarily believe that every person went in with the intention of ending up dead that day.

For example, after Aurora, the shooter had opportunity to kill himself, or engage with the police, but instead went without resistance. (And it's unlikely he was choosing a death by police route, since he was wearing protective gear.)



kps said:


> I was going to leave it there, but I must comment on your choices. Not that I'm an expert, but certain things stand out.
> 
> Bath...85 years ago by a disgruntled school board employee.
> 
> UTexas...46 years ago by an ex-marine. Different psychology I would think. Doubt he was being bullied.
> 
> Ft Hood...by a Muslim fanatic. Painfully clear it was a terrorist attack.
> 
> Columbine...by two individuals working as a team. Different psychology yet again.


Well, it's not clear to the many investigating officials involved that Ft. Hood was a terrorist attack. In any case, neither the FBI nor the Pentagon choose to characterize the event as terrorism.

But in any case, I would argue that there is a different psychology to every mass shooting. Certainly, no one has yet been able to come up with a profile. And that is my point. 

To say that we know that mass murderers always choose vulnerable locations or always kill themselves/make sure they get killed when an armed official arrives is a way of oversimplifying this. The more accurate answer is that no one really knows yet.


----------



## screature

eMacMan said:


> Look the president is a politician. Politicians are somewhat lower on the evolutionary ladder than Bankers<lawyers<bums on the street. From a purely Darwinian perspective, does it make any sense at all to take extra steps to preserve the lineage? <insert sarc emoticon here>


 Pure bunk to say the very least.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> I'm not convinced that's true.... at least not in the sense that not every event was necessarily thought through to that point. It may seem obvious that the only way out of this kind of a thing is to either kill yourself or be killed, but I don't necessarily believe that every person went in with the intention of ending up dead that day.
> 
> For example, after Aurora, the shooter had opportunity to kill himself, or engage with the police, but instead went without resistance. (And it's unlikely he was choosing a death by police route, since he was wearing protective gear.)
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's not clear to the many investigating officials involved that Ft. Hood was a terrorist attack. In any case, neither the FBI nor the Pentagon choose to characterize the event as terrorism.
> 
> But in any case, I would argue that there is a different psychology to every mass shooting. Certainly, no one has yet been able to come up with a profile. And that is my point.
> 
> *To say that we know that mass murderers always choose vulnerable locations* or always kill themselves/make sure they get killed when an armed official arrives is a way of oversimplifying this. The more accurate answer is that no one really knows yet.



I think we can safely say it is true in *most * situations... that is why they can commit *mass* murder and not kill just one or two people before they kill themselves or are killed/apprehended.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> I think we can safely say it is true in *most * situations... that is why they can commit *mass* murder and not kill just one or two people.


We can safely say that successful mass murder tends to be in vulnerable places. But not necessarily that those who _intend_ to commit mass murder deliberately choose vulnerable places, as kps' earlier post suggested.


----------



## fjnmusic

Sonal said:


> But in any case, I would argue that there is a different psychology to every mass shooting. Certainly, no one has yet been able to come up with a profile. And that is my point.
> 
> To say that we know that mass murderers always choose vulnerable locations or always kill themselves/make sure they get killed when an armed official arrives is a way of oversimplifying this. The more accurate answer is that no one really knows yet.


Well put, Sonal. We want them all to fit a profile so then we could see them coming, but we usually fail to make the connections until after the deed is already done. I think it's probably safe to say that in each case the killer had personal problems and/or psychotic tendencies that would have made it difficult for people to get close enough to diagnose and/or help them. Most seem to be described as recluses. The boy in Connecticut certainly seemed to fit this description. 

The guns are already widely available in the US. This doesn't men they shouldn't try to ban at least some of them, but the genie is already out of the bottle. The mentality about gun culture as well as mental illness has to change, but I don't see that happening. A month passes and people go back to whatever they believed once the novelty of a new shooting wears off. It's the culture, and they think they're the greatest nation on earth.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> We can safely say that successful mass murder tends to be in vulnerable places. *But not necessarily that those who intend to commit mass murder deliberately choose vulnerable places,* as kps' earlier post suggested.


Do you know of any situations where a would be mass murder (not terrorist act) was foiled because the would be mass murderer attacked a well defended location? If so how many of them do you know of relative to locations that were chosen because of their vulnerability?

It seems to me if *one* person wants to commit mass murder it is just "common sense" that they would choose a location where they could inflict as much damage as possible before they could be stopped or kill themselves.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> I'm not convinced that's true.... at least not in the sense that not every event was necessarily thought through to that point. It may seem obvious that the only way out of this kind of a thing is to either kill yourself or be killed, but I don't necessarily believe that every person
> 
> For example, after Aurora, the shooter had opportunity to kill himself, or engage with the police, but instead went without resistance. (And it's unlikely he was choosing a death by police route, since he was wearing protective gear.)
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's not clear to the many investigating officials involved that Ft. Hood was a terrorist attack. In any case, neither the FBI nor the Pentagon choose to characterize the event as terrorism.
> 
> But in any case, I would argue that there is a different psychology to every mass shooting. Certainly, no one has yet been able to come up with a profile. And that is my point.
> 
> To say that we know that mass murderers always choose vulnerable locations or always kill themselves/make sure they get killed when an armed official arrives is a way of oversimplifying this. The more accurate answer is that no one really knows yet.



I based my post on what Larry Carreia wrote in his lengthy tome linked below:


> The single best way to respond to a mass shooter is with an immediate, violent response. The vast majority of the time, as soon as a mass shooter meets serious resistance, it bursts their fantasy world bubble. Then they kill themselves or surrender. This has happened over and over again.


and him being an experienced firearms instructor and very knowledgeable in these matters, I took it as fact, and fact it may be.

If you have a few minutes do read it. Agree or not with Correia, it makes for an interesting read, especially if you put it in context of a country awash in guns, a country so saturated with firearms that it would be truly an impossible task to remove them all without force and changing the constitution...and that's not about to happen. IMHO, the only way this can be fixed is if you fix the culture of fear and violence first. 
An opinion on gun control « Monster Hunter Nation


----------



## Sonal

fjnmusic said:


> Well put, Sonal. We want them all to fit a profile so then we could see them coming, but we usually fail to make the connections until after the deed is already done. I think it's probably safe to say that in each case the killer had personal problems and/or psychotic tendencies that would have made it difficult for people to get close enough to diagnose and/or help them. Most seem to be described as recluses. The boy in Connecticut certainly seemed to fit this description.


I love armchair psychology as much as the next person, but the danger, IMO, in the armchair psychology of trying to figure out what kind of people do this sort of thing, how and why they go about making their choices, and trying to fit them all into a particular box is that:
a) We create a bunch of bad assumptions about how and why these things happen and then start making bad decisions based on bad assumptions
b) We start dividing the world into good people and bad people instead of realizing that we are all people and the horrifying things that some people is all within the realm of humanity... which makes for a better starting point to figuring out how this happened
c) We start making life difficult for people who have no intention of doing harm, but somehow fit this profile of bad assumptions: people who are quiet, people who are weird, people who have mental illnesses, etc.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> I love armchair psychology as much as the next person, but the danger, IMO, in the armchair psychology of trying to figure out what kind of people do this sort of thing, how and why they go about making their choices, and trying to fit them all into a particular box is that:
> a) We create a bunch of bad assumptions about how and why these things happen and then start making bad decisions based on bad assumptions
> b) We start dividing the world into good people and bad people instead of realizing that we are all people and the horrifying things that some people is all within the realm of humanity... which makes for a better starting point to figuring out how this happened
> c) We start making life difficult for people who have no intention of doing harm, but somehow fit this profile of bad assumptions: people who are quiet, people who are weird, people who have mental illnesses, etc.


Sonal the profiling of criminal behaviour has been going on for decades and not by armchair psychologists, but by people who conduct fulsome research. For example we know that many serial killers start out by killing small animals and work their way up...

Profiling is a legitimate aspect of criminology and has been used and is used widely as means of identifying the psychology of criminals of all sorts. It is far from being perfect in every case but is a useful tool in the criminal investigator's and criminologists tool box.

Just to add it is a simple fact that the world does have "good" people and "bad" people. The vast majority of us fit into a grey area but their are some who fit into the extremes.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> Do you know of any situations where a would be mass murder (not terrorist act) was foiled because the would be mass murderer attacked a well defended location? If so how many of them do you know of relative to locations that were chosen because of their vulnerability?
> 
> It seems to me if *one* person wants to commit mass murder it is just "common sense" that they would choose a location where they could inflict as much damage as possible before they could be stopped or kill themselves.


Media being what it is, cases where something was quickly foiled seems unlikely to make the headlines.... no tragedy, no story.

But to me, the problem with this line of thinking is that it assumes that a person is logically thinking out, how can I kill as many people as possible? But I don't believe that's necessarily the case, in that the place might be selected for more personal or symbolic reasons.

For example, at Columbine, the two students went to a school with armed guards. It would have likely been easier for them to commit a mass murder at (picking random examples) something like an unarmed library, or a daycare, or something. But they chose their school. It doesn't seem likely that they selected their school because they thought it was particularly vulnerable compared to how many other possible locations in Littleton which would be more vulnerable, but they chose it because it was meaningful to them to select that place.

That is why I think it's not really accurate to say that locations are selected on the basis of vulnerability, though it certainly plays a role in the success, and (if the attacked was planned for a long time) the planning.


----------



## fjnmusic

Sonal said:


> I love armchair psychology as much as the next person, but the danger, IMO, in the armchair psychology of trying to figure out what kind of people do this sort of thing, how and why they go about making their choices, and trying to fit them all into a particular box is that:
> a) We create a bunch of bad assumptions about how and why these things happen and then start making bad decisions based on bad assumptions
> b) We start dividing the world into good people and bad people instead of realizing that we are all people and the horrifying things that some people is all within the realm of humanity... which makes for a better starting point to figuring out how this happened
> c) We start making life difficult for people who have no intention of doing harm, but somehow fit this profile of bad assumptions: people who are quiet, people who are weird, people who have mental illnesses, etc.


With respect to point C, you're absolutely right. Shunning the odd ones only perpetuates the isolation. Extending a welcoming hand and finding medical/psychiatric help before a tragedy happens is so important and necessary to get past the us/them mentality of your average citizen. But the whole mentality of the nation has to change, including the belief that some people have an inherent entitlement to health care while others do not. The US is essentially a caste system.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> Sonal the profiling of criminal behaviour has been going on for decades and not by armchair psychologists, but by people who conduct fulsome research. For example we know that many serial killers start out by killing small animals and work their way up...
> 
> Profiling is a legitimate aspect of criminology and has been used and is used widely as means of identifying the psychology of criminals of all sorts. It is far from being perfect in every case but is a useful tool in the criminal investigator's and criminologists tool box.


Right, and when done by criminologists and psychologists, it's NOT armchair psychology. Professionals vs. amateurs....


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> *Media being what it is, cases where something was quickly foiled seems unlikely to make the headlines.... no tragedy, no story.*
> 
> But to me, the problem with this line of thinking is that it assumes that a person is logically thinking out, how can I kill as many people as possible? But I don't believe that's necessarily the case, in that *the place might be selected for more personal or symbolic reasons.*
> 
> For example, at Columbine, the two students went to a school with armed guards. It would have likely been easier for them to commit a mass murder at (picking random examples) something like an unarmed library, or a daycare, or something. But they chose their school. It doesn't seem likely that they selected their school because they thought it was particularly vulnerable compared to how many other possible locations in Littleton which would be more vulnerable, but they chose it because it was meaningful to them to select that place.
> 
> That is why I think it's not really accurate to say that locations are selected on the basis of vulnerability, though it certainly plays a role in the success, and (if the attacked was planned for a long time) the planning.


I don't agree with this point. The media would be all over a situation where a tragedy was averted and we would know about it.

I believe you are correct here, there are most often very personal reasons for choosing a given location, however it seems passing strange that most often these locations are where there is little to no armed defences in place.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> Right, and when done by criminologists and psychologists, it's NOT armchair psychology. Professionals vs. amateurs....


I agree.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> and him being an experienced firearms instructor and very knowledgeable in these matters, I took it as fact, and fact it may be.
> 
> If you have a few minutes do read it. Agree or not with Correia, it makes for an interesting read, especially if you put it in context of a country awash in guns, a country so saturated with firearms that it would be truly an impossible task to remove them all without force and changing the constitution...and that's not about to happen. IMHO, the only way this can be fixed is if you fix the culture of fear and violence first.
> An opinion on gun control « Monster Hunter Nation


I'll give it a read if I remember later on.

But most of my objection was to assumptions on how to characterize people who do (or intend to) commit mass murder. Being a firearms instructor means he's knowledgeable about firearms but not necessarily criminal psychology.... which, based on a quick skim, he himself admits.

I do agree that it's a near-impossible task to remove all or even most firearms in the USA, and that culture plays a huge role in all of this.


----------



## Rps

We can analyse this all we want, trying to rationalize the seemingly irrational doesn't make it rational. The key here is that there hasn't been enough critical mass to change the culture ... no matter how exhaustingly horrible these examples of what we see as needless violence are. Not tarring this as a U.S. only issue because as we have seen of late these unspeakable acts exist everywhere...but to the point of the U.S. they need to take a collective deep breath and begin to believe that they can live in their homeland with out being under constant terror and fear of themselves, understand that sometimes a "restriction for the common good" does not translate as an invasion of some constitutional right ( alcohol in the blood testing for DUI for example ) and choose not to participate the perpetuation of guns, guns, guns......


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> I believe you are correct here, there are most often very personal reasons for choosing a given location, however it seems passing strange that most often these locations are where there is little to no armed defences in place.


Which may be explained by the notion that a very large and deadly incident is going to get a lot more airtime than something that was quickly foiled. A good example of how correlation is not causation. (The link kps posted below does refer to a couple of examples where such attempts were foiled, though there's not a lot of detail on these events.)

But to assume that by making areas less vulnerable to attack, those areas are less likely to be chosen does not make sense to me. It may possibly make success less likely in those areas, which is a harm-reduction argument, just as reducing the number/deadliness of guns is a harm-reduction argument. 

Then I wonder.... if you arm more people to defend in particular places, does this start turning into an arms race where someone who considers a mass shooting must seek out deadlier weapons? And then the people defending such places must do the same, or else it is the same problem all over again. To me, this does not sound like a good harm reduction strategy... it just keeps upping the ante.


----------



## groovetube

sonal said:


> which may be explained by the notion that a very large and deadly incident is going to get a lot more airtime than something that was quickly foiled. A good example of how correlation is not causation. (the link kps posted below does refer to a couple of examples where such attempts were foiled, though there's not a lot of detail on these events.)
> 
> but to assume that by making areas less vulnerable to attack, those areas are less likely to be chosen does not make sense to me. It may possibly make success less likely in those areas, which is a harm-reduction argument, just as reducing the number/deadliness of guns is a harm-reduction argument.
> 
> Then i wonder.... If you arm more people to defend in particular places, does this start turning into an arms race where someone who considers a mass shooting must seek out deadlier weapons? And then the people defending such places must do the same, or else it is the same problem all over again. To me, this does not sound like a good harm reduction strategy... It just keeps upping the ante.


+100


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> *Which may be explained by the notion that a very large and deadly incident is going to get a lot more airtime than something that was quickly foiled. * A good example of how correlation is not causation. (The link kps posted below does refer to a couple of examples where such attempts were foiled, though there's not a lot of detail on these events.)
> 
> But to assume that by making areas less vulnerable to attack, those areas are less likely to be chosen does not make sense to me.
> * It may possibly make success less likely in those areas, which is a harm-reduction argument, just as reducing the number/deadliness of guns is a harm-reduction argument. *
> 
> Then I wonder.... *if you arm more people to defend in particular places, does this start turning into an arms race where someone who considers a mass shooting must seek out deadlier weapons? And then the people defending such places must do the same, or else it is the same problem all over again. To me, this does not sound like a good harm reduction strategy... it just keeps upping the ante.*


You missed my edit to my post so here it is again:



> I don't agree with this point. The media would be all over a situation where a tragedy was averted and we would know about it.


Exactly. It doesn't mean that the target would necessarily be removed but the likelihood of success could be greatly reduced... thus why we have the screening that we do at airports, border crossings, large businesses, government offices, etc. 

Where there is a significant threat to public security we have put into place screening systems and armed security.

It is unfortunate that educational institutions have become targets, but over and over again we have seen it to be the case... how long are we going to wait before such harm reduction methods are going to be adopted in our educational facilities?

I agree and am in favour of limiting and restricting certain types of arms to private individuals. But in the US it isn't so easy...

Sure for terrorists, but for the average whack job it greatly reduces their chances of success... and security should be the primary goal in dealing with situations like Connecticut.


----------



## groovetube

until the whack job simply brings far more firepower to be more successful.

What then. Things have -already- escalated in case no one has noticed.


----------



## Sonal

We will have to agree to disagree on how the media reports such events.



screature said:


> It is unfortunate that educational institutions have become targets, but over and over again we have seen it to be the case... how long are we going to wait before such harm reduction methods are going to be adopted in our educational facilities?


And there was armed security at Columbine... which did not seem to do much.

Moreover, studies have shown that armed security guards make children feel less safe at school, which in turn interferes with their learning. 



screature said:


> I agree and am in favour of limiting and restricting certain types of arms to private individuals. But in the US it ain't so easy...


Agreed.



screature said:


> Sure for terrorists, but for the average whack job it greatly reduces their chance of success... and security should be the primary goal in dealing with situations like Connecticut.


Similarly, having no or less deadly guns available for the average whackjob to acquire also reduces their chance of success.... and without the increased risks of armed guards/teachers (accidents do happen) or the cost of providing arms and training/trained and armed security guards, to thousands of schools.... among other places. 

Admittedly, this would be legislative challenge in the USA.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> We will have to agree to disagree on how the media reports such events.
> 
> *And there was armed security at Columbine... which did not seem to do much.*
> 
> Moreover, studies have shown that armed security guards *make children feel less safe* at school, which in turn interferes with their learning.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Similarly, *having no or less deadly guns available for the average whackjob to acquire also reduces their chance of success....*[ and without the increased risks of armed guards/teachers (accidents do happen) or the cost of providing arms and training/trained and armed security guards, to thousands of schools.... among other places.
> 
> Admittedly, this would be legislative challenge in the USA.


What screening methods were in place? To me screening is the first point of defence.

I can understand the feelings of children but that doesn't mean they are correct... the boogey man isn't under their bed but yet they are afraid of him.

You know this isn't going to happen, or at least anytime soon, so what do you suggest in the interim?


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> I'll give it a read if I remember later on.
> 
> But most of my objection was to assumptions on how to characterize people who do (or intend to) commit mass murder. Being a firearms instructor means he's knowledgeable about firearms but not necessarily criminal psychology.... which, based on a quick skim, he himself admits.
> 
> I do agree that it's a near-impossible task to remove all or even most firearms in the USA, and that culture plays a huge role in all of this.


The training he provided on the use of deadly force, self defence, etc, would be based on available criminal psychology and years of practical experience in the field by many others and/or gov. and military departments. Based on that premise, there was no reason for me to refute what he said.

I'm of the opinion that in a gun saturated environment (like the US) where any waco can get a gun, it's better to have an armed teacher, janitor, principal, guard, etc in the school to protect the children than a sign on the front door stating "Gun Free Zone". 

Holmes the Aurora shooter did pick a more vulnerable spot, he also chose to surrender much like Breivik in Norway. I have no explanation and I'm definitely no expert on human psychology. Far too complex an issue for "amateurs" like me. I had no intention of turning this into a debate on the psychology of mass murderers. Especially mass murderers of innocent children.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> I can understand the feelings of children but that doesn't mean they are correct... the boogey man isn't under their bed but yet they are afraid of him.


They may not be correct, but if it interferes with their ability to learn in school, this creates another problem. 



screature said:


> You know this isn't going to happen, or at least anytime soon, so what do you suggest in the interim?


Continued advocacy for better screening, better controls on private sales, less access to deadly weapons, fewer guns, etc. 

I think no matter how long it takes to get there, the USA is going to have to realize that divesting themselves of their culture of violence and guns is ultimately going to be to their benefit.

I don't think that arming teachers, providing armed security guards at schools, etc., are particularly good interim strategies, as they serve to entrench the existing cultural problem.... making it only harder to change in the future.

I do recognize that it is going to be a long an ugly and violent road either way.


----------



## kps

If you could wean Americans off the culture of violence most of the 300 million guns would disappear on their own instead of being in the hands of scared and untrained individuals.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> If you could wean Americans off the culture of violence most of the 300 million guns would disappear on their own instead of being in the hands of scared and untrained individuals.


True. But while they have a gun in their hand, weaning seems a lot less likely.


----------



## groovetube

indeed. This is why I'm not hopeful for any solutions that actually work anytime soon. 

I spent a few years down there travelling, and after seeing all the well armed militias and seeing gun crime in front of my eyes occur, I don't see Americans seeing that having that many guns floating around as any kind of a problem. The solution, seems to be, more guns.

More guns. Yeah that'll fix it. The ole deterrent thing. Until the bad guy gets a bigger gun.


----------



## Macfury

News Talk Radio 77 WABC New York - [From ABC News]


> We've had this unwritten code, even among criminals, that schools are off limits. Those are our kids. You don't mess with that," Utah Shooting Sports Council (USSC) Chairman Clark Aposhian told ABC News.
> 
> "That perception has been blown away now," he said. "It's been shattered and if there's one thing that parents across the country are united on, it's that they are committed to and serious about protecting their kids."
> 
> Aposhian spoke shortly before opening a weapons training class for teachers and school employees that drew more than 200 Utah educators organized by the USSC, a leading gun lobby group that believes that teachers should be able to fight back when faced with an armed intruder.
> 
> "One firearm in the hands of one teacher could have made the difference at Sandy Hook or Columbine, but they weren't allowed to carry in those schools," Aposhian said.


----------



## fjnmusic

So say the armed teacher fires, misses or only maims, the shooter blows him or her away, and now that classroom full of children are sitting ducks since their hiding place is now exposed. People who advocate more guns "for protection" do not always think things through. Would the teacher be permitted to shoot first, for example, or would the shooter have to kill someone for the teacher to be permitted to fire his or her weapon?


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> So say the armed teacher fires, misses or only maims, the shooter blows him or her away, and now that classroom full of children are sitting ducks since their hiding place is now exposed. People who advocate more guns "for protection" do not always think things through. Would the teacher be permitted to shoot first, for example, or would the shooter have to kill someone for the teacher to be permitted to fire his or her weapon?


All that is clear is that they have the guts to kill the person attacking them and their students.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> All that is clear is that they have the guts to kill the person attacking them and their students.


Sure, until their guts are splattered all over the walls because their aim was not great, the shooter beat them to it or they were not permitted to fire a round until the other guy shot first and killed them. Even the police issue a warning first, and they are legally permitted to fire on an assailant. You're not thinking this through, Macfury. A teacher firing on an intruder could also do more damage and put his or her kids more at risk if they miss.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> So say the armed teacher fires, misses or only maims, the shooter blows him or her away, and now that classroom full of children are sitting ducks since their hiding place is now exposed. People who advocate more guns "for protection" do not always think things through. Would the teacher be permitted to shoot first, for example, or would the shooter have to kill someone for the teacher to be permitted to fire his or her weapon?


Wouldn't they be "sitting ducks" either way? They would definitely stand a better chance with the armed teacher than not. There are thousands of "what if" scenarios except that “The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is with a good guy with a gun.” I know, I know, NRA rhetoric, but when you think about it, it's true.

As this is becoming reality south of the border I'd imagine that whomever would be authorized to conceal carry on the job (be it teachers, staff, janitors) would have the proper training in the use of deadly force and the appropriate practical range training on top of everything else. In some states I believe this is already mandatory, if you apply for a conceal carry permit.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Sure, until their guts are splattered all over the walls because their aim was not great, the shooter beat them to it or they were not permitted to fire a round until the other guy shot first and killed them. Even the police issue a warning first, and they are legally permitted to fire on an assailant. You're not thinking this through, Macfury. A teacher firing on an intruder could also do more damage and put his or her kids more at risk if they miss.


If I had my choice, I would send my kid to a school where a teacher _might_ be armed over Hands Up Elementary where teachers are taking a principled stand for victimhood.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Wouldn't they be "sitting ducks" either way? They would definitely stand a better chance with the armed teacher than not. There are thousands of "what if" scenarios except that &#147;The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is with a good guy with a gun.&#148; I know, I know, NRA rhetoric, but when you think about it, it's true.


Not really. One of the young teachers in Connecticut saved her class by misinforming the gunman that her students were in the gym. He killed her anyway, but her students survived not because she was armed but because she was a quick thinker. "Bad guys" and "good guys" are pejorative terms anyway. If this guy was so bad, why didn't anybody notice that fact before he shot up a school? It's hard to know what's going to happen until it happens. Hindsight is 20/20.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Not really. One of the young teachers in Connecticut saved her class by misinforming the gunman that her students were in the gym. He killed her anyway, but her students survived not because she was armed but because she was a quick thinker. "Bad guys" and "good guys" are pejorative terms anyway. If this guy was so bad, why didn't anybody notice that fact before he shot up a school? It's hard to know what's going to happen until it happens. Hindsight is 20/20.



So if she had been armed, she could have told him they were in the gym--and killed the gunman before he killed others.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Not really. One of the young teachers in Connecticut saved her class by misinforming the gunman that her students were in the gym. He killed her anyway, but her students survived not because she was armed but because she was a quick thinker. "Bad guys" and "good guys" are pejorative terms anyway. If this guy was so bad, why didn't anybody notice that fact before he shot up a school? It's hard to know what's going to happen until it happens. Hindsight is 20/20.


Well wasn't his mother preparing to commit him? Perhaps that's just false information, who knows or perhaps that is the reason he killed her and went on the school rampage. In any case, I'd rather if the principal of that Newtown school was armed and attempted to take the sick perp out than just flinging herself into the path of the bullets. Yes, very commendable but it didn't change the outcome, did it?


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> Would the teacher be permitted to shoot first, for example, or would the shooter have to kill someone for the teacher to be permitted to fire his or her weapon?


Why even let it escalate that far? _Everyone_ who enters the school does so through one door, and passes through a metal detector manned by armed security detail. Bigger schools, multiple doors, same scenario. The situation never has to get near the classroom.


----------



## groovetube

oh the insanity of it all.

People don't even see it. We lived through the whole stupidity of the color coded warning system that controlled the population, and now I see the 'freedom fighters' all lining up for this true lunacy.

It won't do a damn ting except escalate it all. I'm glad I live here with our gun control and not down there.


----------



## SINC

Yep, this now too:

Utah council to hold class for teachers on concealed carry permits - UPI.com


----------



## i-rui

groovetube said:


> oh the insanity of it all.
> 
> People don't even see it. We lived through the whole stupidity of the color coded warning system that controlled the population, and now I see the 'freedom fighters' all lining up for this true lunacy.
> 
> It won't do a damn ting except escalate it all. I'm glad I live here with our gun control and not down there.


+1

David Frum (a conservative) really nailed the idiocy of the NRA proposal last week :

David Frum Ridicules NRA On Twitter (STORIFY) « The Agonist


----------



## eMacMan

I can think of very few professions more likely to drive someone bonkers than teaching. Do we really want our teachers carrying heat when they step over the cliff?


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> +1
> 
> David Frum (a conservative) really nailed the idiocy of the NRA proposal last week :
> 
> David Frum Ridicules NRA On Twitter (STORIFY) « The Agonist


David Frum is NOT a conservative. He's a Republican with a lot of bad ideas. How many liberal ideas can you espouse and still call yourself a conservative? He passed the tipping point long ago.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> They may not be correct, but if it interferes with their ability to learn in school, this creates another problem.


I don't know that there is any evidence that having armed security on the premises interferes with their ability to learn in school.



Sonal said:


> Continued advocacy for better screening, better controls on private sales, less access to deadly weapons, fewer guns, etc.


If by better screening you mean making sure that people who are psychologically disturbed do not own guns it would not have helped in this case as the guns were the mother's. But in general I agree. As for the other interim solutions that you propose they are all a long way off.



Sonal said:


> I think no matter how long it takes to get there, the USA is going to have to realize that divesting themselves of their culture of violence and guns is ultimately going to be to their benefit.


The problem is that a very significant proportion of the population in the USA does not agree with that statement and they have the constitution to back them up.



Sonal said:


> I don't think that arming teachers, providing armed security guards at schools, etc., are particularly good interim strategies, as they serve to entrench the existing cultural problem.... making it only harder to change in the future.


I certainly don't agree with arming teachers but having security screening systems in place, e.g. metal detectors, baggage scanners, security pass cards, etc. along with armed security at the entrances (like at airports and large businesses and government facilities) could go a long way toward addressing the safety of students in the interim. I don't see how doing so entrenches a culture that is already entrenched. When you are in the ocean you can't get any wetter.



Sonal said:


> I do recognize that it is going to be a long an ugly and violent road either way.


Agreed.


----------



## eMacMan

screature said:


> ...I certainly don't agree with arming teachers but having security screening systems in place, e.g. metal detectors, baggage scanners, security pass cards, etc. along with armed security at the entrances (like at airports and large businesses and government facilities) could go a long way toward addressing the safety of students in the interim. I don't see how doing so entrenches a culture that is already entrenched. When you are in the ocean you can't get any wetter....
> 
> Agreed.


If your purpose is to create compliant Sheeple then I agree. Personally I would prefer todays kids to grow up recognizing that their Government can be wrong and do wrong, and scream so loudly when it happens that people just have to listen and maybe even give their mis-representatives a good hard kick in the rump! 

I am sure Woody Guthrie will forgive me for the paraphrasing.


----------



## groovetube

i-rui said:


> +1
> 
> David Frum (a conservative) really nailed the idiocy of the NRA proposal last week :
> 
> David Frum Ridicules NRA On Twitter (STORIFY) « The Agonist


If you don't do and say what you're told, then you are NOT a real conservative!


----------



## John Clay

screature said:


> I certainly don't agree with arming teachers but having security screening systems in place, e.g. metal detectors, baggage scanners, security pass cards, etc. along with armed security at the entrances (like at airports and large businesses and government facilities) could go a long way toward addressing the safety of students in the interim. I don't see how doing so entrenches a culture that is already entrenched. When you are in the ocean you can't get any wetter.



Over my dead body.

Airport security is horrid enough. There's no need, or benefit, to imposing that upon school children.





eMacMan said:


> If your purpose is to create compliant Sheeple then I agree. Personally I would prefer todays kids to grow up recognizing that their Government can be wrong and do wrong, and scream so loudly when it happens that people just have to listen and maybe even give their mis-representatives a good hard kick in the rump!
> 
> I am sure Woody Guthrie will forgive me for the paraphrasing.


+1.


----------



## Macfury

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Agreed on both counts.

I want teachers to be given the choice to be armed, just to add a degree of uncertainty to the plans of shooters. Security checkpoints just add a new level of incompetent government bureaucracy and unnecessary authority to an already overburdened society.


----------



## screature

eMacMan said:


> If your purpose is to create compliant Sheeple then I agree. Personally I would prefer todays kids to grow up recognizing that their Government can be wrong and do wrong, and scream so loudly when it happens that people just have to listen and maybe even give their mis-representatives a good hard kick in the rump!
> 
> I am sure Woody Guthrie will forgive me for the paraphrasing.





John Clay said:


> Over my dead body.
> 
> Airport security is horrid enough. There's no need, or benefit, to imposing that upon school children.
> 
> +1.





Macfury said:


> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Agreed on both counts.
> 
> I want teachers to be given the choice to be armed, just to add a degree of uncertainty to the plans of shooters. Security checkpoints just add a new level of incompetent government bureaucracy and unnecessary authority to an already overburdened society.


Hundreds of thousands of people, my self included, go though security access points, every day every. Students and staff would only need to have a card scanner to have access. It is no big deal. The other measures would only be for visitors i.e. non staff and students.

And yes it does provide for greater security.


----------



## eMacMan

screature said:


> Hundreds of thousands of people, my self included, go though security access points, every day every. Students and staff would only need to have a card scanner to have access. It is no big deal. The other measures would only be for visitors i.e. non staff and students.
> 
> And yes it does provide for greater security.


Yep trading liberty for security is always a great idea. Just ask those folks in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.


----------



## screature

eMacMan said:


> Yep trading liberty for security is always a great idea. Just ask those folks in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.


Oh for gods sake why the hyperbole. What liberty is being taken away by having secure access to a building... The liberty of would be mass murderers?


----------



## fjnmusic

eMacMan said:


> I can think of very few professions more likely to drive someone bonkers than teaching. Do we really want our teachers carrying heat when they step over the cliff?


This. Nailed it. "Oops! Sorry Johnny! I meant to get Bob behind you."


----------



## eMacMan

screature said:


> Oh for gods sake why the hyperbole. What liberty is being taken away by having secure access to a building... The liberty of would be mass murderers?


Strange as it may sound to some of you Easterners, there are still a few of us that refuse to quiver in terror just cause the guvment tells us to be afraid. A lifetime of experience tells me to keep a very close eye on the fear mongers, as they are the real threat.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> I don't know that there is any evidence that having armed security on the premises interferes with their ability to learn in school.


I've seen references to such studies, though not the original studies.... haven't hit upon the right search terms to dig them up.

In any case, here is an early (2001) review of approaches to dealing with violence in schools, though it shows that there are more questions about the usefulness of such approaches than there are answers as to what seems to work.... I hope that some further research has been conducted since: 
"Indeed, some preliminary evidence suggests that physical surveillance methods (metal detectors, searches, and security guards) can predict increased disorder."
School Violence: Prevalence, Fears, and Prevention | RAND



screature said:


> The problem is that a very significant proportion of the population in the USA does not agree with that statement and they have the constitution to back them up.


And a significant proportion in the USA does agree with me, but does not have the constitution to back them up. 



screature said:


> I certainly don't agree with arming teachers but having security screening systems in place, e.g. metal detectors, baggage scanners, security pass cards, etc. along with armed security at the entrances (like at airports and large businesses and government facilities) could go a long way toward addressing the safety of students in the interim. I don't see how doing so entrenches a culture that is already entrenched. When you are in the ocean you can't get any wetter.


Maybe you can't get wetter, but you can get deeper into the ocean, which means it will take longer to get somewhere that you can dry.


----------



## Dr.G.

"Maybe you can't get wetter, but you can get deeper into the ocean, which means it will take longer to get somewhere that you can dry. " A great expression, Sonal. Very appropriate. Paix, mon amie.


----------



## eMacMan

I said earlier that I had the feeling that the anti-gun gang and the NRA were working together here. So lets review things to date.

Slaughter at a school. Do they investigate whether the shooter was using SSRIs?, whether there was Scopalomine in his system? Nope!

Very confused reporting. Was there a "shooter in the school" drill planned at the same time? Lots of rumours. Unfortunately the Principal who could have answered that question was the first one shot.

Then we have the Gun control advocates pouncing while bodies are still warm in the morgue. Weapons and munition sales equal 3 and a half years worth in three days. They had been very poor after the first "My God they elected Obama panic" failed to produce even a whisper of gun control.

A counter proposal by the NRA for armed guards in every school. A true wing-nut idea followed by an even dumber one. 

Lets have metal detectors and blast proof doors and windows at all of the schools. Figure a minimum of $100,000/school for installing bullet proof glass, the detectors, alterations to the schools electrical systems, finding and training two or three people per school to run the thing.... Now multiply that by 100,000 public schools in the US. That's only $10 Billion dollar$ or so. 

The result: Kids whom are afraid of their own shadow and who meekly obey authority without question. 

IOW working together the Anti/pro gun bunch hand over a huge stash of cash to corporate America and to the Weaponry Corps.

This is simply too neat of a progression to continue calling this a random event. Definitely time to call false flag.

BTW that cost is nothing. Someone will slip some plastic grenades past the super security and BOOM suddenly there will also be naked body scanners in all those schools. I wonder how enthused parents with teenaged daughters will be when they pull that off.


----------



## kps

Well, let's put our tinfoil hats aside for a second and have a look at this...from the "View" of all places.

Interesting, needles to say it touches on pretty much everything we discussed in the thread.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## fjnmusic

eMacMan said:


> I said earlier that I had the feeling that the anti-gun gang and the NRA were working together here. So lets review things to date.
> 
> Slaughter at a school. Do they investigate whether the shooter was using SSRIs?, whether there was Scopalomine in his system? Nope!
> 
> Very confused reporting. Was there a "shooter in the school" drill planned at the same time? Lots of rumours. Unfortunately the Principal who could have answered that question was the first one shot.
> 
> Then we have the Gun control advocates pouncing while bodies are still warm in the morgue. Weapons and munition sales equal 3 and a half years worth in three days. They had been very poor after the first "My God they elected Obama panic" failed to produce even a whisper of gun control.
> 
> A counter proposal by the NRA for armed guards in every school. A true wing-nut idea followed by an even dumber one.
> 
> Lets have metal detectors and blast proof doors and windows at all of the schools. Figure a minimum of $100,000/school for installing bullet proof glass, the detectors, alterations to the schools electrical systems, finding and training two or three people per school to run the thing.... Now multiply that by 100,000 public schools in the US. That's only $10 Billion dollar$ or so.
> 
> The result: Kids whom are afraid of their own shadow and who meekly obey authority without question.
> 
> IOW working together the Anti/pro gun bunch hand over a huge stash of cash to corporate America and to the Weaponry Corps.
> 
> This is simply too neat of a progression to continue calling this a random event. Definitely time to call false flag.
> 
> BTW that cost is nothing. Someone will slip some plastic grenades past the super security and BOOM suddenly there will also be naked body scanners in all those schools. I wonder how enthused parents with teenaged daughters will be when they pull that off.


Exactly. Not to mention the kids who love to sneak something past the authority figures through the windows to stick it to the man. Nope, I say you still have to start by reaching out to the outcasts in society so they don't have so much pain to compensate for. A community of people as opposed to little secure fortress islands. So they put a security guard in every school and the next attack takes place on the playground. Or the mall, in spite of the security. We need to take away the desire to kill or injure other human beings.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

Hey maybe the police can get armed police outside of every police station:

Three New Jersey police officers shot; gunman reported dead | Reuters

Head shaking stupidity.


----------



## kps

skippythebushkangaroo said:


> Hey maybe the police can get armed police outside of every police station:
> 
> Three New Jersey police officers shot; gunman reported dead | Reuters
> 
> Head shaking stupidity.


I guess from now on, they'll be processing suspects without uncuffing them.

This incident is totally unrelated to the other shootings the writer feels compelled to mention and certainly unrelated to the Newtown tragedy. Comparison fail. This could have occurred anywhere, including Canada. it's just carelessness on the cop's part that lead to this violent end...but notice, he only managed to kill one, the one he'd taken the gun from. 

The stupidity of this incident, however tragic, reminds me of this commercial:

(Trivia: the soda jerk in this commercial is non other than real life Marine gunnery sergeant R. Lee Ermey, the Gny. Sgt. Hartman from the movie "Full Metal Jacket")





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

Some interesting info coming out about Lanza...



> in a belated acknowledgment by nbc on the today show today, *it is apparently confirmed that an ar-15 rifle was not used by adam lanza* in the shooting of the connecticut school children. such a rifle was found in the trunk of his car, but it was apparently not used in the shooting.
> 
> in addition, *it is confirmed that lanza tried to buy an ar-15 rifle some days before the shooting, but was denied the purchase by a connecticut gun dealer.* (wanna bet, this is not emphasized very much? do ya?) pete williams said it was because connecticut has a "... long waiting period ... ", but this suggestion is pure idiocy. the waiting period would not have been the grounds for the vendor to have refused tender of the weapon on an attempted purchase, ... , it simply would have delayed delivery had the purchase been completed. there must have been another ground for denying purchase, and i suspect the state of connecticut denied delivery on the grounds that lanza had been adjudicated dangerous because of mental defect.


Further...



> when will the next "change," the next "clarification" in facts emerge, to be massaged more carefully towards obama's gun confiscation agenda?


----------



## kps

Thanks for the update, FeXL, but I suspect that it won't matter to the gun grabbers fixated on banning inanimate object. Now they'll want to ban all semi automatic handguns with a detachable magazine on top of all modern semi-automatic rifles.


----------



## Sonal

My understanding was not that Lanza was denied purchase because of the waiting period, but that he decided against purchasing the weapon because he didn't want to wait.

I heard that fairly early on in all of this, though, so I've been waiting for confirmation of that story.... as far as I'm concerned the gun shop bit is still rumour.


----------



## i-rui

people might want to double check the info they post as "apparently confirmed":

Newtown shooter's guns: What we know - CNN.com



> The primary weapon used in the attack was a "Bushmaster AR-15 assault-type weapon," said Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance


----------



## Macfury

Thanks for a link to CNN, America's source of talking heads and increasingly irrelevant analysis.


----------



## i-rui

the cnn link actually quotes the investigating officer. seems a better source than a crappy blog analyzing youtube videos.

maybe a conservative website would be easier for you to swallow the truth?

Setting the Record Straight: Adam Lanza Did use the Bushmaster AR-15 | RedState


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> the cnn link actually quotes the investigating officer. seems a better source than a crappy blog analyzing youtube videos.
> 
> maybe a conservative website would be easier for you to swallow the truth?
> 
> Setting the Record Straight: Adam Lanza Did use the Bushmaster AR-15 | RedState


i-rui, in recent years, CNN has become known for posting the weirdest off-the-cuff material in hopes of being first to report it. Their days as an authoritative voice are far behind them.


----------



## groovetube

redstate as well?

But by all means, continue yammering about CNN.


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> Thanks for a link to CNN, America's source of talking heads and increasingly irrelevant analysis.


Would you prefer the New York Times?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/nyregion/sandy-hook-school-shooting-in-newtown.html

Multiple sources state the Bushmaster was used during the shootings, though I don't think it's been definitively stated that it was the only weapon used. (Beyond the handgun he used to shoot himself.)


----------



## i-rui




----------



## fjnmusic

Record Gun Sales in December, 2012 - ABC News

Yup. It's all about safety.


----------



## CubaMark

*Adam Lanza quarreled with four teachers day before he shot three*



> Reports say that Adam Lanza visited the school the day before the massacre and was involved in an altercation with four members of the school staff. He killed three of the staff members the next day, the fourth escaped because she was not at school.
> According to the Daily Mail, Lanza reportedly got into an altercation with members of staff, including Principal Dawn Hochsprung and teacher Victoria Soto both of whom he shot the next day.





> The fourth teacher who escaped being shot because she was not at school is now being interviewed by police investigators who have not revealed the subject of the argument between the teachers and Lanza.
> Police are hoping that the testimony of the survivor would help to establish the motive behind the shooting.


(DigitalJournal)


----------



## Sonal

CubaMark said:


> *Adam Lanza quarreled with four teachers day before he shot three*
> 
> (DigitalJournal)


That story came out very shortly after the shooting, but hasn't yet been confirmed. 

It's likely not true, as every report that it happened came out within a couple of days of the shooting, and there has been no subsequent report.... surely, with the supposed 4th teacher still alive, a detail would have emerged by now.


----------



## CubaMark

Hmmm... Yes. I keep forgetting that Digital Journal is far from authoritative. Seems like a place for people who are "wannabe" journalists, judging by the quality of some of the writing. My bad.


----------



## Sonal

CubaMark said:


> Hmmm... Yes. I keep forgetting that Digital Journal is far from authoritative. Seems like a place for people who are "wannabe" journalists, judging by the quality of some of the writing. My bad.


No worries. At the time, more reputable sources were reporting the same thing.... there's a lot of unconfirmed information about this event floating out there.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Hmmm... Yes. I keep forgetting that Digital Journal is far from authoritative. Seems like a place for people who are "wannabe" journalists, judging by the quality of some of the writing. My bad.


When researching on Google News for more than a few minutes, I often filter out Digital Journal to eliminate junk results.


----------



## Rps

From today's Windsor Star:


Call to arms is fearmongering

Supporters of gun control gather on Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House in Washington on Dec. 14 during a vigil for the victims of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
Photograph by: Associated Press Files , The Windsor Star
Email

Emile Therien, The Windsor Star
| Jan 03, 2013 | Last Updated: Jan 03, 2013 - 7:07 UTC
As history has shown, that awful tragedy in an elementary school in Connecticut that took the lives of 27 people, including 20 children, will renew calls by many members of the U.S. gun culture, including the NRA and gun manufacturers, for all citizens to arm for self-protection. Battle Cry America! True to form, at the NRA press conference held on Dec. 21, its spokesperson, Wayne LaPierre, called for such action, including putting a police officer in every school in America.

Let's set the record straight.

Studies tend to reveal people who carry a weapon for self-protection are more likely to increase violence than reduce it; the weapon is also more likely to be used against the victims than by them. An American study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that guns kept in the home were 22 per cent more likely to kill a family member or an acquaintance than they were to kill an intruder. As reported in Rolling Stone magazine, a 1988 study of gun fatalities in King County, Washington for the period covering 1978 to 1983, found that for every time a gun was used in a self-protection homicide, 37 lives were lost in gun suicides, 4.6 lives were lost in gun homicides, and 1.3 lives were lost via unintentional gun deaths - 43 deaths for every self-defence homicide. A second Kellermann study, released in 1993, revealed that keeping a firearm in the home increased the risk of homicide almost threefold. There are nearly three hundred million privately owned firearms in the U.S, of which approximately one hundred million are handguns. Since 1980, according to a reliable source, forty-four states have passed some form of law that allows gun owners to carry concealed weapons outside of their homes for personal protection. In an average year, about one hundred thousand Americans are killed or injured with guns. One number that jumps out is from the FBI's 2008 data that reveals that only 245 alleged criminals were killed by civilians, far fewer than were killed by police. This squares with an FBI report that in 1992 handguns were used only 262 times by law-abiding citizens to kill criminals justifiably. Arming for self-protection! Go figure.

Emile Therien, Public Health & Safety Advocate, Ottawa


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Let's set the record straight.


The more thorough studies indicate the reverse.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> The more thorough studies indicate the reverse.


Care to elaborate? That certainly wasn't a more thorough response.


----------



## kps

Macfury said:


> The more thorough studies indicate the reverse.


And perhaps newer too...1978?...Really?

The article is a total fail. 

A *recent *FBI report indicated that armed persons and/or the presence of arms and armed people prevented as much as 990,000 violent incidents including homicide. 

Let me put it simply, Emile fails to cite any of his outlandish claims and clearly pushing an agenda with either very old and/or totally made up information. 

Let's bring this up to more recent times:

MILLER: Gun ownership up, crime down - Washington Times

Gun Control - Just Facts

FBI — Gun Checks/NICS


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> I've seen references to such studies, though not the original studies.... haven't hit upon the right search terms to dig them up.
> 
> In any case, here is an early (2001) review of approaches to dealing with violence in schools, though it shows that there are more questions about the usefulness of such approaches than there are answers as to what seems to work.... I hope that some further research has been conducted since:
> *"Indeed, some preliminary evidence suggests that physical surveillance methods (metal detectors, searches, and security guards) can predict increased disorder."*
> School Violence: Prevalence, Fears, and Prevention | RAND


My argument was not addressing metal detectors for students or staff but for "visitors" to a school.



screature said:


> Hundreds of thousands of people, my self included, go though security access points, every day every. *Students and staff would only need to have a card scanner to have access. It is no big deal. The other measures would only be for visitors i.e. non staff and students.*
> 
> And yes it does provide for greater security.


Obviously such a measure wouldn't prevent every violent act in schools and I am no expert in security, but such measures are in place for many large institutions, private or public, and create a deterrent/control point for "outsiders". It is the system that is used in our own Parliament for example.



Sonal said:


> And a significant proportion in the USA does agree with me, but does not have the constitution to back them up.


And therein lies the rub.



Sonal said:


> Maybe you can't get wetter, but you can get deeper into the ocean, which means it will take longer to get somewhere that you can dry.


All one needs is a few inches of water in which to drown... after that the rest is just overkill. 

The US is already awash with weapons, a few more aimed at protection instead of inflicting harm isn't going to matter one iota IMO.


----------



## margarok

I read through this article this morning and think it makes quite a few of the same points my sort of 2nd Amendment supporters tend to espouse. I realize this author is just one man with one point of view, but his background gives him good credibility, I believe. It is very lengthy, but thorough.

From: 

ol remus and the woodpile report


An opinion on gun control
Larry Correia

_The following is a cross-post of Larry Correia's article, An opinion on gun control, originally posted at Monster Hunter Nation . Links to articles by Mr. Correia are common at Woodpile Report but this article is so timely and powerful Remus wants it on the record here, in its entirety. Remus does this only rarely. He sees Mr. Correia's article as a significant event, perhaps even part of a "tipping point" or a "watershed" in the defense of the Constitution.
_

I didn't want to post about this, because frankly, it is exhausting. I've been having this exact same argument for my entire adult life. It is not an exaggeration when I say that I know pretty much exactly every single thing an anti-gun person can say. I've heard it over and over, the same old tired stuff, trotted out every single time there is a tragedy on the news that can be milked. Yet, I got sucked in, and I've spent the last few days arguing with people who either mean well but are uninformed about gun laws and how guns actually work (who I don't mind at all), or the willfully ignorant (who I do mind), or the obnoxiously stupid who are completely incapable of any critical thinking deeper than a Facebook meme (them, I can't stand). 

Today's blog post is going to be aimed at the first group. I am going to try to go through everything I've heard over the last few days, and try to break it down from my perspective. My goal tonight is to write something that my regular readers will be able to share with their friends who may not be as familiar with how mass shootings or gun control laws work. 

A little background for those of you who don't know me, and this is going to be extensive so feel free to skip the next few paragraphs, but I need to establish the fact that I know what I am talking with, because I am sick and tired of my opinion having the same weight as a person who learned everything they know about guns and violence from watching TV. 

I am now a professional novelist. However, before that I owned a gun store. We were a Title 7 SOT, which means we worked with legal machineguns, suppresors, and pretty much everything except for explosives. We did law enforcement sales and worked with equipment that is unavailable from most dealers, but that means lots and lots of government inspections and compliance paperwork. This means that I had to be exceedingly familiar with federal gun laws, and there are a lot of them. I worked with many companies in the gun industry and still have many friends and contacts at various manufacturers. When I hear people tell me the gun industry is unregulated, I have to resist the urge to laugh in their face. 

I was also a Utah Concealed Weapons instructor, and was one of the busiest instructors in the state. That required me to learn a lot about self-defense laws, and because I took my job very seriously, I sought out every bit of information that I could. My classes were longer than the standard Utah class, and all of that extra time was spent on Use of Force, shoot/no shoot scenarios, and role playing through violent encounters. I have certified thousands of people to carry guns. 

I have been a firearms instructor, and have taught a lot of people how to shoot defensively with handguns, shotguns, and rifles. For a few years of my life, darn near every weekend was spent at the range. I started out as an assistant for some extremely experienced teachers and I also had the opportunity to be trained by some of the most accomplished firearms experts in the world. The man I stole most of my curriculum from was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Special Forces, turned federal agent SWAT team commander. I took classes in everything from wound ballistics (10 hours of looking at autopsy slides) to high-speed cool-guy door-kicking stuff. I've worked extensively with military and law enforcement personnel, including force on force training where I played the OpFor (i.e. I got to be the bad guy, because I make an awesome bad guy. You tell me how evil/capable you want me to be, and how hard you want your men to work, and I'd make it happen, plus I can take a beating). Part of this required learning how mass shooters operate and studying the heck out of the actual events. 

I have been a competition shooter. I competed in IPSC, IDPA, and 3gun. It was not odd for me to reload and shoot 1,000 rounds in any given week. I fired 20,000 rounds of .45 in one August alone. I've got a Remington 870 with approximately 160,000 rounds through it. I've won matches, and I've been able to compete with some of the top shooters in the country. I am a very capable shooter. I only put this here to convey that I know how shooting works better than the vast majority of the populace. 

I have written for national publications on topics relating to gun law and use of force. I wrote for everything from the United States Concealed Carry Association to SWAT magazine. I was considered a subject matter expert at the state level, and on a few occasions was brought in to testify before the Utah State Legislature on the ramifications of proposed gun laws. I've argued with lawyers, professors, professional lobbyists, and once made a state rep cry. 

Basically for most of my adult life, I have been up to my eyeballs in guns, self-defense instruction, and the laws relating to those things. So believe me when I say that I've heard every argument relating to gun control possible. It is pretty rare for me to hear something new, and none of this stuff is new. 

Armed Teachers 

So now that there is a new tragedy the president wants to have a "national conversation on guns". Here's the thing. Until this national conversation is willing to entertain allowing teachers to carry concealed weapons, then it isn't a conversation at all, it is a lecture. 

Now when I say teachers carrying concealed weapons on Facebook I immediately get a bunch of emotional freak out responses. You can't mandate teachers be armed! Guns in every classroom! Emotional response! Blood in the streets! 

No. Hear me out. The single best way to respond to a mass shooter is with an immediate, violent response. The vast majority of the time, as soon as a mass shooter meets serious resistance, it bursts their fantasy world bubble. Then they kill themselves or surrender. This has happened over and over again. 

Police are awesome. I love working with cops. However any honest cop will tell you that when seconds count they are only minutes away. After Colombine law enforcement changed their methods in dealing with active shooters. It used to be that you took up a perimeter and waited for overwhelming force before going in. Now usually as soon as you have two officers on scene you go in to confront the shooter (often one in rural areas or if help is going to take another minute, because there are a lot of very sound tactical reasons for using two, mostly because your success/survival rates jump dramatically when you put two guys through a door at once. The shooter's brain takes a moment to decide between targets). The reason they go fast is because they know that every second counts. The longer the shooter has to operate, the more innocents die. 

However, cops can't be everywhere. There are at best only a couple hundred thousand on duty at any given time patrolling the entire country. Excellent response time is in the three-five minute range. We've seen what bad guys can do in three minutes, but sometimes it is far worse. They simply can't teleport. So in some cases that means the bad guys can have ten, fifteen, even twenty minutes to do horrible things with nobody effectively fighting back. 

So if we can't have cops there, what can we do? 

The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started. 

The teachers are there already. The school staff is there already. Their reaction time is measured in seconds, not minutes. They can serve as your immediate violent response. Best case scenario, they engage and stop the attacker, or it bursts his fantasy bubble and he commits suicide. Worst case scenario, the armed staff provides a distraction, and while he's concentrating on killing them, he's not killing more children. 

But teachers aren't as trained as police officers! True, yet totally irrelevant. The teacher doesn't need to be a SWAT cop or Navy SEAL. They need to be speed bumps. 

But this leads to the inevitable shrieking and straw man arguments about guns in the classroom, and then the pacifistic minded who simply can't comprehend themselves being mandated to carry a gun, or those that believe teachers are all too incompetent and can't be trusted. Let me address both at one time. 

Don't make it mandatory. In my experience, the only people who are worth a darn with a gun are the ones who wish to take responsibility and carry a gun. Make it voluntary. It is rather simple. Just make it so that your state's concealed weapons laws trump the Federal Gun Free School Zones act. All that means is that teachers who voluntarily decide to get a concealed weapons permit are capable of carrying their guns at work. Easy. Simple. Cheap. Available now. 

Then they'll say that this is impossible, and give me all sorts of terrible worst case scenarios about all of the horrors that will happen with a gun in the classroom… No problem, because this has happened before. In fact, my state laws allow for somebody with a concealed weapons permit to carry a gun in a school right now. Yes. Utah has armed teachers. We have for several years now. 

When I was a CCW instructor, I decided that I wanted more teachers with skin in the game, so I started a program where I would teach anybody who worked at a school for free. No charge. Zip. They still had to pay the state for their background check and fingerprints, but all the instruction was free. I wanted more armed teachers in my state. 

I personally taught several hundred teachers. I quickly discovered that pretty much every single school in my state had at least one competent, capable, smart, willing individual. Some schools had more. I had one high school where the principal, three teachers, and a janitor showed up for class. They had just had an event where there had been a threat against the school and their resource officer had turned up AWOL. This had been a wake up call for this principal that they were on their own, and he had taken it upon himself to talk to his teachers to find the willing and capable. Good for them. 

After Virginia Tech, I started teaching college students for free as well. They were 21 year old adults who could pass a background check. Why should they have to be defenseless? None of these students ever needed to stop a mass shooting, but I'm happy to say that a couple of rapists and muggers weren't so lucky, so I consider my time well spent. 

Over the course of a couple years I taught well over $20,000 worth of free CCW classes. I met hundreds and hundreds of teachers, students, and staff. All of them were responsible adults who understood that they were stuck in target rich environments filled with defenseless innocents. Whether they liked it or not, they were the first line of defense. It was the least I could do. 

Permit holders are not cops. The mistake many people make is that they think permit holders are supposed to be cops or junior danger rangers. Not at all. Their only responsibility is simple. If someone is threatening to cause them or a third person serious bodily harm, and that someone has the ability, opportunity, and is acting in a manner which suggest they are a legitimate threat, then that permit holder is allowed to use lethal force against them. 

As of today the state legislatures of Texas, Tennessee, and Oklahoma are looking at revamping their existing laws so that there can be legal guns in school. For those that are worried these teachers will be unprepared, I'm sure there would be no lack of instructors in those states who'd be willing to teach them for free. 

For everyone, if you are sincere in your wish to protect our children, I would suggest you call your state representative today and demand that they allow concealed carry in schools. 

Gun Free Zones for the rest of the article go to 

ol remus and the woodpile report


----------



## Macfury

Excellent article. Thanks for posting it, margarok.


----------



## John Clay

margarok said:


> I read through this article this morning and think it makes quite a few of the same points my sort of 2nd Amendment supporters tend to espouse. I realize this author is just one man with one point of view, but his background gives him good credibility, I believe. It is very lengthy, but thorough.


Great article, thanks.

Further reinforces the need for concealed carry permits here, too.


----------



## groovetube

solution to guns?

More guns!!!

We do not, need concealed weapons here.


----------



## screature

John Clay said:


> Great article, thanks.
> 
> Further reinforces the need for concealed carry permits here, too.


The way it works on Parliament Hill is that the vast majority of security officers are unarmed but there are non-uniformed officers who, to the untrained eye, look like just a regular Joe who carry a concealed weapon and are ready to take on an armed threat.


----------



## Macfury

John Clay said:


> Further reinforces the need for concealed carry permits here, too.


Absolutely. I continue to be amazed at the number of people who are confronted with mass murder, then instead of looking for a solution to mass murder, start looking for a "solution to guns." It's some sort of derangement that hits them when they catch a whiff of virtual gunpowder.

When we identify a dangerous traffic problem, we look for solutions to traffic accidents, not "a solution to cars."


----------



## smashedbanana

Somebody already posted that article earlier in this thread. But I guess it's getting so long it's cyclical 

Like most gun proponents I think his focus is too short sighted. Of course people who are coming forth voluntarily to get training are responsible, smart, the best people you would want to have a gun if you _wanted_ someone to have a gun.

The problem is later, once you've armed all the responsible people, and opened the door to everyone. What happens when you start getting teachers who get a gun "just because". 

Further that you've now got even more gun owners, making any kind of gun control even harder down the road.

Personally I also think it's a big stretch to assume someone who buys a gun like a teacher can suddenly be considered a line of protection. Killing someone, even justified is a not an easy thing to do. In the heat of the moment who knows what can happen. The same arguement that every second counts also counts against someone who has to resolve themselves to kill another person.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Personally I also think it's a big stretch to assume someone who buys a gun like a teacher can suddenly be considered a line of protection. Killing someone, even justified is a not an easy thing to do. In the heat of the moment who knows what can happen. The same arguement that every second counts also counts against someone who has to resolve themselves to kill another person.


Who would hesitate to shoot if they saw children being blown away?


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> Who would hesitate to shoot if they saw children being blown away?


The perfect answer is no one. But the correct answer is no one would want to hesitate. 

This a far off example, but have you ever played paintball? You are on a field and you can shoot anyone. Some people never get a shot off. Why is that? There are no real rules, no one can die, there are no penalties. And every one has a gun and is in the mindset that shooting is required.

Transfer that to a real live situation where the bullets travel at 3000FPS insead of under 200.


----------



## kps

smashedbanana said:


> Somebody already posted that article earlier in this thread. But I guess it's getting so long it's cyclical
> 
> .


Thanks for remembering and actually reading what I post. Glad at least one or two of you is. LOL.

Yeah, I posted that Here. on the 27th of december.


----------



## groovetube

smashedbanana said:


> The perfect answer is no one. But the correct answer is no one would want to hesitate.
> 
> This a far off example, but have you ever played paintball? You are on a field and you can shoot anyone. Some people never get a shot off. Why is that? There are no real rules, no one can die, there are no penalties. And every one has a gun and is in the mindset that shooting is required.
> 
> Transfer that to a real live situation where the bullets travel at 3000FPS insead of under 200.


It seems some people watch too much tv and think when the time comes, they will have perfect aim, will not shoot an innocent, and will be rambo of the day. Generally, their first solution is the most simplistic, and one they see on tv. More guns so we can shoot the bad guy. But the problems with this, will never ever occur to them.


----------



## Dr.G.

groovetube said:


> It seems some people watch too much tv and think when the time comes, they will have perfect aim, will not shoot an innocent, and will be rambo of the day. Generally, their first solution is the most simplistic, and one they see on tv. More guns so we can shoot the bad guy. But the problems with this, will never ever occur to them.


I was speaking with a local Newfoundland Constabulary officer (they have only in the past few years been allowed to carry guns) and asked him his view of having people armed in schools (we both live about two minutes from a local school). He said that the problem for him as an armed officer of the law would be that he would enter the scene with people already shooting. He would not know who were the "good guys" and who was the "bad guy".


----------



## groovetube

Dr.G. said:


> I was speaking with a local Newfoundland Constabulary officer (they have only in the past few years been allowed to carry guns) and asked him his view of having people armed in schools (we both live about two minutes from a local school). He said that the problem for him as an armed officer of the law would be that he would enter the scene with people already shooting. He would not know who were the "good guys" and who was the "bad guy".


Yeah. I wouldn't want to be the guy who pulls out my concealed gun to shoot the bad guy, only to get my head blown off by some other yahoo, who had a concealed and saw me shooting.

People have more experience watching tv than brains me thinks...


----------



## smashedbanana

kps said:


> Thanks for remembering and actually reading what I post. Glad at least one or two of you is. LOL.
> 
> Yeah, I posted that Here. on the 27th of december.


I don't agree with everything you say or post, but I do read it and consider it


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Yeah. I wouldn't want to be the guy who pulls out my concealed gun to shoot the bad guy, only to get my head blown off by some other yahoo, who had a concealed and saw me shooting.
> 
> People have more experience watching tv than brains me thinks...


You think that all CCW permit holders are yahoos?

How about this guy at the scene of Congresswoman Giffords' shooting.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## kps

smashedbanana said:


> I don't agree with everything you say or post, but I do read it and consider it


Thanks...


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Transfer that to a real live situation where the bullets travel at 3000FPS insead of under 200.


If I'm under fire and children are being shot, I will use that gun to good effect, even if others could not. What does it matter if I get shot while waiting to die? I'll take my chances.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> You think that all CCW permit holders are yahoos?
> 
> How about this guy at the scene of Congresswoman Giffords' shooting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


Not everyone. There are good people with experience.

But I have grave concerns with having way more people with concealed permits.


----------



## fjnmusic

Dr.G. said:


> I was speaking with a local Newfoundland Constabulary officer (they have only in the past few years been allowed to carry guns) and asked him his view of having people armed in schools (we both live about two minutes from a local school). He said that the problem for him as an armed officer of the law would be that he would enter the scene with people already shooting. He would not know who were the "good guys" and who was the "bad guy".


Good point, Dr. G. We have so many knee-jerk reactions here based on the assumption that good guys and bad guys are clearly defined and easy to recognize. If I accidentally swear in class, I have now inadvertently created a precedent for the students to do the same. If a teacher can carry a concealed weapon, you can be sure there will be students and parents who believe they are likewise entitled. The strategic shooter will take out the armed teacher first. The threat is not always external. A classroom with concealed weapons is not the kind if classroom I want my children to attend.

The other thing that we seem to forget is that the US and Canada are very different cultures when it comes to guns. In the US it is a right, an entitlement, while in Canada we treat gun ownership as a privilege. It is one of the main reasons we have a much lower death rate per capita than they do. Do we really want to become more like the US in this regard?


----------



## i-rui

Macfury said:


> When we identify a dangerous traffic problem, we look for solutions to traffic accidents, not "a solution to cars."


the glaringly obvious difference being that cars exist for transportation, while assault weapons and certain ammo clips exist to kill people (specifically large amounts of them, quickly.)


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> the glaringly obvious difference being that cars exist for transportation, while assault weapons and certain ammo clips exist to kill people (specifically large amounts of them, quickly.)


Yes, guns are designed to kill people, to protect people by threatening to kill others. They've been around for centuries--can we get past pretending to be shocked that they might be used as the weapons they are?


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> the glaringly obvious difference being that cars exist for transportation, while assault weapons and certain ammo clips exist to kill people (specifically large amounts of them, quickly.)


Oh yeah, the "assault weapons" that have been banned since 1986 in the US? And those terrible 30round magazines you call clips?

More truth instead of media and politician sound bite bull crap.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## iMouse

Macfury said:


> Who would hesitate to shoot if they saw children being blown away?


Not me.

And I've fired more than enough rounds to go for a head shot.

IMO, shooting innocent children requires a summery trial, conviction, and execution.

And I would happily be the judge, the jury, *and* the executioner.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Oh yeah, the "assault weapons" that have been banned since 1986 in the US? And those terrible 30round magazines you call clips?
> 
> More truth instead of media and politician sound bite bull crap.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


An informative video about the difference between true assault rifles and look-alikes, KPS. However, it does make me wonder why either gun would ever be necessary for civilian use. They can both fire off enough rounds to kill a lot of people very quickly, whether one trigger pull at a time, semi-automatic or fully automatic. I don't understand why civilians ever require handguns either, for that matter. Police, certainly. The average individual? For what? Target practice?

I suppose the rationale is that since there are so many other yahoos out there with guns, then I need one to protect myself too. You certainly don't use a handgun to hunt deer. But as I've said before, this genie has been out of the bottle for so long, there is just no way to reverse it in the US. There are enough guns for every man, woman and child. And sales of guns and ammunition went UP in December, not down. We do not need to allow more guns in Canada, of that I'm sure. And I have nothing against hunting either. Just not humans.


----------



## groovetube

Perhaps if way less people were walking around with assault weapons in the US there'd be far less shootings.

The solution isn't more guns, it's taking more guns off the streets and destroying them, period. The only ones benefitting from this is the arms industry pumping out more and more guns for the streets and making a mint.

I'll take our 50 murders to a US city's 500+ a year and our gun control any day. Anyone suggesting that the solution is -more- guns is simply delusional. It isn't much different than someone suggesting that the way to combat smoking fumes in a building is for you to smoke too.

I guess the evidence that people with guns in the house are more likely to die from them isn't enough eh?


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Good point, Dr. G. We have so many knee-jerk reactions here based on the assumption that good guys and bad guys are clearly defined and easy to recognize. If I accidentally swear in class, I have now inadvertently created a precedent for the students to do the same. If a teacher can carry a concealed weapon, you can be sure there will be students and parents who believe they are likewise entitled. The strategic shooter will take out the armed teacher first. The threat is not always external. A classroom with concealed weapons is not the kind if classroom I want my children to attend.
> 
> The other thing that we seem to forget is that the US and Canada are very different cultures when it comes to guns. In the US it is a right, an entitlement, while in Canada we treat gun ownership as a privilege. It is one of the main reasons we have a much lower death rate per capita than they do. Do we really want to become more like the US in this regard?


Or they can hunker down outside eating donuts like they did at Columbine and wait for the shooting to stop before going in. Sorry for the heavy dose of sarcasm, but it's that what happened? (minus the donuts, of coarse)

Not even the NRA is saying that every teacher should be armed. I'm sure there are plenty of teachers already with CCW permits out there. They're saying that those who wish to, should be able to be armed in school. In other words, to remove the "Gun Free Zone" status of schools.

Look, not everyone is qualified or should be armed around kids, but if properly vetted and trained I see no issue with those volunteering to add an additional layer of security to the schools.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> An informative video about the difference between true assault rifles and look-alikes, KPS. However, it does make me wonder why either gun would ever be necessary for civilian use. They can both fire off enough rounds to kill a lot of people very quickly, whether one trigger pull at a time, semi-automatic or fully automatic. I don't understand why civilians ever require handguns either, for that matter. Police, certainly. The average individual? For what? Target practice?
> 
> I suppose the rationale is that since there are so many other yahoos out there with guns, then I need one to protect myself too. You certainly don't use a handgun to hunt deer. But as I've said before, this genie has been out of the bottle for so long, there is just no way to reverse it in the US. There are enough guns for every man, woman and child. And sales of guns and ammunition went UP in December, not down. We do not need to allow more guns in Canada, of that I'm sure. And I have nothing against hunting either. Just not humans.


There are plenty of hunters in the US using both hand guns for deer and plenty of hunters using AR type semi-automatic rifles to hunt feral hogs, coyotes, other vermin and even deer. I posted a youtube vid earlier with regards to this.

Here in Canada handgun hunting is prohibited and AR style firearms are classified as restricted and as such are not allowed to be used in hunting. That is something I'd like to see changed.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Perhaps if way less people were walking around with assault weapons in the US there'd be far less shootings.
> 
> The solution isn't more guns, it's taking more guns off the streets and destroying them, period. The only ones benefitting from this is the arms industry pumping out more and more guns for the streets and making a mint.
> 
> I'll take our 50 murders to a US city's 500+ a year and our gun control any day. Anyone suggesting that the solution is -more- guns is simply delusional. It isn't much different than someone suggesting that the way to combat smoking fumes in a building is for you to smoke too.
> 
> I guess the evidence that people with guns in the house are more likely to die from them isn't enough eh?


When was the last time someone used an "assault weapon" in the US or Canada for that matter? Even criminals don't use them. Only Hollywood.

And people with knives in the house are more likely to die from them than baseball bats and hammers.


----------



## i-rui

Macfury said:


> Yes, guns are designed to kill people, to protect people by threatening to kill others. They've been around for centuries--can we get past pretending to be shocked that they might be used as the weapons they are?


assault weapons haven't been around for centuries. neither have large ammo clips.

the irony is that the 2nd amendment was written when the right to bear arms meant muskets (at most). I'm sure the enlightened minds of the founding fathers would have seen the folly of potentially arming everyone with assault weapons.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Or they can hunker down outside eating donuts like they did at Columbine and wait for the shooting to stop before going in. Sorry for the heavy dose of sarcasm, but it's that what happened? (minus the donuts, of coarse)
> 
> Not even the NRA is saying that every teacher should be armed. I'm sure there are plenty of teachers already with CCW permits out there. They're saying that those who wish to, should be able to be armed in school. In other words, to remove the "Gun Free Zone" status of schools.
> 
> Look, not everyone is qualified or should be armed around kids, but if properly vetted and trained I see no issue with those volunteering to add an additional layer of security to the schools.


In the US, perhaps. Not here. We do not have a misunderstood-and-anachronistic second amendment and we do not need one. And for the record, Columbine already did have security on the premises. Newtown school was locked from the inside; the killer had to force his way in. It doesn't do any good when you have a psycopath hell-bent on taking lives. And why was the guy in Connecticut so hell-bent? Gee, I'd have to say it could have something to do with the gun culture that he was raised in, likely heavy exposure to first person shooter games, his lack of social connection with other human beings, and the fact that all the guns in the house were kept in the basement where he lived in his mother's house. He killed her first, apparently with no hesitation. The way to stop this kind of psycopath is not to allow him to fixate on violence in the first place. Not everyone with mental illness goes on a killing spree.

I just wish that these murder-suicides would reverse the order of operations. Take themselves out first and leave everyone else, if they're going to kill themselves anyway.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> When was the last time someone used an "assault weapon" in the US or Canada for that matter? Even criminals don't use them. Only Hollywood.
> 
> And people with knives in the house are more likely to die from them than baseball bats and hammers.


guns in general. I say assault weapons since this seems to be what people are focusing on.

The only uses for guns in my mind is for hunting. No one, should have a gun in the city. Period.

And beyond your little analogy, the truth is, the proof is in the pudding. In the US, guns are everywhere, and they have the murder rate to show for it.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Oh yeah, the "assault weapons" that have been banned since 1986 in the US? And those terrible 30round magazines you call clips?
> 
> More truth instead of media and politician sound bite bull crap.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.



the video is (knowingly) conflating the term "assault weapon" with "assault riffle". In fact, the video even goes onto touch what mainly constitutes an "assault weapon" - the fact that a weapon is semi-automatic. combine that with certain other features and you have an assault weapon.


----------



## fjnmusic

groovetube said:


> Perhaps if way less people were walking around with assault weapons in the US there'd be far less shootings.
> 
> The solution isn't more guns, it's taking more guns off the streets and destroying them, period. The only ones benefitting from this is the arms industry pumping out more and more guns for the streets and making a mint.
> 
> I'll take our 50 murders to a US city's 500+ a year and our gun control any day. Anyone suggesting that the solution is -more- guns is simply delusional. It isn't much different than someone suggesting that the way to combat smoking fumes in a building is for you to smoke too.
> 
> I guess the evidence that people with guns in the house are more likely to die from them isn't enough eh?


50 to 500 would be a 1:10 ratio, GT, which would correspond to the difference in the size of the population of both countries. That number isn't even close to the truth, however. The ratio is more like 1 handgun death in Canada to 200 in the US. That right to bear arms is working out really well to protect the citizens.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> I just wish that these murder-suicides would reverse the order of operations. Take themselves out first and leave everyone else, if they're going to kill themselves anyway.


Oh I'd agree, but then the media wouldn't make them famous and do stories on them day in and day out for weeks...months...years...continue with anniversaries of their deeds for ever and ever....


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> 50 to 500 would be a 1:10 ratio, GT, which would correspond to the difference in the size of the population of both countries. That number isn't even close to the truth, however. The ratio is more like 1 handgun death in Canada to 200 in the US. That right to bear arms is working out really well to protect the citizens.


I'm not talking about the total for the country fjn, I'm referring to just a city.

Canada had 144, and the US 9300+. Is that just 10 times?


And yes. All the lunatics suggesting more guns will solve things completely ignore hard evidence to the contrary.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> the video is (knowingly) conflating the term "assault weapon" with "assault riffle". In fact, the video even goes onto touch what mainly constitutes an "assault weapon" - the fact that a weapon is semi-automatic. combine that with certain other features and you have an assault weapon.


He's just trying to educate those ignorant in firearms. Plenty of rabid antis that purposefully keep perpetuating these misnomers in order to fear monger and push the gun grabber agenda. I think he did an exemplary job at describing the difference between a semi-automatic rifle, and an assault rifle which other equally ignorant morons, especially in the media, keep calling an "assault weapon". If I kill someone with a hammer, does that hammer now become an assault weapon? A tactical hammer perhaps? Or just the murder weapon.

Look at the firearm pictured below...it can be legally used to hunt with it in Canada.

A) Is it an assault weapon?
B) Is it an assault rifle?
C) Is it a modern semi-automatic rifle? 

Note to you all: That magazine only holds 5 rounds of 7.62x39mm ammo.









•
•


----------



## margarok

kps said:


> Thanks for remembering and actually reading what I post. Glad at least one or two of you is. LOL.
> 
> Yeah, I posted that Here. on the 27th of december.


Sorry if I duplicated... I was out in the woods of Missouri, uh, hunting until the 30th.


----------



## smashedbanana

kps said:


> He's just trying to educate those ignorant in firearms. Plenty of rabid antis that purposefully keep perpetuating these misnomers in order to fear monger and push the gun grabber agenda. I think he did an exemplary job at describing the difference between a semi-automatic rifle, and an assault rifle which other equally ignorant morons, especially in the media, keep calling an "assault weapon". If I kill someone with a hammer, does that hammer now become an assault weapon? A tactical hammer perhaps? Or just the murder weapon.


I don't think anyone needs a more than 10 round for anything legal. 7.62mm Is also crazy. Even the Canadian Military uses 5.56. I'm not sure, but I don't think Canadians can buy new AK type weapons since 1995. I'm pretty sure they are just grandfathered. We can get SKS's etc., but that only holds a couple rounds and you have to jump through all the Canadian hoops and barrels.

American gun owners seem to want to defend the right to own all weapons at all costs. Do you know they can buy a civilian .50CAL sniper rifle? That thing has an effective range of 1-2kms! 2+ In then hands of someone trained (ex military, police sniper, etc.) In some states you can buy a grenade launcher. Sure you have to jump through hoops, and pay $200/tax per grenade, but a *grenade launcher*!

While I am on a rant, why is body armor legal there? In every one of the recent shootings (New Town, Columbine, Aurora) the shooters had bought body armor. What possible legitimate reason can there be to own body armor? Deer that fight back?

My point here is whole the AR-15 is taking the credit as the defacto problematic item, is really is only part of the problem in the recent incidents.


----------



## fjnmusic

smashedbanana said:


> I don't think anyone needs a more than 10 round for anything legal. 7.62mm Is also crazy. Even the Canadian Military uses 5.56. I'm not sure, but I don't think Canadians can buy new AK type weapons since 1995. I'm pretty sure they are just grandfathered. We can get SKS's etc., but that only holds a couple rounds and you have to jump through all the Canadian hoops and barrels.
> 
> American gun owners seem to want to defend the right to own all weapons at all costs. Do you know they can buy a civilian .50CAL sniper rifle? That thing has an effective range of 1-2kms! 2+ In then hands of someone trained (ex military, police sniper, etc.) In some states you can buy a grenade launcher. Sure you have to jump through hoops, and pay $200/tax per grenade, but a *grenade launcher*!
> 
> While I am on a rant, why is body armor legal there? In every one of the recent shootings (New Town, Columbine, Aurora) the shooters had bought body armor. What possible legitimate reason can there be to own body armor? Deer that fight back?
> 
> My point here is whole the AR-15 is taking the credit as the defacto problematic item, is really is only part of the problem in the recent incidents.


You're absolutely right. But when you have a whole nation that believes it has a God-given right to own weapons to kill others with, the type of guns being discussed for banning is really just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The mentality must change, and with the proliferation of weapons already in existence, this country won't be repairing itself anytime soon. It would be like trying to disarm the biggest superpower in the world. Not gonna happen.


----------



## kps

smashedbanana said:


> I don't think anyone needs a more than 10 round for anything legal. 7.62mm Is also crazy. Even the Canadian Military uses 5.56. I'm not sure, but I don't think Canadians can buy new AK type weapons since 1995. I'm pretty sure they are just grandfathered. We can get SKS's etc., but that only holds a couple rounds and you have to jump through all the Canadian hoops and barrels.


Why is 7.62 crazy? Not much bigger or more powerful than the 5.56. Both are military rounds, used in hunting. The $150 SKS you mention uses the 7.62x39mm, the 7,62x51mm is equivalent to .308 one of the most popular hunting rounds and the 5.56 NATO is equivalent to a .223. That firearm is not an AK or a variant, and it's also non restricted so it's legal to hunt with. Would I take it hunting? No way, someone might get scared and p*** their pants, call the SWAT team and they'll throw my blaze orange ass in jail until they figure it out.



smashedbanana said:


> American gun owners seem to want to defend the right to own all weapons at all costs. Do you know they can buy a civilian .50CAL sniper rifle? That thing has an effective range of 1-2kms! 2+ In then hands of someone trained (ex military, police sniper, etc.) In some states you can buy a grenade launcher. Sure you have to jump through hoops, and pay $200/tax per grenade, but a *grenade launcher*!


Do you have any idea as to the skill required to shoot that rifle at those distances? It's not a gun for psychos, criminals or your average target shooter. The damn things cost $7000-$17,000 and the ammunition( if you can get it) is $10 per round.

Here, help yourself, all you need is a PAL. 
]Wolverine Supplies - Online Gun Store | Wolverine Supplies Home



smashedbanana said:


> While I am on a rant, why is body armor legal there? In every one of the recent shootings (New Town, Columbine, Aurora) the shooters had bought body armor. What possible legitimate reason can there be to own body armor? Deer that fight back?


There's a very good chance that the buzz I've been hearing is true and those were not plate carriers but tactical vests to carry spare ammo magazines and other supplies. Like this vest/chest rig


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> 50 to 500 would be a 1:10 ratio, GT, which would correspond to the difference in the size of the population of both countries. That number isn't even close to the truth, however. The ratio is more like 1 handgun death in Canada to 200 in the US. That right to bear arms is working out really well to protect the citizens.


Crappy presentations like that poster do nobody any favours. The figures are completely out of whack, comparing total deaths in countries with vastly different populations, ignoring the suicide components of those deaths, etc.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> While I am on a rant, why is body armor legal there? In every one of the recent shootings (New Town, Columbine, Aurora) the shooters had bought body armor. What possible legitimate reason can there be to own body armor?


Make body armour illegal to ensure that you can be killed by government bullets?


----------



## smashedbanana

kps said:


> You think that all CCW permit holders are yahoos?
> 
> How about this guy at the scene of Congresswoman Giffords' shooting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


Watching the video I was strcuk by him saying this: "I almost shot the man holding the gun"

Who was the man holding the gun? Not _the_ shooter. Therein lies the problem with arming civilians and expecting them to do the job trained professionals should be doing.


----------



## margarok

An interesting comparison of murder rate/violent crime rate at the 3 minute point of England/Wales compared to the U.S.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ooa98FHuaU0#!


----------



## groovetube

Macfury said:


> Crappy presentations like that poster do nobody any favours. The figures are completely out of whack, comparing total deaths in countries with vastly different populations, ignoring the suicide components of those deaths, etc.


actually if you followed (which generally you don't it seems) fjn misunderstood the numbers.

And if you actually did do your own 'damned research', even accounting for suicides and accidental deaths, the US gun crimes are very significantly higher than ours, even accounting for population etc.

But that might require one to use some reasoning power, and less forum tro, er stirring up... :baby:


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Why is 7.62 crazy? Not much bigger or more powerful than the 5.56. Both are military rounds, used in hunting. The $150 SKS you mention uses the 7.62x39mm, the 7,62x51mm is equivalent to .308 one of the most popular hunting rounds and the 5.56 NATO is equivalent to a .223. That firearm is not an AK or a variant, and it's also non restricted so it's legal to hunt with. Would I take it hunting? No way, someone might get scared and p*** their pants, call the SWAT team and they'll throw my blaze orange ass in jail until they figure it out.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any idea as to the skill required to shoot that rifle at those distances? It's not a gun for psychos, criminals or your average target shooter. The damn things cost $7000-$17,000 and the ammunition( if you can get it) is $10 per round.
> 
> Here, help yourself, all you need is a PAL.
> ]Wolverine Supplies - Online Gun Store | Wolverine Supplies Home
> 
> 
> 
> There's a very good chance that the buzz I've been hearing is true and those were not plate carriers but tactical vests to carry spare ammo magazines and other supplies. Like this vest/chest rig


personally, I find most of the discussion around which size or class of gun to ban kind of pointless.

After having spent a long time in the US, that's a country where banning weapons simply isn't going to do anything, certainly not in the short term. They have a serious problem there, and banning, or more guns, isn't going to do squat.

The number of absolute lunatics running around arming themselves to protect themselves against some Armageddon of government attack is mind melting. I really don't think most of the residents here in Canada have any clue as to the gravity of what's happening down there.

Perhaps the government should just attack them and have done with them so the rest of us can move on.


----------



## kps

smashedbanana said:


> Watching the video I was strcuk by him saying this: "I almost shot the man holding the gun"
> 
> Who was the man holding the gun? Not _the_ shooter. Therein lies the problem with arming civilians and expecting them to do the job trained professionals should be doing.


Watch it again, that's not what he says.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> personally, I find most of the discussion around which size or class of gun to ban kind of pointless.
> 
> After having spent a long time in the US, that's a country where banning weapons simply isn't going to do anything, certainly not in the short term. They have a serious problem there, and banning, or more guns, isn't going to do squat.
> 
> The number of absolute lunatics running around arming themselves to protect themselves against some Armageddon of government attack is mind melting.
> 
> Perhaps the government should just attack them and have done with them so the rest of us can move on.


I agree with you, banning won't solve anything. There, here or in jolly olde England for that matter.

This is also a response to margarok's video on stats.

The UK has had a total ban on handguns and semiautomatic rifles since 1994, yet each day continue to fight gun crime. At your leisure you can watch this series of videos of London's CO19 (armed police) unit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMrDCokuQRc&playnext=1&list=PLCA63C6D58E43CF48

Pretty clear that bans don't work. It's attitudes, certain aspects of our culture and parts of society that needs to change.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> I agree with you, banning won't solve anything. There, here or in jolly olde England for that matter.
> 
> This is also a response to margarok's video on stats.
> 
> The UK has had a total ban on handguns and semiautomatic rifles since 1994, yet each day continue to fight gun crime. At your leisure you can watch this series of videos of London's CO19 (armed police) unit.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMrDCokuQRc&playnext=1&list=PLCA63C6D58E43CF48
> 
> Pretty clear that bans don't work. It's attitudes, certain aspects of our culture and parts of society that needs to change.


That too is a generalization, because bans -do- work in other countries, like here, and the UK. It doesn't stop all gun crime obviously. But my point here is that the US so armed to the teeth and the population isn't about to give up their guns regardless of any ban, that's why the US has more gun deaths a year than anyone else.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> That too is a generalization, because bans -do- work in other countries, like here, and the UK. It doesn't stop all gun crime obviously. But my point here is that the US so armed to the teeth and the population isn't about to give up their guns regardless of any ban, that's why the US has more gun deaths a year than anyone else.


Not really, it's not the bans, it's ease of availability that is the major issue. With the proper license, I can pretty much own anything an American can own. Except down there, there is no licensing to speak of and each state is different..


----------



## FeXL

Apologies if this has already been addressed, I can't stomach the lefty hyperbole & rhetoric to go back & check...

A few days back, Journal News published an online list of all pistol permit holders in two counties (a third denied the request). Pure class. Since then, they've decided that they needed to hire a security company who employs armed guards at their doors.

McFortress



> This column does not begrudge the Journal News for exercising its Second Amendment right to armed self-defense. *But doing so after attacking law-abiding citizens for doing exactly the same thing is the most stunning display of media hypocrisy we've seen* since the "civility" frenzy of early 2011.


Bold mine.

Typical. Do as we say, not as we do.


----------



## FeXL

With safety measures in place, returning Sandy Hook students attend 'safest school in America'



> Returning students, teachers and administrators were met by a large police presence outside their new school in the neighboring town of Monroe, where a middle school that had been shuttered for nearly two years was overhauled and renamed after their old school. *Several officers guarded the entrance and checked IDs of parents dropping off children.*


You mean, the safety measures that every school in America should have in place?


----------



## groovetube

I guess that's the price of freedom!


-giggle-


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> With safety measures in place, returning Sandy Hook students attend 'safest school in America'
> 
> 
> 
> You mean, the safety measures that every school in America should have in place?


Of course it's safe now. The pschokiller is already dead. It's like setting up a safety zone with police tape where the last lightning strike took place.


----------



## heavyall

kps said:


> Not really, it's not the bans, it's ease of availability that is the major issue. With the proper license, I can pretty much own anything an American can own. Except down there, there is no licensing to speak of and each state is different..


Those are two sides of the same coin. If guns are available, then *they're available*. The more restrictions you put on who can have these weapons, on where they can be used, and on how they're stored, the lower the overall availability. Lanza didn't use guns registered in his name, but he did have access to legally purchased and registered weapons. If those weapons were not available to his mother, they wouldn't be available to him either. Many criminals get their guns by stealing them. If they weren't there in the stores and in people's homes, they wouldn't be there to steal either.


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> Those are two sides of the same coin. If guns are available, then *they're available*. The more restrictions you put on who can have these weapons, on where they can be used, and on how they're stored, the lower the overall availability. Lanza didn't use guns registered in his name, but he did have access to legally purchased and registered weapons. If those weapons were not available to his mother, they wouldn't be available to him either. Many criminals get their guns by stealing them. If they weren't there in the stores and in people's homes, they wouldn't be there to steal either.


One thing about criminals; they often don't follow the rules.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> I guess that's the price of freedom!
> 
> 
> -giggle-


Right you are Tim.

Getting your ass shot-off is acceptable collateral damage, in the war to maintain their "hobby".

Superlative, or something along those lines.


----------



## MacDoc

Strange that no pet bylaws seem to work .... but lethal weapons are passé....just sayin' -



> Exotic Pet Laws - Laws On Exotic Pets
> exoticpets.about.com › ... › Exotic Pets › Resources for Exotic Pet Owners
> Not sure if it is legal to own the type of exotic pet you have or are looking to get in the ..*. To be short, no wild animals are allowed to be kept as pets in California*





> Smaller communities struggle with animal bylaws, says Humane ...
> bigcatrescue.org/smaller-communities-struggle-with-animal-bylaws-s...Most provinces require a specific permit for residents to keep exotic animals and ... O'Sullivan said he's consulted on a number of municipal animal bylaws: “ Generally, they're quite strong. ... Three Sumatran tiger cubs born at California zoo .


quite a list there is around the nation.....


----------



## fjnmusic

MacDoc said:


> Strange that no pet bylaws seem to work .... but lethal weapons are passé....just sayin' -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> quite a list there is around the nation.....


Perhaps if the founding fathers (who can do no wrong) had built a right-to-own-exotic-pets amendment into the constitution, it would be a very different matter. You ever notice that Americans refer to the infallibility of the founding fathers with as much conviction as other people have toward the founders of religions?


----------



## kps

MacDoc said:


> Strange that no pet bylaws seem to work .... but lethal weapons are passé....just sayin' -
> quite a list there is around the nation.....


In the US firearms fall under the federal NFA and state laws with 
California having the toughest and most restrictive firearms regulations already. And do pet by laws really work in that state?


In Canada firearms are strictly enforced by the FA (Firearms Act) Provinces have no say in it.
Thankfully they don't, as there is no shortage of stupid politicians who would totally screw up what are already very confusing laws and regulations.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps if the founding fathers (who can do no wrong) had built a right-to-own-exotic-pets amendment into the constitution, it would be a very different matter. You ever notice that Americans refer to the infallibility of the founding fathers with as much conviction as other people have toward the founders of religions?


I feel sorry for your students if this is what you're teaching them.

The US Constitution is perhaps the world's most emulated document for a reason. One may be the 1st amendment that gave you the right to write that without your ass ending up in jail.



> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the *freedom of speech,* or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> I feel sorry for your students if this is what you're teaching them.
> 
> The US Constitution is perhaps the world's most emulated document for a reason. One may be the 1st amendment that gave you the right to write that without your ass ending up in jail.


Whoa, buddy. I'm Canadian. I don't need a first, second or any other amendment to protect my freedom of speech. And once again, you completely missed the point of what I said. You really think the founding fathers were infallible?


----------



## heavyall

kps said:


> The US Constitution is perhaps the world's most emulated document for a reason.


The US constitution is a piece of toilet paper. It's blind allegiance to that decrepit document that is causing most of the problems that lead to the incidents this thread is talking about. "The constitution says it's my right" is by far the weakest argument going.


----------



## iMouse

fjnmusic said:


> You ever notice that Americans refer to the infallibility of the founding fathers with as much conviction as other people have toward the founders of religions?


The correlation has not escaped my notice, Spock. 

Remember the ST-TOS episode The Omega Glory, featuring the Yangs v. the Kohms. :lmao:

Yet another old religious document, almost as intransigent, that has out-lived it's time.



fjnmusic said:


> Whoa, buddy. I'm Canadian. I don't need a first, second or any other amendment to protect my freedom of speech.


Amen, Komrade. :clap:



fjnmusic said:


> And once again, you completely missed the point of what I said. You really think the founding fathers were infallible?


Surely they are Saints at this point. Just awaiting godliness.


----------



## FeXL

Further on that Journal News leak of legal gun owners...

Ex-Burglars Say Newspaper’s Gun Map Would’ve Made the Job Easier, Safer



> That was the most asinine article I’ve ever seen,” said Walter T. Shaw, 65, a former burglar and jewel thief who the FBI blames for more than 3,000 break-ins that netted some $70 million in the 1960s and 1970s. “Having a list of who has a gun is like gold - why rob that house when you can hit the one next door, where there are no guns?


Another perspective:



> While some burglars may use the newspaper’s information to avoid guns, Portenier said others will target homes with guns. The newspaper’s decision could even lead to legally-owned guns proliferating on the street, he said.
> 
> “That’s one of the first things we’d check out—guns are on the top of the list of what you want to steal,” he said. “They can walk out with a shotgun and a couple of handguns and sell them on the street for $300 or $400 a pop. They can sell them to a gangbanger who ends up killing someone."


If someone in that area gets burgled, I hope the victims sue the backside off the newspaper.

Wonder what their circulation just did...


----------



## eMacMan

heavyall said:


> The US constitution is a piece of toilet paper. It's blind allegiance to that decrepit document that is causing most of the problems that lead to the incidents this thread is talking about. "The constitution says it's my right" is by far the weakest argument going.


Well certainly Clinton, Bush II and Bush III would seem to agree with you. The only article or amendment left intact by that unholy trio is the second. That is only because there are so many firearms out there that they needed something or maybe several somethings like Sandy Hook to justify going after them. 

Like I said earlier False Flag.


----------



## mrjimmy

fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps if the founding fathers (who can do no wrong) had built a right-to-own-exotic-pets amendment into the constitution, it would be a very different matter.


The Right to Bear Bears?


----------



## Dr.G.

heavyall said:


> The US constitution is a piece of toilet paper. It's blind allegiance to that decrepit document that is causing most of the problems that lead to the incidents this thread is talking about. "The constitution says it's my right" is by far the weakest argument going.


I totally disagree with this point, heavyall.

".... who we are is who we were." 

Paix, mon ami.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_N6JFb_q-E]Amistad - John Quincy Adams before Supreme Court on Slavery - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rps

heavyall said:


> The US constitution is a piece of toilet paper. It's blind allegiance to that decrepit document that is causing most of the problems that lead to the incidents this thread is talking about. "The constitution says it's my right" is by far the weakest argument going.


You've got to be kidding!!!!! The U.S. Constitution is a hallmark document right up there with the Magna Carta. Like all things political, it has pros and cons, but to say it is toilet paper is an injustice to the foresight of it's creators.


----------



## Dr.G.

Rps said:


> You've got to be kidding!!!!! The U.S. Constitution is a hallmark document right up there with the Magna Carta. Like all things political, it has pros and cons, but to say it is toilet paper is an injustice to the foresight of it's creators.


I strongly agree, Rp. Any rule of law has its faults, but the strengths of the US Constitutition has withstood the test of time. Unlike baseball, the US Constitution has truly marked time with and for America. While I had to memorize the Preamble to the Constitution in public school, it was only when I was in university that I began to fully understand the magnitude of this paragraph, and the Constitution itself. Way back when, I wanted to be a Constitutional lawyer.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

For me, at least, these are more than just words on an old piece of paper.

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## fjnmusic

Dr.G. said:


> I strongly agree, Rp. Any rule of law has its faults, but the strengths of the US Constitutition has withstood the test of time. Unlike baseball, the US Constitution has truly marked time with and for America. While I had to memorize the Preamble to the Constitution in public school, it was only when I was in university that I began to fully understand the magnitude of this paragraph, and the Constitution itself. Way back when, I wanted to be a Constitutional lawyer.
> 
> "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
> 
> For me, at least, these are more than just words on an old piece of paper.
> 
> Paix, mon ami.


"Secure the Blessings" and "ordain" certainly seem to have a decidedly religious tone for a secular document. The "perfect Union" part is also a little bit of an eye-opener. Do Americans really believe they have a perfect Union, or that they are even close to one?


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The "perfect Union" part is also a little bit of an eye-opener. Do Americans really believe they have a perfect Union, or that they are even close to one?



Read it again. Not "perfect" but "more perfect."

Is this your first exposure to the actual text?


----------



## Macfury

iMouse said:


> Remember the ST-TOS episode The Omega Glory, featuring the Yangs v. the Kohms. :lmao
> 
> Yet another old religious document, almost as intransigent, that has out-lived it's time.


Yes, I do remember that episode--but apparently you don't remember it very well. The point of the episode was that the people were repeating the words, without applying their meaning. The episode concluded with the knowledge that the US Constitution remained relevant.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Read it again. Not "perfect" but "more perfect."
> 
> Is this your first exposure to the actual text?


Yep. As a Canadian, I study Canadian history, not American. Also "more perfect" is about semantically equal to "a little bit pregnant." Either you are perfect or you are not. Another indicator that the founding Fathers were not quite as flawless as they are revered to be. Smart, yes. Opportunistic, yes. Basically fair-minded, yes. But perfect? No. Am I the only one sees the religious corollaries here?


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Yep. As a Canadian, I study Canadian history, not American. Also "more perfect" is about semantically equal to "a little bit pregnant." Either you are perfect or you are not. Another indicator that the founding Fathers were not quite as flawless as they are revered to be. Smart, yes. Opportunistic, yes. Basically fair-minded, yes. But perfect?


While you're at it, why not correct that crazy grammar they're using in Shakespeare's plays and sonnets?



fjnmusic said:


> Am I the only one sees the religious corollaries here?


Yes, there are religious connotations in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. But you're acing as if though you're the first to ever see this. Why not study up on it a little, instead of presenting your own journey of personal discovery on the fly?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> While you're at it, why not correct that crazy grammar they're using in Shakespeare's plays and sonnets?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, there are religious connotations in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. But you're acing as if though you're the first to ever see this. Why not study up on it a little, instead of presenting your own journey of personal discovery on the fly?


Why not stop being so bossy? Sheesh.


----------



## Dr.G.

fjnmusic said:


> "Secure the Blessings" and "ordain" certainly seem to have a decidedly religious tone for a secular document. The "perfect Union" part is also a little bit of an eye-opener. Do Americans really believe they have a perfect Union, or that they are even close to one?


Well, this is how they spoke and wrote back then. As well, they were striving to establish the Constitution "in Order to form a more perfect Union". The key word there is "more" perfect Union. Thus, they did not see their sitution, even with the Constitution, as perfect. It was not until after the Civil War that there was reference to "the" United States, rather than "these" United States. 

The United States of America, for better or worse, is still a work in progress, much like Canada. As a citizen of both countries I worked to help make America a better place for one and all, and now that I am in Canada, I try to do the same thing for everyone here. I was born an American citizen, but chose to become a Canadian citizen. If the truth be known, if told I had to chose one country to live in for the rest of my life, it would be Canada. Still, I don't like to see the US blasted beyond what it has earned in terms of it's faults and weaknesses, just as I would not want to see Canada blasted unfairly.

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## iMouse

Macfury said:


> Yes, I do remember that episode--but apparently you don't remember it very well. The point of the episode was that the people were repeating the words, without applying their meaning. The episode concluded with the knowledge that the US Constitution remained relevant.


I do, but apparently you don't.

They only took the true intent of the words, because Kirk told them to, and he was at that point looked on as a god.

Mmmmm, more religious babble.


----------



## fjnmusic

iMouse said:


> I do, but apparently you don't.
> 
> They only took the true intent of the words, because Kirk told them to, and he was at that point looked on as a god.
> 
> Mmmmm, more religious babble.


Indeed. Fascinating.


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> Read it again. Not "perfect" but "more perfect."


This was the point I was trying to make, Macfury. Great minds think alike. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> Yes, I do remember that episode--but apparently you don't remember it very well. The point of the episode was that the people were repeating the words, without applying their meaning. The episode concluded with the knowledge that the US Constitution remained relevant.


Yes. Kirk spoke "the words" quite well, if I recall correctly.


----------



## iMouse

fjnmusic said:


> Indeed. Fascinating.


Careful there.

Next thing you know, you will be amused. :lmao:


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Whoa, buddy. I'm Canadian. I don't need a first, second or any other amendment to protect my freedom of speech. And once again, you completely missed the point of what I said. You really think the founding fathers were infallible?


I know you're Canadian, I didn't fall off the hay wagon yesterday, but you're missing the point.

Those 18th century visionaries have probably influenced every modern and democratic government in this world and that would include Canada and its charter. You may not need them but you should thank them for your free speech, protection from unreasonable search and seizure and a plethora of other rights copied into our charter.


----------



## partsguy

Ummm... Magna Carta anyone (kps mostly)?

(PS: 1066. Slightly predates that other thing your talking about.)


----------



## Dr.G.

kps said:


> I know you're Canadian, I didn't fall off the hay wagon yesterday, but you're missing the point.
> 
> Those 18th century visionaries have probably influenced every modern and democratic government in this world and that would include Canada and its charter. You may not need them but you should thank them for your free speech, protection from unreasonable search and seizure and a plethora of other rights copied into our charter.


An excellent point, kps. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## fjnmusic

iMouse said:


> Careful there.
> 
> Next thing you know, you will be amused. :lmao:


Perhaps this is a good time for a colorful metaphor.


----------



## kps

partsguy said:


> Ummm... Magna Carta anyone (kps mostly)?
> 
> (PS: 1066. Slightly predates that other thing your talking about.)


Dude...not even close, but sure, English common law was the basis. However while the Americans have "castle laws" we do not. Go figure.


----------



## groovetube

well they're now going to need a whole lot more than castle laws now that there are guns for every man woman and child in that country and we're ow hearing about shootings constantly now. 

Freedom, will very soon start turning into freedom, with armed guards, in armed gated communities.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> Freedom, will very soon start turning into freedom, with armed guards, in armed gated communities.


The rich have had those for years. They remain unconcerned for the trivial masses.


----------



## skippythebushkangaroo

💩


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> The rich have had those for years. They remain unconcerned for the trivial masses.


Sure, but it's a whole lot different when the armed guards are on -your- payroll.


----------



## BigDL

groovetube said:


> well they're now going to need a whole lot more than castle laws now that there are guns for every man woman and child in that country and we're ow hearing about shootings constantly now.
> 
> Freedom, will very soon start turning into freedom, with armed guards, in armed gated communities.





iMouse said:


> The rich have had those for years. They remain unconcerned for the trivial masses.


Isn't a prison a place where the residents are safely locked in and monitored by armed guards?


----------



## groovetube

freedom!!!


ha ha ha ha ha.


----------



## screature

BigDL said:


> Isn't a prison a place where the residents are safely locked in and monitored by armed guards?


What a completely ridiculous comparison.


----------



## iMouse

screature said:


> What a completely ridiculous comparison.


You think so, do you?

They are held captive by their wealth, and must take precautions whenever they venture forth.

Keep selling the mystique.


----------



## Macfury

iMouse said:


> You think so, do you?
> 
> They are held captive by their wealth, and must take precautions whenever they venture forth.
> 
> Keep selling the mystique.


What country are you referring to? Yemen?


----------



## iMouse

Macfury said:


> What country are you referring to? Yemen?


Well, less so Canada, but I was referring to our own back-yard.

Armored Vehicles and Bulletproof Cars for Sale, Including used Armored Vehicles


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> You think so, do you?
> 
> They are held captive by their wealth, and must take precautions whenever they venture forth.
> 
> Keep selling the mystique.


You have to understand that such comparisons will never register. The blind howls of "freeeedom!" is pretty much the extent of the ambitions, but never in a million years will they ever see that the complete opposite is occurring.

Even more astounding are the further right 'activists' who fully advocate government sponsored armed 'guards' to protect such freedoms. As a direct result of their insistence on maintaining an arsenal to massacre each other.

Oh, and interestingly enough, Yemen seems to have a smaller homicide rate than the US.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> Oh, and interestingly enough, Yemen seems to have a smaller homicide rate than the US.


Perhaps they can improve their standing in the Draft?


----------



## fjnmusic

BigDL said:


> Isn't a prison a place where the residents are safely locked in and monitored by armed guards?


Just like on The Walking Dead.


----------



## screature

iMouse said:


> You think so, do you?
> 
> They are held captive by their wealth, and must take precautions whenever they venture forth.
> 
> Keep selling the mystique.


Sigh... the difference is obvious...

*Prisons* are for criminals:

They are put there by the legal system because the have been convicted of a crime.

Armed guards keep them in, from escaping, i.e. getting out.

They cannot get out until their time is served.

They have no choice.

They are put there for the safety of society.

Society pays for them to be there.

*Gated communities* are for non-incarcerated/free individuals:

They are there because they want to be, not because they have been convicted of a crime.

Armed guards help keep them safe and by not letting criminals getting in.

They can come and go as they please.

They have the same choices as any other free individual.

They live there for their own safety, not the safety of society.

They pay for themselves to be there.

There are many other differences but these are some of the most obvious for anyone with eyes and without a political agenda to see... 

Rather obvious differences and why the comparison is quite simply ridiculous.


----------



## groovetube

Let's see.

In gated communities with armed guards, and having to travel around with guards, I highly doubt they're there because 'they want to be'. They're there because if they aren't, they risk getting their heads blown off. So the difference, is mere semantics. They still, have to be there.

Sure they can come and go as they please, but once again, they risk getting shot off the street.

Now keep in mind, I don't think we're talking about how things are right now, but where things can go if things keep getting worse (and fast), and where things could be, if the lunatics get their way.

It isn't that hard to envision.


----------



## eMacMan

So since East Berliners were not criminals, East Berlin was not a prison, unless of course they wanted to leave at which point they became criminals and East Berlin a prison.

Strikes me that the argument that one is not a prisoner unless he is a criminal is a load of crap.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> Strikes me that the argument that one is not a prisoner unless he is a criminal is a load of crap.


Still, it hardly compares with the amount of crap some others post in this thread, Bob. Just being stupid is bad enough. Proving it by posting snipe after snipe comment, is well . . . proof?


----------



## groovetube

It's always amusing when someone goes and gets up on the soapbox, and loudly proclaims others to be sniping, and then calls them all 'stupid'. What happened to the pontificating about name calling?

You just can't make this stuff up!


----------



## screature

eMacMan said:


> So since East Berliners were not criminals, East Berlin was not a prison, unless of course they wanted to leave at which point they became criminals and East Berlin a prison.
> 
> *Strikes me that the argument that one is not a prisoner unless he is a criminal is a load of crap*.


Do we or residents of the US live in East Berlin? Your post seems like a bunch of hyperbolic crap to me... Completely irrelevant to the context at hand...


----------



## screature

SINC said:


> Still, it hardly compares with the amount of crap some others post in this thread, Bob. Just being stupid is bad enough. Proving it by posting snipe after snipe comment, is well . . . proof?


Seriously? You in any way agree with this post? 

Consider the context... obviously some people can be prisoners who aren't criminals but that is not the comparison that was made. A Prison = a Gated Community was the comparison...

The comparison is completely fallacious on many levels.


----------



## SINC

screature said:


> Seriously? You in any way agree with this post?
> 
> Consider the context... obviously some people can be prisoners who aren't criminals but that is not the comparison that was made. A Prison = a Gated Community was the comparison...
> 
> The comparison is completely fallacious on many levels.


NO, I don't agree at all. Just pointing out that rather than making an intelligent or productive response to the discussion in various threads, some posters choose to be 'snipers' in the bushes posting smart a$$ remarks or shots at the subject matter, time after time, after time. They are so obvious they are tiresome. It proves only one thing, they have no idea how stupid they make themselves look.


----------



## screature

SINC said:


> NO, I don't agree at all. Just pointing out that rather than making an intelligent or productive response to the discussion in various threads, some posters choose to be 'snipers' in the bushes posting smart a$$ remarks or shots at the subject matter, time after time, after time. They are so obvious they are tiresome. It proves only one thing, they have no idea how stupid they make themselves look.


Ok fine, but my interpretation of your post was that I was one of the 'snipers' in the bushes posting smart a$$ remarks or shots...


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> Seriously? You in any way agree with this post?
> 
> Consider the context... obviously some people can be prisoners who aren't criminals but that is not the comparison that was made. A Prison = a Gated Community was the comparison...
> 
> The comparison is completely fallacious on many levels.


I think... He's just sniping at the er, snipers. Though most of us tend to snipe a bit, but calling people stupid goes even further.

Anyway, I have disagree with you over this. While no, gated communities are not 'prisons', I think the point was they are -like- prisons. Certainly the differences like you are not allowed to leave for your sentence may be obvious, I think as the violence problems continues to get worse and worse, our freedom will be one much less and less.

I think that's what is being talked about.


----------



## SINC

screature said:


> Ok fine, but my interpretation of your post was that I was one of the 'snipers' in the bushes posting smart a$$ remarks or shots...


Not a chance Steve. There is only one who wears that crown. 

And that person knows who they are. It's obvious from their posts in rebuttal.


----------



## groovetube

:baby:

After calling everyone stupid, I hope you got the crown fitted first!


----------



## SINC

screature said:


> Ok fine, but my interpretation of your post was that I was one of the 'snipers' in the bushes posting smart a$$ remarks or shots...


Nope not you. It's the guys who continue to throw rim shots.


----------



## groovetube

Well now that you've successfully derailed the topic, I'll leave you to continue name calling, and playing the moderator. Get all your anger out, have at'er. I'm out for the night.

Hopefully tomorrow this nonsense will cease, and the topic at least loosely, can be returned to.


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Nope not you. It's the guys who continue to throw rim shots.


One time in music class, I mistakenly referred to a rim shot as a rim job. There was one fellow in particular who laughed heartily.


----------



## iMouse

fjnmusic said:


> One time in music class, I mistakenly referred to a rim shot as a rim job.


Oh goody, a segway.

About time too. 



fjnmusic said:


> There was one fellow in particular who laughed heartily.


Probably a drummer. :lmao:


----------



## groovetube

Oh thhhtop.


----------



## eMacMan

First off I simply pointed out that Screatures starting premise that one had to be a criminal to be a prisoner was clearly fallacious. My single example provided 10s of Millions of exceptions and is just one of at least a dozen examples that popped into my head. That is not sniping, merely engaging in intelligent debate.

OTOH were I to speculate on what fueled Don's inappropriate response, that would be sniping.


----------



## FeXL

Further on that Journal News release of law-abiding gun-owner names & addresses.



> “GET THE HELL out of your ELITIST EGGHEAD TOWER, put on your BIG BOY PANTS, FACE THE MUSIC and START ANSWERING QUESTIONS!”


That, BTW, is a statement by a judge...


----------



## kps

Interesting article in Forbes:

'Assault Weapon' Is Just A PR Stunt Meant To Fool The Gullible - Forbes


----------



## screature

eMacMan said:


> First off I simply pointed out that Screatures starting premise that one had to be a criminal to be a prisoner was clearly fallacious


Relative to the context in Canada and most modern evolved democracies it certainly is not... But you keep referencing anachronistic examples as evidence.... That is why I reply.



eMacMan said:


> My single example provided 10s of Millions of exceptions and is just one of at least a dozen examples that popped into my head. That is not sniping, merely engaging in intelligent debate.


As I already alluded to this is completely a red herring and irrelevant to modern times.


----------



## screature

SINC said:


> Not a chance Steve. There is only one who wears that crown.
> 
> And that person knows who they are. It's obvious from their posts in rebuttal.


Thanks Don... I'm just little wound up these days.


----------



## MacDoc

At least New York is ignoring the NRA rhetoric ....



> *New York Is Moving Quickly to Enact Tough Curbs on Guns*
> 
> By DAVID M. HALBFINGER and THOMAS KAPLAN
> Published: January 9, 2013 111 Comments
> 
> New York State is nearing agreement on a proposal to put what would be some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws into effect, including what Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo vowed on Wednesday would be an ironclad ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, and new measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and mentally ill people.


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/10/nyregion/new-york-nears-gun-control-tightening-laws.html?hp&_r=0

There are some decent stats showing the effectiveness of gun control even in the US where states have taken steps.

Not sure how effective this will be



> President Barack Obama is considering the use of an executive order to restrict access to guns or ammunition in the wake of nationwide revulsion in the US over the Connecticut school shootings, vice-president Joe Biden said Wednesday.


the real issue is not assault weapons tho that ban should be a given. The issue is a combination of handguns, little control over sales channels and an exemption from liability suits for gun manufacturers that idjit GW passed.

Long guns and shotguns in rural and hunting areas are not an issue anywhere in the world.
A quarter of a million deaths and injuries from firearms annually in the US is a monumental problem.....it's about to surpass automobiles as a leading cause of death and injury.

It's good that Obama is in his second term which frees him to act more aggressively. Stiffer laws in NY may translate into fewer handguns into Canada - also a good thing.
Some small silver lining....we can hope.


----------



## fjnmusic

Guns don't kill people....but they sure do help expedite the process.


----------



## Macfury

MacDoc, no executive order can be legally passed to contravene the Second Amendment. Obama pays little attention to the Constitution, but such an Order would not survive.

I enjoyed this image i found online:


----------



## kps

Macdoc is making stuff up again...250000deaths and injuries? Really? Up from 12000 over night. Must be the panic run on the ARs being banned.

Well I caught the bug too, just in case Obama stops exports as well.

Look what the mailman just brought me:


----------



## Macfury

When the zombie plague starts in earnest, kps, I'm up for a visit!


----------



## kps

Macfury said:


> When the zombie plague starts in earnest, kps, I'm up for a visit!


Read an article how there are no ARs, magazines or .223 ammo left in stores in the US and manufacturers are 6mo to a year behind orders. Lucky for us here in Canada, we can import ammo from other sources besides the US. I already can't find additional magazines which are pinned to only 5 rounds as per the Firearms act.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> Read an article how there are no ARs, magazines or .223 ammo left in stores in the US and manufacturers are 6mo to a year behind orders. Lucky for us here in Canada, we can import ammo from other sources besides the US. I already can't find additional magazines which are pinned to only 5 rounds as per the Firearms act.


Zombies won't wait for ammo orders to come in.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Macdoc is making stuff up again...250000deaths and injuries? Really? Up from 12000 over night. Must be the panic run on the ARs being banned.


where are you getting your 12,000 #? That is *way way way way way too low* to account for gun related "deaths & injury".

I think you may be confusing that with gun homicides.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> I already can't find additional magazines which are pinned to only 5 rounds as per the Firearms act.


why would you need more than 5 shots? are you that bad of a shot?


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> where are you getting your 12,000 #? That is *way way way way way too low* to account for gun related "deaths & injury".
> 
> I think you may be confusing that with gun homicides.


Perhaps, but 250,000 also sounds inaccurate. Would be nice to see the source of the stats and what's included. The 12000 number also included law enforcement use and civilian use in protecting life or self defence.

I-rui, simple fact is, pinning 30rd mags to only 5 rounds is a joke considering that in this country you are prohibited from using firearms classified as restricted for hunting even though they're easily capable of that on small to medium sized game. 

So, considering a licensed individual is only allowed to discharge a restricted firearm at an approved range, why the limit? Minimize holes in paper? LOL


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Perhaps, but 250,000 also sounds inaccurate. Would be nice to see the source of the stats and what's included. The 12000 number also included law enforcement use and civilian use in protecting life or self defence.


according to wiki :

Gun violence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 66.9% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm.[6] There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[7] Just over half of all gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[8] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 suicide deaths, and 12,632 (40.5%) homicide deaths. Some suicides are committed after the perpetrator has committed one or more murders.[9]


so a rough estimate could be around 100,000 gun related injury and deaths per year. not sure where the 250,000 # came from, but i also didn't see where mac doc posted it, and what it was related to.



kps said:


> So, considering a licensed individual is only allowed to discharge a restricted firearm at an approved range, why the limit? Minimize holes in paper? LOL


because when someone decides to go on a killing rampage i don't think they care about what's "allowed", so it makes perfect sense to limit any possible damage and restrict high capacity magazines.

knowing that law abiding gun owners can only discharge these weapons at a gun range the request that they change mags every 5 shots seems reasonable. what's the hurry? the target isn't going anywhere.


----------



## eMacMan

i-rui said:


> according to wiki :
> 
> Gun violence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> so a rough estimate could be around 100,000 gun related injury and deaths per year. not sure where the 250,000 # came from, but i also didn't see where mac doc posted it, and what it was related to.
> 
> 
> 
> because when someone decides to go on a killing rampage i don't think they care about what's "allowed", so it makes perfect sense to limit any possible damage and restrict high capacity magazines.
> 
> knowing that law abiding gun owners can only discharge these weapons at a gun range the request that they change mags every 5 shots seems reasonable. what's the hurry? the target isn't going anywhere.


Since US suicide rate is somewhat lower than many of the countries touted as success for gun control, suicides have to be excluded when referring to US gun deaths. These individuals would have killed themselves regardless of their ability to access firearms.


----------



## Sonal

eMacMan said:


> Since US suicide rate is somewhat lower than many of the countries touted as success for gun control, suicides have to be excluded when referring to US gun deaths. These individuals would have killed themselves regardless of their ability to access firearms.


Not necessarily. They may have tried to kill themselves anyway, but their methods may be less immediate or less effective, which would allow time for help to intervene.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> so a rough estimate could be around 100,000 gun related injury and deaths per year. not sure where the 250,000 # came from, but i also didn't see where mac doc posted it, and what it was related to.


See Post 484 of this thread.



> because when someone decides to go on a killing rampage i don't think they care about what's "allowed", so it makes perfect sense to limit any possible damage and restrict high capacity magazines.


Exactly, so what's stopping anyone from un-pinning the mag? It only affects the law abiding and therefore useless as a preventative measure.



> knowing that law abiding gun owners can only discharge these weapons at a gun range the request that they change mags every 5 shots seems reasonable. what's the hurry? the target isn't going anywhere.


Ever hear of IPSC, IDPA or USPSA? It's timed competition and in 3-gun competition you shoot multiple targets. See how many shots this guy fires from his AR without reloading





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






or the guy at the 3min mark of this video.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Not necessarily. They may have tried to kill themselves anyway, but their methods may be less immediate or less effective, which would allow time for help to intervene.


Okay, but in a country with 88 guns for each 100 people, a gun will be the obvious choice wouldn't you say? The likelihood that the individual already possesses the firearm is enormous. So it's not surprising that there would be a prodigious number of suicides by firearms as opposed to other methods..


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Okay, but in a country with 88 guns for each 100 people, a gun will be the obvious choice wouldn't you say? The likelihood that the individual already possesses the firearm is enormous. So it's not surprising that there would be a prodigious number of suicides by firearms as opposed to other methods..


88 guns/hundred people does not mean that 88 people out of every 100 have guns. It could mean that out of every 100 people there's one guy with 88 guns... sure, very likely that that guy would choose a gun, not so much for others. 

In any case, my point is that suicides should not be excluded on the basis that those people would have killed themselves anyway.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> 88 guns/hundred people does not mean that 88 people out of every 100 have guns. It could mean that out of every 100 people there's one guy with 88 guns... sure, very likely that that guy would choose a gun, not so much for others.
> 
> In any case, my point is that suicides should not be excluded on the basis that those people would have killed themselves anyway.


I know what the stat means. How many guns each citizen owns does not negate the point. It's still valid, no matter how you look at it. I never argued whether suicides should be included or not, but IMHO, they shouldn't.

Here's some more stats for you folks...





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## John Clay

i-rui said:


> knowing that law abiding gun owners can only discharge these weapons at a gun range the request that they change mags every 5 shots seems reasonable. what's the hurry? the target isn't going anywhere.


Changing mags every 10 seconds gets old, fast. Especially when your hands are freezing trying to reload, or in timed competitions where every second counts.

As kps said, mag limits only stop law-abiding people from filling them up. It's absurdly easy to remove the pin that limits them, yielding a mag that holds full capacity.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> I know what the stat means. How many guns each citizen owns does not negate the point. It's still valid, no matter how you look at it. I never argued whether suicides should be included or not, but IMHO, they shouldn't.


You didn't. eMacMan did, and that who I replied to.

Though they should be included. Acute suicidality is frequently a transient state; those feelings do pass, if the person does not kill themselves first. (The person will still need help, but they are not at imminent risk.) An available gun makes that a lot less likely.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> You didn't. eMacMan did, and that who I replied to.
> 
> Though they should be included. Acute suicidality is frequently a transient state; those feelings do pass, if the person does not kill themselves first. (The person will still need help, but they are not at imminent risk.) An available gun makes that a lot less likely.


Guns are banned in Japan and they're 3rd in the world in suicides. The Japanese have no trouble offing themselves in great numbers without guns. 

Guns have no impact on suicide, if someone is determined to do themselves in, they'll do it whether a gun is available or not.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Exactly, so what's stopping anyone from un-pinning the mag? It only affects the law abiding and therefore useless as a preventative measure.





John Clay said:


> As kps said, mag limits only stop law-abiding people from filling them up. It's absurdly easy to remove the pin that limits them, yielding a mag that holds full capacity.


well, you're both making a compelling case on why these guns should be fully banned in canada. if it's that easy to alter a clip they should be pulled until the manufacturer changes the design to comply with reasonable gun safety.




John Clay said:


> Changing mags every 10 seconds gets old, fast. Especially when your hands are freezing trying to reload, or in timed competitions where every second counts.


i understand that shooting these guns are fun (i really do), but i'm sure blowing **** up with a bazooka is also a blast - but that doesn't mean bazookas should be legal.

I'm a big proponent for personal freedom, but there does have to be a line where public safety trumps it. For instance people can get drunk, but they can't drive if they're impaired. Seems reasonable.

So yes, i support the right to own hunting riffles and sure, even certain handguns for home defence or target shooting. But sorry, i don't support assault weapons and high mag clips just because some people's hands get cold/tired while they *play* with their guns.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Guns are banned in Japan and they're 3rd in the world in suicides. The Japanese have no trouble offing themselves in great numbers without guns.
> 
> Guns have no impact on suicide, if someone is determined to do themselves in, they'll do it whether a gun is available or not.


Or it means that the Japanese have a high degree of depressed or suicidal people. 

The "if someone is determined to do themselves in" is a really popular line of thinking, but not actually true. (Nor helpful.) For most people, suicidal thoughts pass in time.... that is, they may be determined to kill themselves in that moment, but then the moment passes.

But if they shoot themselves in that moment, the opportunity is lost.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Or it means that the Japanese have a high degree of depressed or suicidal people.
> 
> The "if someone is determined to do themselves in" is a really popular line of thinking, but not actually true. (Nor helpful.) For most people, suicidal thoughts pass in time.... that is, they may be determined to kill themselves in that moment, but then the moment passes.
> 
> But if they shoot themselves in that moment, the opportunity is lost.


Just like the moment when they hit the pavement from 10 storeys up? Or, jump on the rail track with a train coming? Or...

Yup all lost opportunities.


----------



## groovetube

Hey if Alex Jones is right, the US is in for a huge spike in suicides with the prevalence of prozac, er, 'suicide pills.


----------



## fjnmusic

A death is a death, and a gun is a gun. If a person is killed by gunfire, intentionally or not, you count it. This thread has become about quibbling over rather trivial details. 30 round automatic or semi-automatic, 5 round clips, single shot at a time rifles vs. assault rifles, all of these things are details. The second amendment gun entitlement was created at a far different period of time than this, a time of muskets and bayonets, arguably far slower guns. The intent of the amendment was also to enable people to protect their homes, not go out and carry concealed weapons. 2A has been bastardized beyond recognition. One could conceivably make an argument for carrying a rocket launcher. The system is not working anymore given the number of casualties each year.

A ban will not help anymore either, judging by the empty ammunition shelves after Dec 14. The system only works if everyone, good guys or bad, have guns or if no one does, save for police. Adam Lanza did not need a gun permit; he just stole his mother's guns which were easily accessible. When that many people own guns country, somebody is going to F up safety-wise, not to mention all the illegal firearms out there. The US is F'd (or Ph'd?) since the genie is out of the bottle and has been since the country's inception. And with the attitude if entitlement that 2A seems to provide, there is no solution. Even an education campaign will haven't take impact, because the citizens don't have respect for firearms anymore. They just want them like kids want smartphones.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> well, you're both making a compelling case on why these guns should be fully banned in canada. if it's that easy to alter a clip they should be pulled until the manufacturer changes the design to comply with reasonable gun safety.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i understand that shooting these guns are fun (i really do), but i'm sure blowing **** up with a bazooka is also a blast - but that doesn't mean bazookas should be legal.
> 
> I'm a big proponent for personal freedom, but there does have to be a line where public safety trumps it. For instance people can get drunk, but they can't drive if they're impaired. Seems reasonable.
> 
> So yes, i support the right to own hunting riffles and sure, even certain handguns for home defence or target shooting. But sorry, i don't support assault weapons and high mag clips just because some people's hands get cold/tired while they *play* with their guns.


...and as I said a hundred time before and demonstrated with video...

*These are not assault weapons!!!!!*

They're not even assault rifles. So no, they do not have to be banned, they are just as capable of hunting with as with any other semi-automatic hunting rifle.

I'm tired of repeating myself over and over. If some of you can't see facts clearly as to what is and isn't an assault rifle, than there's no point in me trying to explain it any more.


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> A death is a death, and a gun is a gun. If a person is killed by gunfire, intentionally or not, you count it. This thread has become about quibbling over rather trivial details. 30 round automatic or semi-automatic, 5 round clips, single shot at a time rifles vs. assault rifles, all of these things are details. The second amendment gun entitlement was created at a far different period of time than this, a time of muskets and bayonets, arguably far slower guns. The intent of the amendment was also to enable people to protect their homes, not go out and carry concealed weapons. 2A has been bastardized beyond recognition. One could conceivably make an argument for carrying a rocket launcher. The system is not working anymore given the number of casualties each year.
> 
> A ban will not help anymore either, judging by the empty ammunition shelves after Dec 14. The system only works if everyone, good guys or bad, have guns or if no one does, save for police. Adam Lanza did not need a gun permit; he just stole his mother's guns which were easily accessible. When that many people own guns country, somebody is going to F up safety-wise, not to mention all the illegal firearms out there. The US is F'd (or Ph'd?) since the genie is out of the bottle and has been since the country's inception. And with the attitude if entitlement that 2A seems to provide, there is no solution. Even an education campaign will haven't take impact, because the citizens don't have respect for firearms anymore. They just want them like kids want smartphones.


+1 I agree.

It's going to take a very long time to put that genie back in the bottle, but they have to start somewhere, and quibbling about different classes of weapons is just a distraction it seems.


----------



## groovetube

We interrupt this program about guns and gun control with a report on another school shooting...





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






yeah, that actually happened...


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Just like the moment when they hit the pavement from 10 storeys up? Or, jump on the rail track with a train coming? Or...
> 
> Yup all lost opportunities.


Unless they happen to be on the roof of a tall building or beside a rail track with a train coming while in having an acute suicidal crisis, there's still some amount of time.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> ...and as I said a hundred time before and demonstrated with video...
> 
> *These are not assault weapons!!!!!*
> 
> They're not even assault rifles. So no, they do not have to be banned, they are just as capable of hunting with as with any other semi-automatic hunting rifle.
> 
> I'm tired of repeating myself over and over. If some of you can't see facts clearly as to what is and isn't an assault rifle, than there's no point in me trying to explain it any more.


*you* don't get to decide what constitutes an "assualt weapon". 

it's a legal term,created by law makers used to designate certain types of guns. not what gun enthusiasts want (or not want) them to be.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> *you* don't get to decide what constitutes an "assualt weapon".
> 
> it's a legal term,created by law makers used to designate certain types of guns. not what gun enthusiasts want (or not want) them to be.


Legal term my a**, I nor the gun enthusiasts have made any designations. Engineers with their technical/mechanical/experience and knowledge know difference. Differences accepted by the whole world as to what an assault rifle is and isn't. Politicians and the idiot media can do all the social engineering they want, it still doesn't change the fact that the big fuss is about nothing more than a simple semi-automatic sport rifle.

Edited---Happy now?


----------



## Sonal

You all want to take 5 until you can post without shouting?


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> A death is a death, and a gun is a gun. If a person is killed by gunfire, intentionally or not, you count it. This thread has become about quibbling over rather trivial details. 30 round automatic or semi-automatic, 5 round clips, single shot at a time rifles vs. assault rifles, all of these things are details. The second amendment gun entitlement was created at a far different period of time than this, a time of muskets and bayonets, arguably far slower guns. The intent of the amendment was also to enable people to protect their homes, not go out and carry concealed weapons. 2A has been bastardized beyond recognition. One could conceivably make an argument for carrying a rocket launcher. The system is not working anymore given the number of casualties each year.


The details may not make any difference to you, because it's not your property they're trying to ban and confiscate. Property that you may have owned for decades.


----------



## i-rui

Sonal said:


> You all want to take 5 until you can post without shouting?


I didn't "shout" (which is usually referred to all caps and exclamation marks on a forum). i simply reciprocated kps's use of font size to emphasize my point that *he* doesn't get to decide what guns qualify in laws that ban assault weapons.



kps said:


> *Legal term my a**, I nor the gun enthusiasts have made any designations. Engineers with their technical/mechanical/experience and knowledge know difference. Differences accepted by the whole world as to what an assault rifle is and isn't. Politicians and the idiot media can do all the social engineering they want, it still doesn't change the fact that the big fuss is about nothing more than a simple semi-automatic sport rifle.*


"semi-automatic sport rifle"

"semi-automatic" is a legitimate technical term.

"sport rifle" is a marketing term by gun manufactures. There is no technical merit to using the term "sport" ahead of "rifle". In the same way you have accepted the term "sport rifle" (because that is how it has been packaged for you to digest by gun manufactures) others have accepted the term "assault weapons" to designate a class of weapons by lawmakers in the past. 

I do agree that some of the criteria is silly, and IMO it should be expanded to include any semi-automatic gun with high capacity ammo clips. Lawmakers have decided on the term "assault weapon" in the past. I really don't care what they call it, and if it makes you feel better to call them boom boom sticks, or whatyamacallits go right ahead, it doesn't change the argument that there is no *reasonable* reason to have these weapons that shoot high capacity clips, other than to kill more people, faster.


----------



## groovetube

The problem as has been pointed out numerous times, is that the 2nd amendment was written at a time when muskets were all you had, and loading those things were waaay slower than even non semi auto rifles.

Things have changed since then, and drastically so. We're just simply going to have to accept that the mass numbers of insane killing machines on our streets, is far far above what the authors of the 2ndA ever envisioned. So while we all argue about what is, and isn't an 'assault rifle', let's remember that we have now, a very very serious problem, that is not going to go away, it's going to get much worse, fast. And all the armed guards in the country isn't going to do a damn thing, except escalate things.

Bans won't initially prevent crazies from accessing the number of guns already on the street. It's going to take years, years to actively get these guns OFF the streets. There are too many guns available, and the ability to get one needs to be really clamped down on. For those who say there's already rules and laws for this, clearly, they aren't being followed well enough.

Everybody is going to need to get on board with solutions, anti-gun people need to accept hunters etc. want their guns, and hunters, etc., are just going to have to accept that tougher rules will be a tougher thing to deal with, but massacres are going to increase. Deal with it. Pour me a pity drink.


----------



## iMouse

There is absolutely no reason on Earth why a semi-automatic 'sports' rifle has to look like an army assault weapon.

They are selling macho bull**** with that crap, and nothing else.

Serious hunters or recreational shooters just laugh at that junk.

If anything, all those unnecessary embellishments make them *less* suitable for the job.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> I didn't "shout" (which is usually referred to all caps and exclamation marks on a forum). i simply reciprocated kps's use of font size to emphasize my point that *he* doesn't get to decide what guns qualify in laws that ban assault weapons.
> 
> 
> 
> "semi-automatic sport rifle"
> 
> "semi-automatic" is a legitimate technical term.
> 
> "sport rifle" is a marketing term by gun manufactures. There is no technical merit to using the term "sport" ahead of "rifle". In the same way you have accepted the term "sport rifle" (because that is how it has been packaged for you to digest by gun manufactures) others have accepted the term "assault weapons" to designate a class of weapons by lawmakers in the past.
> 
> I do agree that some of the criteria is silly, and IMO it should be expanded to include any semi-automatic gun with high capacity ammo clips. Lawmakers have decided on the term "assault weapon" in the past. I really don't care what they call it, and if it makes you feel better to call them boom boom sticks, or whatyamacallits go right ahead, it doesn't change the argument that there is no *reasonable* reason to have these weapons that shoot high capacity clips, other than to kill more people, faster.


Wrong. The media and anti gun politicians came up with "assault weapon" to stigmatize a firearm and those using the civilian semi-auto version for shooting sport, hunting sport and in the case of the US, for protection. 

Assault rifles have definitive mechanical differences and the term can not be used to refer to civilian semi-automatic rifles. It's completely inaccurate and if you have issues with it being labeled sporting then fine, refer to it as the civilian version. It also is not a weapon unless it is used as a weapon, so once again the terminology is used to stigmatize owners and to fear monger and scare the ignorant. 

The scare mongering and social engineering accomplishes nothing but FUD. It makes those unfamiliar with firearms even more ignorant.


----------



## groovetube

I don't think the bad guys care much for classifications. If it can shoot fast, and kill, and there's lots of them around to get one, they're good.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> The problem as has been pointed out numerous times, is that the 2nd amendment was written at a time when muskets were all you had, and loading those things were waaay slower than even non semi auto rifles.
> 
> Things have changed since then, and drastically so. We're just simply going to have to accept that the mass numbers of insane killing machines on our streets, is far far above what the authors of the 2ndA ever envisioned. So while we all argue about what is, and isn't an 'assault rifle', let's remember that we have now, a very very serious problem, that is not going to go away, it's going to get much worse, fast. And all the armed guards in the country isn't going to do a damn thing, except escalate things.
> 
> Bans won't initially prevent crazies from accessing the number of guns already on the street. It's going to take years, years to actively get these guns OFF the streets. There are too many guns available, and the ability to get one needs to be really clamped down on. For those who say there's already rules and laws for this, clearly, they aren't being followed well enough.
> 
> Everybody is going to need to get on board with solutions, anti-gun people need to accept hunters etc. want their guns, and hunters, etc., are just going to have to accept that tougher rules will be a tougher thing to deal with, but massacres are going to increase. Deal with it. Pour me a pity drink.


First of all, the second amendment was written into the constitution not to protect the right of the sportsmen, it was put in to protect against tyranny. I don't see why so many of you don't get it. They gave the people the right to protect themselves from the very people that wrote it. The government, --as a last resort.

Here's a quote from one of the founding fathers who wrote it:

*"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson
*

*The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.-Thomas Jefferson*


----------



## SINC

kps said:


> First of all, the second amendment was written into the constitution not to protect the right of the sportsmen, it was put in to protect against tyranny. I don't see why so many of you don't get it.


Well, ya know kps, the intellectuals always have to weigh in.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> There is absolutely no reason on Earth why a semi-automatic 'sports' rifle has to look like an army assault weapon.


Why? Does it scare you?



> They are selling macho bull**** with that crap, and nothing else.


Okay, if you say so.



> Serious hunters or recreational shooters just laugh at that junk.


Sure, Fudds laugh...as in Elmer. They laugh at stuff they don't understand just like many fear what they do not understand.


----------



## kps

SINC said:


> Well, ya know kps, the intellectuals always have to weigh in.


Their minds have been conditioned to follow the "anti" rhetoric and the fear mongering media spin. They think it's intellectually superior.


----------



## groovetube

'cause y'know... 1776 is a'comin oh YES IT IS!!!

You say Jones was a crazy, but I see people here practically repeating his insanity!


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> 'cause y'know... 1776 is a'comin oh YES IT IS!!!
> 
> You say Jones was a crazy, but I see people here practically repeating his insanity!


You know Groove, there's very few who could compete with that level of tin foil nutbarism.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> First of all, the second amendment was written into the constitution not to protect the right of the sportsmen, it was put in to protect against tyranny. I don't see why so many of you don't get it. They gave the people the right to protect themselves from the very people that wrote it. The government, --as a last resort.
> 
> Here's a quote from one of the founding fathers who wrote it:
> 
> *"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson
> *
> 
> *The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.-Thomas Jefferson*


Well this is certainly NOT how they are being used, so I would have to conclude that most Americans are abusing their second amendment rights. The right to carry a concealed weapon with you to the grocery store, for example, has nothing to do with protection from government tyranny. In fact, it may be the one who thinks they are exercising their 2A rights that the rest of the population needs protection from. Take that psycho Alex Jones for example.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> You know Groove, there's very few who could compete with that level of tin foil nutbarism.


well, with all this talk of needing to arm oneself to the teeth to protect oneself from government tyranny, and as you know, I have seen first hand, the militias deep in the heart of america and how insanely armed they are... I have to ask, how is this different than what alex jones is resenting?

It may seem tinfoil on CNN, but, that's what I'm hearing here.

To repeat what someone else here said, what is this, Yemen?


----------



## SINC

kps said:


> You know Groove, there's very few who could compete with that level of tin foil nutbarism.


:clap: Well done kps, nailed it exactly. :lmao:


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> You know Groove, there's very few who could compete with that level of tin foil nutbarism.


I don't know that SInc realizes that we've clinked glasses in person. :lmao:


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> I don't know that SInc realizes that we've clinked glasses in person. :lmao:


Oh yes he does. Even read your profanity laced stuff on Magic every day. 

Like the one you made about me in this thread :lmao:

What a sad display.


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> Why? Does it scare you?.


And if I said "yes", how would that make you feel?

Here, lay down and tell me all about it. Just between us, you understand.



kps said:


> They laugh at stuff they don't understand, just like many fear what they do not understand.


I don't feel like laughing at this "stuff". I understand, and fear, what is going on. Thankfully it's South of the border.

I will admit that a .223 is an excellent hunting calibre, as a missed shot will disintegrate when it hits a branch, or whatever. Heavier calibres just keep sailing along, caring not what they hit.


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> Oh yes he does. Even read your profanity laced stuff on Magic every day.
> 
> Like the one you made about me in this thread :lmao:
> 
> What a sad display from a so-called man.


I realize that you despise me, (actually Im sure everyone does now), but honestly, that day I told you where to go, because you and your bullying ways deserved it. And so did a number of people.

And I don't post any more 'profanity' than anyone else there does on a daily basis.

As for your demeaning comment about calling me a 'so-called man', well that's your problem. You want to take it down to that level, you can stay there all by yourself thanks.


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> I realize that you despise me, (actually Im sure everyone does now), but honestly, that day I told you where to go, because you and your bullying ways deserved it. And so did a number of people.
> 
> And I don't post any more 'profanity' than anyone else there does on a daily basis.
> 
> As for your demeaning comment about calling me a 'so-called man', well that's your problem. You want to take it down to that level, you can stay there all by yourself thanks.


Oh, I don't have to groove, your post about me shows your level and I am far above that.


----------



## iMouse

SINC said:


> Oh, I don't have to groove, your post about me shows your level and I am far above that.


So's your old man. tptptptp


----------



## groovetube

Listen, if you are hell bent on taking this really personal, perhaps you should either take it PM, or somewhere else.

You might think I'm nuts, disagree heavily with my opinions, or think I'm quite delusional for believing what I believe, but where you start throwing around things like "so called man", and etc., it's time to call it day. You're crossing the line and being a bully according to this forums rules.


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> Listen, if you are hell bent on taking this really personal, perhaps you should either take it PM, or somewhere else.
> 
> You might think I;m nuts, disagree heavily with my opinions, or think I'm quite delusional for believing what I believe, but where you start throwing around things like ;so called man, and etc., it's time to call it day. You're crossing the line and being a bully.


No, I am exposing you for what you are. I retract the so called man, but nothing else.


----------



## groovetube

and what is that? Someone who told you where to go in another place where it was allowed, and you deserved it? I simply told you what I thought. Some would call that being straight.

I'm a little surprised you wish to take it over here, where that sort of thing is not allowed.


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> and what is that? Someone who told you where to go in another place where it was allowed, and you deserved it?
> 
> I'm a little surprised you wish to take it over here, where that sort of thing is not allowed.


Didn't bother you there did it? Why does it suddenly bother you here when I do it politely without profanity?


----------



## groovetube

because the rules here, are different. Playing and hiding behind the line in the rules here is what causes plenty of trouble here. If you wish to talk straight out, you know where you can.

I'm more than happy to cut the crap and work it out until it's resolved.


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> because the rules here, are different. Playing and hiding behind the line in the rules here is what causes plenty of trouble here. If you wish to talk straight out, you know where you can.
> 
> I'm more than happy to cut the crap and work it out until it's resolved.


Not lately they're not. Haven't seen a mod post in near a month.

And no thanks on being on the receiving end of your foul language and real feelings over there. Just thought it was time everyone knew you for what you really are here.

Night groove. Have a good one.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> well, with all this talk of needing to arm oneself to the teeth to protect oneself from government tyranny, and as you know, I have seen first hand, the militias deep in the heart of america and how insanely armed they are... I have to ask, how is this different than what alex jones is resenting?
> 
> It may seem tinfoil on CNN, but, that's what I'm hearing here.
> 
> To repeat what someone else here said, what is this, Yemen?


I'm not advocating any one arm themselves to the teeth or join a militia, all I did was explain the idea behind the 2nd A. Plain and simple.

Please, Jones is so far right and wrapped in tinfoil that if he went any further he'd be left.


----------



## groovetube

Well if you outed me as someone who wouldn't take your bullying and told you to go $% yourself, well that's cool.

I can live with that 

I've been told where to go myself more than once and have lived to tell the tale. I may have deserved it more than once.

Have a good one yourself.


----------



## fjnmusic

Look, if you two narcissists are just about done, there's some of us that are actually providing some commentary on the shootings at a Connecticut school that wouldn't mind a response now and then. No offense.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> And if I said "yes", how would that make you feel?
> 
> Here, lay down and tell me all about it. Just between us, you understand.


Sad. Very sad. Suffering from Hoplophobia is not pretty. I would try and cure you.


----------



## SINC

fjnmusic said:


> Look, if you two narcissists are just about done, there's some of us that are actually providing some commentary on the shootings at a Connecticut school that wouldn't mind a response now and then. No offense.


None taken Frank. Back on topic, the gun lobby is so far ahead of the anti-gun lobby, we're likely talking decades, not years to see any improvement in gun unavailability in the US. It is too firmly entrenched.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> because the rules here, are different. Playing and hiding behind the line in the rules here is what causes plenty of trouble here. If you wish to talk straight out, you know where you can.
> 
> I'm more than happy to cut the crap and work it out until it's resolved.


What's this? Contrition in the face of public humiliation?


----------



## FeXL

Back to guns...

Thought this was appropriate:


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> Look, if you two narcissists are just about done, there's some of us that are actually providing some commentary on the shootings at a Connecticut school that wouldn't mind a response now and then. No offense.


now just imagine if we all here had guns!


----------



## FeXL

We don't?


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Back to guns...
> 
> Thought this was appropriate:


Looks like we're discovering what the problem may be....

This is progress.


----------



## FeXL

One more:


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> We don't?


well, some of us don't, and that isn't fair. 

Perhaps we should all have guns, in case someone starts shooting, then we can all shoot. 

That would fix things.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Well this is certainly NOT how they are being used, so I would have to conclude that most Americans are abusing their second amendment rights. The right to carry a concealed weapon with you to the grocery store, for example, has nothing to do with protection from government tyranny. In fact, it may be the one who thinks they are exercising their 2A rights that the rest of the population needs protection from. Take that psycho Alex Jones for example.


All the second does is protect the right to "keep & bear arms" The concealed carry permits are state legislated and issued.

But, if we must compare it to the 18th century then lets understand that they did carry pistols and swords on a daily bases for defence and if you didn't hunt, you didn't eat, so most of this would be a "given". The specific intent as to the 2nd by the authors, I've already explained.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> well, some of us don't, and that isn't fair.
> 
> Perhaps we should all have guns, in case someone starts shooting, then we can all shoot.
> 
> That would fix things.


The only thing you're shooting is blanks....

Couldn't resist


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Ther only thing you're shooting is blanks....
> 
> Couldn't resist


Well it isn't like I'd know!


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Sad. Very sad. Suffering from Hoplophobia is not pretty. I would try and cure you.


Perhaps after you get over you Hoplomania.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Perhaps after you get over you Hoplomania.


I'm here as a sportsman and an educator...to help you all not to fear inanimate objects.


----------



## screature

kps said:


> I'm here as a sportsman and an educator...*to help you all not to fear inanimate objects*.


Yep it is certain people that need to be feared. 

Not guns or axes or knives or chainsaws or hammers or crossbows or cars or subways etc... just certain people.

Things don't kill people. People kill people. Some things may make it easier but none-the-less, without people those things don't kill anyone.

Now asteroids... They can kill lots of people and other creatures without any human involvement.

I think we should outlaw asteroids.

Ohh... and earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, blizzards, heat waves, drought, tsunamis and anything else that could kill a human being including doctors, drugs, drivers (of all forms), oceans, lakes, rivers and streams, bathtubs, swimming pools and all forms of tobacco products, any form of alcohol, unprotected sex, abortion, euthanasia, roller coasters, steam rollers, alpine skiing, parachuting, bungee jumping, clubbing (both entertainment and the physical act) and we could save an untold number of lives that way.


----------



## groovetube

I've heard this guns don't kill people nonsense before.

But in the US where there is an estimated 300 million (or more) guns around, a very heavily armed population, there sure does seem to be an incredible number of people getting shot.

So if that saying were actually true, then murder rates in the different countries, really should be even somewhat similar.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I've heard this guns don't kill people nonsense before.
> 
> But in the US where there is an estimated 300 million (or more) guns around, a very heavily armed population, there sure does seem to be an incredible number of people getting shot.
> 
> So if that saying were actually true, then murder rates in the different countries, really should be even somewhat similar.


Well they don't, none of the firearms I've owned for the last 37 years (and there's a bunch) have killed anyone. One night I'll leave the door to the safe open and see if they'll sneak out and kill someone.


----------



## FeXL

Remember hearing about this in the MSM over 2 years ago?

Gunman killed at Sullivan Central 



> The Sullivan County Sheriff's Department confirms that a man confronted the student resource officer at the school today. The SRO calmed the man down until more officers arrived, at which time the man drew his gun on the SRO and he was shot by officers with the Sullivan County Sheriff's Department.


Yeah, me either...


----------



## FeXL

I'd love every red state in the union to adopt the same policy...

Wyoming Threatens Arrests for Federal Gun Grabbers



> As details continue to emerge regarding gun control plans that President Barack Obama and the Democrats are pushing behind the scenes, Wyoming lawmakers have a message for the federal government: "Don't tread on us."
> 
> ...
> 
> Is this the wave of the future for "red" states concerned about Obama's strong anti-gun intentions?
> 
> It is too early to tell. But it is worth noting that Montana lawmakers began pushing for the same kind of legislation as soon as conservatives took control of that state's legislature in 2010.


----------



## FeXL

*"Gun free" does NOT mean "murder free."*

Don't click the link if you have a thin skin.

Gun free

Just a little blurb on murders in "gun free" 2012 Chicago.


----------



## SINC

*Goon Control*



> To beat the NRA, don’t focus on guns. Focus on keeping them away from dangerous people.
> 
> This weekend, a task force set up by President Obama after the Sandy Hook massacre will finalize its proposals to reduce gun violence. The deliberation involves some big strategic decisions. Slate’s Jacob Weisberg has one good piece of advice: Treat gun control as a health issue, not a moral issue. I have another: Target people, not guns.


Guns don't kill people. People kill people. So keep dangerous people away from guns. - Slate Magazine


----------



## groovetube

when you have as many guns around like the US does, keeping dangerous people away from guns is about as looney an idea as the government trying to find them all.


----------



## Sonal

You know, the more I look into it, the more I like the Swiss model for the USA. It requires a hell of a lot more restriction than what many states have, but it's probably a lot more pragmatic.

Mind you, Swiss law isn't based on the possession of guns for self-defense, to act as an armed bystander, or as a last defence against tyranny, so there's a significant philosophical difference here.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> You know, the more I look into it, the more I like the Swiss model for the USA. It requires a hell of a lot more restriction than what many states have, but it's probably a lot more pragmatic.
> 
> Mind you, Swiss law isn't based on the possession of guns for self-defense, to act as an armed bystander, or as a last defence against tyranny, so there's a significant philosophical difference here.


What is it exactly that makes the Swiss model so appealing?


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> when you have as many guns around like the US does, keeping dangerous people away from guns is about as looney an idea as the government trying to find them all.


Ban looneys, that'll do it. If it saves just one life....


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Ban looneys, that'll do it. If it saves just one life....


I don't think bans at this point on anything is going to stop what's happening and what's coming I'm afraid.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I don't think bans at this point on anything is going to stop what's happening and what's coming I'm afraid.


Exactly, and it ain't gonna be pretty.


----------



## iMouse

Kent State v. the National Guard x 100,000.


----------



## MacDoc

Some serious irony here

Who killed Keith Ratliff, YouTube’s “gun nut” celeb? - Salon.com


----------



## kps

...


----------



## SINC

Another great idea:

Ohio school board approves plan to arm custodians - Salon.com


----------



## kps

On a bit of a lighter note...


*Tactical Assault Rock from CroMagnum Arms International(CAI)*

The assault rock is back. These have been flying off the shelf since Cain first took the tactical advantage against Abel. 

Get this low speed, high drag assault rock while you still can. This is next on Dianne Feinstein's list. 

Features:
-enhanced grip texture
-easily concealable 
-can be thrown as fast as you can swing your arm
-available in standard finish or low tech tactical black spray paint

This is not a weapon.
*This can not be attached to a weapon
*Does not include the "shoulder thing that goes up"
*This is for historical and decorative purposes only
*Can not be sold to Califorinia residents
*If purchased assault rock must be watched carefully as they can develop a mind of their own
*Buyer's responsibility to check all local laws and regulations
*All ATF and NFA rules and regulations apply

Tactical Assault Rock from Cromagnum Arms International Cai | eBay


----------



## iMouse

*All Tactical Assault Rocks must be kept safe in a Rock Vault, except when taken out for throwing.

*When transporting Tactical Assault Rocks by vehicle, they must be kept in a locked trunk/truck box.


----------



## groovetube

Goliath may have something to say on this.


----------



## iMouse

President-emeritus of the NRA, National Rock Association?

I thought he was killed by friendly fire?


----------



## kps

Just in case you're wondering what the 'shoulder thing that goes up" is all about...

It'a good example of the idiots that have the power to create and pass legislation




+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






Here's another one... Absolutely no clue what she's talking about, yet she's a legislator on a ban agenda. There is no such thing as a "heat seeking" bullet. LOL





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> Here's another one... Absolutely no clue what she's talking about, yet she's a legislator on a ban agenda.
> 
> There is no such thing as a "heat seeking" bullet. LOL


Now that's incendiary talk right there.


----------



## MacDoc

seems even in the wild west aka America legislation works

Data indicate drop in high-capacity magazines during federal gun ban - The Washington Post


----------



## Macfury

MacDoc said:


> seems even in the wild west aka America legislation works
> 
> Data indicate drop in high-capacity magazines during federal gun ban - The Washington Post


Again, MacDoc, I ask you why you don't read your own links. I haven't dug into the article to make sure that it presents anything of statistical significance, but it refers only to the state of Virginia,


----------



## groovetube

no crap sherlock.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> no crap sherlock.


A poor choice anyway Tim, as most Canadians know that only lovers live there.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Just in case you're wondering what the 'shoulder thing that goes up" is all about...
> 
> It'a good example of the idiots that have the power to create and pass legislation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another one... Absolutely no clue what she's talking about, yet she's a legislator on a ban agenda. There is no such thing as a "heat seeking" bullet. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


well, it seems we've identified crazies on both sides of the debate. Perhaps this is why nothing substantial ever gets done!



iMouse said:


> A poor choice anyway Tim, as most Canadians know that only lovers live there.


Have you spent any real time in Virginia? Seems false advertising to me


----------



## SINC

Empty shelves in gun stores:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/u...-sales-of-guns-and-ammunition-surge.html?_r=0


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> Empty shelves in gun stores:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/u...-sales-of-guns-and-ammunition-surge.html?_r=0


Well that was effective.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> well, it seems we've identified crazies on both sides of the debate. Perhaps this is why nothing substantial ever gets done!


Except that these crazies write and pass legislation and impact thousands if not millions of people.


----------



## kps

SINC said:


> Empty shelves in gun stores:


I see the "assault weapon" stimulus package is working as predicted.


----------



## kps

Interesting....

Defence training against an active shooter-CNN video


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> I see the "assault weapon" stimulus package is working as predicted.


You only need threaten a shortage, of anything really, for a run to occur.

*OMG, there is going to be a shortage of Common Sense.
*
<Pass it on, quickly please.>


----------



## margarok

iMouse said:


> You only need threaten a shortage, of anything really, for a run to occur.
> 
> *OMG, there is going to be a shortage of Common Sense.
> *
> <Pass it on, quickly please.>


I'm gonna go get me sum. (of that there common sense, that is)


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Except that these crazies write and pass legislation and impact thousands if not millions of people.


Isn't that kinda what I implied?

Both sides are passing legislation.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Isn't that kinda what I implied?
> 
> Both sides are passing legislation.


Okay, your meaning must have gotten lost in cyber-translation.


----------



## kps

Prime example of when government can't protect it's people. Even though there are strict gun laws in Mexico, these people just had enough of the crime. I say good for them.

Armed civilians patrol two towns in Mexico.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Prime example of when government can't protect it's people. Even though there are strict gun laws in Mexico, these people just had enough of the crime. I say good for them.
> 
> Armed civilians patrol two towns in Mexico.


stict gun laws in Mexico??? have you been? :lmao:


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> stict gun laws in Mexico??? have you been? :lmao:


No sober as judge and yup, tough and probably also corrupt...but,



> Mexico is actually sometimes held up as an example of exemplary gun laws. Despite a sort-of constitutional guarantee of the right to bear arms, Mexico has only one gun store, which is run by the army, and severe legal restrictions on gun ownership





> Mexico has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. But while drug cartels have well-stocked arsenals, law-abiding citizens struggle to get a permit to own a gun.





> In a country where violent crime thrives amidst Costas-style gun restrictions, people have taken to openly ignoring the law to defend themselves. There's no reason to think matters would be much different north of the border.


Mexico Shows That Tight Gun Control Laws Don't Guarantee Compliance - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Also:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/world/americas/in-mexico-a-restrictive-approach-to-gun-laws.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Anyway, that should do you for now.


----------



## groovetube

This example isn't much of a relevant one. Mexico is a corrupt police state, with drug cartels practically running parts of the country. Of course citizens want to arm themselves, they practically have civil war in some parts.

And I would guess if they did have lax gun laws like the US, the carnage would be insane. As residents armed themselves with semi or automatic weapons, the cartels would simply ramp up in response. It's a no brainer.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> This example isn't much of a relevant one. Mexico is a corrupt police state, with drug cartels practically running parts of the country. Of course citizens want to arm themselves, they practically have civil war in some parts.
> 
> And I would guess if they did have lax gun laws like the US, the carnage would be insane. As residents armed themselves with semi or automatic weapons, the cartels would simply ramp up in response. It's a no brainer.


Do you really think it's only the cartels they need to protect themselves from?

There's no satisfying you is there...


----------



## groovetube

did you miss the 'corrupt police state' part?

The situation there is vastly different than the US. Trying make any comparison there is ludicrous. Perhaps CM who lives there could weigh in.


----------



## eMacMan

groovetube said:


> did you miss the 'corrupt police state' part?
> 
> The situation there is vastly different than the US. Trying make any comparison there is ludicrous. Perhaps CM who lives there could weigh in.


Uh! Any body that has watched the Great Bankster Heist and the other Congressional Shenanigans of the past three decades would be very hard pressed to describe the US Government as anything less than totally corrupt.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> did you miss the 'corrupt police state' part?
> 
> The situation there is vastly different than the US. Trying make any comparison there is ludicrous. Perhaps CM who lives there could weigh in.


Oh brother. I never compared it to the US, where are you getting that from? Just because I posted that article in this thread does not mean I'm making a comparison. In post 599 I already mentioned corruption so I don't know what you're on about by stressing it?


----------



## groovetube

Well what was the reason for posting the article about Mexico still having huge numbers of deaths despite their apparant strong gun laws?

Did I miss something?


----------



## eMacMan

groovetube said:


> Well what was the reason for posting the article about Mexico still having huge numbers of deaths despite their apparant strong gun laws?
> 
> Did I miss something?


Those death numbers may be a bit skewed with the Fine FAT (ATF) folks supplying arms to the cartels. Anyone else recall "Fast and Furious"?

ATF gunwalking scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## groovetube

eMacMan said:


> Uh! Any body that has watched the Great Bankster Heist and the other Congressional Shenanigans of the past three decades would be very hard pressed to describe the US Government as anything less than totally corrupt.


what? The US government has corruption??

Do tell! :lmao:


----------



## fjnmusic

This thread now has pretty much nothing to do with the school shooting in Connecticut. Just sayin'. It's pretty easy to get sidetracked by tangentially related issues. I'd be much more interested in looking at what made Adam Lanza snap, for example. Gun control laws would make no difference in his case, since he simply stole legally acquired guns. Whether a single trigger pull fires multiple bullets or you have to pull the trigger each time a bullet is fired doesn't make much difference. The kids would be just as dead either way. What is it that turned this young man with a high IQ into a killing machine that day? And how can we try to prevent similar tragedies?


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> *This thread now has pretty much nothing to do with the school shooting in Connecticut. *Just sayin'. It's pretty easy to get sidetracked by tangentially related issues. I'd be much more interested in looking at what made Adam Lanza snap, for example. Gun control laws would make no difference in his case, since he simply stole legally acquired guns. Whether a single trigger pull fires multiple bullets or you have to pull the trigger each time a bullet is fired doesn't make much difference. The kids would be just as dead either way. What is it that turned this young man with a high IQ into a killing machine that day? And how can we try to prevent similar tragedies?


Absolutely... It has become the "Gun Control Thread". It should have been partitioned out to be so a long time ago now.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Well what was the reason for posting the article about Mexico still having huge numbers of deaths despite their apparant strong gun laws?
> 
> Did I miss something?


As usual...lol


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> This thread now has pretty much nothing to do with the school shooting in Connecticut. Just sayin'. It's pretty easy to get sidetracked by tangentially related issues. I'd be much more interested in looking at what made Adam Lanza snap, for example. Gun control laws would make no difference in his case, since he simply stole legally acquired guns. Whether a single trigger pull fires multiple bullets or you have to pull the trigger each time a bullet is fired doesn't make much difference. The kids would be just as dead either way. What is it that turned this young man with a high IQ into a killing machine that day? And how can we try to prevent similar tragedies?


I tried to keep it relevant back in post #35



> Firearms ownership is highly defensible, McDoc, but this thread isn't the place for gun politics. Start a new thread.


But it seems everyone had other ideas and so here we are.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> I tried to keep it relevant back in post #35
> 
> But it seems everyone had other ideas and so here we are.


Post #35 was 576 posts ago, kps. Always easier to blame the other guy.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Post #35 was 576 posts ago, kps. Always easier to blame the other guy.


Blaming...not blaming anyone, people wanted to talk about other issues so that's how the thread evolved.

Anyway, I think this has now run it's course...I'm done here.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Blaming...not blaming anyone, people wanted to talk about other issues so that's how the thread evolved.
> 
> Anyway, I think this has now run it's course...I'm done here.


I agree. It's just conversation. I don't get why people get bent over things going in a natural direction. Jeez


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I agree. It's just conversation. I don't get why people get bent over things going in a natural direction. Jeez


Agreed...now I'm really done.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Blaming...not blaming anyone, people wanted to talk about other issues so that's how the thread evolved.
> 
> Anyway, I think this has now run it's course...I'm done here.


Easy there, buddy. I'm just suggesting that we're all responsible for going off on a tangent. Even you. Even me. It just seems we've talked the weapons angle to death. Now maybe it's time to consider other methods of prevention of this kind of tragedy. What else can we learn from this dark chapter in history?


----------



## groovetube

that's true. Unfortunately it often comes down to knee jerk reactions, banning something without following up on the many other things that -also- needs to be addressed.

Then the right gets in, screams the ban didn't work, and removes it. Unfettered access returns, blah blah, rinse and repeat.


----------



## fjnmusic

Yes, very unscientific, I'm sure bryanc would agree, to change several variables at once and then blame or credit only one variable for the success or lack thereof of the experiment.


----------



## screature

screature said:


> Absolutely...* It has become the "Gun Control Thread"*. It should have been partitioned out to be so a long time ago now.


But just to add... kps has had plenty of company in making it so (myself included) and if there is any "blame" to be had, remember, when you point a finger there are three others points back at you...

kps has defended his position based on the ideological "assaults" of others. He has not been a gun advocate, but an advocate of the rights of gun owners, something entirely different.... lest we forget...


----------



## fjnmusic

Kps is a grownup, just like the rest of us, and can enter or exit a thread at any time. No one is preventing this. For me, this incident is less about access to guns (which is frighteningly easy in the US, less so in Canada), and more about how we monitor those who are on the edge. Is there anything we as society can do take better care of the homocidal people before they kill? Blowing them away is always an easy afterthought, but perhaps there is a better answer.


----------



## Sonal

Personally, I don't mind when threads turn into something else with the following caveats:

1) Someone is specifically asking solution to a particular problem, and doesn't get any useful answers before the thread turns into something else.
2) A thread becomes needlessly political or polemic, i.e., ("I'm thinking about buying a house." "Well if <insert political leader> is elected, you'll be lucky to keep your house a day before it's <insert dire consequence>")

I don't mind if it becomes needlessly silly or funny (like the "Why was I banned" thread) because we could all use a few more chuckles. 

If we think of face-to-face conversation, it usually twists and morphs into other things. And here on the internet, nothing stops someone from quoting a much earlier post if they want to get back on topic... though sometimes that gets buried in the tide of conversation.

For point 1, no one was asking about anything... it was merely a report on a current (and heinous) event--of which, there's been very little further detail released. And I don't think that this thread has become _needlessly_ political, in that gun control/ownership is a topic that arises naturally from an event like a mass shooting.

So, as the person who started this thread, feel free to carry on however you choose.


----------



## fjnmusic

Fair enough.


----------



## screature

*Shootings in Connecticut School*



Sonal said:


> Personally, I don't mind when threads turn into something else with the following caveats:
> 
> 1) Someone is specifically asking solution to a particular problem, and doesn't get any useful answers before the thread turns into something else.
> 2) A thread becomes needlessly political or polemic, i.e., ("I'm thinking about buying a house." "Well if <insert political leader> is elected, you'll be lucky to keep your house a day before it's <insert dire consequence>")
> 
> I don't mind if it becomes needlessly silly or funny (like the "Why was I banned" thread) because we could all use a few more chuckles.
> 
> If we think of face-to-face conversation, it usually twists and morphs into other things. And here on the internet, nothing stops someone from quoting a much earlier post if they want to get back on topic... though sometimes that gets buried in the tide of conversation.
> 
> For point 1, no one was asking about anything... it was merely a report on a current (and heinous) event--of which, there's been very little further detail released. And I don't think that this thread has become _needlessly_ political, in that gun control/ownership is a topic that arises naturally from an event like a mass shooting.
> 
> So, as the person who started this thread, *feel free to carry on however you choose*.


GUNS. LOTS of GUNS.


















Yeah baby... more... more... That's it... Unhunh...


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> GUNS. LOTS of GUNS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah baby... more... more... That's it... Unhunh...


:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


Glad you got it.


----------



## Sonal

screature said:


> Glad you got it.


Thanks for the laugh, screature. 

Oh, and kps (if he's still around) asked about the Swiss. 
How Switzerland Developed a Gun Culture That Works | TIME.com


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Agreed...now I'm really done.


ha! Sure ya are.

Perhaps that pint is due. I'm tired of typing.


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> If we think of face-to-face conversation, it usually twists and morphs into other things. And here on the internet, nothing stops someone from quoting a much earlier post if they want to get back on topic... though sometimes that gets buried in the tide of conversation.


Face-to-face conversations usually don't involve 20 people, so a thread like this develops remarkably well, considering the number of participants.


----------



## margarok

Sonal said:


> Personally, I don't mind when threads turn into something else with the following caveats:
> 
> 1) Someone is specifically asking solution to a particular problem, and doesn't get any useful answers before the thread turns into something else.
> 2) A thread becomes needlessly political or polemic, i.e., ("I'm thinking about buying a house." "Well if <insert political leader> is elected, you'll be lucky to keep your house a day before it's <insert dire consequence>")
> 
> I don't mind if it becomes needlessly silly or funny (like the "Why was I banned" thread) because we could all use a few more chuckles.
> 
> If we think of face-to-face conversation, it usually twists and morphs into other things. And here on the internet, nothing stops someone from quoting a much earlier post if they want to get back on topic... though sometimes that gets buried in the tide of conversation.
> 
> For point 1, no one was asking about anything... it was merely a report on a current (and heinous) event--of which, there's been very little further detail released. And I don't think that this thread has become _needlessly_ political, in that gun control/ownership is a topic that arises naturally from an event like a mass shooting.
> 
> So, as the person who started this thread, feel free to carry on however you choose.


I like your style. :clap:


----------



## margarok

How's this for re-introducing the original topic in a new light?

I'm quoting a post from a blog a friend sent me... I do not know the original poster and this is the first time I've seen this "theory." However, I am bringing it to you here, because I know you will find it interesting.

Article:
"Who is Adam Lanza?
Wednesday, December 26, 2012 8: 23% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.


(Before It's News)

As many of you know, this entire event at Sandy Hook, CT leaves a lot more questions than answers, and with each passing day the story seems to get more convoluted and irrational. I decided to do some of my own digging into Adam Lanza’s background, and so far I have been unable to even confirm that this person actually even exists.

I did two separate searches on Intelius and Spokeo and each of them resulted in the same baffling results. Both Nancy and Peter Lanza are listed in Sandy Brook, CT and their family tree shows Nancy and Peter Lanza with only one child….Ryan Lanza. Adam Lanza does not show up in the family tree at either website and searches for Adam Lanza from CT, yield only two results, which are clearly not him.

The search results are posted below. If you scroll down you will see that on each of Nancy, Peter’s and Ryan’s searches a family tree is given of all known members:"
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...a-2522488.html

And... from another blogger on the same issue:

Has anyone seen a family photo of Adam and Ryan Lanza where they are in the same photo together?

I cannot find even one online.....

Rumor alert on Facebook says they are one in the same....

This thing stinks to high heaven.


All right... Margarok here with my two cents: This thing does stink. It stinks that all these kids and and school workers/teachers have been killed. But a conspiracy involving a non-existent brother makes no sense at all. Why would anyone believe someone manufactured the brother?


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Face-to-face conversations usually don't involve 20 people, so a thread like this develops remarkably well, considering the number of participants.


Once again we are in agreement, MF. Is there a full moon or something?


----------



## fjnmusic

margarok said:


> How's this for re-introducing the original topic in a new light?
> 
> I'm quoting a post from a blog a friend sent me... I do not know the original poster and this is the first time I've seen this "theory." However, I am bringing it to you here, because I know you will find it interesting.
> 
> Article:
> "Who is Adam Lanza?
> Wednesday, December 26, 2012 8: 23% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.
> 
> 
> (Before It's News)
> 
> As many of you know, this entire event at Sandy Hook, CT leaves a lot more questions than answers, and with each passing day the story seems to get more convoluted and irrational. I decided to do some of my own digging into Adam Lanza’s background, and so far I have been unable to even confirm that this person actually even exists.
> 
> I did two separate searches on Intelius and Spokeo and each of them resulted in the same baffling results. Both Nancy and Peter Lanza are listed in Sandy Brook, CT and their family tree shows Nancy and Peter Lanza with only one child….Ryan Lanza. Adam Lanza does not show up in the family tree at either website and searches for Adam Lanza from CT, yield only two results, which are clearly not him.
> 
> The search results are posted below. If you scroll down you will see that on each of Nancy, Peter’s and Ryan’s searches a family tree is given of all known members:"
> http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...a-2522488.html
> 
> And... from another blogger on the same issue:
> 
> Has anyone seen a family photo of Adam and Ryan Lanza where they are in the same photo together?
> 
> I cannot find even one online.....
> 
> Rumor alert on Facebook says they are one in the same....
> 
> This thing stinks to high heaven.
> 
> 
> All right... Margarok here with my two cents: This thing does stink. It stinks that all these kids and and school workers/teachers have been killed. But a conspiracy involving a non-existent brother makes no sense at all. Why would anyone believe someone manufactured the brother?


The original news reports said Ryan Lanza. So who lived in the mother's basement? And if the guy was a black sheep, why was he still in his mother's house? And how were they able to interview Ryan Lanza if he was also the gunman who shot himself? Perhaps Adam was adopted, but you're right: there has been a disproportionate amount of radio silence on this person since mid-December.


----------



## FeXL

It was only a matter of time.

Journal News gun permit map used by burglars to target White Plains home?



> A White Plains residence pinpointed on a controversial handgun permit database was burglarized Saturday, and the burglars' target was the homeowner's gun safe.
> 
> At least two burglars broke into a home on Davis Avenue at 9:30 p.m. Saturday but were unsuccessful in an attempt to open the safe, which contained legally owned weapons, according to a law enforcement source. One suspect was taken into custody, the source said.


Further.



> The same elitist eggheads who use their editorial page to coddle terrorists and criminals are now treating law abiding citizens like level three sexual predators.


----------



## Macfury

Mass gun murders by decade, adjusted for population:

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=7031



> In reality, like all complex social phenomena, the causes of these mass shootings are many, of unequal force, and changeable. Trying to pin the blame on any one culprit is a task best left to the dedicated.


----------



## Rps

I read this in this mornings Windsor Star, it's taken from an article by Lee-Anne Goodman of the Canadian Press. I think this sums up the unrelenting fear our American brothers and sisters have been experiencing, and further builds the inordinate mistrust of the government. I thought I would share this as the concept here seems so fundamentally flawed.....but non-the-less is gaining, it seems credence.......

Lee-Anne Goodman, The Canadian Press

WASHINGTON – The United States has long been a breeding ground for conspiracy theorists, spurred by an often violent history riddled, in particular, with shadowy political assassinations.

But the latest conspiracy movement seems custom-made to underscore the need for a national debate on mental illness. Some of the Sandy Hook Truthers, as they’ve been dubbed, believe last month’s mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., was a hoax.

The Obama administration perpetrated the hoax, the conspiracy theorists claim, in order to ratchet up support for tougher gun control measures.

They call themselves Operation Terror, and many of the movement’s adherents appear to have ties to the so-called 9-11 truthers who have long held that the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were an inside job by the George W. Bush administration.

Their theories on the Dec. 14 shooting in Sandy Hook appear to lack any basis in fact, reality or common sense. But Google Trends suggests the movement is gaining momentum with both a Florida college professor and a libertarian Fox News anchor in Cincinnati questioning the official narrative on the events.

On various websites and blogs, some Sandy Hook truthers crow about the “smoking gun” they say proves the shooting was a hoax — a photo of President Barack Obama, backstage at a Newtown vigil two days after the shooting, a young blonde girl sitting on his lap.

They insist the girl is six-year-old Emilie Parker, one of the 20 child victims of the shooting. The Sandy Hook truthers claim her parents slipped up in their participation in the hoax, and allowed their eldest daughter to cuddle up to Obama.

“The story that she was killed at Sandy Hook is not possible, because here she is sitting on the president’s lap after the shooting,” intones the narrator of a YouTube video, one of dozens of its kind, this one the recipient of more than 260,000 web hits.

In fact, it’s the dead girl’s little sister.

The child’s father, Robbie Parker, was also faking his profound despair when he tearfully addressed the media shortly after his daughter’s murder, the believers claim, and was reading from cue cards.

The family members of the massacre’s tiniest victims aren’t the only ones being accused of such unthinkable fraud as they continue to grieve.

A town resident who sheltered six youngsters after they fled Sandy Hook Elementary School in terror is even facing harassment from some of the conspiracy theorists.

Gene Rosen, a 69-year-old pet-sitter, told Salon.com this week that he’s getting phone calls and emails accusing him of fabricating his story.

One email read: “How are all those little students doing? You know, the ones that showed up at your house after the ‘shooting.’ What is the going rate for getting involved in a government-sponsored hoax anyway?”

Police are investigating the harassment. Rosen, who also comforted a frantic mother who came to his door looking for her deceased child, told Salon he’s furious at anyone who believes in such an outrageous conspiracy theory.

“There must be some way to morally shame these people, because there were 20 dead children lying an eighth of a mile from my window all night long,” he said.

“I am rageful about it, both for the children and for the mother of the child who came to my house looking for her son.”

Other Newtown conspiracy theorists allege there were four perpetrators from Israeli special forces, and that it wasn’t children who died, but a secret United Nations delegation.

Fox News’s Ben Swann is among those doubting Adam Lanza was the only shooter.

A Florida college professor also suggested on his personal blog that the Sandy Hook shooting may not have played out the way many believe it did — if it happened at all.

“I said that there may very well be elements of that event that are synthetic to some degree, that are somewhat contrived,” James Tracy, of Florida Atlantic University, recently told a local TV station in Boca Raton.

“I think that, overall, the media really did drop the ball. I don’t think that the media have gotten to the bottom of some of the things that may have taken place there.”

Conspiracy theories, indeed, are part of the national fabric of the United States.

A veritable cottage industry still surrounds the assassination of John F. Kennedy almost 50 years ago, with alleged culprits ranging from the CIA to the mob, Fidel Castro and Lyndon Johnson, or a combination of them all. One book even alleged a UFO connection.

During the Cold War, some believed Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower was a Communist plant.

The 9-11 truthers assert that the twin towers of the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan were brought down by timed explosions by those working for the Bush administration. And it was a guided missile that hit the Pentagon, not a jetliner, they allege.

More recently, the so-called birther movement advanced the theory that Obama was born in Kenya, not in Hawaii, and is therefore an illegitimate president.

One expert on the American conspiracy theory phenomenon points out, however, that throughout the course of U.S. history, there have been no shortage of massive government coverups — and they’ve only served to encourage skeptics.

“There have been so many well-documented conspiracies in American history,” James Broderick, a professor at New Jersey City University, said in an interview.

Broderick points to everything from weapons of mass destruction to Lance Armstrong’s admission of longtime drug use after years of denials and Robert F. Kennedy’s recent acknowledgement that his family has long believed the official government report on JFK’s assassination was a whitewash.

“It does seem appalling the way conspiracy theorists, and many people in general, try to exploit for their own petty political purposes a national tragedy — it’s sickening and disgraceful,” said Broderick, the co-author of the 2008 book “Web of Conspiracy.”

“But what the 9-11 truthers told me is what’s truly sickening and disgraceful is to not look deeper, to just accept pat answers without asking questions.”

Some of the people advancing theories of more than one shooter in Newtown might have their hearts in the right place, Broderick said.

“But of course there’s also a segment who are just angry at the government and at Obama all the time — the people who believe he’s a Muslim and a fascist and everything else — and they have jumped on the bandwagon, posted terrible things on the web and tried to fuel the fires in the most shameful ways.”


----------



## Rps

Now we are getting really really ridiculous here:

Steve Stockman: Barack Obama 'Reminds Me of Saddam Hussein' - YouTube

I guess they have to pass an IQ test in Texas to become an elected official.....anyone who fails gets the job.


----------



## FeXL

Same in NY...

Oops: In Gun Grab Rush, Idiot Cuomo Forgets to Exempt Police From New Law



> On Tuesday, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the sweeping gun measure, the nation’s toughest. It includes a ban on the possession of high-capacity magazines.
> 
> Specifically, magazines with more than 7 rounds will be illegal under the new law.
> 
> The problem as the statute is currently written does NOT exempt law enforcement officers.
> 
> The NYPD, the State Police and virtually every law enforcement agency in the state carry 9-milli-meter guns, which have a 15-round capacity.
> 
> Unless an exemption is added by the time the law takes effect in March, police would technically be in violation of the new gun measure.


----------



## FeXL

That's two...

Journal News map-listed guns, permits stolen from New City home, cops say



> Two handguns and two pistol permits were stolen from the New City home of a man whose name and address are listed on the website of a local newspaper as possessing gun permits, police said.
> 
> The thieves ransacked the house Wednesday night, breaking into two safes on the home's third floor and stealing a third safe. The guns were in the stolen safe, police said.


Then, of course, the disclaimer:



> "The burglary is still under investigation, and there are no facts to support this correlation at this time," Clarkstown Sgt. Joanne Fratianni said in a statement. "If the investigation develops further information, it will be released accordingly."


Mere coincidence...


----------



## groovetube

priceless. Many won't get it however...


----------



## CubaMark

*The Second Amendment Was Really Ratified to Preserve Slavery*

Have you ever asked yourself why, whenever we have these battles over reasonable gun safety laws, the gun nuts huddle around the Second Amendment as if it were the Holy Grail? Say the word "militia" today and everyone thinks about those folks up in Idaho building their little fortresses, not anything resembling the "well-regulated militia" defined in the amendment. Thom Hartmann's been doing some research and surprisingly, the reasons behind it are not what everyone thinks:

_The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says "State" instead of "Country" (the Framers knew the difference - see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia's vote. Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that . . . and we all should be too.

In the beginning, there were the militias. In the South, they were also called the "slave patrols," and they were regulated by the states._​
(Crooks & Liars - MacFury's favourite source!)


----------



## screature

CubaMark said:


> *The Second Amendment Was Really Ratified to Preserve Slavery*
> 
> Have you ever asked yourself why, whenever we have these battles over reasonable gun safety laws, the gun nuts huddle around the Second Amendment as if it were the Holy Grail? Say the word "militia" today and everyone thinks about those folks up in Idaho building their little fortresses, not anything resembling the "well-regulated militia" defined in the amendment. Thom Hartmann's been doing some research and surprisingly, the reasons behind it are not what everyone thinks:
> 
> _The real reason the Second Amendment was ratified, and why it says "State" instead of "Country" (the Framers knew the difference - see the 10th Amendment), was to preserve the slave patrol militias in the southern states, which was necessary to get Virginia's vote. Founders Patrick Henry, George Mason, and James Madison were totally clear on that . . . and we all should be too.
> 
> In the beginning, there were the militias. In the South, they were also called the "slave patrols," and they were regulated by the states._​
> (Crooks & Liars - MacFury's favourite source!)


More of the needless 

For god's sake this has nothing, literally zero to do with the Connecticut shootings...

Please someone, anyone, start a separate gun control thread.

This kind of post just is completely irrelevant to the tragedy... other than to promote the political proclivities of the poster.

Enough is enough!

Talk about exploiting a tragedy for one's own political purposes... this is on par with the NRA response, equally exploitative. Quite frankly it sickens me.


----------



## eMacMan

screature said:


> More of the needless
> 
> For god's sake this has nothing, literally zero to do with the Connecticut shootings...
> 
> Please someone, anyone, start a separate gun control thread.
> 
> This kind of post just is completely irrelevant to the tragedy... other than to promote the political proclivities of the poster.
> 
> Enough is enough!
> 
> Talk about exploiting a tragedy for one's own political purposes... this is on par with the NRA response, equally exploitative. Quite frankly it sickens me.


I find it obscene that from the first day the Gun Control types have jumped on this tragedy as a way to promote their agenda. The organized effort to capitalize on the tragedy to promote gun control, does have me thinking the entire incident might have been a false flag. It seems unconscionable to murder children to promote an agenda, but worse things have happened in recent years. Occupying Iraq to funnel taxpayer money to the MIC and the banksters would be just one example.

And yes the NRAs response has been equally obscene.


----------



## groovetube

I believe the creator of this thread has already clarified that she is fine with the discussion being not just about the tragedy itself, and on the issue of gun control.

I don't know why screeture is so upset that someone is discussing gun control. Of course it will go there. It isn't like people who support gun control (the majority of American it seems) need yet another tragedy to support their views. That's simply preposterous.


----------



## fjnmusic

I suspect it's virtually impossible to talk about school shootings without discussing gun control, for or against, since the weapons used were (ahem) guns. 

I for one am interested to know more about this second amendment theory based on the interests of slave owners. Slaves certainly do not represent government tyranny.


----------



## groovetube

It seems to upset people that people have conversations that include things that are related.

Not sure why.


----------



## margarok

My Northern Friends: I've been out of touch a couple of days, taking care of some business that hopefully will help my mother take care of my 90 year old father at home. Because Dad is/was a POW in Japan during WWII, he is eligible for certain programs that can help my mother take care of him at home.

I tell you that to tell you this: I traveled to a site an hour's drive from my home to talk to a military veterans' advocacy group about how to get Mom the help she/Dad deserves according to the law. I heard more discussion of guns, the need to buy more guns, the need to train with guns, the need to stock up on ammo, etc., than I heard about getting some assistance for Mom.

This situation is getting pretty ugly. For you, it is a point to argue as you contemplate the horrid crimes committed with handguns here in the U.S. For those of us sane here in the hinterlands, we struggle to understand the big picture as we strive to take care of ourselves and our families. 

Am not pointing at anyone... am just saying that this argument over gun law is noisy and drowning out all else around here.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> (Crooks & Liars - MacFury's favourite source!)


If you intend to make a point of this, why not research it yourself and do some original thinking? Stating that some blogger named "karoli" says that "Thom Hartmann says..." is the hallmark of intellectual laziness.


----------



## groovetube

just imagine macfury, king of the 'prove it' response telling someone else to do their own research!


----------



## Macfury

I saw a life-sized reproduction of this painting by Diego Rivera at the AGO's Frida and Diego show. This work is a detail, from the cycle "Political Vision of the Mexican People" and can be found in the building of the Ministry of Education, Mexico City. 

Titled _The Arsenal - Frida Kahlo Distributes Arms _it focuses on the distribution of firearms as an act of emancipation from oppression.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> I saw a life-sized reproduction of this painting by Diego Rivera at the AGO's Frida and Diego show. This work is a detail, from the cycle "Political Vision of the Mexican People" and can be found in the building of the Ministry of Education, Mexico City.
> 
> Titled _The Arsenal - Frida Kahlo Distributes Arms _it focuses on the distribution of firearms as an act of emancipation from oppression.


Aw c'mon, Macfury. It's a painting! Anybody could have made that! It's like the Last Supper. It doesn't prove that's how things went down. I've always admired her eyebrow though.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> If you intend to make a point of this, why not research it yourself and do some original thinking? Stating that some blogger named "karoli" says that "Thom Hartmann says..." is the hallmark of intellectual laziness.


You really are a piece of work.

Allow me to click links and do your Googling for you....

*Thom Hartmann* (Wikipedia)

Exerpt:
_Hartmann is a lay scholar of the history and textual analysis of the United States Constitution; attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); Thomas Jefferson; the assassination of John F. Kennedy; the Federalist Papers; electronic voting rigging; and environmental issues like climate change. He has authored many books on political topics and ADHD._​
As for "original thinking" - love the personal insults, you really know how to contribute to a friendly community atmosphere.


----------



## iMouse

CubaMark said:


> You really are a piece of work.
> 
> As for "original thinking" - love the personal insults, you really know how to contribute to a friendly community atmosphere.





> She should have died hereafter;
> There would have been a time for such a word.
> Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
> Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
> To the last syllable of recorded time;
> And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
> The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
> Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
> That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
> And then is heard no more. It is a tale
> Told by an idiot, *full of sound and fury
> Signifying nothing.*


_Macbeth (Act 5, Scene 5, lines 17-28)_

Bold mine.


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> _Macbeth (Act 5, Scene 5, lines 17-28)_
> 
> Bold mine.


:lmao:

:clap:


----------



## groovetube

UPDATED: 5 People Shot At 3 Different Gun Shows On Gun Appreciation Day | ThinkProgress

Just another day in 'merica.

Where everyone feels entitled to have and play with weapons capable of mass murder. What could go wrong?


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> UPDATED: 5 People Shot At 3 Different Gun Shows On Gun Appreciation Day | ThinkProgress
> 
> Just another day in 'merica.
> 
> Where everyone feels entitled to have and play with weapons capable of mass murder. What could go wrong?


Did you even read the article? All of the incidents were accidental discharges, not malicious shootings.

Do you happen to have the number of people that were hit by drunk drivers yesterday? Or fell down stairs? Cut themselves or others with a kitchen knife, by accident? Dollars to donuts, it far exceeds 5.


----------



## groovetube

omg! It was accidental shootings???? FFS that changes everything!!!!

LOL

One difference between the gun thing and the driving and drunk deaths thing, at least we regulate the hell out of drivers forcing them to qualify in driving lessons, tests etc., and totally clamp down on drunk driving to reduce deaths.

Somehow, some regulations, or entitlements are real baaaaad, but others, well shut up.


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> omg! It was accidental shootings???? FFS that changes everything!!!!
> 
> LOL
> 
> One difference between the gun thing and the driving and drunk deaths thing, at least we regulate the hell out of drivers forcing them to qualify in driving lessons, tests etc., and totally clamp down on drunk driving to reduce deaths.
> 
> Somehow, some regulations, or entitlements are real baaaaad, but others, well shut up.


According to the CDC, there were 606 accidental deaths by firearm in the US in 2010. Not exactly a high risk hobby.

According to the same source, there were 10,228 people killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, and 1.4 million arrested for DUI.

I feel exponentially safer at the shooting range than I do walking down a city street.


----------



## Rps

John Clay;1248371
I feel exponentially safer at the shooting range than I do walking down a city street.[/QUOTE said:


> That's fine, but the point I think you are missing is that these people who attended GAD were supposed to be licensed and trained in how to handle a weapon. Using a term so often used here: FAIL!!!!


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> According to the CDC, there were 606 accidental deaths by firearm in the US in 2010. Not exactly a high risk hobby.
> 
> According to the same source, there were 10,228 people killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, and 1.4 million arrested for DUI.
> 
> I feel exponentially safer at the shooting range than I do walking down a city street.


question: How many of those drunk drivers who killed someone, 'accidentally drank alcohol'?

This sound like deliberate acts to me, and we all know how many deliberate fatal shootings there are in the US.

Given that driving an automobile has peaceful purposes and everyone drives a car everyday often all day, unlike firing a weapon, which is designed specifically to kill, it's no surprise that numbers of deaths from cars will be high. But pro gun people will never grasp this.

The difference still is, the US seems to regulate driving a motor vehicle far more than guns.

I'm sure I'll hear a boat load of belly aching about that one, but until I see the level of skill testing, licensing, ownership cards, licence plates on guns, and insurance plans for a gun owner, you're full of hot air.


----------



## iMouse

John Clay said:


> I feel exponentially safer at the shooting range than I do walking down a city street.


Sure you do.

You screw-up on the line and the range officer will suspend/ban you.

Guess they need more range officers at gun shows eh?


----------



## kps

Rps said:


> That's fine, but the point I think you are missing is that these people who attended GAD were supposed to be licensed and trained in how to handle a weapon. Using a term so often used here: FAIL!!!!


Ummm this is in the US...what licensing...what training, they're likely inexperienced newbies fearing Obama bans and panic buying. Only fail is your understanding of the US gun shows. Have you ever been? I have, many times, to the Rochester NY show.


----------



## MacDoc

now I'm convinced....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxnhgkYa9dQ


----------



## John Clay

MacDoc said:


> now I'm convinced....


No different than any of these - driving fails - YouTube


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> question: How many of those drunk drivers who killed someone, 'accidentally drank alcohol'?
> 
> This sound like deliberate acts to me, and we all know how many deliberate fatal shootings there are in the US.
> 
> Given that driving an automobile has peaceful purposes and everyone drives a car everyday often all day, unlike firing a weapon, which is designed specifically to kill, it's no surprise that numbers of deaths from cars will be high. But pro gun people will never grasp this.
> 
> The difference still is, the US seems to regulate driving a motor vehicle far more than guns.
> 
> I'm sure I'll hear a boat load of belly aching about that one, but until I see the level of skill testing, licensing, ownership cards, licence plates on guns, and insurance plans for a gun owner, you're full of hot air.


Came out of retirement just for you...

Deliberate acts? Are you serious? Negligent discharge at worst due to stupidity perhaps, but deliberate...naw.

And the one thing that the anti gunners don't understand is that firearms are used as many times a day for peaceful uses as much as cars. Can you say law enforcement, sportsman, security, etc?

Just so you understand...I'm licences, trained, have registrations, serial numbers, and liability and theft insurance...any more questions?"


----------



## kps

MacDoc said:


> now I'm convinced....


There are far more YouTube compilations of Darwin candidates who do not use guns in their stupidity.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Came out of retirement just for you...
> 
> Deliberate acts? Are you serious? Negligent discharge at worst due to stupidity perhaps, but deliberate...naw.
> 
> And the one thing that the anti gunners don't understand is that firearms are used as many times a day for peaceful uses as much as cars. Can you say law enforcement, sportsman, security, etc?
> 
> Just so you understand...I'm licences, trained, have registrations, serial numbers, and liability and theft insurance...any more questions?"


That's not what I said though. Clay was comparing accidental shootings to deliberate drunk drivers. 

Accidental shootings, and there are apparently like up to 20,000 a year, are accidents. But drunk drivers, that's no accident...

And you may be licensed, registered etc., but you live in Canada. Where we have drastically less gun deaths. I'm talking about the US.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> That's not what I said though. Clay was comparing accidental shootings to deliberate drunk drivers.
> 
> Accidental shootings, and there are apparently like up to 20,000 a year, are accidents. But drunk drivers, that's no accident...
> 
> And you may be licensed, registered etc., but you live in Canada. Where we have drastically less gun deaths. I'm talking about the US.


No G, you're talking about guns. Calling them "weapons" which are only used to kill, not about the differences between Canada and the US gun laws. We are all painfully aware of the US firearms situation, guns in the hands of kid punks and idiots...and that has nothing to do with guns themselves.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> No G, you're talking about guns. Calling them "weapons" which are only used to kill, not about the differences between Canada and the US gun laws. We are all painfully aware of the US firearms situation, guns in the hands of kid punks and idiots...and that has nothing to do with guns themselves.


Wait a sec here. You're taking issue with me calling accidental shootings 'deliberate acts'. I never suggested that. At all. I disagreed with clay comparing accidental shootings, with deliberate acts of getting behind the wheel of a car drunk.

As for peaceful purposes, I disagree. There are, no peaceful purposes for a gun. It is, a weapon. Whether for security, law enforcement, those aren't peaceful purposes. Violence is involved, whether it is for protection, enforcing the law etc.

The only grey area here is hunting. It's not accurate to lump hunting in with law/protection etc. That's my opinion.

And yes, I'm only talking about the US situation, which is vastly different than ours. To compound their problem, they can barely even enforce the laws they -do- have on the books. The NRA apparently helped draft policy that ensures even the ATF is practically neutered to enforce what they do have in regulation and laws.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Wait a sec here. You're taking issue with me calling accidental shootings 'deliberate acts'. *I never suggested that. At all.* I disagreed with clay comparing accidental shootings, with deliberate acts of getting behind the wheel of a car drunk.


Excuse me? Let me remind you...or are you suggesting I'm misinterpreting it?



previous post by groovetube said:


> This sound like deliberate acts to me, and we all know how many deliberate fatal shootings there are in the US.





> As for peaceful purposes, I disagree. There are, no peaceful purposes for a gun. It is, a weapon. Whether for security, law enforcement, those aren't peaceful purposes. Violence is involved, whether it is for protection, enforcing the law etc.


Guns or the presence of guns prevent violence as much as they can initiate it, that is a fact.

Assigning societies' problems on inanimate objects, a hunk of metal is sure to solve all our problems.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Excuse me? Let me remind you...or are you suggesting I'm misinterpreting it?
> 
> 
> 
> As for peaceful purposes, I disagree. There are, no peaceful purposes for a gun. It is, a weapon. Whether for security, law enforcement, those aren't peaceful purposes. Violence is involved, whether it is for protection, enforcing the law etc.
> 
> The only grey area here is hunting. It's not accurate to lump hunting in with law/protection etc. That's my opinion.
> 
> And yes, I'm only talking about the US situation, which is vastly different than ours. To compound their problem, they can barely even enforce the laws they -do- have on the books. The NRA apparently helped draft policy that ensures even the ATF is practically neutered to enforce what they do have in regulation and laws.


I think you need to following the conversation there.



> This sound like deliberate acts to me, and we all know how many deliberate fatal shootings there are in the US.


Sounds like deliberate acts to me, were referring to the drunk drivers causing deaths. because Clay, was comparing accidental deaths due to shootings, to deliberate drunk drivers.


and we all know how many deliberate fatal shootings there are in the US... because once again... Clay, was comparing accidental deaths due to shootings, to deliberate drunk drivers.

Which I found ridiculous.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> There are far more YouTube compilations of Darwin candidates who do not use guns in their stupidity.


Weak argument. It only takes ONE idiot to accidentally kill someone.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Guns or the presence of guns prevent violence as much as they can initiate it, that is a fact.
> 
> Assigning societies' problems on inanimate objects, a hunk of metal is sure to solve all our problems.


And they also escalate the violence, and that too, is a fact. The idea that somehow everyone arming themselves with guns for protection will lower gun crime, is nonsense.

Are you really suggesting that if everyone in Toronto armed themselves with guns that our 50+ murder rate will magically drop?

It's no less crazy than thinking the all the US needs is a ban on certain weapons. A ban will take many years, and is far from being an effective solution on it's own.


----------



## John Clay

fjnmusic said:


> Weak argument. It only takes ONE idiot to accidentally kill someone.


Only takes one idiot with a shovel to kill someone, too. Where's the crusade against shovels and spades?


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I think you need to following the conversation there.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like deliberate acts to me, were referring to the drunk drivers causing deaths.
> 
> and we all know how many deliberate fatal shootings there are in the US... because Clay, was comparing accidental deaths due to shootings, to deliberate drunk drivers.
> 
> Which I found ridiculous.


I hit the send button too fast...

Alright then, but sometimes comparisons just don't factor in to the issue.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> I hit the send button too fast...
> 
> Alright then, but sometimes comparisons just don't factor in to the issue.


no problem. I'm no writer, so it may not be very clear.

Oh I see now we're on to banning shovels. See this is why we have problems, the shrieking about nonsense just never ceases does it.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> And they also escalate the violence, and that too, is a fact. The idea that somehow everyone arming themselves with guns for protection will lower gun crime, is nonsense.
> 
> Are you really suggesting that if everyone in Toronto armed themselves with guns that our 50+ murder rate will magically drop?
> 
> It's no less crazy than thinking the all the US needs is a ban on certain weapons. A ban will take many years, and is far from being an effective solution on it's own.


I thought we were talking about the US...we're magically back in Toronto now? 

I'm talking about law enforcement upholding the peace by carrying firearms as a deterrent...never said anything about civilians or arming any and all civilians. Also, I was referring to all crime an not just 'gun' crime.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> I thought we were talking about the US...we're magically back in Toronto now?
> 
> I'm talking about law enforcement upholding the peace by carrying firearms as a deterrent...never said anything about civilians or arming any and all civilians. Also, I was referring to all crime an not just 'gun' crime.


Well, the concept that somehow the population arming themselves (which is what you're referring to and what is being discussed for the US) is nonsense in my opinion.

So I used Toronto as an example. We have a murder rate of 50+ a year, so if this is trues, we should be able to lower that by arming the citizens right?

I think, if we used the American mindset, we'll begin seeing gun crime numbers rise dramatically over time. That's why I used Toronto as an example for this.

In the US, they are floating the idea that the population must retain the right to arm themselves with semi automatics with 30 round mags. That's insane.

As for law enforcement, don't many law enforcement officers in Britain not carry firearms?


----------



## SINC

Armed officers placed on routine foot patrol for first time - Telegraph


----------



## fjnmusic

John Clay said:


> Only takes one idiot with a shovel to kill someone, too. Where's the crusade against shovels and spades?


Good comeback, John. Shovels and spades could be used as weapons, true, but that is not the primary purpose of their design. Can you explain exactly what guns are designed to do if not to kill or maim the thing you are pointing at? To scare away flocks of noisy magpies perhaps?


----------



## John Clay

fjnmusic said:


> Good comeback, John. Shovels and spades could be used as weapons, true, but that is not the primary purpose of their design. Can you explain exactly what guns are designed to do if not to kill or maim the thing you are pointing at? To scare away flocks of noisy magpies perhaps?


I can't speak for anyone else, but I only use mine for poking holes in paper. Muscle cars are only designed to go unsafely fast, but most owners use them responsibly.

Just because something can be used for evil doesn't mean it will be, and just because banning something can save one life doesn't mean it should be banned. Punishing the law-abiding majority because of the actions of a selfish minority is repugnant.


----------



## fjnmusic

John Clay said:


> I can't speak for anyone else, but I only use mine for poking holes in paper. Muscle cars are only designed to go unsafely fast, but most owners use them responsibly.
> 
> Just because something can be used for evil doesn't mean it will be, and just because banning something can save one life doesn't mean it should be banned. Punishing the law-abiding majority because of the actions of a selfish minority is repugnant.


No argument there. I have a number of guitars that I could use for simply swatting mosquitoes, but that would be a fairly obvious misuse of what these devices were designed for. I've gone to shooting ranges myself, even took whole classes to them for Hunter Education when it was still allowed. There was a shooting range built into the basement of the high school, for gosh sakes. All precautions including ear protection were taken of course. I am not an advocate of gun bans for responsible gun owners, even though I cannot see much reason for a regular person to need access to semi-automatic or fully-automatic weapons, especially to protect against a supposedly "tyrannical government." That just strikes me as sanctioned paranoia.

The big difference between a gun and most other implements of destruction is that you can be a fair distance from the person you wish to kill and still be successful. That's what makes guns different, and why they are so popular. Where do we draw the line? Should people be able to also own grenades, rocket launchers, and tanks in the name of "protection against government tyranny"? How about missile-equipped planes or drone planes? Where does it end?

In my mind, the problem is the lack of specifications in the second amendment itself. It was written in the musket age as a concession to get all the states to join the union, especially the ones who did not trust the British. Any hint of any degree of a ban creates a run on ammo. The guns and the ammo are already out there in the good old U, S, and A. There's a great Twilight Zone episode called "The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street" that shows what happens when people let their paranoia override their reasoning faculties. This is a complex problem with no easy or implementable solution.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0734664/


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Well, the concept that somehow the population arming themselves (which is what you're referring to and what is being discussed for the US) is nonsense in my opinion.
> 
> So I used Toronto as an example. We have a murder rate of 50+ a year, so if this is trues, we should be able to lower that by arming the citizens right?
> 
> I think, if we used the American mindset, we'll begin seeing gun crime numbers rise dramatically over time. That's why I used Toronto as an example for this.
> 
> In the US, they are floating the idea that the population must retain the right to arm themselves with semi automatics with 30 round mags. That's insane.


We discussed this already, in a country saturated to bursting with guns, in many cases it may make sense for them. I certainly don't endorse that for this country though and Americans have always had easily available guns to protect themselves with whatever they wanted...well, pretty much. Out of those 300,000,000 guns only 2,500,000 are these AR type rifles.



> As for law enforcement, don't many law enforcement officers in Britain not carry firearms?


Is that why their overall violent crime rate is higher than the US? Not talking gun crime here let's get that straight. 

SINC's article looks interesting, haven't read it yet. BTW, run a search on C019 on youtube, there's an interesting documentary series on them chasing armed criminals with their MP5 machine guns in a country which banned most guns over 10 years ago...lol


----------



## fjnmusic




----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> We discussed this already, in a country saturated to bursting with guns, in many cases it may make sense for them. I certainly don't endorse that for this country though and Americans have always had easily available guns to protect themselves with whatever they wanted...well, pretty much. Out of those 300,000,000 guns only 2,500,000 are these AR type rifles.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why their overall violent crime rate is higher than the US? Not talking gun crime here let's get that straight.
> 
> SINC's article looks interesting, haven't read it yet. BTW, run a search on C019 on youtube, there's an interesting documentary series on them chasing armed criminals with their MP5 machine guns in a country which banned most guns over 10 years ago...lol


If the UK has more violent crime per capita than the US, is the definitions exactly the same? Are the reporting methods the same?

Figures like these can be spun in many different ways with a lot of differences to be accounted for.

As the US, solutions are going to take years, and one dimensional ones, such as a simple ban (without proper enforcement), more guns (armed guards etc.) simply isn't going to make a significant change.

I think people need to take a deep breath, put aside the crazy analogies, and see this form a common perspective.


----------



## kps

I figure these stats should be fairly accurate...

I posted this a few pages back, watch it.

Stats

The US definitely might have a problem, but it's not the worst, even in developed countries.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> I figure these stats should be fairly accurate...
> 
> I posted this a few pages back, watch it.
> 
> Stats
> 
> The US definitely might have a problem, but it's not the worst, even in developed countries.


Even if it's not the worst, it's still not very GOOD. It's like saying our team lost 59-12 while your team lost 74-5, so therefore our team did better.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Even if it's not the worst, it's still not very GOOD. It's like saying our team lost 59-12 while your team lost 74-5, so therefore our team did better.


Well they did...didn't they? lol 

Your point is rather weak considering what I and Groove were discussing regarding the UK.


----------



## groovetube

he's right though.

So let's say you add guns in the the UK mix. I don't know that you can say for sure that there'd be less violent crime, since that's a rather simplistic view based on assuming that violent crime is up due to a lack of guns.

I'd say, you'd simply have a whole lot more dead murdered people. Some solution!


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> he's right though.
> 
> So let's say you add guns in the the UK mix. I don't know that you can say for sure that there'd be less violent crime, since that's a rather simplistic view based on assuming that violent crime is up due to a lack of guns.
> 
> I'd say, you'd simply have a whole lot more dead murdered people. Some solution!


Read SINK's article, their gun crime is up 17%. Rather strange for a country with a total handgun ban and a ban on most rifles, but then it's irrelevant since we all agree here that bans don't work. So why the spurt?

G, get that whole 'more guns less crime' crap out of your head, why are you stuck on that? I'm not proposing that for the UK at all, let them deal with it on their own.

Guns don't cause crime, they only facilitate it for gosh, darn, sake....and clearly only gun crime. 

But even the Brits, with their unarmed police seem to feel the need for a 'show of force' in certain areas...and with submachine guns no less.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Read SINK's article, their gun crime is up 17%. Rather strange for a country with a total handgun ban and a ban on most rifles, but then it's irrelevant since we all agree here that bans don't work. So why the spurt?
> 
> G, get that whole 'more guns less crime' crap out of your head, why are you stuck on that? I'm not proposing that for the UK at all, let them deal with it on their own.
> 
> Guns don't cause crime, they only facilitate it for gosh, darn, sake....and clearly only gun crime.
> 
> But even the Brits, with their unarmed police seem to feel the need for a 'show of force' in certain areas...and with submachine guns no less.


I think anyone realizes that guns in of themselves, don't cause crime. But they sure make killing someone far easier with many of them around. Putting more of them out there only results in more dead.

Gun bans over the long term, -do- work. It clearly works here. But we don't have major arms manufacturers here flooding our country with them, because unlike the US, they're not allowed. But I do realize, the mere gun bans, is, a one dimensional solution. A political act to appear like you're doing something.

Granted there are many variables, but the US needs to turn back the clock on letting those manufacturers, profit MASSIVELY from flooding the country with guns.


----------



## SINC

kps said:


> Read SINC's article, their gun crime is up 17%. Rather strange for a country with a total handgun ban and a ban on most rifles, but then it's irrelevant since we all agree here that bans don't work. So why the spurt?


Point is kps that even formerly unarmed nations like Britain are being forced to move to armed police or lose the battle to gangs. That alone seems lost on those whose irrational opposition to guns which is largely based on fear of the unknown. Anyone who has been around firearms used responsibly all their lives are educated enough to recognize their value and certainly aren't stuck in the brain dead 'guns are designed to kill' mentality.


----------



## groovetube

oooh brain dead, well did that make you feel better? Oh I hope so.

Anyway kps perhaps yakking in person is better, a difficult subject to hack out in a forum.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I think anyone realizes that guns in of themselves, don't cause crime. But they sure make killing someone far easier with many of them around. Putting more of them out there only results in more dead.


Isn't that what I said? Whether it leads to more dead is debatable as we do not know what would have happened without the gun.



> Gun bans over the long term, -do- work. It clearly works here. But we don't have major arms manufacturers here flooding our country with them, because unlike the US, they're not allowed. But I do realize, the mere gun bans, is, a one dimensional solution. A political act to appear like you're doing something.


No, what works here is licensing, training, proper pre-screening and tough regulations regarding storage, transportation and discharge laws of all firearms as cited in the Federal Firearms Act. A Federal Act and not a miss-mash like in the US of Federal and State laws and regulations.

Just so you know, every Canadian Forces C8 *assault rifle* is lovingly made right here in lovely Kitchener Ontario and my very own AR style rifle had no problem being imported and legitimately sold here. There is no problem getting pretty much any product from any of the major manufacturers...and that is as it should be.

The only idiocy I see in Canadian C-68 is silly bans based on names, non-technical/mechanical reasons and hi-cap magazines. I don't agree with a lot of it, but I tolerate it and continue to enjoy my hobby and sport as best as the law allows.



> Anyway kps perhaps yakking in person is better, a difficult subject to hack out in a forum.


Up for meat space after treatment, if all goes well.


----------



## kps

SINC said:


> Point is kps that even formerly unarmed nations like Britain are being forced to move to armed police or lose the battle to gangs. That alone seems lost on those whose irrational opposition to guns which is largely based on fear of the unknown. Anyone who has been around firearms used responsibly all their lives are educated enough to recognize their value and certainly aren't stuck in the brain dead 'guns are designed to kill' mentality.


The UK has certainly degenerated in many ways, not what it used to be. I wish them luck.


----------



## groovetube

I don't disagree on the regulations etc.

As far as you getting the ar here, things are far more regulated here. And a huge problem in the us is the inability to enforce the regs they do have.

Anyway, I hope things go well for you.


----------



## kps

I found something that *fnjmusic* will like on the 2nd amendment, a 30 min interview with Prof. Saul Cornell. I don't agree with all that he has to say, but here it is non-the-less. Interesting what he says about the republicans.

Gun Control in America: Re-examining the Second Amendment | The Sunday Edition with Michael Enright | CBC Radio


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> I found something that *fnjmusic* will like on the 2nd amendment, a 30 min interview with Prof. Saul Cornell. I don't agree with all that he has to say, but here it is non-the-less. Interesting what he says about the republicans.
> 
> Gun Control in America: Re-examining the Second Amendment | The Sunday Edition with Michael Enright | CBC Radio


"The Second Amendment is brandished by gun advocates as a formidable brick wall against any attempts at gun control legislation. The Second Amendment, written in 1791, states, "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

"The Second Amendment is the foundation of the contemporary gun rights lobby, and we'll be hearing it referenced a lot more as the debate over gun control rages on. But it may not mean quite what its more fervent devotees believe."

Yup. That sounds like my kind of debate. Thanks, kps.


----------



## groovetube

The truth is, the authors of the amendments, likely couldn't foresee what America would be in 2012, and the level of sophistication we have in weaponry.

It's fast becoming like trying to insist we can stone adulterers outside our city walls. Things have to change.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> The truth is, the authors of the amendments, likely couldn't foresee what America would be in 2012, and the level of sophistication we have in weaponry.
> 
> It's fast becoming like trying to insist we can stone adulterers outside our city walls. Things have to change.


The 2A has never been about technology or its use, it was a principle, a safeguard and expected to march right along with time. 

The problem in America is not guns, but a pervasive culture of crime and violence exacerbated by the easily available guns. Not to mention a myriad of other issues from mental health to economic and social disparity.

Perhaps they'll figure it out in a few decades, but in the mean time, this offers a great deflection for the politicians faced with a tanking economy and crushing national debt.


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> ...
> Perhaps they'll figure it out in a few decades, but in the mean time, this offers a great deflection for the politicians faced with a tanking economy and crushing national debt.


Yep this is a traditional smokescreen issue. Whenever the gun control and/or abortion debates get heated between elections, it is a very good indicator that congress is up to something that stinks to high heaven


----------



## Rps

kps;1248577
The problem in America is not guns said:


> BINGO! Personally, I think there are two worlds when it comes to constitutional reform: those that say we need to interpret the constitution for the current world, and then there are those who say we need to take it literally. At issue is the cherry picking of those two worlds when it comes to legislation. If all "men" are created equal, then women are inferior, or is it "men" as a collective noun for humanity. If one looks through the various laws that have been contemporised we see many examples of this thought process.
> 
> While this is certainly a cultural issue in the U.S. I would like to offer a thought. When the 2A was drafted what was the technology like ? Do we think the legislative body would have even imagined the weapons we have today?.....this is a cherry pick I know but I would like to draw your attention to the constitutionality of "Ride-Programmes" in the U.S. They seem to have been up held as they serve the greater good .... maybe gun control changes should be seen in the same light.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> BINGO! Personally, I think there are two worlds when it comes to constitutional reform: those that say we need to interpret the constitution for the current world, and then there are those who say we need to take it literally.


It's almost impossible to take the meanings of things "literally" without some degree of interpretation. However, the meaning of the words are clear:

Justice Story, appointed as an Associate Justice to the Supreme Court wrote in 1833:



> The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.


Tench Coxe, a member of the the Continental Congress wrote in 1789:



> As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.


So yes, I believe that they would continue to be in full support of this right.


----------



## John Clay

Rps said:


> While this is certainly a cultural issue in the U.S. I would like to offer a thought. When the 2A was drafted what was the technology like ? Do we think the legislative body would have even imagined the weapons we have today?


I don't think technological advances are relevant at all - the Framers wrote the 2A as a safeguard against an oppressive government. It matters not what technology was, or is - the right to bear arms has evolved with it, keeping government in check with a civilian militia.

Further, the 2A states that the right to bear arms "shall not be infringed". Without a change to the Constitution, any gun control measures are unconstitutional IMO.


----------



## bryanc

This strikes me as a ludicrous argument in the modern context.

While it made some sense in the 18th and 19th century, there is zero chance an armed citizenry of a modern western country* are going to have any impact on the ability of their government to tyrannize or otherwise abuse them. The massive bail-outs of the automotive and financial sectors in the U.S. are objective proof of this.

Guns cannot protect your 401k, your access to healthcare, your children's education, or anything else. And if the government wants to attack you personally, they'll declare you a terrorist (much easier if you have a bunch of guns) and wipe you out with drones.

The whole notion is absurd.

The modern citizens' best protection against tyrannical government is the internet and other communications technologies. When we are well informed, we are less susceptible to abuse by the powers that be. It's also very important to note that it is less likely to be the government we need to be afraid of than the large corporations. But here again, it is our knowledge of corporate misdeeds (and the consequent consumer backlash) that is our best protection.

*note: the citizens of developing countries are in a different situation, as evidenced by the armed uprisings in Lebanon and elsewhere. But this isn't really relevant to the U.S.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> This strikes me as a ludicrous argument in the modern context.
> 
> While it made some sense in the 18th and 19th century, there is zero chance an armed citizenry are going to have any impact on the ability of their government to tyrannize or otherwise abuse them. The massive bail-outs of the automotive and financial sectors in the U.S. are objective proof of this.
> 
> Guns cannot protect your 401k, your access to healthcare, your children's education, or anything else. And if the government wants to attack you personally, they'll declare you a terrorist (much easier if you have a bunch of guns) and wipe you out with drones.
> 
> The whole notion is absurd.
> 
> The modern citizens' best protection against tyrannical government is the internet and other communications technologies. When we are well informed, we are less susceptible to abuse by the powers that be. It's also very important to note that it is less likely to be the government we need to be afraid of than the large corporations. But here again, it is our knowledge of corporate misdeeds (and the consequent consumer backlash) that is our best protection.


Nonsense. You mistakenly equate government welfare programs with freedom. You are so steeped in statism, you can no longer differentiate between the two.


----------



## eMacMan

bryanc said:


> ...
> 
> The modern citizens' best protection against tyrannical government is the internet and other communications technologies. When we are well informed, we are less susceptible to abuse by the powers that be. It's also very important to note that it is less likely to be the government we need to be afraid of than the large corporations. But here again, it is our knowledge of corporate misdeeds (and the consequent consumer backlash) that is our best protection.
> 
> *note: the citizens of developing countries are in a different situation, as evidenced by the armed uprisings in Lebanon and elsewhere. But this isn't really relevant to the U.S.


It should be noted that stateside and to an increasing degree in Canada, it has become Government of the people, by the Corporations and for the Corporations. Just a few supporting examples are: Auto bailouts, The Great Bankster Heist, occupation of Iraq, attacks on Libya...

The ability of the US Government to arbitrarily call someone a terrorist and deprive them of all human rights is more than sufficient proof of the tyrannical intent of those who control Congress.


----------



## kps

bryanc said:


> This strikes me as a ludicrous argument in the modern context.
> 
> .


.


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> The ability of the US Government to arbitrarily call someone a terrorist and deprive them of all human rights is more than sufficient proof of the tyrannical intent of those who control Congress.


I don't know if it's sufficient proof as leading to tyranny, but it certainly is a serious concern.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> I don't know if it's sufficient proof as leading to tyranny, but it certainly is a serious concern.


Yes. 

I'm not sure how a gun will help defeat that, though.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Yes.
> 
> I'm not sure how a gun will help defeat that, though.


I'm not sure either, but I'm of the opinion that it's better to have one than not have one, when you need it.


----------



## fjnmusic

bryanc said:


> This strikes me as a ludicrous argument in the modern context.
> 
> While it made some sense in the 18th and 19th century, there is zero chance an armed citizenry of a modern western country* are going to have any impact on the ability of their government to tyrannize or otherwise abuse them. The massive bail-outs of the automotive and financial sectors in the U.S. are objective proof of this.
> 
> Guns cannot protect your 401k, your access to healthcare, your children's education, or anything else. And if the government wants to attack you personally, they'll declare you a terrorist (much easier if you have a bunch of guns) and wipe you out with drones.
> 
> The whole notion is absurd.
> 
> The modern citizens' best protection against tyrannical government is the internet and other communications technologies. When we are well informed, we are less susceptible to abuse by the powers that be. It's also very important to note that it is less likely to be the government we need to be afraid of than the large corporations. But here again, it is our knowledge of corporate misdeeds (and the consequent consumer backlash) that is our best protection.
> 
> *note: the citizens of developing countries are in a different situation, as evidenced by the armed uprisings in Lebanon and elsewhere. But this isn't really relevant to the U.S.


I must concur with the atheist on this one.


----------



## i-rui

John Clay said:


> Further, the 2A states that the right to bear arms "shall not be infringed". Without a change to the Constitution, any gun control measures are unconstitutional IMO.


the second amendment doesn't mention "guns" at all. Just "arms", so by your logic ANY kind of law trying to control ANY weapon is unconstitutional.

I would hope reasonable people would see the folly in allowing ever citizen the right to own whatever weapon they wanted. Bazookas, RPGs, Tanks, F-18s, Apache Helicopters, Chemical weapons, Nukes....etc...etc...

And truthfully, the only way any "militia" would stand a chance against the US government would be if they had that entire arsenal at their disposal. (so let's not pretend that argument holds any water)

So, the question for any reasonable person is not IF every citizen can own and carry any weapon they want, but rather where is the line drawn between legal and illegal. I can understand a difference of opinion on where that line is drawn, but to pretend it shouldn't exist is insane.


----------



## groovetube

the 2A didn't say the government couldn't impose limits on the level of arms a citizen can bear.

Sure you can bear arms, and that is not infringed, just not the semi auto 30 round clip sort. Why is this so hard to understand?


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> the second amendment doesn't mention "guns" at all. Just "arms", .


Uh-huh. Which were considered firearms when the Constitution was written.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> I would hope reasonable people would see the folly in allowing ever citizen the right to own whatever weapon they wanted. Bazookas, RPGs, Tanks, F-18s, Apache Helicopters, Chemical weapons, Nukes....etc...etc...


Centuries before anything like the 2A citizen soldiers owned their own swords, shields and armour...few if any owned their own catapults, trebuchets, galleons, etc. That's the issue. A modern semi-auto AR style rifle is just that, nothing more then a personal firearm equivalent to what once was a sword, a spear, or musket.



> And truthfully, the only way any "militia" would stand a chance against the US government would be if they had that entire arsenal at their disposal. (so let's not pretend that argument holds any water)


Sure it holds water, it leaks a little, but...If it came to that, it would be civil war and many government troops or guardsman would desert to join their side with their "arsenal" and weaponry in tow.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> Sure it holds water, it leaks a little, but...If it came to that, it would be civil war and many government troops or guardsman would desert to join their side with their "arsenal" and weaponry in tow.


Agreed. Look at the many dictatorships worldwide that are being overthrown through force of arms alone.


----------



## SINC

i-rui said:


> And truthfully, the only way any "militia" would stand a chance against the US government would be if they had that entire arsenal at their disposal. (so let's not pretend that argument holds any water)


This is the single most often demonstrated point of ignorance by anti gun types. They simply have absolutely no idea how determined an aggressive militia with a mission can be. Why is that you suppose? Yep, because they have never been part of, or in close proximity to any armed group in their lives at any level, be it moderate or extreme. Had they been, they would know the folly of such assumptions.


----------



## i-rui

Macfury said:


> Uh-huh. Which were considered firearms when the Constitution was written.


so you acknowledge the historical limitations of the original text? wonderful!



kps said:


> it would be civil war and *many government troops or guardsman would desert to join their side with their "arsenal" and weaponry in* tow.


agreed. that's often how a country's own military is toppled. so why exactly do the citizens need their inferior semi-automatic weapons again? you yourself are implying they require the backing of part of the military.



SINC said:


> This is the single most often demonstrated point of ignorance by anti gun types. They simply have absolutely no idea how determined an aggressive militia with a mission can be. Why is that you suppose? Yep, because they have never been part of, or in close proximity to any armed group in their lives at any level, be it moderate or extreme. Had they been, they would know the folly of such assumptions.


sure, all those guns did a hell of a lot for the Branch Davidians down in Waco.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> agreed. that's often how a country's own military is toppled. so why exactly do the citizens need their inferior semi-automatic weapons again? you yourself are implying they require the backing of part of the military.


Popular uprisings start with the "farmer beating his plough into a sword". The military is under government control until the uprising...see how that might work? 

The technology has little to do with it, determination does. Even a group of amateurs with bolt action hunting rifles could in a pinch, seize a lightly armed armoury or police station and obtain better firearms and ammunition and much more...just say'n.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Popular uprisings start with the "farmer beating his plough into a sword". The military is under government control until the uprising...see how that might work?
> 
> The technology has little to do with it, determination does. Even a group of amateurs with bolt action hunting rifles could in a pinch, seize a lightly armed armoury or police station and obtain better firearms and ammunition and much more...just say'n.


You know, for when the zombie apocalypse comes.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Popular uprisings start with the "farmer beating his plough into a sword". The military is under government control until the uprising...see how that might work?
> 
> The technology has little to do with it, determination does. Even a group of amateurs with bolt action hunting rifles could in a pinch, seize a lightly armed armoury or police station and obtain better firearms and ammunition and much more...just say'n.


OK, let's say I don't disagree. so again the question has to be asked....why would the proposed restricting of certain guns and high capacity ammo clips negate the second amendment? There would still be enough to get whatever "theoretical" toppling of said tyrannical government started. You yourself are admitting as much.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> You know, for when the zombie apocalypse comes.


Absolutely...beejacon


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> OK, let's say I don't disagree. so again the question has to be asked....why would the proposed restricting of certain guns and high capacity ammo clips negate the second amendment? There would still be enough to get whatever "theoretical" toppling of said tyrannical government started. You yourself are admitting as much.


I'll even admit it would be possible with a pitch fork too. We're drifting into hypotheticals here and silly Red Dawn scenarios perhaps. 

As I said earlier, the technology is irrelevant. A 30 round mag is just part of the engineering nothing more and it really makes no difference...5, 10, 30, 100.....bullets still come out one at a time.


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> This is the single most often demonstrated point of ignorance by anti gun types. They simply have absolutely no idea how determined an aggressive militia with a mission can be. Why is that you suppose? Yep, because they have never been part of, or in close proximity to any armed group in their lives at any level, be it moderate or extreme. Had they been, they would know the folly of such assumptions.


what sort of militia are we talking about? I mean, I've been firsthand in the woods with a few 'militias' in the US. Are we talking about battle hardened ones, ones who have been through serious battles, lost a few, gained a few?

Or the sort where they run around in forests training to shoot 'stuff' for that big apocalyptic event where they get to unleash their training in shootin' stuff?

It seems there's a whole lotta assumin going on here.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Centuries before anything like the 2A citizen soldiers owned their own swords, shields and armour...few if any owned their own catapults, trebuchets, galleons, etc. That's the issue. A modern semi-auto AR style rifle is just that, nothing more then a personal firearm equivalent to what once was a sword, a spear, or musket.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure it holds water, it leaks a little, but...If it came to that, it would be civil war and many government troops or guardsman would desert to join their side with their "arsenal" and weaponry in tow.


If that's the case, why the need to arm the citizens to the teeth?


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> If that's the case, why the need to arm the citizens to the teeth?


How is that arming citizens to the teeth and who is doing it? I don't see a _need_, as you put it, but I think citizens should have an ability to own firearms which can be defined as personal or sporting. I have never advocated or supported any notion that you should be able to own RPGs or Howitzers in your back yard aimed at City Hall.


----------



## groovetube

Well my friend, that's because you love in Canada.

As you know, things are quite different in 'merica


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> As I said earlier, the technology is irrelevant. A 30 round mag is just part of the engineering nothing more and it really makes no difference...5, 10, 30, 100.....bullets still come out one at a time.


if it makes no difference why the resistance to smaller clips?



kps said:


> I have never advocated or supported any notion that you should be able to own RPGs or Howitzers in your back yard aimed at City Hall.


i'm happy to hear this, and i think this is the discussion that reasonable people should be having : where does society draw the line between legal and prohibited?

I can respect (even if i disagree with) someone who feels the line should be on one side or the other verses my personal view, but where i lose patience in the discussion is when people hide behind the 2A as if it's sacrosanct. It was a well intentioned, but flawed passage written by men of a bygone time. It's not supposed to be divine scripture, but rather a living document.

The argument that the 2A is the *only* thing holding back a tyrannical government is not a reasonable one. (if only americans got this outraged over the patriot act!). And conflating the argument with "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is an ideological position that fails when applied to the reality of the situation where weapons facilitate "people killing people" and thus must be weighed against the public good they may threaten with said weapons.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> if it makes no difference why the resistance to smaller clips?


Simply for that very reason, if one is hunting feral hogs or coyotes a 30 round mag will serve better, if bench resting at the range shooting at a 300 yrd target a 5 or 10 may be fine. Key is having that choice especially when there is no real difference in functionality. 




> i'm happy to hear this, and i think this is the discussion that reasonable people should be having : where does society draw the line between legal and prohibited?
> 
> I can respect (even if i disagree with) someone who feels the line should be on one side or the other verses my personal view, but where i lose patience in the discussion is when people hide behind the 2A as if it's sacrosanct. It was a well intentioned, but flawed passage written by men of a bygone time. It's not supposed to be divine scripture, but rather a living document.


Okay, some people hide behind it and some would eliminate and destroy it...both are extremists and probably have other issues and agendas.

I don't believe the 2A is flawed, it may be vague, but if one reads some attributed quotes to the founders regarding, not just that portion of the constitution, but others, one can come to a reasonable conclusion as to their intent and meaning. However many scholars insert their own biases to the study of the constitution and there are thousands if not hundred of thousand scholars not to mention court justices interpreting the document.

Interestingly the last time they tried to mess with the constitution they gave themselves prohibition which lead to the rise of organized crime, organized drug trade and the culture of guns and violence responsible for a majority of the violent deaths in the US, Mexico and even Canada. People should contemplate that next time they berate guns and law abiding gun owners when they light up that innocent joint. What is it? Something like 47,000 killed in the Mexican cartel wars with many guns given them by the BATF? Pathetic.




> The argument that the 2A is the *only* thing holding back a tyrannical government is not a reasonable one. (if only americans got this outraged over the patriot act!). And conflating the argument with "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is an ideological position that fails when applied to the reality of the situation where weapons facilitate "people killing people" and thus must be weighed against the public good they may threaten with said weapons.


Okay, not the only thing preventing tyranny, but a potential tyrant may have serious concerns as to his success with the potential of armed conflict with majority of its citizens. 

Weapons protect, just as much as they kill, and that is the material point. Call it a double edged sword, if you will.


----------



## margarok

fjnmusic said:


> You know, for when the zombie apocalypse comes.


 :clap:

By the way, I just wanted to pop in on my way out the door to go see my folks in the Missouri hinterlands! Prepping for the zombies is a real chore. Am happy about our county sheriffs though.

Showing Lots of Grit in the Show-Me State! « LewRockwell.com Blog


----------



## bryanc

Having a personal arsenal of semi-automatic weapons as a private citizen would certainly be an advantage in the case of a zombie apocalypse. I can also see it being valuable in the case of societal collapse or some sort of Road Warrior scenario. Or even if you live in certain areas of US cities where the rule of law has effectively failed it makes sense to arm yourself. But entertaining notions of protecting yourself against a tyrannical government (and it's fully modern military force) with personal firearms is just ridiculous.

If a government of a developed country turned it's military on it's own citizens, a significant number of the military would refuse and switch sides; bringing with them real military weapons and making personal firearms useless. Modern military conflicts are not about a few guys in the woods with rifles, and if it ever got to the point where armed citizens were conducting guerrilla warfare against the government, any guns the citizens had to start with would be negligible compared to the guns that would be coming into the conflict from other global forces... the Taliban didn't have their AK-47s for hunting. The 2A argument made sense when it was written but it has no relevance in developed countries today.

While we have very real reasons to be concerned about our government's protection of our interests, guns are of no value in maintaining our security in the modern context. An independent and investigative press is important, access to information is important, fair elections are important, an engaged citizenry is important, education is important, an independent judiciary is important, and limitations on corporate political interference is important, but guns are not important. Unfortunately, especially in the US, all the fuss about gun control is successfully distracting the citizenry from the erosion of all the things that are really important in protecting society from tyrants.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Unfortunately, especially in the US, all the fuss about gun control is successfully distracting the citizenry from the erosion of all the things that are really important in protecting society from tyrants.


So abrogating gun rights is not tyranny--just everything else but guns. Got it.


----------



## Sonal

kps said:


> Okay, not the only thing preventing tyranny, but a potential tyrant may have serious concerns as to his success with the potential of armed conflict with majority of its citizens.


I can't help but think that only a dumb tyrant-to-be goes about imposing tyranny by way of direct warfare. 

Propaganda. Othering people. Creating a sense of us vs. them.... let the people think that this was their idea.


----------



## bryanc

Sonal said:


> I can't help but think that only a dumb tyrant-to-be goes about imposing tyranny by way of direct warfare.
> 
> Propaganda. Othering people. Creating a sense of us vs. them.... let the people think that this was their idea.


Yes... all of this and other insidious social changes (largely focused on the concentration of wealth and power). None of which has anything to do with allowing or disallowing the citizenry to cary guns. Gun control is entirely tangential to the issue of preventing or overthrowing a tyrannical government.

It is, however, very relevant to public safety. A nut with a pointed stick or a bolt-action hunting rifle may well kill or maim a few people before he is apprehended, but the same nut with a semi-automatic and a few high capacity magazines can go one quite a killing spree before he's brought down. And, as Kps has correctly pointed out, there's no significant difference in the functionality of the weapon from a legitimate use POV, so why do we need to allow citizens to have these semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines?

Clearly, as i-rui has already pointed out, the issue is not wether we put limits on the kinds of weapons citizens are allowed to own - obviously we do and obviously we should. The issue is what those limits should be.


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> I can't help but think that only a dumb tyrant-to-be goes about imposing tyranny by way of direct warfare.


The tyrant does not. However the tyrant disarms citizens long before the "hard" tyranny follows the "soft."


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Simply for that very reason, if one is hunting feral hogs or coyotes a 30 round mag will serve better, if bench resting at the range shooting at a 300 yrd target a 5 or 10 may be fine. Key is having that choice especially when there is no real difference in functionality.


My point would be society has to balance the inconvenience of someone hunting Feral Hogs having to change & carry multiple clips vs the potential damage a deranged person on a killing spree NOT having to change & carry multiple clips. IMO I think society should chose the former as a slightly inconvenienced hunter is not *really* a big deal while a mad gunmen with a 100 round clip *is* a big deal! 




kps said:


> Interestingly the last time they tried to mess with the constitution they gave themselves prohibition which lead to the rise of organized crime, organized drug trade and the culture of guns and violence responsible for a majority of the violent deaths in the US, Mexico and even Canada. People should contemplate that next time they berate guns and law abiding gun owners when they light up that innocent joint. What is it? Something like 47,000 killed in the Mexican cartel wars with many guns given them by the BATF? Pathetic.


There has been several amendments since the 18th that instated prohibition, including giving women the right to vote, giving everyone over the age of 18 the right to vote, and of course repealing prohibition, so i disagree completely with the idea that "messing with the constitution" is bad. *Every* Amendment is people messing with the constitution (including of course the 2A), which is exactly the point - it's a living document that can and should evolve with the times.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> There has been several amendments since the 18th that instated prohibition, including giving women the right to vote, giving everyone over the age of 18 the right to vote, and of course repealing prohibition, so i disagree completely with the idea that "messing with the constitution" is bad. *Every* Amendment is people messing with the constitution (including of course the 2A), which is exactly the point - it's a living document that can and should evolve with the times.


The Constitution was made deliberately difficult to change. If changed, it should be changed through due process, not Obama's executive orders.


----------



## bryanc

This argument is completely one-sided; i-rui presenting well-reasoned rational positions backed by historical and contemporary facts, vs. the gunmen of the wild west worrying about mythical tyrants who wanna take their guns and interfere with their hunting of wild pigs.

It's so _obvious_ that the convenience of pig hunters is the important thing here.


----------



## i-rui

Macfury said:


> The Constitution was made deliberately difficult to change. If changed, it should be changed through due process, not Obama's executive orders.


sure, i agree. but as has been demonstrated the 2A is so vague and antiquated that it can not be taken literally and needs to be updated in it's definition as there will never be a unanimous consensus on it's interpretation.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> This argument is completely one-sided; i-rui presenting well-reasoned rational positions backed by historical and contemporary facts, vs. the gunmen of the wild west worrying about mythical tyrants who wanna take their guns and interfere with their hunting of wild pigs.
> 
> It's so _obvious_ that the convenience of pig hunters is the important thing here.


This conclusion is only obvious to a statist such as yourself, bryanc. If you have lost the fire in your belly shared by a free people, then you will never see the issue otherwise.


----------



## i-rui

bryanc said:


> While we have very real reasons to be concerned about our government's protection of our interests, guns are of no value in maintaining our security in the modern context. An independent and investigative press is important, access to information is important, fair elections are important, an engaged citizenry is important, education is important, an independent judiciary is important, and limitations on corporate political interference is important, but guns are not important. Unfortunately, especially in the US, all the fuss about gun control is successfully distracting the citizenry from the erosion of all the things that are really important in protecting society from tyrants.


+1. Bill Maher said as much on friday night (albeit with his special brand of comedy).





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

These are the people who are supposedly informing the public. Can't tell the difference between a sling swivel and a grenade launcher mount. One more reason to doubt anything the MSM has to say...about anything...

Damn, skooled by the Chicago Tribunal



> I am apparently one iggerant bastard. My betters in the media have schooled me in my iggerance.
> 
> Now I thought this here thang in da pichur was a *sling-swivel* where ya attached the sling up in da front.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> This conclusion is only obvious to a statist such as yourself, bryanc. If you have lost the fire in your belly shared by a free people, then you will never see the issue otherwise.


I am neither a statist nor have I been distracted from the genuine threats to freedom this gun control nonsense seems to have distracted you from.

The unwarranted surveillance of private citizens by conservative governments spouting nonsense about "law and order", or worse, the data mining conducted by private corporations with the tacit consent of conservative governments are far greater threats to our freedoms than the ability to own semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines. The anti-terrorism and anti-piracy laws passed by conservative governments that allow citizens to be detained without due process or threatened with decades in prison for sharing information are real attacks on our freedom. The concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few (notably conservative) billionaires, and the decay of investigative journalism are things that proponents of a free society should be very concerned about. The abject failure of conservative governments to regulate and control the concentration of wealth by the financial industry, and it's new ability to put public money at risk for its private gain has a greater effect on our freedom than any guns ever will.

You've bought into the right-wing talking points and are playing your part as a puppet of the corporatocracy. Squawking about gun control is the opposite of preserving freedom.


----------



## Rps

bryanc said:


> You've bought into the right-wing talking points and are playing your part as a puppet of the corporatocracy. Squawking about gun control is the opposite of preserving freedom.


+1 Corporate Monarchy strikes again! I hate to keep harping on this, and I promise this will be my last post on this topic, but Ike's last words as President were "beware the military-industrial complex......... truer words were never spoken.


----------



## bryanc

i-rui said:


> +1. Bill Maher said as much on friday night (albeit with his special brand of comedy).


I love it. "We're like a strip club with a million bouncers and no strippers!" I wish I'd seen that before I wrote what I did above; Maher says it much better.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> I am neither a statist nor have I been distracted from the genuine threats to freedom this gun control nonsense seems to have distracted you from.
> 
> The unwarranted surveillance of private citizens by conservative governments spouting nonsense about "law and order", or worse, the data mining conducted by private corporations with the tacit consent of conservative governments are far greater threats to our freedoms than the ability to own semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines. The anti-terrorism and anti-piracy laws passed by conservative governments that allow citizens to be detained without due process or threatened with decades in prison for sharing information are real attacks on our freedom. The concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few (notably conservative) billionaires, and the decay of investigative journalism are things that proponents of a free society should be very concerned about. The abject failure of conservative governments to regulate and control the concentration of wealth by the financial industry, and it's new ability to put public money at risk for its private gain has a greater effect on our freedom than any guns ever will.
> 
> You've bought into the right-wing talking points and are playing your part as a puppet of the corporatocracy. Squawking about gun control is the opposite of preserving freedom.


Um hm. You want to give the government even more power over individuals regarding gun laws. The *same *government that is supposedly enslaving you through agreements allowing corporate despotism and abrogation of civil rights. 

Just so we're clear on this.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> Um hm. You want to give the government even more power over individuals regarding gun laws. The *same *government that is supposedly enslaving you through agreements allowing corporate despotism and abrogation of civil rights.
> 
> Just so we're clear on this.


Yes. Because I am not incapable of understanding that the government isn't one single entity, and that it has useful and desirable functions that it should be doing (like gun control) as well as lots of functions that it should not be doing (like bankrolling private companies).

The point here, as is so eloquently made in the Bill Maher clip linked above (did you watch it?), is that the freedom that needs protecting is not the freedom to bear arms and nor is it effectively protected by those arms. If you're genuinely concerned about individual liberty, forget about the guns and start focusing on how politicians are serving the interests of powerful corporate puppet masters.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Yes. Because I am not incapable of understanding that the government isn't one single entity, and that it has useful and desirable functions that it should be doing (like gun control) as well as lots of functions that it should not be doing (like bankrolling private companies).
> 
> The point here, as is so eloquently made in the Bill Maher clip linked above (did you watch it?), is that the freedom that needs protecting is not the freedom to bear arms and nor is it effectively protected by those arms. If you're genuinely concerned about individual liberty, forget about the guns and start focusing on how politicians are serving the interests of powerful corporate puppet masters.


If the comedian Bill Maher has convinced you that this is the important issue of your time, then by all means follow the comedian's lead.


----------



## bryanc

Macfury said:


> If the comedian Bill Maher has convinced you that this is the important issue of your time, then by all means follow the comedian's lead.


Look up 'Ad hominem'. As I clearly stated above, I was convinced of the importance of issues other than gun control, WRT individual liberty, long before I saw Maher's schtick a few minutes ago; I just find his articulation of the argument particularly good. If you can find fault with the argument, let's hear it.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Propaganda. Othering people. Creating a sense of us vs. them.... let the people think that this was their idea.


Isn't that already happening _right now _down in the US? beejacon


----------



## groovetube

bryanc said:


> I am neither a statist nor have I been distracted from the genuine threats to freedom this gun control nonsense seems to have distracted you from.
> 
> The unwarranted surveillance of private citizens by conservative governments spouting nonsense about "law and order", or worse, the data mining conducted by private corporations with the tacit consent of conservative governments are far greater threats to our freedoms than the ability to own semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines. The anti-terrorism and anti-piracy laws passed by conservative governments that allow citizens to be detained without due process or threatened with decades in prison for sharing information are real attacks on our freedom. The concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few (notably conservative) billionaires, and the decay of investigative journalism are things that proponents of a free society should be very concerned about. The abject failure of conservative governments to regulate and control the concentration of wealth by the financial industry, and it's new ability to put public money at risk for its private gain has a greater effect on our freedom than any guns ever will.
> 
> You've bought into the right-wing talking points and are playing your part as a puppet of the corporatocracy. Squawking about gun control is the opposite of preserving freedom.


ha ha! :clap:

This has been pointed out to them numerous times, but it just doesn't seemed to be grokked whatsoever.

Sure, let them have their guns (the corps making them are making a killing!!! Sellin like hotcakes!!!)

Let them shriek about liberty freedom and their guns, in fact encourage it! It'll keep their eye off the ball...


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> My point would be society has to balance the inconvenience of someone hunting Feral Hogs having to change & carry multiple clips vs the potential damage a deranged person on a killing spree NOT having to change & carry multiple clips. IMO I think society should chose the former as a slightly inconvenienced hunter is not *really* a big deal while a mad gunmen with a 100 round clip *is* a big deal!


On the surface it makes sense to those that buy into the hype and spin, but from my practical and user knowledge I can not agree.



> There has been several amendments since the 18th that instated prohibition, including giving women the right to vote, giving everyone over the age of 18 the right to vote, and of course repealing prohibition, so i disagree completely with the idea that "messing with the constitution" is bad. *Every* Amendment is people messing with the constitution (including of course the 2A), which is exactly the point - it's a living document that can and should evolve with the times.


Yes, there were amendments made to the constitution, but the vote for women, 18 year olds and the repeal of prohibition did not give them organized crime, gangs, drug trade as a legacy. So I don't think you should disagree so _completely._

I have no objections to the 2A being a _living_ document with with some sensible regulation being applied as long as the core intent stays intact. That will be up to them.

I'm sure there'll will be more talk of banning _plasma rifles in a 40watt range_ when the Terminators come.


----------



## kps

bryanc said:


> This argument is completely one-sided; i-rui presenting well-reasoned rational positions backed by historical and contemporary facts, vs. the gunmen of the wild west worrying about mythical tyrants who wanna take their guns and interfere with their hunting of wild pigs.
> 
> It's so _obvious_ that the convenience of pig hunters is the important thing here.


Wow, too much formaldehyde leaking in the lab again? :lmao:


----------



## Kosh

The problem is, a gun ban would never work in the US or take forever to become effective. Just look at what half of the US citizens are doing right now, they're stocking up on guns and large sized clips. You'd never get 50% (heck I may even be guessing low with 50%) of US citizens to voluntarily turn in banned guns and clips.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Yes, there were amendments made to the constitution, but the vote for women, 18 year olds and the repeal of prohibition did not give them organized crime, gangs, drug trade as a legacy. So I don't think you should disagree so _completely._


No, I do disagree. The Prohibition amendment didnt have anything to do with "giving them" organized crime. Organized crime was involved in gambling and prostitution long before Prohibition came into effect. I agree that prohibition was a cash cow for them in the same way that drugs are a cash cow for them today. But other countries that never enforced probation still had organized crime and the problems that come along with it.

The lesson to be learnt from the misguided 18th amendment is not that amendments shouldn't be added, but rather that drugs should be decriminalized.



kps said:


> I'm sure there'll will be more talk of banning _plasma rifles in a 40watt range_ when the Terminators come.


Ha, I remember that line.



Kosh said:


> The problem is, a gun ban would never work in the US or take forever to become effective.


I certainly agree it isa problem, but that doesn't mean something shouldn't be attempted. It will take a long time, but time does march on and whether it takes 20 or 50 years things eventually will get better. There is even some statistical evidence that that lame assault weapons ban they had in place under Clinton was making a small difference.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> There is even some statistical evidence that that lame assault weapons ban they had in place under Clinton was making a small difference.


The ban was dropped because it made no statistically significant difference.


----------



## groovetube

i-rui said:


> No, I do disagree. The Prohibition amendment didnt have anything to do with "giving them" organized crime. Organized crime was involved in gambling and prostitution long before Prohibition came into effect. I agree that prohibition was a cash cow for them in the same way that drugs are a cash cow for them today. But other countries that never enforced probation still had organized crime and the problems that come along with it.
> 
> The lesson to be learnt from the misguided 18th amendment is not that amendments shouldn't be added, but rather that drugs should be decriminalized.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha, I remember that line.
> 
> 
> 
> I certainly agree it isa problem, but that doesn't mean something shouldn't be attempted. It will take a long time, but time does march on and whether it takes 20 or 50 years things eventually will get better. *There is even some statistical evidence that that lame assault weapons ban they had in place under Clinton was making a small difference.*


yes it certainly did, but since Bush II opened the flood gates it'll take decades to bring it back. COme to think of it, it's taking quite a while to bring a few things back before the mess Bush II made isn't it.


----------



## i-rui

Macfury said:


> The ban was dropped because it made no statistically significant difference.


it wasn't "dropped", it expired as the law had a sunset clause written into it. 

There is statistical evidence that shows it was making a difference, but admittedly the effect was minor.

Personally I thought it was an inefficient law, but still better than nothing.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> Personally I thought it was an inefficient law, but still better than nothing.


I thought "nothing" was better.


----------



## eMacMan

.


----------



## i-rui

As long as we're posting comic strips......


----------



## i-rui

also,. didn't see this posted in this thread.....from last week:

Chatfield school security guard forgets gun in washroom | World | News | National Post


----------



## groovetube

Just a gun. Nothing to see here.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> also,. didn't see this posted in this thread.....from last week:
> 
> Chatfield school security guard forgets gun in washroom | World | News | National Post


Maybe you want to dougle-up for that extra goodness..

Security guard charged after accidentally shooting off own penis - Weird News - Canoe.ca


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Maybe you want to dougle-up for that extra goodness..
> 
> Security guard charged after accidentally shooting off own penis - Weird News - Canoe.ca


oh man. Shoulda studied for the shootin part of the security guard exam.

There is, an exam for that right?


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> oh man. Shoulda studied for the shootin part of the security guard exam.
> 
> There is, an exam for that right?


Apparently not in Trinidad-Tobago. It also says he was in illegal possession of the firearm.


----------



## i-rui

kps said:


> Maybe you want to dougle-up for that extra goodness..
> 
> Security guard charged after accidentally shooting off own penis - Weird News - Canoe.ca


tripple-up ?





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Dr.G.

i-rui said:


> tripple-up ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


Well, the 2nd Amendment protects our "well regulated militia" and their firearms, it just does not protect us from jerks and their firearms. XX)


----------



## Kosh

kps said:


> Maybe you want to dougle-up for that extra goodness..
> 
> Security guard charged after accidentally shooting off own penis - Weird News - Canoe.ca


Ouch. I guess he never followed that sacred firearm safety rule "Never point your gun at something you don't want to shoot".


----------



## kps

OMG, and these are the people after the Second amendment and gun grabs.

I'm telling you, there's no hope...LOL People who are totally devoid of any firearms knowledge should just defer to those that do and STFU.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## margarok

I saw that. Really sad the people we elect to office.


----------



## FeXL

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seattle Gun BuyBack Gets JACKED! Turns Into a Damn Gun Show! LOL



> People that had arrived to trade in their weapons for $100 or $200 BuyBack gift cards _($100 for handguns, shotguns and rifles, and $200 for assault weapons)_ soon realized that gun collectors were there and paying top dollar for collectible firearms. So, as the line for the chump cards got longer and longer people began to jump ship and head over to the dealers.


----------



## FeXL

A story you won't find on the MSM...

RIT Students Accosted By Gunmen In Their Home



> Early Tuesday morning, Christopher Boise heard a noise coming from the basement. As he walked toward the source of that noise, the RIT student noticed two men standing in the downstairs portion of his apartment.
> 
> "They were waiting for me at the bottom of the stairs," said Boise.
> 
> One of them had a handgun trained on Boise.


What happened? His roommate, Raymond, heard his scream & dug his AR-15 out of his gun bag.



> "By the time I had it out and ready, one of the men came at my door, slowly opened it, saw that there was a barrel on the other side and from there backed out," Raymond said.
> 
> The two men fled the apartment.


Sonuvagun...



> Nothing was taken and *no shots were fired.*


Bold mine.


----------



## groovetube

what's the moral of the story?

Every individual should have a semi auto rifle in their home ready to take any intruder out.

*What could possibly go wrong?*

Bold mine


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> what's the moral of the story?
> 
> Every individual should have a semi auto rifle in their home ready to take any intruder out.
> 
> *What could possibly go wrong?*
> 
> Bold mine


Well, a couple intruders would get shot. That's a public service though, not a problem.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> Well, a couple intruders would get shot. That's a public service though, not a problem.


except, in real life, that's not always what happens.

You've been watching too many tv shows.


----------



## CubaMark

*Father of six-year-old boy killed in Sandy Hook massacre heckled by pro-gun activists*

The father of a six-year-old boy who was killed in the Sandy Hook school massacre has reportedly been heckled by pro-gun activists while testifying at a local hearing on firearm control. 

Neil Heslin, whose son Jesse was among the 27 victims of last month’s massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, was giving an emotional account of his son’s death when activists apparently interrupted him, shouting “the second amendment”.

Mr Heslin held a large framed photograph of Jesse as he spoke, saying: “It’s not a good feeling. Not a good feeling looking and your child laying in a casket or looking at your child with a bullet wound in his forehead.”

It was around this point that a handful of people among the 2000 gathered at the packed legislative hearing reportedly began to shout and interrupt Mr Heslin.​
(IndependentUK)


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> *Father of six-year-old boy killed in Sandy Hook massacre heckled by pro-gun activists*
> 
> The father of a six-year-old boy who was killed in the Sandy Hook school massacre has reportedly been heckled by pro-gun activists while testifying at a local hearing on firearm control.
> 
> Neil Heslin, whose son Jesse was among the 27 victims of last month&#146;s massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, was giving an emotional account of his son&#146;s death when activists apparently interrupted him, shouting &#147;the second amendment&#148;.
> 
> Mr Heslin held a large framed photograph of Jesse as he spoke, saying: &#147;It&#146;s not a good feeling. Not a good feeling looking and your child laying in a casket or looking at your child with a bullet wound in his forehead.&#148;
> 
> It was around this point that a handful of people among the 2000 gathered at the packed legislative hearing reportedly began to shout and interrupt Mr Heslin.​
> (IndependentUK)


Well if course! Because the rights if the pro-gun lobbyists to be heard is FAR more important than the grief of a father for his dead son. If guns had not been readily available to the shooter, his son might very well be alive today.


----------



## kps

Tug, tug, tug at the heartstrings...

I'm sorry he got heckled by idiots, no call for that, but perhaps emotionally distraught parents of murderer children should be counselled and allowed to grieve and heal instead of made to testify about something they may not know anything about.

This is serious business and emotion has no business in it. Laws based and passed on emotion are always bad laws.


----------



## groovetube

perhaps next the NRA will suggest arming 6 year olds. y'never know when a 6 year old needs to protect themselves!


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> Tug, tug, tug at the heartstrings...
> 
> I'm sorry he got heckled by idiots, no call for that, but perhaps emotionally distraught parents of murderer children should be counselled and allowed to grieve and heal instead of made to testify about something they may not know anything about.
> 
> This is serious business and emotion has no business in it. Laws based and passed on emotion are always bad laws.


Jesus, you expect detachment after THAT event? 

Man, you are *COLD!!!*. 

One might think that the gun lobby doesn't use emotion to sell their crap either.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Tug, tug, tug at the heartstrings...
> 
> I'm sorry he got heckled by idiots, no call for that, but perhaps emotionally distraught parents of murderer children should be counselled and allowed to grieve and heal instead of made to testify about something they may not know anything about.
> 
> This is serious business and emotion has no business in it. Laws based and passed on emotion are always bad laws.


Oh you mean like laws like the second amendment based on a paranoid fear of Yankees and tyrannical governments, or any other ne'er-do-well that might trespass upon my property? Yup, I know what you mean.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> Jesus, you expect detachment after THAT event?
> 
> Man, you are *COLD!!!*.
> 
> One might think that the gun lobby doesn't use emotion to sell their crap either.


It's akin to a grieving father who lost his 6 year old son to brain cancer testifying at a government health care funding. Kids die, adults die, people in general die. If you take your grief to that level of public, you need to expect the public.


----------



## fjnmusic

iMouse said:


> Jesus, you expect detachment after THAT event?
> 
> Man, you are *COLD!!!*.
> 
> One might think that the gun lobby doesn't use emotion to sell their crap either.


The gun lobby represents business opportunities first and foremost. They're like funeral homes that want to sell the highest-priced casket for your own piece of mind. Lest we forget.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Oh you mean like laws like the second amendment based on a paranoid fear of Yankees and tyrannical governments, or any other ne'er-do-well that might trespass upon my property? Yup, I know what you mean.


No you don't.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> No you don't.


Oh, now this isn't even an argument. It's just contradiction.


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> The gun lobby represents business opportunities first and foremost. *They're like funeral homes that want to sell the highest-priced casket for your own piece of mind.* Lest we forget.


Having just gone through a funeral home experience and two before the latest that *is not* what any reputable funeral home does, (and there are plenty) they don't up sell. 

As best they can, they match the want's of the deceased with the budget of the living.

We were very impressed with our experience of the Tubman Funeral Home in Almonte... very impressed indeed.

So IMO and based on my experience, your analogy is fundamentally flawed.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> The gun lobby represents business opportunities first and foremost. They're like funeral homes that want to sell the highest-priced casket for your own piece of mind. Lest we forget.


What does this have to do with the vast majority of Americans who want to own guns?


----------



## iMouse

fjnmusic said:


> Oh, now this isn't even an argument. It's just contradiction.


Data can't use contractions, but that was after your time. :lmao:


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> Oh you mean like laws like the second amendment based on a paranoid fear of Yankees and tyrannical governments, or any other ne'er-do-well that might trespass upon my property? Yup, I know what you mean.


Cripes are you at all aware of the history of the US?

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution



> ...It was adopted on *December 15, 1791*, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights...


American Civil War



> ...fought from *1861 to 1865*...


Seventy years later... it had zero, absolutely nothing to do with a "a paranoid fear of Yankees".

It seems you should be the one doing home work and not assigning it to students.

Seriously.


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> The gun lobby represents business opportunities first and foremost. They're like funeral homes that want to sell the highest-priced casket for your own piece of mind. Lest we forget.


See your mistake was using an analogy, it created a smoke screen. Tou know how when someone mean has a dog excitedly waiting for them to thow a ball and they pretend to throw it?

But you're absolutely right. I read that the NRA is behind ads that are targeting youth to help ensure a strong ($$$$$) future membership and gun sales (even more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)


----------



## fjnmusic

groovetube said:


> See your mistake was using an analogy, it created a smoke screen. Tou know how when someone mean has a dog excitedly waiting for them to thow a ball and they pretend to throw it?
> 
> But you're absolutely right. I read that the NRA is behind ads that are targeting youth to help ensure a strong ($$$$$) future membership and gun sales (even more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)


Finally some sanity returns. Thanks GT. people love to quibble over details, but the NRA is not about 2A rights. It is about selling more guns and making a profit. 

Sorry about your loss, Screature, and I'm glad your funeral home experience was a good one. However, I have also seen many times when the bereaved family was taken advantage of because they didn't know they had a choice.

All those Americans who want to have a gun also want those guns not to be fired upon them. You can't have it both ways. The more guns are out there, the more accidental shootings, let alone intentional ones. Simple math.


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> Finally some sanity returns. Thanks GT. people love to quibble over details, but the NRA is not about 2A rights. It is about selling more guns and making a profit.
> 
> Sorry about your loss, Screature, and I'm glad your funeral home experience was a good one. However, I have also seen many times when the bereaved family was taken advantage of because they didn't know they had a choice.
> 
> All those Americans who want to have a gun also want those guns not to be fired upon them. You can't have it both ways. The more guns are out there, the more accidental shootings, let alone intentional ones. Simple math.


thx, though, if -only- I could spell!

Yes the past is chock full of incidents of funeral homes upselling. They're just, you know, very smooth about it, for obvious reasons. A business, is a business afterall!


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> But you're absolutely right. I read that the NRA is behind ads that are targeting youth to help ensure a strong ($$$$$) future membership and gun sales (even more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)





fjnmusic said:


> Finally some sanity returns. Thanks GT. people love to quibble over details, but the NRA is not about 2A rights. It is about selling more guns and making a profit.
> 
> .


The NRA is a gun store now? LOL what are you two on about? Gun rights advocacy increases gun sales...it is to laugh. Profits? does the NRA make a cut off of every gun sale like Microsoft off of every licence?

Please, stop making stuff up.


----------



## groovetube

With gun manufacturers flush with cash is there to pony up, it's a pretty cozy relationship.

It's not hard to see the relationship here. Not to mention how the NRA helped write policy practically castrating the ATF from doing their job. It's all happening right in front of us.

The NRA isn't this altruistic organization gun enthusiasts often make them out to be.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> With gun manufacturers flush with cash is there to pony up, it's a pretty cozy relationship.
> 
> It's not hard to see the relationship here. Not to mention how the NRA helped write policy practically castrating the ATF from doing their job. It's all happening right in front of us.
> 
> The NRA isn't this altruistic organization gun enthusiasts often make them out to be.


...and vice versa is also true. Plenty of advocacy groups are in bed with manufacturers and special interest groups. Nothing new there except you two are portraying it as the only relationship in existence. _Ooooh the evil gun lobby only in it for the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
_


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> The NRA is a gun store now? LOL what are you two on about? Gun rights advocacy increases gun sales...it is to laugh. Profits? does the NRA make a cut off of every gun sale like Microsoft off of every licence?
> 
> Please, stop making stuff up.


Really?

How is it that the NRA can afford an office in Washington, if not for 'donations'?


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> ...and vice versa is also true. Plenty of advocacy groups are in bed with manufacturers and special interest groups. Nothing new there except you two are portraying it as the only relationship in existence. _Ooooh the evil gun lobby only in it for the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
> _


How so? I suppose given that everyone's hands are in someone's back pockets, it wouldn't surprise me.

I know that -some- are truly in it for just for the belief in 2A. But that becomes a great big excuse for the real money.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> Really?
> 
> How is it that the NRA can afford an office in Washington, if not for 'donations'?


Seriously? How do donations equate for profit from gun sales in this context? Keep up Mickey.CLICK HERE


----------



## groovetube

The er, voluntary' donations at gun sales time could also help.

And the $$ in support from gun manufacturers. And that's only what's above board. You'd be naive to believe there's not far more to that story.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> How so? I suppose given that everyone's hands are in someone's back pockets, it wouldn't surprise me.
> 
> I know that -some- are truly in it for just for the belief in 2A. But that becomes a great big excuse for the real money.


Quite fashionable these days to bash an organization started during the civil war to help the Union defeat slavery, but meh, they're nothing but a bunch of evil demented gun nuts and they need to be declared a terrorist organization. :lmao:


----------



## iMouse

Oh, tossing Slavery into the equation now are you?

I believe long guns are all that are necessary to satisfy 2A.

And, given a choice between a long gun and a hand gun, I will opt for the long gun every time.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Quite fashionable these days to bash an organization started during the civil war to help the Union defeat slavery, but meh, they're nothing but a bunch of evil demented gun nuts and they need to be declared a terrorist organization. :lmao:


oh you gun nut (and I mean that in the nicest way possible)

I don't think the NRA is in any way a terrorist organization. I jus think they don't get 2012.

By the same token, not many really get what has to happen over time to solve things. Putting more guns on the street will do squat. Except more guns.


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> I don't think the NRA is in any way a terrorist organization. I jus think they don't get 2012.


Some people don't even get it's now 2013.


----------



## iMouse

SINC said:


> Some people don't even get it's now 2013.


You must still be writing cheques.

Why??


----------



## groovetube

Oh right 2013. Oops.

I have someone that writes cheques for me. That's my excuse.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> Oh, tossing Slavery into the equation now are you?
> 
> I believe long guns are all that are necessary to satisfy 2A.
> 
> And, given a choice between a long gun and a hand gun, I will opt for the long gun every time.


Why not, it's not me making this an emotional issue.LOL

Keep on believing, brother.


----------



## Lawrence

Man Shot Dead After Arriving At Wrong House, No Thanks To GPS

Nice


----------



## eMacMan

I am leaning more and more to calling the shootings a false flag.

Based on things other than shockingly poor reporting.

*First graders targeted. *Come on an unstable teen is far more likely to go after his tormentors, or at least target a high school or Junior High.

*Nearly 100% kill rate.* Very unusual in mass shootings where injuries often exceed deaths.
*
Instant gear up towards gun control. *Looks suspiciously like the puppet masters got impatient and decided to rush things along by staging a particularly gruesome assault. See the first two items here.

And now this. I will admit coincidence can be just that, but this is really stretching things. Especially as it happened on the day BO formally launched his push for Gun Legislation. The Lame Stream seemed to smell the rotting fish and rapidly pushed it to the back burner.



> Gun violence in Chicago has claimed another teenager who only last week marched with her school band in Washington at President Obama’s inauguration, continuing an escalating trend of deadly shootings on the city’s South Side.
> 
> 
> Hadiya Pendleton, 15, an honor student at Chicago’s Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. College Preparatory High School and a majorette in the marching band, was killed midday Tuesday while hanging out with friends after exams in a nearby park, the Chicago _Tribune_ reported. As she was standing under a shelter to get out of the rain, an unidentified male jumped a fence and ran toward her group, firing at them. Pendleton was struck in the back, while another boy was hit in the leg. The shooter then jumped into a car and sped off.
> 
> Read more: Chicago Girl Who Performed at Obama’s Inauguration Killed in Shooting | TIME.com
> ​


----------



## i-rui

eMacMan said:


> I am leaning more and more to calling the shootings a false flag.
> 
> Based on things other than shockingly poor reporting.
> 
> *First graders targeted. *Come on an unstable teen is far more likely to go after his tormentors, or at least target a high school or Junior High.
> 
> *Nearly 100% kill rate.* Very unusual in mass shootings where injuries often exceed deaths.
> *
> Instant gear up towards gun control. *Looks suspiciously like the puppet masters got impatient and decided to rush things along by staging a particularly gruesome assault. See the first two items here.
> 
> And now this. I will admit coincidence can be just that, but this is really stretching things. Especially as it happened on the day BO formally launched his push for Gun Legislation. The Lame Stream seemed to smell the rotting fish and rapidly pushed it to the back burner.


what are you trying to say? that Sandy Hook was staged by the government?


----------



## eMacMan

i-rui said:


> what are you trying to say? that Sandy Hook was staged by the government?


Just connecting the dots. No way to say if the connections are correct, but the official theory has also has way too many holes. Why no drug tests on the shooter? If there were tests why have the results not been made public? Autopsies showed deaths were by assault rifle until it became apparent the non-assault rifle was found locked in the trunk of a car, then suddenly the weapons became a brace of pistols?.....

The key word in Gun control is *control*. The founders realized that it is very difficult to safely control an armed populace, hence the second amendment. We may find the idea of a bunch of overweight, poorly educated, and perhaps tipsy ******** as front line defenders of America's constitutional freedoms scary. Still 'tis less scary than no defenders at all.

As to who wants that much control badly enough to stage something like Sandy Hook........ It ain't some loner who played one too many video games.

More often than not the guys that make it to the top, would best serve society from behind bars. So it is always wise to look for the worst in them and delight in those rare occasions they prove better than expectations.

I will say that I used to think I was far too cynical about politicians, but recent years have proved I was not nearly cynical enough. I am merely trying to adapt my outlook accordingly. One thing of which I am absolutely certain: Just because they are our guys, it does not follow that they are good guys.


----------



## i-rui

eMacMan said:


> Just connecting the dots.


i wouldn't say connecting the dots. more like feeding a paranoid delusional fantasy.



eMacMan said:


> Autopsies showed deaths were by assault rifle until it became apparent the non-assault rifle was found locked in the trunk of a car, then suddenly the weapons became a brace of pistols?......


i don't want to spend much time debunking the rest of your theory since a simple google search will do that for anyone interested, but i do want to comment on the above since it keeps making the rounds on the internet (this is probably the 4th time i've seen it mentioned on a different forum - all of course leading back to the same false report from dec 15th!)

The AR-15 was always the main weapon used according to police. In the news feeding frenzy while the media was tripping over each other trying to cover the story, there was video of Police removing a weapon from the trunk of Lanza's car. False speculation led a couple of initial reports to say the gun was the AR-15, but in fact it was a shotgun.

The official report has never changed.



> A large quantity of unused ammunition was recovered inside the school, along with three semi-automatic firearms found with Lanza: a .223-caliber Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, a 10mm Glock handgun and a 9mm SIG Sauer P226 handgun.[19][20][18][21][63] A 30 round magazine was recovered with the rifle.[19] Outside the school, an Izhmash Saiga-12 combat shotgun was found in the car Lanza had driven


Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## mlmummert

i-rui said:


> what are you trying to say? that Sandy Hook was staged by the government?


Oh God, the same government that supposedly staged September 11.

Now who is going to say that gun industry executives staged Sandy Hook themselves just to sell more guns?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

A panel of appeal court judges declared a self-defence claim can be made even when three of the dead were shot in the back — one while wounded on the ground.

Chris Bishop has murder convictions overturned after shooting intruders | Canada | News | National Post


----------



## kps

Man, I hope this gets back to some semblance of normalcy.

Convicted rapist organizes gun control demonstration at Dayton gun show; Media fails to note his sex offender status


----------



## FeXL

Newtown Calls for Armed School Officers

Wait. Wha...?



> *The Newtown Board of Education wants more armed police officers in the town's four elementary schools after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.*
> 
> Last night, they decided to ask the town to approve the request to include one additional full-time Newtown police at each of the elementary schools in next year's budget.


Bold mine.

Newtown "gets" it...


----------



## FeXL

Another story you won't see in the MSM...

Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opens Fire On Classmates…



> *A student opened fire at his middle school Thursday afternoon, wounding a 14-year-old in the neck before an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away,* police said.


Bold from the link.

This success, as opposed to Biden's toothless suggestion last week:



> “*We are not calling for armed guards in schools…we think that would be a terrible mistake,*” the VP said during a PBS “Fireside Hangout.”


Bold from the link.

From the comments:



> If the officer wasn't there, it would be on the news.


The sad truth...


----------



## FeXL

DHS Report: Mass Shooters Prefer Handguns, Not Likely To Be Veterans



> This is what a mass killer looks like, according to a Department of Homeland Security analysis. He works alone. He uses a semi-automatic handgun. He’s a he. And he probably didn’t serve in the U.S. military.
> 
> That’s the conclusion of a November 28 analysis by the New Jersey branch of the Department of Homeland Security’s partnership with state and local law enforcement. The so-called intelligence “Fusion Center” sifted through data on 29 major mass killings in the U.S. since 1999, starting with the Littleton, Colorado school shooting. Its practical advice is to be more concerned by your co-worker with the bad hygiene who mutters about putting his “things in order” than by the war veteran in the next cubicle.​


More:



> The report (pdf) is worth a read to show just how little difference any of the proposals from the left would do to actually address the topic. This fact in particular just leaped off the page at me ("literally" as gun-grabbing Joe Biden might say):
> 
> Typically, the immediate deployment of law enforcement is required to stop the shooting and mitigate further harm to victims. Typically, active shooter situations are over within 10 to 15 minutes.​
> Let me rephrase that for you: "Typically, victims are sitting ducks for the 10-15 minutes it takes law enforcement to arrive."


Yup.


----------



## groovetube

Didn't columbine have an armed guard?


----------



## fjnmusic

groovetube said:


> Didn't columbine have an armed guard?


Yes, but if he's stationed at one set of doors and the perp comes through another set, it doesn't matter much, does it? Americans, especially hardcore gun rights ones, seem to completely miss the point that it is the right to bear arms, 2A, that is very much a part of these mass killings. If it wasn't every citizen's right to own a gun in the first place, much less require a license and training to use it safely, not to mention those that steal from the honest owners, as Adam Lanza did, the problem might not be so bad. But because of the proliferation if weapons, especially concealable weapons like handguns in the US, the ONLY recourse is to arm citizens even more, and turn schools into glorified prisons. The existing guns are not going away, and the gun companies need to keep selling to stay profitable, so they need more customers.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the conjured up White House hooey about Obama "loving" to shoot skeet...

Obama goes 'skeet shooting all the time'? Hardly ever, sources say



> "The only time he shot skeet was for President's Cup," said the source, referring to a shooting competition tradition involving the presidential Marine guards. "I was there. *He stayed for about five minutes, and couldn't leave fast enough.*"
> 
> Skeet shooting "is very hard," said the source. "Especially for someone not used to guns ... *He couldn't have been more uncomfortable.*"


Bold mine.

Yup.


----------



## Macfury

Reminds me of John :"Herman Munster" Kerry on the campaign trail, walking into a local establishment and proclaiming: "I want to get me a hunting license."

Or Hillary walking out of the woods with some birds that had been shot in advance so she could look like a duck hunter,


----------



## kps

....You tell him, Liz. :lmao:


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> ....You tell him, Liz. :lmao:


ha ha ha.:lmao:


----------



## Macfury

Mark Twain:



> Don’t meddle with old unloaded firearms. They are the most deadly and unerring things that have ever been created by man. You don’t have to take any pains at all with them; you don’t have to have a rest, you don’t have to have any sights on the gun, you don’t have to take aim, even. No, you just pick out a relative and bang away, and you are sure to get him. A youth who can’t hit a cathedral at thirty yards with a Gatling gun in three-quarters of an hour, can take up an old empty musket and bag his mother every time at a hundred. Think what Waterloo would have been if one of the armies had been boys armed with old rusty muskets supposed not to be loaded, and the other army had been composed of their female relations. The very thought of it makes me shudder.


----------



## i-rui

FeXL said:


> Further on the conjured up White House hooey about Obama "loving" to shoot skeet...
> 
> Obama goes 'skeet shooting all the time'? Hardly ever, sources say
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Yup.


lol. gotta love it

at first the right was all up in arms saying Obama never fired anything, and demanded proof. then when a photo was released the attack line becomes "well he doesn't do it ALL THE TIME!" - according to unnamed sources (always the most reliable!).

Of course the reality is what difference does it make? The proposed legislation doesn't have anything to do with his prolificacy with skeet guns. Has anyone on the right even read his executive orders regarding guns? Pretty tame stuff.

But don't let the truth get in the way of the hate.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> Has anyone on the right even read his executive orders regarding guns? Pretty tame stuff.


Pretty temporary stuff. Attempting to bypass lawmakers for an issue that can be dealt with via vote will not withstand the litmus test for this sort of thing.



i-rui said:


> But don't let the truth get in the way of the hate.


Who hates him? I just want him to go away—and take his disastrous ideas with him.


----------



## i-rui

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you actually DO hate him MF.
(based on what i've read from many of your posts these past few years)

But no worries....i hate my share of politicians too.


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb and say you actually DO hate him MF.
> (based on what i've read from many of your posts these past few years)
> 
> But no worries....i hate my share of politicians too.


Disgust would be my preferred term. Hate creates too strong a bond to the intended object!


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Disgust would be my preferred term. Hate creates too strong a bond to the intended object!


Well you sure talk about him a lot.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Well you sure talk about him a lot.


He's been in the news lately.


----------



## bryanc

Yes... Obama and his damn efforts to pull the US back from the brink of becoming MacFury's utopia; a land where everyman has a weapon, and health care, education, clean water, etc. are for those who can afford them. MacFury would've loved the Dark Ages... as long as he wasn't a peasant... and as long as he didn't get sick... or want to live past 40.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Yes... Obama and his damn efforts to pull the US back from the brink of becoming MacFury's utopia; a land where everyman has a weapon, and health care, education, clean water, etc. are for those who can afford them. MacFury would've loved the Dark Ages... as long as he wasn't a peasant... and as long as he didn't get sick... or want to live past 40.


Obama has been puling the U.S. out of economic chaos in much the same way that a fat man helps a donkey reach a destination by getting on its back. His incompetence has seen one of the slowest recoveries in U.S. history.


----------



## screature

OMG. :yikes: I see this is still called the Shootings in Connecticut School thread...

Really?

Can't someone start an appropriately named Gun Control thread.

I mean seriously. It does an injustice to the real tragedy to keep posting to this thread under the name the Shootings in Connecticut School when the posts have had absolutely nothing to do with it for a few 100 posts or more...


----------



## iMouse

This event won't be swept under the rug quite so easily.

But nice try.

23 Angels.


----------



## i-rui

screature said:


> OMG. :yikes: I see this is still called the Shootings in Connecticut School thread...
> 
> Really?
> 
> *Can't someone start an appropriately named Gun Control thread.
> *
> I mean seriously. It does an injustice to the real tragedy to keep posting to this thread under the name the Shootings in Connecticut School when the posts have had absolutely nothing to do with it for a few 100 posts or more...


You're more then welcome to start the thread yourself. Personally i'll post wherever the discussion goes......but i do think there is a definite connection between sandy hook and the gun control debate so i don't have a problem with it being talked about in this thread.


----------



## eMacMan

i-rui said:


> You're more then welcome to start the thread yourself. Personally i'll post wherever the discussion goes......but i do think there is a definite connection between sandy hook and the gun control debate so i don't have a problem with it being talked about in this thread.


Agreed

Clearly the gun control lobby was preparing press releases before the victims were moved from the scene. Combined with the fact that the victims were first graders (extremely unusual for mass killings) and that it happened right at the beginning of BOs second term, it all seems a little too coincidental. 

Note that BO went through four years, two elections, and the Aurora theatre shootings, all the while leaving the populace with the impression that he wanted nothing to do with gun control. As usual what he does and says are poles apart.


----------



## SINC

Apologies if this has been posted here earlier, but it seems relevant.


----------



## kps

Fully on Topic

*Must see:*





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

DHS Week In Review



> Biden announces that AR-15s are useless for personal defense.
> 
> DHS buys 7,000 AR-15s for personal defense.


----------



## bryanc




----------



## Macfury

Is that cartoon still running?!


----------



## bryanc

yes; over 40 years and more popular than ever. Must be confusing for those who don't understand satire.


----------



## jamesB

SINC said:


> Apologies if this has been posted here earlier, but it seems relevant.


Ironically a similar photo could be found for JFK's last parade, then Obama's statement would be true.


----------



## Macfury

jamesB said:


> Ironically a similar photo could be found for JFK's last parade, then Obama's statement would be true.


Guns, just like seatbelts, cannot _always_ keep us safe.


----------



## groovetube

Except that seatbelts don't protect you from seatbelts.

oops.


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> Except that seatbelts don't protect you from seatbelts.
> 
> oops.


Guns don't protect you from guns, either. They protect you from stupid/insane/drunk, just like seatbelts.


----------



## bryanc

An seat belts can't be used to massacre school children, or theatre goers, or whoever happens to be caught in the crossfire.

Any technology can be used for good or ill. But some technologies, like guns, have very few good purposes they can be put to by the vast majority of citizens, and other technologies, like seat belts have very few bad purposes they can be put to by the vast majority of citizens. So we should apply general rules; for extremely dangerous technologies like guns and radio isotopes, make the default "no you can't have this" and if you can demonstrate a special need, society will make an exception and you get a permit (as I have to for radio isotopes). For technologies that are not especially dangerous, we let everyone have it if they want it. For technologies that are dangerous, but highly convenient, like cars, we require training and regulate their use extensively.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> Guns don't protect you from guns, either. They protect you from stupid/insane/drunk, just like seatbelts.


They don't protect you from guns?

SO let me get this straight. If I get a gun, it doesn't protect me from guns? I have to pick it up, and point it at someone who is aiming to shoot me? Oh what I have to fire it too?

I thought the gun itself would protect me.

I had no idea.


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> An seat belts can't be used to massacre school children, or theatre goers, or whoever happens to be caught in the crossfire.


We were talking about the use of seat belts as protective devices, not weapons. Nor were we talking about outlawing them. But do go on...


----------



## groovetube

I think he just trounced his own analogy :lmao:


----------



## Lawrence

18-year-olds can buy handguns



> Federal law says you need to be 21 to buy a handgun, but a little-known loophole lets young people stock up


...


----------



## kps

Lawrence said:


> 18-year-olds can buy handguns
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, imagine that! Remember the draft in the US where they sent 17 and 18 year olds to Nam with full auto assault rifles and colt 45s? lol

Big deal.

Here's a 13 year old action shooter for your outrage.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## fjnmusic

kps said:


> Yeah, imagine that! Remember the draft in the US where they sent 17 and 18 year olds to Nam with full auto assault rifles and colt 45s? lol
> 
> Big deal.
> 
> Here's a 13 year old action shooter for your outrage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> YouTube Video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


She is a very good shooter. And the point of your video is?


----------



## iMouse

Damn, she's a cute little thing.

Those shotgun loads, at least, don't seem to be full-strength, for a 13-year-old girl.

Either that, or she's even better than it looks.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> She is a very good shooter. And the point of your video is?


The loop hole I get and I guess they better plug it, but seriously, the age is irrelevant. 

The point of the video ? Dave's outrage...lol


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> Damn, she's a cute little thing.
> 
> Those shotgun loads, at least, don't seem to be full-strength, for a 13-year-old girl.
> 
> Either that, or she's even better than it looks.


She's very, very, good. Look at the time. Competitions have rules, no doubt they are approved loads.


----------



## jamesB

fjnmusic said:


> And the point of your video is?


Don't pi$$ her off!


----------



## Lawrence

kps said:


> Yeah, imagine that! Remember the draft in the US where they sent 17 and 18 year olds to Nam with full auto assault rifles and colt 45s? lol
> 
> Big deal.
> 
> Here's a 13 year old action shooter for your outrage.


What makes you think I'm outraged?

...


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> The loop hole I get and I guess they better plug it, but seriously, the age is irrelevant.
> 
> The point of the video ? Dave's outrage...lol


I kinda agree on the age thing with you. Kinda 

And I'll guess Dave is tougher to outrage than that.


----------



## kps

Lawrence said:


> What makes you think I'm outraged?
> 
> ...


Just pulling your chain a little man, taking libberty from the old heady days of MBBS.


----------



## Lawrence

kps said:


> Just pulling your chain a little man, taking libberty from the old heady days of MBBS.


Only Evil Matthew can do that, With a side order of The Mose,
Everyone else has to take a number.

...


----------



## kps

Lawrence said:


> Only Evil Matthew can do that, With a side order of The Mose,
> Everyone else has to take a number.
> 
> ...


They're not around, my number came up...


----------



## fjnmusic

Here's something to ponder....


----------



## Dr.G.

If correct, that is an amazing fact. fjn. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## SINC

Some things just never change:



> Washington (CNN) -- Eight weeks after the massacre of 20 Connecticut first-graders, a ban on the kind of semi-automatic rifle used by the killer remains elusive -- if not impossible.
> 
> Such a ban became a rallying cry for victims' families, advocacy groups and politicians supporting tougher gun laws in the emotional aftermath of the Newtown shootings in December.
> 
> President Barack Obama still calls for updating a 1994 assault weapons ban that expired 10 years later as part of his package of steps intended to reduce chronic gun violence in America, especially in major cities.
> 
> However, fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association and millions of American gun owners has shifted debate away from prohibiting specific weapons to making it harder for criminals, terrorists and the mentally ill to obtain guns.


Gun focus shifts from ban to checks and trafficking - CNN.com


----------



## groovetube

Really? The NRA is focusing on making it harder for criminals to get guns?

Actually, if one checks the facts, this is completely false. I would agree though should this effort actually be made honestly, then this would be probably as effective if not more than any weapons ban.


----------



## SINC

If you read the entire story, you will find your assumption is what is wrong. The NRA said no such thing. In fact this is their position quoted directly from the story:



> The NRA and other opponents contend that any limit on private gun ownership violates the constitutional right to bear arms. Even partial steps in that direction, such as prohibiting specific models, are considered a path to potential confiscation or other future elimination of Second Amendment rights, they argue.


----------



## John Clay

Some sensible testimony to the Minnesota Public Safety and Policy Committee.





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## groovetube

You're right. I did read that wrong.


----------



## i-rui

actually the NRA is now *against* mandatory background checks, so in a way they are making it easier for criminals to get guns :





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






funny how the NRA has become more extreme in just 14 years:





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## groovetube

They also were the reason why the ATF can only do one check on a gun shop, a year. Despite the fact that about 2 thirds of the guns used in crime come from apparently about 1% of the gun shops.

The NRA. All about protecting citizens rights!


----------



## iMouse

Where do they get the *majority* of their money to operate?

Perhaps they should be required to register under the lobby act?


----------



## kps

..double tap


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> Where do they get the *majority* of their money to operate?
> 
> Perhaps they should be required to register under the lobby act?


Membership dues and donations they are a non-profit org. You can join as a Canadian if you wish.


----------



## kps

i-rui said:


> actually the NRA is now *against* mandatory background checks, so in a way they are making it easier for criminals to get guns :


What La Pierre was trying to get across is that the vast majority of criminals buy their gun on the street or steal them not in a store.


----------



## groovetube

yet 2/3s of them oddly enough apparently originate from 1% of the dealers.

But that cannot be further investigated, because of the NRA.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> yet 2/3s of them oddly enough apparently originate from 1% of the dealers.
> 
> But that cannot be further investigated, because of the NRA.


All guns originate with a dealer DOH! It's what happens afterwards.

2/3 may traced back to an unscrupulous dealers, but after how many times have they changed hands since the original purchase--legal or not?

Look, mandatory background checks for criminality and mental health should be at least a start. It is here in Canada.


----------



## fjnmusic




----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> Ozy


Man, that would be messy.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> All guns originate with a dealer DOH! It's what happens afterwards.
> 
> 2/3 may traced back to an unscrupulous dealers, but after how many times have they changed hands since the original purchase--legal or not?
> 
> Look, mandatory background checks for criminality and mental health should be at least a start. It is here in Canada.


I don't disagree kps, but if the NRA could stop neutralizing the ATF and guns were stopped at the source, perhaps we wouldn't be talking about a weapons ban.

WHile I may support gun bans in theory, I'm also aware enough to see them as mere bandages to a country like the US.


----------



## i-rui

iMouse said:


> Where do they get the *majority* of their money to operate?
> 
> Perhaps they should be required to register under the lobby act?


the NRA is registered as a lobby group - the lobbying arm is called the NRA-ILA

NRA-ILA | About NRA-ILA

the NRA-ILA does not get any NRA membership money, and is donation only, many of which comes from the gun industry.

Whom Does the NRA Really Speak For? - Jordan Weissmann - The Atlantic



> But around 2005, the group began systematically reaching out to its richest members for bigger checks through its "Ring of Freedom" program, which also sought to corral corporate donors. Between then and 2011, the Violence Policy Center estimates that the firearms industry donated as much as $38.9 million to the NRA's coffers. The givers include 22 different gun makers, including famous names like Smith & Wesson, Beretta USA, SIGARMS, and Sturm, Ruger & Co. that also manufacture so-called assault weapons.
> 
> Some of that funding has given the NRA a direct stake in gun and ammo sales. As Bloomberg noted in its January article, Sturm, Ruger & Co. launched a campaign to sell one million guns, and promised to donate $1 of each purchase to the group. Since 1992, MidWay USA, which retails gun supplies including ammo and controversial high-capacity magazines, has allowed its customers to round up each of their online and mail orders to the nearest dollar, and automatically donate the extra to the NRA. Together with other companies that have joined the effort, MidWay has helped collect more than $9 million for NRA. MidWay's owner, Larry Pottfield, also happens to be the the group's largest individual donor.
> 
> These connections have fueled the theory among some gun-control advocates that the NRA is just another corporate front. That might theoretically explain why the group has opposed politically popular measures such as requiring background checks at gun shows and banning sales to people on the terrorist watch list, proposals that even its own members have been found to support. For gun makers, the fewer rules, the better.


----------



## Sonal

Just a note that I've changed the title of this thread to reflect the topic of most of this discussion.

I'd have done it earlier, but I hadn't realized that we had that power.

It didn't bother me, personally, to tie in the gun control debate with the Sandy Hook shootings, but if you were offended by it, I hope this helps.


----------



## kps

Sonal said:


> Just a note that I've changed the title of this thread to reflect the topic of most of this discussion.
> 
> I'd have done it earlier, but I hadn't realized that we had that power.
> 
> It didn't bother me, personally, to tie in the gun control debate with the Sandy Hook shootings, but if you were offended by it, I hope this helps.


Fantastic Sonal, thank you!!!!:love2:


----------



## fjnmusic

Sonal said:


> Just a note that I've changed the title of this thread to reflect the topic of most of this discussion.
> 
> I'd have done it earlier, but I hadn't realized that we had that power.
> 
> It didn't bother me, personally, to tie in the gun control debate with the Sandy Hook shootings, but if you were offended by it, I hope this helps.


As long as there are no bad words, just acrimonious accusations, I'm sure we'll all be getting along just fine.


----------



## screature

Sonal said:


> Just a note that I've changed the title of this thread to reflect the topic of most of this discussion.
> 
> I'd have done it earlier, but I hadn't realized that we had that power.
> 
> It didn't bother me, personally, to tie in the gun control debate with the Sandy Hook shootings, but if you were offended by it, I hope this helps.





kps said:


> Fantastic Sonal, thank you!!!!:love2:


Wonderful... thank you Sonal and the new management for allowing us to edit the title of threads that we started. :clap:


----------



## iMouse

Is this a new feature here?

How odd.


----------



## screature

iMouse said:


> _Is this a new feature here?_
> 
> How odd.


It is indeed. For those of us who start threads here with some frequency.

I don't know what the rolled eyes are for considering you have started exactly zero (0) threads here and so would have no experience in the matter.


----------



## fjnmusic

screature said:


> It is indeed. For those of us who start threads here with some frequency.... don't know that the rolled eyes are for...


Congratulations, Screature, on your new choice of avatar. Gonna miss Mac in the back of the head guy, but dinosaur guy is a welcome new addition. As for me, Spock remains in my green blood.


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> Congratulations, Screature, on your new choice of avatar. Gonna miss Mac in the back of the head guy, but dinosaur guy is a welcome new addition. As for me, Spock remains in my green blood.


Ahh shucks.. thanks fjnmusic... it just came to me in a flash the other night.


----------



## iMouse

screature said:


> I don't know what the rolled eyes are for ....


I distinctly heard a massive sucking sound, that's why.



screature said:


> .... considering you have started exactly zero (0) threads here and so would have no experience in the matter.


1) Poll: Assisted Suicide *iMouse*

2) Athiests/Agnostice pay for Religion* iMouse* (which I got static for, because "There is already a Religion thread.)​


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> It is indeed.For those of us who start threads here with some frequency.
> 
> I don't know what the rolled eyes are for considering you have started exactly zero (0) threads here and so would have no experience in the matter.


actually as a new member he's started exactly 2 threads, so why the sudden attack on someone new? We can use some new blood around here.


----------



## fjnmusic

groovetube said:


> actually as a new member he's started exactly 2 threads, so why the sudden attack on someone new? We can use some new blood around here.


No respect until you hit 5000 posts! tptptptp


----------



## SINC

I am pretty sure iMouse has been here on ehMac for quite some time under at least two other nicknames, so his experience is perhaps more than most would know.


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> I am pretty sure iMouse has been here on ehMac for quite some time under at least two other nicknames, so his experience is perhaps more than most would know.


Once for a short bit quite some time ago, and I convinced him to come back. 



fjnmusic said:


> No respect until you hit 5000 posts! tptptptp


yeah really.


----------



## iMouse

fjnmusic said:


> No respect until you hit 5000 posts! tptptptp


I don't think I have that much time left for all *that* yammering. 



SINC said:


> I am pretty sure iMouse has been here on ehMac for quite some time under at least two other nicknames, so his experience is perhaps more than most would know.


Don't be so sure, old fella.

I've been here only in the frock you see me in now.

I bailed 5 years ago because this place was deader than Toby's donkey-hole.

Now I'm back, to stir some life into the place, as Groovy suggests.

Unlike Tilt, I embrace my godliness to do such a thing.


----------



## screature

iMouse said:


> I distinctly heard a massive sucking sound, that's why.
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Poll: Assisted Suicide *iMouse*
> 
> 2) Athiests/Agnostice pay for Religion* iMouse* (which I got static for, because "There is already a Religion thread.)​


Sorry I offended you... I searched threads started by iMouse and I got zero as a result.

I am sorry that I allowed the Search function here on ehMac to provide accurate results thereby insulting you. So let me rephrase my post:

_I don't know what the rolled eyes are for considering you have started exactly *two (2)* threads here and so would have *little* experience in the matter._​
Exactly what "sucking" sound would you be talking about, as you weren't even aware that until recently it wasn't possible for one to edit the title of one's thread and for it to show up in the general menu?

Yet* you* roll your eyes as if *I *don't know what I am taking about... that's really rich.


----------



## SINC

iMouse said:


> Don't be so sure, old fella.
> 
> I've been here only in the frock you see me in now.
> 
> I bailed 5 years ago because this place was deader than Toby's donkey-hole.
> 
> Now I'm back, to stir some life into the place, as Groovy suggests.
> 
> Unlike Tilt, I embrace my godliness to do such a thing.


Well for an old fella, my memory still works pretty well. Does this name ring a bell?


----------



## iMouse

Don't know about the i, but those do happen to be my first 2 names.

Are you stalking me, perchance?


----------



## SINC

Not at all, just too many similarities in posting style for me not to notice.


----------



## screature

fjnmusic said:


> No respect until you hit 5000 posts! tptptptp


That may be a bit harsh... how about 1000 posts and you get a promotion to "Honourable Citizen"... something iMouse is only 3/4s to the way of achieving.


----------



## kps

Now that Sonal was nice enough to re-title the thread can we get back to the topic?


----------



## screature

kps said:


> Now that Sonal was nice enough to re-title the thread can we get back to the topic?


Yes you are right kps.. please carry on despite the side show. 

Sorry for the distraction.


----------



## iMouse

Curmudgeons do tend to flock together you realize.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Now that Sonal was nice enough to re-title the thread can we get back to the topic?


it never ends does it. iMouse had a nick briefly that was different a few years ago. A few others here had a name but abandoned it for another. Woopdeedoo. Congratulations to the great efforts of sleuthing, for the love of gawd, let's get back on topic.

Speaking gun control, imagine a few identities here in person fully armed!


----------



## fjnmusic

Now that the superhero iMouse's secret identity of John Henry has been revealed, let us hear some of the master crimefighter's views on the weaponry of the bad guys. Is it any match for your quick wit and speedy resolve? Can you stop a bullet with your teeth? In a contest between, say, Batman and Superman, who would win?





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Dr.G.

groovetube said:


> it never ends does it. iMouse had a nick briefly that was different a few years ago. A few others here had a name but abandoned it for another. Woopdeedoo. Congratulations to the great efforts of sleuthing, for the love of gawd, let's get back on topic.
> 
> Speaking gun control, imagine a few identities here in person fully armed!


I can't imagine anyone here who had a gun would use it against anyone of us here in EhMacLand. We disagree over various issues, but only resort to using words to "blast away" (no pun intended) at another person's arguement. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## screature

Dr.G. said:


> I can't imagine anyone here who had a gun would use it against anyone of us here in EhMacLand. We disagree over various issues, but only resort to using words to "blast away" (no pun intended) another person's argument. Paix, mon ami.


Amen brother...

I don't even kill spiders in the house as they kill other "undesirables" in the house... 

The only things I kill intentionally are ants in the house. Not that I have anything against ants strictly speaking, but if your home becomes their home you are in for a lot of trouble.


----------



## iMouse

Well, for a re-start, how about we stop worrying about what happens South of the border.

We can do excrement about it anyway.

Now Canada, that's a subject we can SINC our teeth into.

if you are convicted of committing a crime with a gun/fake gun and you go away for 10 years. Done.

Now this harsh treatment will be hard on the cops, who might get shot at trying to arrest someone. But then they can call upon summary trial and execution, and the matter will be finished, for the perp.

The penal system would have to suffer a short-term upgrade, until the message got through to the criminals.

Now if we had some kind of lottery to support new prisons, I might actually start buying some 'chances' again.


----------



## SINC

screature said:


> The only things I kill intentionally is ants in the house. Not that I have anything against ants strictly speaking, but if your home becomes their home you are in for a lot of trouble.


Cucumbers. Cut up and spread cucumber bits and peels near the nest. They will abandon it.


----------



## BigDL

*One more chance please*



iMouse said:


> Curmudgeons do tend to flock together you realize.


I'm convinced, personally, the irritability is due to the long hard winter weather. Perhaps some affirmations and a cherry pip, pip, might brighten the mood, for an old pal. What'a'ya'say?


----------



## screature

iMouse said:


> *Well, for a re-start, how about we stop worrying about what happens South of the border.*
> 
> We can do excrement about it anyway.
> 
> Now Canada, that's a subject we can SINC our teeth into.
> 
> if you are convicted of commit a crime with a gun/fake gun and you go away for 10 years. Done.
> 
> Now this harsh treatment will be hard on the cops, who might get shot trying to arrest someone. But then they can call upon summary trial and execution, and the matter will be finished, for the perp.
> 
> The penal system would have to suffer a short-term upgrade, until the message got through to the criminals.
> 
> Now if we had some kind of lottery to support new prisons, I might actually start buying some 'chances' again.


That would indeed be a good re-start to this thread and one that I fully support.


----------



## screature

SINC said:


> Cucumbers. Cut up and spread cucumber bits and peels near the nest. They will abandon it.


Never heard that before... I will try it once I can figure out where their nest is located.


----------



## smashedbanana

We HAVE strong gun control here...


----------



## iMouse

So you're OK with gang-bangers killing each other?

Me too.

Unfortunately, for the civilians they kill, some of them couldn't hit a barn from the inside.


----------



## Rps

Dr.G. said:


> I can't imagine anyone here who had a gun would use it against anyone of us here in EhMacLand. We disagree over various issues, but only resort to using words to "blast away" (no pun intended) at another person's arguement. Paix, mon ami.


Does this mean we have a high calibre of poster here?????


----------



## Dr.G.

Rps said:


> Does this mean we have a high calibre of poster here?????


No, just posters who will not take the life of another poster with a gun of some sort. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## kps

The Ian Thompson case appears to be over but not quite. Here's a good interview with Solomon Friedman. 

Defending self-defence : News Video Gallery


----------



## groovetube

Dr.G. said:


> No, just posters who will not take the life of another poster with a gun of some sort. Paix, mon ami.


I have learned over the years never to assume things. Of course this may have come form the many years I spent travelling the US from sea to shining sea.


----------



## eMacMan

Talk about hard to find.

Got to thinking about this thread in a rather convoluted manner. 

Got an eMail linking me to John Williamson's version of Waltzing Matilda. Saw links to "The Band Played Waltzing Matilda" which got me to thinking about Eric Bogle. Looking for him on Youtube, I stumbled across this video which got me thinking about the shootings in Connecticut and so ended up being posted here.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7St829K6cs]One Smaller Star - Eric Bogle - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## kps

Time to bring this to reality

A couple of interesting testimonies regarding New Jerseys bid to follow New York's idiot pistol magazine limit. Remember, these are not gun culture people, just ordinary citizens.

•




+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






•




+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

Colorado Democrat: Women Don’t Need Guns If They ‘Feel Like They’re Going To Be Raped’



> Chill, women, says Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar. While arguing for the disarmament of college students, Salazar says that even if women feel like they’re going to be raped, they may not, so who needs a firearm for protection? From Revealing Politics:
> 
> “It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around at somebody.”


----------



## FeXL

Misstep in gun bill could defeat the effort



> One of the major gun-control efforts in Olympia this session calls for the sheriff to inspect the homes of assault-weapon owners. *The bill’s backers say that was a mistake.*


Bold mine.

Of course it was...


----------



## kps

It really getting stupid down south. This'll be huge next election.


----------



## FeXL

Further on that "Misstep..." post above.

Not. So. Much.

Scratch A Proggie, Find A Tyrant



> Senator Kline was a sponsor of an assault weapons bill in the 2009-2010 session which contained the EXACT SAME PROVISION.
> 
> ...
> 
> And from a bill he sponsored in 2005, Bill 3475:


Further:



> Senator Kline didn’t “make a mistake”.
> 
> ...
> 
> It bears noting that these bills are almost identical, further demonstrating that this wasn’t a mistake; _it was deliberate._


Italics from the link.

Lending further credence to the axiom: How can you tell when a politician is lying? When his lips are moving...


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> It really getting stupid down south. This'll be huge next election.


Yep the perfect smokescreen to disguise what Bush and Obushma have done to the rest of the Constitution.


----------



## bryanc

Yep, pretty soon the 2nd amendment will be all American's have left; they'll have their guns, but no free speech, no free press, no due process, and basically no other civil rights. Like Bill Maher said, it'll be like a strip joint where everyone's a bouncer, and there are no dancers.


----------



## eMacMan

bryanc said:


> Yep, pretty soon the 2nd amendment will be all American's have left; they'll have their guns, but no free speech, no free press, no due process, and basically no other civil rights. Like Bill Maher said, it'll be like a strip joint where everyone's a bouncer, and there are no dancers.


Bit worse than that. Obushma asked for and received the power to order the assassination of any US citizen anywhere in the world, entirely at his own discretion. Just slipped that in with one of those encyclopedia sized omni-bus bill.


----------



## FeXL

Sexual Assaults Fell 90% After Colorado Springs University Legalized Campus Guns



> Colorado Springs University legalized the right to carry concealed firearms on campus in 2003. Since then, according to Students for Concealed Carry, *the number of forcible and non-forcible sexual assaults dropped sharply, falling 90 percent from a high in 2002 to a new low in 2008.*


Bold mine.

Tell me again the reason we should disarm private, law-abiding citizens...


----------



## iMouse

That is affect of the criminality, as in a causal affect.

Solve that first and you wouldn't have a need to arm everybody.

A lust perhaps, but that's another matter.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Sexual Assaults Fell 90% After Colorado Springs University Legalized Campus Guns
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Tell me again the reason we should disarm private, law-abiding citizens...


Tell me again the reason we should _arm_ private, law-abiding citizens. 

All the shootings at University campuses throughout history have involved the use of guns.


----------



## eMacMan

I know there is a University of Colorado, Colorado Springs. There is also the rather over rated Colorado College and good old Pikes Peak Community College. I am reasonably familiar with that part of the world and for the life of me I simply cannot recall a straight up University of Colorado Springs.


----------



## FeXL

fjnmusic said:


> Tell me again the reason we should _arm_ private, law-abiding citizens.
> 
> All the shootings at University campuses throughout history have involved the use of guns.


Yes. In gun free zones...


----------



## FeXL

Good on them.

Firearms Companies Restricting Sales to Government Agencies in Areas That Restrict Gun Rights



> *A growing number of firearm and firearm-related companies have stated they will no longer sell items to states, counties, cities and municipalities that restrict their citizens' rights to own them.*
> 
> According to The Police Loophole, 34 companies have joined in publicly stating that governments who seek to restrict 2nd Amendment rights will themselves be restricted from purchasing the items they seek to limit or ban.


Sauce for the gander...


----------



## John Clay

A shockingly balanced report from the CBC, of all places.

Out of the Shadows - The National - CBC Player


----------



## fjnmusic

John Clay said:


> A shockingly balanced report from the CBC, of all places.
> 
> Out of the Shadows - The National - CBC Player


That's an interesting piece and certainly does present a balanced perspective. If all gun owners were as polite and respectful as this one, it would be a whole different scene. But when just about any whack job who wants one can get a gun, I think it's a serious problem. He did make a good point about Honda Accords.


----------



## kps

fjnmusic said:


> That's an interesting piece and certainly does present a balanced perspective.* If all gun owners were as polite and respectful as this one, it would be a whole different scene.* But when just about any whack job who wants one can get a gun, I think it's a serious problem. He did make a good point about Honda Accords.


Well, you do know at least one other.  

I guess the CEEB watches SunMedia because John appeared there earlier regarding our current battle with CFO Wyatt. Over his paper attack on all of us, by attaching unnecessary and useless additions to what already is part of the existing authorization to transport.

All ATTs in Ontario contain basically this: You are allowed to transport you restricted firearm to your club or any another club which is a CFO approved club. Also unlike other provinces in Ontario it is your club that has to apply on your behalf an not you. A gun owner without a club was refused an ATT to a club because of it, and it was challenged.

As a comparison, in AB, You call for an ATT your self and on approval it'll state Club, any club, border crossing, gunsmith.

Once again based based on a 2002 precedent the courts sided with the plaintiff and an order was issued to give the individual an ATT. That was 10 years ago.

This spurred this entrenched bureaucrat to go on his spiteful revenge of adding a third stipulation to the ATT...now the generic "any club" is saddled with you must have an invitation to the club. Or 3years in jail? Sounds fair to any of you? Is that in the interest of public safety? Making us who already have a licence, and all necessary permits to jump through more hoops for this bureaucrat at the risk of criminal charges? 

Anyway, watch this:

Faith Goldy on new gun rules : News : SunNews Video Gallery


----------



## FeXL

Further on the business consequences of gun restrictions.

Beretta starting to look at moving out of Maryland after gun-control push



> Earlier today, I linked to a Christian Science Monitor report that the firearms industry had begun to organize in opposition to the recent push for increased gun control, but that the major manufacturers had not yet committed themselves. That situation has changed, reports the Washington Post, at least in Maryland, where Beretta makes it home — at least for now. *The company has begun considering a relocation of its headquarters to a state where its product hasn’t been made illegal, and may take hundreds of jobs with them*


Bold mine.

Let's see how fast Maryland backtracks...


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> Further on the business consequences of gun restrictions.
> 
> Let's see how fast Maryland backtracks...


Well, you'll also have to watch New York, Connecticut , Massachusetts and some others too.

These are the traditional firearm manufacturing states and many are not just threatening to leave, they are leaving.


----------



## Kosh

Oh, I'm sure some gun-loving state like Texas or Mississippi will love to have a gun manufacturer move there.

Texas, Mississippi seek to lure gun and ammunition makers | Fox News


----------



## SINC

Kosh said:


> Oh, I'm sure some gun-loving state like Texas or Mississippi will love to have a gun manufacturer move there.


Speaking of Texas:





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## CubaMark

*Van ISD employee shot at handgun training class*



> (Van, Texas)...an employee was shot during private instruction after a school district sponsored handgun training safety class.





> Back in January, the Van Independent School District school board authorized "certain school employees and other persons" to carry authorized firearms on school property.
> 
> "We are going to go above and beyond on all out training," said Van Superintendent Don Dunn back in January. "We're going to start training immediately. It will be every employee who is approved to carry."



(KLTV)


----------



## John Clay

CubaMark said:


> *Van ISD employee shot at handgun training class*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (KLTV)


Pretty sure some people drive into posts while learning to drive, too.


----------



## iMouse

John Clay said:


> Pretty sure some people drive into posts while learning to drive, too.


Peddle cars for them, pop-guns for this lot.


----------



## SINC

And on it goes:

South Dakota approves guns in the classroom


----------



## fjnmusic

SINC said:


> And on it goes:
> 
> South Dakota approves guns in the classroom


And if that fails to deter the bad guys, them maybe the kids should be able to carry too. Oh and neighborhood militias! They can be a helpful deterrent too! Or maybe just one medium-sized nuke for each neighborhood. But only certain people would be trained to use it.


----------



## SINC

This ought to work well.

U.S. communities want gun ownership mandatory | CTV News


----------



## FeXL

1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation



> The _Denver Post_...confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. As reported elsewhere, *some of this purchase order is for hollow-point rounds, forbidden by international law for use in war*, along with a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending less than 6 million rounds a month. Therefore 1.6 billion rounds would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America.


Bold mine.



> At 15 million rounds (which, in itself, is pretty extraordinary and sounds more like fun target-shooting-at-taxpayer-expense than a sensible training exercise) … that’s a stockpile that would last DHS over a century.


Questions, questions...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> 1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation


Don't worry about it for now. These rounds are for use only after the "hicks and hillbillies" have been disarmed.


----------



## FeXL

Guns accessories manufacturer Magpul to move from Colorado



> A popular Colorado firearms accessories manufacturer has announced it is leaving the state upon sweeping new gun-control measures Gov. John Hickenlooper is expected to sign Wednesday.
> 
> Magpul Industries Corp. has received more than 20,000 news likes on its Facebook announcement that the company is leaving Colorado.


Good. Let the Governor answer a few pointed question about job losses...


----------



## FeXL

Little bit of karma coming around...

Serbu Firearms Tells NYPD To Pound Sand



> I appreciate your interest in our BFG-50A; I’m sure it would be an excellent addition to your department’s arsenal. *Unfortunately, we have a policy of selling to state law enforcement agencies only what is allowed to be sold to private citizens in that state.* Since the passage of the NY SAFE act, the BFG-50A is considered an assault weapon and as such is no longer available to private citizens in the state of New York. Therefore we have to respectfully decline to supply your department with BFG-50A rifles.


Bold mine.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Barrett started it, Serbu is following suit. I hope every gun manufacturer in the US does the same. I'd be willing to bet none of them loses a dime in lost sales...


----------



## iMouse

Sure Flexie, why not?


----------



## FeXL

Flexie? Is that me?

If so, I'm missing the point of your post.


----------



## Kosh

Actually Barrett and Serbu are being childish in my view. The police will just get their equipment elsewhere and besides, the police are just in the middle of this. It's not like they make the laws, they're just responsible to enforce them. 

Does Barrett and Serbu do the same thing for other countries? I doubt it.


----------



## i-rui

Good. 

Police don't really need .50 calibre weapons. Citizens certainly shouldn't be allowed to own them either.

Although, I question the legitimacy of the email exchange. Pretty easy to make stuff up when you don't include the officer's name or email for verification. Seems like an easy PR stunt to rile up their gun nut base on their facebook page, who will of course eat this up.


----------



## eMacMan

Kosh said:


> Actually Barrett and Serbu are being childish in my view. The police will just get their equipment elsewhere and besides, the police are just in the middle of this. It's not like they make the laws, they're just responsible to enforce them.
> 
> Does Barrett and Serbu do the same thing for other countries? I doubt it.


One of the best ways to keep the police in line is to force them to obey the laws they enforce. Unless of course a Police force along the lines of the KGB, Gestapo or Homeland Security actually appeals to you.


----------



## Kosh

eMacMan said:


> One of the best ways to keep the police in line is to force them to obey the laws they enforce. Unless of course a Police force along the lines of the KGB, Gestapo or Homeland Security actually appeals to you.


Yeah right. How are you supposed to arrest a gang with illegal assault rifles if you only have pistols and shotguns. Let's get real. Police units need to be properly armed. Whether this is only the SWAT unit or all police, I leave that up to the police.


----------



## Kosh

i-rui said:


> Good.
> 
> Police don't really need .50 calibre weapons. Citizens certainly shouldn't be allowed to own them either.


A .50 cal sniper rifle can come in handy for the police. Will stop a semi in it's tracks. Will shoot through a wall. Good at a distance too.


----------



## FeXL

Video: Guy in Bloomberg gun-control ads breaks all the major rules of gun safety



> We’ve talked about this before. When it comes to gun safety, the physicians in the Democratic Party are not so into healing themselves.
> 
> In the latest example, we have Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s $12 million ads, which Emily Miller points out, break the three first rules of gun safety.


Go figger.



> Forgive me if I don’t feel like giving up my rights as a law-abiding citizen to a billionaire mayor who can’t instruct his recruits to keep their booger hooks off the bang switch. But by all means, continue to make laws without knowing jack about your subject. It always works so well.


----------



## iMouse

They are certainly well named.

About « Hot Air


----------



## i-rui

Kosh said:


> A .50 cal sniper rifle can come in handy for the police. Will stop a semi in it's tracks. Will shoot through a wall. Good at a distance too.


do those scenarios occur often? i'm sure an apache helicopter would come in handy against a tank, but it doesn't mean i think the police should have one.

if a "die hard" scenario ever occurred it'd probably be best to call in the military...


----------



## iMouse

Kosh said:


> A .50 cal sniper rifle can come in handy for the police. Will stop a semi in it's tracks. Will shoot through a wall. Good at a distance too.





i-rui said:


> do those scenarios occur often? i'm sure an apache helicopter would come in handy against a tank, but it doesn't mean i think the police should have one.
> 
> if a "die hard" scenario ever occurred it'd probably be best to call in the military...


The Secret Service already has 50's in their arsenal.

They also fear this weapon, as it's capable of taking down an airplane/helicopter with a good shot.

I think you can guess why they are concerned.

There is absolutely no need for a civilian to need this gun. Want is another matter, but "you can't always get what you want".


----------



## John Clay

iMouse said:


> The Secret Service already has 50's in their arsenal.
> 
> They also fear this weapon, as it's capable of taking down an airplane/helicopter with a good shot.
> 
> I think you can guess why they are concerned.
> 
> There is absolutely no need for a civilian to need this gun. Want is another matter, but "you can't always get what you want".


They're perfectly legal in Canada


----------



## keebler27

I'm wondering if the Obama administration wanted to spark the US economy with this talk of weapons bans - ammo supply levels are low. People are buying as much ammo as possible. Prices are going up, from what I'm told.

I don't think the US needs .50 cal sniper weapons.

CDN military snipers use .338 ? ( I believe). It's flatter for a longer distance with enough hitting power.

I thought maybe the media was driving a fury, but I have a twitter account following alot of hunters and there certainly seems to be a pile of people (not just hunters) who HATE Obama. It's crazy. People have posted things like, "Come try and get my guns." or "I'm stocking up on ammo in case the govt tries". Could be nothing, but it's a consistent theme.


----------



## iMouse

John Clay said:


> They're perfectly legal in Canada


Ah, but you fail to mention that the controls in place here would render most people unable to acquire one. 

Nice try though.

tptptptp

Perhaps if you are heading to the Metro Zoo, to hunt elephant, one might come in handy.

Even then, most African hunters of the day preferred a Weatherby Double .600 Nitro Express.

Just in case.


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> Ah, but you fail to mention that the controls in place here would render most people unable to acquire one.
> 
> Nice try though.


I have a friend who legally owns a .50 cal. He has offered to let me fire the rifle later this summer. Look forward to it.


----------



## iMouse

FeXL said:


> I have a friend who legally owns a .50 cal. He has offered to let me fire the rifle later this summer. Look forward to it.


As a former target shooter I envy you.

But not the $5 per shell cost.


----------



## FeXL

He says he can reload for $6 & appreciates donations to that end.


----------



## Kosh

keebler27 said:


> I'm wondering if the Obama administration wanted to spark the US economy with this talk of weapons bans - ammo supply levels are low. People are buying as much ammo as possible. Prices are going up, from what I'm told.
> 
> I don't think the US needs .50 cal sniper weapons.
> 
> CDN military snipers use .338 ? ( I believe). It's flatter for a longer distance with enough hitting power.
> 
> I thought maybe the media was driving a fury, but I have a twitter account following alot of hunters and there certainly seems to be a pile of people (not just hunters) who HATE Obama. It's crazy. People have posted things like, "Come try and get my guns." or "I'm stocking up on ammo in case the govt tries". Could be nothing, but it's a consistent theme.


Oh, yeah, Obama's "legislation" and other state legislation has done the complete opposite of what was intended. In fact, I've seen in one US Mac forum where a person buying his first gun in the US has had a hard time finding the gun he wants because of all the sales of firearms.

That's why I've said, it would take ages for gun control to do anything in the US. People in the US right now are stocking up on guns. 

In one way, Serbu and Barrett should be thanking the various states and feds for helping them sell guns.


----------



## Kosh

FeXL said:


> He says he can reload for $6 & appreciates donations to that end.


 
LOL, yeah that's the price of a higher caliber. 

But then if your a police SWAT sniper, you also have the advantage of the target can't hide behind a desk or a door.




FeXL said:


> do those scenarios occur often?


In Canada. I doubt it, unless your in the TV series Flashpoint. :lmao: I was trying to see if any Canadian SWAT (Tactical/Emergency Response) unit even has one. It looks unlikely. It seems that more US SWAT units have one.

In the US, I'm sure like I said above, it's come in handy in hostage negotiations, bank robberies, or sniper vs sniper situations. If it can guarantee a shot that a .308 can't. The Secret Service definitely have a bunch.


----------



## jamesB

keebler27 said:


> I'm wondering if the Obama administration wanted to spark the US economy with this talk of weapons bans - ammo supply levels are low. People are buying as much ammo as possible. Prices are going up, from what I'm told.
> 
> I don't think the US needs .50 cal sniper weapons.
> 
> CDN military snipers use .338 ? ( I believe). It's flatter for a longer distance with enough hitting power.
> 
> I thought maybe the media was driving a fury, but I have a twitter account following alot of hunters and there certainly seems to be a pile of people (not just hunters) who HATE Obama. It's crazy. People have posted things like, "Come try and get my guns." or "I'm stocking up on ammo in case the govt tries". Could be nothing, but it's a consistent theme.


Canada's best sniper shots were made using a 50cal.


----------



## Kosh

Let's not forget that a Canadian, Gerald Bull, was responsible for designing and creating some of the largest guns that would make a 50 cal look like a baby. Gerald Bull - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## BigDL

Huffington Post said:


> In the first week after the Newtown, Conn., massacre on Dec. 14, more than 100 people in the U.S. were killed by guns. In the first seven weeks, that number had risen to at least 1,285 gunshot killings and accidental deaths. A little more than three months after Newtown, there have been 2,244. The Huffington Post has recorded every gun-involved murder and accidental shooting death reported in U.S. news media since Newtown, revealing an epidemic that shows no signs of abating. The horrors cannot be contained behind yellow police tape or find resolution in a courtroom. For the victim's families, the grief deforms all it touches. There's the fear that the radio will play her favorite ballad. An airplane overhead, like the kind he flew, will strike panic. Home is not safe. One month, two months, two years, nine years since those fatal shots -- the grief never leaves.



One Nation Under The Gun: Thousands Of Gun Deaths Since Newtown











click here for interactive Mapping the Dead: Gun Deaths Since Sandy Hook


----------



## SINC

Some see it for what it really is:


----------



## iMouse

Unfortunately, guns have little success telling idiots to get away from them.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> He says he can reload for $6 & appreciates donations to that end.


**warning* Some foul language *warning**

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZrFVtmRXrw


----------



## FeXL

One more...

Another gun manufacturer announces it’s leaving Colorado



> “I make this announcement with mixed emotions,” Phillip Howe, president and CEO of HiViz, said in a statement. “Colorado is a beautiful state with great people, but we cannot in clear conscience support with our taxes a state that has proven through recent legislation a willingness to infringe upon the constitutional rights of our customer base.”​


Good.


----------



## eMacMan

So have been waiting to hear what prescribed meds James Holmes was on.



> From his bathroom, police recovered Sertraline, an antidepressant, and Clonazepam, which is often used to treat anxiety, bipolar and panic disorders. Over-the-counter allergy, cold and pain medications were found as well.
> 
> Investigators also removed 50 cans and bottles of beer, whiskey and rum. But finding the pills and booze doesn’t prove that Holmes was consuming them or consuming them as prescribed, O’Toole said.


What's interesting are the side effects.

Clonazepam Side Effects - Klonopin


> *Rare:* Abnormal thinking, including disorientation, delusions (holding false beliefs that cannot be changed by facts), or loss of sense of reality; agitation; behavior changes, including aggressive behavior, bizarre behavior, decreased inhibition, or outbursts of anger; convulsions (seizures); hallucinations


And more specifically the combo package


> *Using clonazePAM together with sertraline may increase side effects* such as dizziness, drowsiness, and difficulty concentrating. Some people may also experience some impairment in thinking and judgment.


Klonopin and Zoloft Drug Interactions - Drugs.com

So the question now becomes did someone use this combo to create a monster or was it simply fortuitous for the gun control advocates


----------



## FeXL

Some US gun death stats. More people died by blunt objects or fists or knives in the US in 2011 than by all rifles, including AR-15's.

“Assault” Rifles and Homicide: Some Statistics

This despite the alleged fact that guns are designed to do only one thing: kill.

So, where's the blunt object, fist & knife registry?


----------



## iMouse

Now compare handguns to long guns, and see what conclusion you come up with.


----------



## FeXL

I haven't seen the US stats regarding handguns. However, it is "assault" rifles that are getting the headlines in the States and largely the cause of the movement towards restrictions. One thing that I am very aware of is the particular demographic doing the most killing with handguns in the US: black male gang members.


----------



## FeXL

So where is all the ammo?

Despite stockpiling, DHS now claims they have ammo shortage



> On Thursday, Border Patrol agents working in the El Centro (CA) border sector were told by email that they would not be receiving any practice rounds during the next three months.


From the email:



> _Due to budget concerns and ammunition availability, we will not be getting issued any proficiency ammunition for next quarter. In addition to these reductions, we are also being limited to qualification ammo only. What this means to you is that you will not receive the normal 150 rounds for practice and we will not have any extra ammunition for a combat course following normal qualifications._​


The question is asked:



> Since last year, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased nearly 2 billion rounds of ammunition.
> 
> So, what are they doing with all those bullets?


----------



## fjnmusic

They are stockpiled in case of a need to overthrow a tyrannical government.


----------



## eMacMan

fjnmusic said:


> They are stockpiled in case of a need to *support* a tyrannical government.


Corrected that little error for you.


----------



## iMouse

fjnmusic said:


> They are stockpiled in case of a need to overthrow a tyrannical government.


They'll take the government pay, and bullets, but it doesn't mean they have sipped the Kool-Aid too.


----------



## CubaMark

*New Research Confirms Gun Rampages Are Rising
*
_By the time the nation confronted the unthinkable school massacre in Connecticut last December, Mother Jones' groundbreaking investigation of mass shootings, launched the prior summer, had shown that mass gun violence in America was on the rise. The trend appeared to be no coincidence in light of the proliferation of guns and looser gun laws nationwide. One leading criminologist took issue with our criteria, arguing that mass shootings had not become more common. But now, research from an expert on criminal justice at Texas State University further shows that gun rampages in the United States have escalated.

The research, to be published in a book in July, confirms that:


Public shooting rampages have spiked in particular over the last few years
Many of the attackers were heavily armed
None of the shootings was stopped by an ordinary citizen using a gun
_​
(MotherJones)


----------



## BigDL

I just came across this Canadian slant on the Gun Control debate. riotwire's 'Nobodys Really Arguing' (NRA) funerals



riotwire said:


> Hey kids, are you sick and tired of funerals that don’t have a live twitter feed?
> 
> When your friend’s class got shot up, did they lay the good times to rest along with the pint-sized cadavers?
> 
> Are you worried that those gun-lobbying left-wingers will take away the best drama the fourth grade has to offer?
> 
> Introducing Nobody’s Really Arguing “fun”eral! At Nobody’s Really Arguing Funerals we’ll embalm your friends with fun! Yeah, you heard me — FUN!
> 
> Our expert funeral planners can provide you with the all details you are dying for — sick music, lethal food, and that killer party vibe!!!
> 
> So remember, don’t let your death be the one everyone forgets — call Nobody’s Really Arguing. Or just use our acronym!
> 
> And speaking of acronyms — ask about our new YOLO caskets.














riotwire said:


> NRA “Fun”erals Now Available in Canada
> 
> We know how Canadians love their cross-border shopping. Whether a house in Florida, a purse at the Coach outlet, or an AK47 from Randy’s Guns ‘n’ Such, nothing makes you and your fellow Canucks cheer like a tax-free bargain!
> 
> And since you’ve already got our guns, our opiates, and most of our crack cocaine — why not reap the benefit of our funerals too?
> 
> Concerned about the legality of our services? Epic Fail! The law is in OUR favour — and that’s favour with the U in it!
> 
> As of last December your federal government repealed federal gun show regulations AND your Public Safety Minister is pushing to reclassify both handguns and assault rifles so that you and your friends can get Sandy Hooked into the fun!
> 
> And if you’re still too young to own one, not to worry — your uncle Vic is making sure that licenses are now renewable every 10 years instead of every 5, which means you’ll be able to get your little trigger happy fingers on granddad’s gat once the oldtimer’s sets in.
> 
> Short on cash? Not to worry. If your friend only had enough money saved for his softball banquet tux rental, we’ve got a plan for you. Nobody’s Really Arguing offers special financing to those in emerging neighbourhoods — yep, we mean YOU.*
> 
> *Toronto’s Regent Park, Halifax’s North End, Vancouver’s East Side, and the entire city of Regina.


----------



## SINC

Nothing like spreading babble from such an upstanding and reliable web site across the board.


----------



## Macfury

This probably makes all of the gun control talk obsolete:

BBC News - Working gun made with 3D printer


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> This probably makes all of the gun control talk obsolete:
> 
> BBC News - Working gun made with 3D printer


I heard this on the news today. Scary. Reminds me of that scene with John Malcovich with his plastic gun in that Clint Eastwood movie.


----------



## groovetube

However in Australia, after they went for gun control and destroyed many guns, they apparently haven;t had a mass shooting since.

Wonder which is the best path. [strokes chin]


----------



## eMacMan

Since the prevailing opinion here seems to be that gun related crimes stateside are on the rise, I am including this quote from Reuters:

Yep firearms related homicides have dropped nearly 40% over the past 20 years.



> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Gun-related homicides and other crimes involving guns have fallen sharply over the last two decades in the United States, but most Americans believe firearms crime is higher now than 20 years ago, according to an analysis and a separate poll released on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> Some 11,101 gun-related homicides were reported in the United States in 2011, a figure that is down 39 percent from the 1993 peak, the Justice Department reported. Nonfatal firearm crimes declined by 69 percent to 467,300 in the same period.
> 
> 
> Amid an intense national debate about gun control - which flared anew in the wake of a December shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, that left 26 people dead - some 56 percent of Americans believe that gun crime is higher now than it was 20 years ago, the Pew Research Center said its poll showed.
> 
> 
> Only 12 percent of Americans realize that gun crimes have fallen, the center said in a statement. The Pew survey was based on a March 14-17 survey of 924 adults and had a margin of error of 3.9 percentage points.


Even more dramatic when the 22% population increase is taken into account.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Since the prevailing opinion here seems to be that gun related crimes stateside are on the rise, I am including this quote from Reuters:
> 
> Yep firearms related homicides have dropped nearly 40% over the past 20 years.
> 
> 
> 
> Even more dramatic when the 22% population increase is taken into account.


In fact, given that the current regulatory climate has co-existed with such a massive drop in homicides, who wants to risk this successful trajectory by making massive changes to regulations.


----------



## groovetube

eMacMan said:


> Since the prevailing opinion here seems to be that gun related crimes stateside are on the rise, I am including this quote from Reuters:
> 
> Yep firearms related homicides have dropped nearly 40% over the past 20 years.
> 
> 
> 
> Even more dramatic when the 22% population increase is taken into account.


Though the ban that expired 9 years ago on assault weapons, well, we can see pretty clearly what's been happening since then, and it seems it's getting worse.

I find it hard to believe that any sane person would be against ensuring background checks on anyone purchasing a gun at places such as gun shows etc., where just about any convicted felon, mentally deranged person can buy a gun without any background checks.

It's unfortunate that the lunatic right has to lie and frame things in such a way to prevent these measures.

Because when you think about it, saying gun crime in the US is dropping when you compare their astronomical numbers to ours isn't exactly fantastic.

Also, I notice the figure quoted, is gun related homicides. I wonder what the number of all crimes committed with the use of a firearm.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> Also, I notice the figure quoted, is gun related homicides. I wonder what the number of all crimes committed with the use of a firearm.


And, accurate or not, they trumpet the percentage being massive.

That's because the numbers were, and still are, catastrophic.

Idiots.


----------



## eMacMan

groovetube said:


> ....
> 
> Also, I notice the figure quoted, is gun related homicides. I wonder what the number of all crimes committed with the use of a firearm.


All violent crime was down a similar amount. 

To be fair over the past 10 years it may have a lot to do with many of societies psychopaths ending up in the Armed Forces and satisfying their blood lust on foreign soil.


----------



## groovetube

Interestingly enough, Canada has had the same thing occur over the last couple decades, yet I don't know that we have changed our gun control laws significantly more than the strong ones we already have.

The problem with the US is they have a near epidemic of gun deaths compared to us, and a majority of other countries, but unfortunately the gun nuts have made this all about 'the gubbmnit's gonna come take mah guns' stupidity, and can't see that some of the proposals will actually preserve their right to bear arms, but help keep criminals and mentally ill from obtaining these weapons. You would think, that these individuals who wish to arm themselves to protect themselves (and I don't blame them since the lunatic few wish to keep guns available to criminals and mentally ill it seems...) that they would be for, making sure proper background checks are performed.

The recent rise in mass shootings I don't see slowing down. I somehow don't think the elation of lower numbers are going to be much consolation to the still huge number of people being gunned down on US streets.


----------



## groovetube

eMacMan said:


> All violent crime was down a similar amount.
> 
> To be fair over the past 10 years it may have a lot to do with *many of societies psychopaths ending up in the Armed Forces and satisfying their blood lust on foreign soil.*


oh really? Well a lot of them are now coming home and are pretty Peed off at the government (VA screwups etc.) and with assault rifles so readily available, things should get real toasty down there.


----------



## mrjimmy

James Holmes Elected New NRA President | The Onion - America's Finest News Source


----------



## Macfury

There's some pretty tortured analysis here that sounds like pappy pontificating while sitting on a stump. Stick to the figures, instead of fantasy!


----------



## FeXL

Gotta love hot microphones...

Ooops… Hot mic reveals lawmakers intent to confiscate guns



> At the conclusion of the New Jersey Senate Budget & Appropriations Committee meeting last Thursday, an open microphone caught three state senators, identified by voice as Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, Assistant Majority Leader Sandra Cunningham, Senate Majority Whip Linda Greenstein, and at least one staff member talking candidly about their intent to confiscate all guns from the people they serve. It should be noted that Senator Loretta Weinberg is the chief proponent of the anti-gun legislation being moved through the New Jersey State Senate.
> 
> Although some of the candid conversation is a bit difficult to discern due to the ambient noise, their message is clear. *“We need[ed] a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate,”* stated one high ranking senate member.


Bold from the link.


----------



## FeXL

RCMP Gunning to Ban Non-Restricted Rifle?



> A recent post by Alberta Tactical Rifle Supply on a Canadian firearms forum indicates the RCMP is moving to ban a previously non-restricted rifle: Swiss Arms Black and Green Rifles.
> 
> These models have been selling in Canada for at least a decade and, although the RCMP have not officially communicated the ban, here’s what I make of it after speaking with Blair Hagen from the NFA.


----------



## FeXL

An old saw about making beds & sleeping in them comes to mind. Colorado Senator who pushed through gun control rights now under threat of recall. Yesssssss!

Sen. John Morse recalled: First Colorado legislative recall



> Petition signatures filed with the Colorado Secretary of State’s office are more than sufficient to recall state senator John Morse (D). The recall is the first recall of a Colorado legislator in the state’s history.
> 
> The Recall Morse committee filed over 16,000 signatures, more than double the required number.
> 
> In his position as the senate president this past session, Morse coordinated the passage of anti-Second Amendment bills over massive citizen opposition.


I purely wish we had right of recall legislation in Alberta...


----------



## FeXL

Last weekend 25 people were shot in NYC in 48 hours.

Mayhem in the city: 25 people shot in 48 hours 

How's that gun control thing working out for ya...


----------



## groovetube

Obviously better gun control is working much better here.

Anyone who thinks that a measure would over night change things is delusional, and doesn't truly understand the problem in the US.


----------



## Birdwatcher

groovetube said:


> Anyone who thinks that a measure would over night change things is delusional, and doesn't truly understand the problem in the US.


Always end a post with an insult?


----------



## iMouse

Far better than a dangling participle.


----------



## FeXL

First 5+ months of 2013, 116 people shot in Toronto.

TPS Crime Statistics 

How's that better gun control thing working out for ya...


----------



## groovetube

A hell of a lot better than the us model clearly.

Right back at you.


----------



## FeXL

Don't flatter yourself. I wasn't addressing you...


----------



## groovetube

No. Hard facts are tough to get around.

Trying to compare a Canadian city with an American one is a joke. 

Best to ignore anyone who might counter that.:clap:


----------



## screature

groovetube said:


> No. Hard facts are tough to get around.
> *
> Trying to compare a Canadian city with an American one is a joke. *
> 
> *Best to ignore anyone who might counter that.:clap:*


How nice of you to define anyone who might disagree with/oppose you... they aren't worth talking to you because you are the great GT and all good things flow from you and what you believe. 

So if we aren't going to compare foreign cities why do we compare whole foreign countries?

If it is apples and oranges at the municipal level one would logically think the comparison would be apples and whales at a national level.

Riddle me that...


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> How nice of you to define anyone who might disagree with/oppose you... they aren't worth talking to you because you are the great GT and all good things flow from you and what you believe.
> 
> So if we aren't going to compare foreign cities why do we compare whole foreign countries?
> 
> If it is apples and oranges at the municipal level one would logically think the comparison would be apples and whales at a national level.
> 
> Riddle me that...


You misread screature. I wasn't the one suggesting that I'm ignoring, it was in response to a jab about me thinking I was part of the conversation. This of course, after a complaint about a supposed insult, which wasn't pinned on any person here. I was merely making fun of it.

As for comparisons, the attempt was to try and show that gun control doesn't work at all cause look we have gun crime, when clearly our numbers are waaaaaaaaaay less than American cities. But gun enthusiasts aren't known for their accuracy on facts. (Note the incredible lie campaigns of the NRA...)

I do think its good to compare, but lets not kid ourselves that our problems, are the same as the us. That's ridiculous.
People I guess will believe anything.


----------



## groovetube

Birdwatcher said:


> Always end a post with an insult?


do you have anything to add to the topic or do you only ever thread cop?

I do think someone who thinks introducing a gun control measure would immediately result in less gun crime nearly overnight is delusional.

Shoot me.


----------



## iMouse

FeXL said:


> First 5+ months of 2013, 116 people shot in Toronto.


And how many were gangbangers killing each other?

Hardly a detriment to Society, except for the occasional innocent bystander due to them being ****-poor shots.

Who the Hell shoots a gun while holding it horizontally??


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> And how many were gangbangers killing each other?


You illustrate my point clearly. You can take 100% of the firearms away from every law abiding citizen in the country. Criminals will still obtain & use them, at their &, occasionally, innocent society's expense. 

The problem with those that support gun control is that they just can't wrap their heads around "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns".


----------



## iMouse

Great Britain seems to manage it.


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> Great Britain seems to manage it.


Are you telling me there are no, zero, gun deaths in Britain?


----------



## iMouse

So, you'll accept nothing less than Utopia?

Foolish.


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> So, you'll accept nothing less than Utopia?
> 
> Foolish.


There's the hole in their argument. A significant drop in gun crime doesn't seem to open their eyes.

If they love the gun culture and the ridiculously higher gun crime numbers in the US, go live there then I say. Don't try to bring that here thanks. I was in the us for years and that part really sucked. Only country in the world I've had a gun pointed at me.

No thanks.


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> So, you'll accept nothing less than Utopia?
> 
> Foolish.


My utopia includes less gov't interference in my life, not more. Your response is a red herring. The line of thought clearly argues no legal firearm ownership, no gun crime. This is why the argument falls flat on its backside every time. Even the most firearm restricted countries in the world still have gun crime.


----------



## iMouse

.


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> .


they just ram it into an all or nothing corner. It makes zero sense, and shows they clearly, know they haven't a leg to stand on. 

We have good gun control here in Canada, yet people can still own guns. Gun nuts can't seem to accept that unfettered access to guns, little to no background checks, hampering the ATF to even check up on problem gun shops (thanks NRA...) doesn't help anyone, even legal gun owners.

All they can do is scream that some boogeyman's gonna take away der guns lord thundering!

Unbelievable.


----------



## fjnmusic

Amurica.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> My utopia includes less gov't interference in my life, not more. Your response is a red herring. The line of thought clearly argues no legal firearm ownership, no gun crime. This is why the argument falls flat on its backside every time. Even the most firearm restricted countries in the world still have gun crime.


The liberal hatred of gun ownership--and most of its other policies--stem from a disrespect for and mistrust of the "common man."


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> Amurica.


One word. Sums it up pretty well.

The manufactured paranoia is breathtaking.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> My utopia includes less gov't interference in my life, not more. Your response is a red herring. The line of thought clearly argues no legal firearm ownership, no gun crime. This is why the argument falls flat on its backside every time. Even the most firearm restricted countries in the world still have gun crime.


i remember some EhMac members talking about how they would hide in the attic if their family members were ever threatened with violence. I'd be ashamed to make such a statement, but there you have it...


----------



## FeXL

Oh, well, seeing as we all seem to like cartoons...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> i remember some EhMac members talking about how they would hide in the attic if their family members were ever threatened with violence. I'd be ashamed to make such a statement, but there you have it...


One wonders at what point they were emasculated & lost their spines...


----------



## groovetube

ha ha ha. Now you all are startin to talk tough and stuff.

adorable.


----------



## SINC

This ought to help:

Free gun initiative begins in Houston neighborhood


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> One wonders at what point they were emasculated & lost their spines...


I think they've forgotten when it all fell off. What's telling about that crowd is that they want all the other men to be "just like them."


----------



## Sonal

FeXL said:


> One wonders at what point they were emasculated & lost their spines...


As I recall, that was me (though I said nothing about an attic) and having never been masculated there was no need for an emasculation. Spine is intact, though.


----------



## groovetube

Sonal said:


> As I recall, that was me (though I said nothing about an attic) and having never been masculated there was no need for an emasculation. Spine is intact, though.


What's next? Marking their territories?

No wonder people have a hard time taking gun nuts seriously!


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> As I recall, that was me (though I said nothing about an attic) and having never been masculated there was no need for an emasculation. Spine is intact, though.



I'm afraid it was a so-called man who lurks around these boards. Given any serious threat, I would choose you over many of the people here who were born males.


----------



## Sonal

When the argument descends into judging the machismo of people based on their views..... well, it's just impossible to really take any of this seriously.

That Martin Luther King Jr. What an emasculated wimp! Him and that little girly 'man' Gandhi. Cowards, both of them. Their families must be truly embarrassed by them.


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> That Martin Luther King Jr. What an emasculated wimp! Him and that little girly 'man' Gandhi. Cowards, both of them. Their families must be truly embarrassed by them.


I don't understand the connection. Are these men who ran and hid?


----------



## iMouse

I guess Rosa Parks was efemulated.


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> I'm afraid it was a so-called man who lurks around these boards. Given any serious threat, I would choose you over many of the people here who were born males.


I appreciate that, though I distinctly remember saying that if an armed intruder came into my house, I would run and hide. I was then presented with increasingly bizarre scenarios about multiple armed intruders and weapons and where everyone was arranged in my house to prevent escape and then I had to wonder who here lives in some modern-day Wild West dystopia where they consider these things normal occurrences?


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> I appreciate that, though I distinctly remember saying that if an armed intruder came into my house, I would run and hide. I was then presented with increasingly bizarre scenarios about multiple armed intruders and weapons and where everyone was arranged in my house to prevent escape and then I had to wonder who here lives in some modern-day Wild West dystopia where they consider these things normal occurrences?


I think that film just opened—its called "The Purge."


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> I think that film just opened—its called "The Purge."


Read a plot summary... apparently not killing people ultimately saves the day, though there's a lot of killing people in the meantime.

I guess when faced with an armed stranger, you really need to make a fast judgement call on whether or not they're the type to be grateful you spared them or not.


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> When the argument descends into judging the machismo of people based on their views..... well, it's just impossible to really take any of this seriously.


If someone wants to run and hide, that's OK with me. If someone prefers death to committing violence--just fine. When they want to make decisions that affect MY choices... not fine.


----------



## FeXL

Guess he ignored the sign the progressives posted at the door that read "No Guns Allowed"...

Police: Gunman planned to kill hundreds in Santa Monica shooting spree


----------



## FeXL

The pussification continues...

Hayward school to sponsor toy gun exchange



> An elementary school will hold a toy gun exchange Saturday, offering students a book and a chance to win a bicycle if they turn in their play weapons.
> 
> ...
> 
> Every child who brings a toy gun will get a raffle ticket to win one of four bicycles, Hill said.


Gotta love the progressive nanny state-ism. As always, they deal with the effect instead of the cause...


----------



## groovetube

What did we learn today.

Hmmm.

If you don't own a gun yer a 'pussy'


----------



## i-rui

lol, books and bikes are for LEFTY pinko pussies!!

who cares if a kid rather have a book than a toy gun? really? is this what gets gun nuts panties in a bunch?


----------



## Macfury

i-rui said:


> lol, books and bikes are for LEFTY pinko pussies!!
> 
> who cares if a kid rather have a book than a toy gun? really? is this what gets gun nuts panties in a bunch?


You missed the point entirely.


----------



## FeXL

I guess those unfortunate folk in Santa Monica must not have nodded at the gunman, either. Obviously, it's all their fault...

Campus bans guns, tells people to nod at attackers



> In lieu of guns, people who find themselves in dangerous situations at or near the University of Arkansas at Little Rock should defend themselves by glancing and nodding, said a university safety expert.


The stupid, it burns...


----------



## FeXL

Jes' kinda wonderin' out loud some...

If a male, standing up to & facing off against an intruder to defend your family (or a complete stranger on the street, for that matter), bare-handed or not, with your testicles & spine intact is tough & machismo, what is a male cowering in the attic called?

Does "emasculated, spineless, pussy" come close?

I can think of no lower vermin on the face of this planet than those who, capable, would stand by & watch someone else get deliberately harmed, all the while doing nothing...


----------



## groovetube

Typical macho conservative crap. Start screeching about people in attics (don't know where that came from) no balls, all this big talk.

Generally people mouth off pretty big until they have a firearm pointed at them. 

If all that excites you to no end, stop mouthing off, grow a pair and do basic training and go overseas and put yourself in the line of fire with the real brave souls in our military and put a lid on it.


----------



## iMouse

i-rui said:


> Who cares if a kid rather have a book than a toy gun?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Is this what gets gun nuts panties in a bunch?


The gun lobby cares, as they are backed by the gun manufacturers.

A toy gun is akin to those little 5-packs of cigarettes they used to provided to kids, to 'program' them to be customers for Life.


----------



## iMouse

.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Typical macho conservative crap.


It's called manhood, GT. You may want to try it on sometime...


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> You'll notice that Root doesn't say if the IRS had cause, or what they found.
> 
> Perhaps the legal penalties destroyed his life?


Wrong thread?


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> It's called manhood, GT. You may want to try it on sometime...


I'm sorry, but my definition of manhood doesn't really include standing tall in a sandbox calling people pussies because they don't own a gun and froth at the mouth over the prospect of meeting an intruder with a gun.

And it never will.


----------



## Macfury

Edited: I am being too mean to people of a "gentle" nature.


----------



## iMouse

FeXL said:


> Wrong thread?


Whoops. 

So many threads, so little time.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> I'm sorry, but my definition of manhood doesn't really include standing tall in a sandbox calling people pussies because they don't own a gun and froth at the mouth over the prospect of meeting an intruder with a gun.
> 
> And it never will.


Where in that post, or in the prior one, did I mention firearms? Or ownership thereof? Or even use thereof? I could just as easily meant hammers or cast iron fry pans.

I clearly said that any capable person, "bare-handed or not", who stands by & watches harm befall another without doing everything they could to stop it, is an "emasculated, spineless, pussy". It's post 1049 in this thread, ya can't miss it & it ain't been edited.

BTW, I would also add "coward" to that list of descriptives.

[diversion]

Ya see, groove, that's why very few people on these boards engage you. You put words in other people's posts, you falsely accuse them of things they've never said, you cry & whine like a schoolgirl (oh, the horror, some big bad 'Murican pointed a gun at me once, boohoo... So what? Are you still here to whine about it? Then it couldn't have been that bad. Grow a pair & get over it. You're not the first person on these boards to face adversity, yet you're the only one complaining), you splash empty, meaningless rhetoric about like it was spray paint, more often than not your posts are nothing more than a trolling snipe, you rarely actually answer a question or address an issue (you've become a master at deflection & avoidance), you run off on these pointless, unrelated tangents, it's all the conservatives' fault, blah, blah, blah.

You turn every bloody post you can into something political,



> Typical macho conservative crap.


I know a few liberals who would do whatever they could to defend their family, too, bare handed or not. (I know! Macho liberals! Who knew?)

I have no idea where the hell the rest of that post came from or what the intention was. Just more meaningless blather, as I noted above. WTF?

You recently asked this,



> do you have anything to add to the topic or do you only ever thread cop?


LMAO. Pot, meet kettle. The iron...

On this very thread you post this,



> A hell of a lot better than the us model clearly.
> 
> Right back at you.


You know what that amounts to? Crossing your eyes, sticking out your tongue, blowing a raspberry and saying, "I know you are but what am I?" There's nothing there. It's another empty, meaningless waste-of-cyberspace post by groovetube. 

How about you actually engage the topic instead of spitting all over the audience? How about an example of the US model that is overshadowed by our own? How about some substance?

You complained recently about how you're treated on these boards,



> I guess you haven't seen all the swipes previous coming at me and other posters.


and wonder why (wah, frickin' wah, again, BTW).

This ain't rocket surgery: It's because that's exactly how you treat other people on these boards! Jeezuz, man, take a step back & have a good, hard look at your last hunnert posts. I did. Now, I realize that these boards are far from a university atmosphere where you need to justify everything, and far more like beer-talk in the pub. However, even in the pub there can be constructive, informative and respectful conversation. How many of those last hunnert posts have any of that?

Jes' sayin'...

[/diversion]


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> Whoops.
> 
> So many threads, so little time.


----------



## fjnmusic

iMouse said:


> The gun lobby cares, as they are backed by the gun manufacturers.
> 
> A toy gun is akin to those little 5-packs of cigarettes they used to provided to kids, to 'program' them to be customers for Life.


To avoid culpability, Popeyes cigarettes no longer come with the red lighted ends. Oh and they're now called candy sticks.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Where in that post, or in the prior one, did I mention firearms? Or ownership thereof? Or even use thereof? I could just as easily meant hammers or cast iron fry pans.
> 
> I clearly said that any capable person, "bare-handed or not", who stands by & watches harm befall another without doing everything they could to stop it, is an "emasculated, spineless, pussy". It's post 1049 in this thread, ya can't miss it & it ain't been edited.
> 
> BTW, I would also add "coward" to that list of descriptives.
> 
> [diversion]
> 
> Ya see, groove, that's why very few people on these boards engage you. You put words in other people's posts, you falsely accuse them of things they've never said, you cry & whine like a schoolgirl (oh, the horror, some big bad 'Murican pointed a gun at me once, boohoo... So what? Are you still here to whine about it? Then it couldn't have been that bad. Grow a pair & get over it. You're not the first person on these boards to face adversity, yet you're the only one complaining), you splash empty, meaningless rhetoric about like it was spray paint, more often than not your posts are nothing more than a trolling snipe, you rarely actually answer a question or address an issue (you've become a master at deflection & avoidance), you run off on these pointless, unrelated tangents, it's all the conservatives' fault, blah, blah, blah.
> 
> You turn every bloody post you can into something political,
> 
> 
> 
> I know a few liberals who would do whatever they could to defend their family, too, bare handed or not. (I know! Macho liberals! Who knew?)
> 
> I have no idea where the hell the rest of that post came from or what the intention was. Just more meaningless blather, as I noted above. WTF?
> 
> You recently asked this,
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO. Pot, meet kettle. The iron...
> 
> On this very thread you post this,
> 
> 
> 
> You know what that amounts to? Crossing your eyes, sticking out your tongue, blowing a raspberry and saying, "I know you are but what am I?" There's nothing there. It's another empty, meaningless waste-of-cyberspace post by groovetube.
> 
> How about you actually engage the topic instead of spitting all over the audience? How about an example of the US model that is overshadowed by our own? How about some substance?
> 
> You complained recently about how you're treated on these boards,
> 
> 
> 
> and wonder why (wah, frickin' wah, again, BTW).
> 
> This ain't rocket surgery: It's because that's exactly how you treat other people on these boards! Jeezuz, man, take a step back & have a good, hard look at your last hunnert posts. I did. Now, I realize that these boards are far from a university atmosphere where you need to justify everything, and far more like beer-talk in the pub. However, even in the pub there can be constructive, informative and respectful conversation. How many of those last hunnert posts have any of that?
> 
> Jes' sayin'...
> 
> [/diversion]


ah, excuse me, but we're in a thread discussing gun ownership, and now you're cutting and running from it? Changing the channel all of a sudden? Is this another 'con' tactic?

And now you're mouthing off that people here (and me presumably) wouldn't stand up and protect people in the face of threat?

Just who the hell do you think you are to make such assumptions about anyone you don't know?

If you want to talk about treating people a certain way, you've spent the last few pages, you and your cohort there calling people pussies and putting down their uhhh... 'manhood'. Then you actually go on to make assumptions about whether people would step up and protect their friends or family in the face of threat? People you don't even know?

I might disagree strongly with your opinions and perspective on the issue of gun control and ownership, but let's put an end to this kind of juvenile nonsense.


----------



## Sonal

Is it really necessary to drag gender into this?

Seriously. You all are handy enough with words to find better ways to insult one another.


----------



## groovetube

Sonal said:


> Is it really necessary to drag gender into this?
> 
> Seriously. You all are handy enough with words to find better ways to insult one another.


the minute they started calling people 'pussies', questioning people's 'manhood' and whether they'd stand up to protect their families or not, you know it's gone beyond stupidity and insecurity.

The whole debate on gun ownership is long lost.


----------



## Macfury

I think emasculated says it all. No need for elaboration.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> ah, excuse me, but we're in a thread discussing gun ownership, and now you're cutting and running from it? Changing the channel all of a sudden? Is this another 'con' tactic?...


Your honor, I rest my case...

Most of the content in my post comes directly from this thread. That's why.

I could have started a whole new thread, I guess, entitled "The Care & Feeding of groovetube", but I didn't think that was appropriate. Next time I'll reconsider.

Exactly as expected, you've not only again side-stepped the questions I asked you regarding my use of the term firearms in the post you quoted, you've managed to throw the "con" word in and you've completed obfuscated the intent of my post, all the while coming across as the great injured one, the unfortunate victim in all of this. 

Bravo! Academy performance! Bravissimo! :clap::clap::clap:

I will address one detail. When I read a piece of news whereby a crime has been committed and fully capable passersby just stood & watched, or worse, turned away, I have no need to know them personally. Their inaction tells me everything I need to know about them.

You just carry on in your swirling, smoky little world, groove. When the air clears and the hair on the back of your neck lowers, I suggest you take a long, hard look at that "diversion" part again.

Denial. It's not just a river in Egypt anymore...

One more thing...

And now that you been called on it, it's suddenly all juvenile and you just want the problem to all go away. Masterful...

Apologies to everyone for the derail.


----------



## SINC

^

'Bout time someone called it the way it is! :clap:


----------



## Macfury

Let the sniveling begin.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Your honor, I rest my case...
> 
> Most of the content in my post comes directly from this thread. That's why.
> 
> I could have started a whole new thread, I guess, entitled "The Care & Feeding of groovetube", but I didn't think that was appropriate. Next time I'll reconsider.
> 
> Exactly as expected, you've not only again side-stepped the questions I asked you regarding my use of the term firearms in the post you quoted, you've managed to throw the "con" word in and you've completed obfuscated the intent of my post, all the while coming across as the great injured one, the unfortunate victim in all of this.
> 
> Bravo! Academy performance! Bravissimo! :clap::clap::clap:
> 
> I will address one detail. When I read a piece of news whereby a crime has been committed and fully capable passersby just stood & watched, or worse, turned away, I have no need to know them personally. Their inaction tells me everything I need to know about them.
> 
> You just carry on in your swirling, smoky little world, groove. When the air clears and the hair on the back of your neck lowers, I suggest you take a long, hard look at that "diversion" part again.
> 
> Denial. It's not just a river in Egypt anymore...
> 
> One more thing...
> 
> And now that you been called on it, it's suddenly all juvenile and you just want the problem to all go away. Masterful...
> 
> Apologies to everyone for the derail.


Called on what?

You're the one who decided to call people names and mock people for not having a gun for protection. There's all kinds of juvenile jabs about whether people have enough 'manhood' to stand up and protect people, and you want to accuse me of derailing?



FeXL said:


> The pussification continues...


When you're done pulling the 3 year old act of screaming about 'manhoods' and calling people 'pussies if they don't own guns... and can get back to the topic of gun control and ownership, perhaps the derail will end.



SINC said:


> ^
> 
> 'Bout time someone called it the way it is! :clap:


Ah no. I believe Sonal nailed far better.



Sonal said:


> When the argument descends into judging the machismo of people based on their views..... well, it's just impossible to really take any of this seriously.
> 
> That Martin Luther King Jr. What an emasculated wimp! Him and that little girly 'man' Gandhi. Cowards, both of them. Their families must be truly embarrassed by them.


Exactly. Well said! :clap:


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Let the sniveling begin.


It's started already.


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> It's started already.


then why start it? :lmao:


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> then why start it? :lmao:



Don't flatter yourself, I was responding to MacFury.


----------



## iMouse

This is why I don't watch tennis at mid-court, court-side.


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> Don't flatter yourself, I was responding to MacFury.


Ah but like your little buddy you were goading, obviously.

Something you're best at.


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> This is why I don't watch tennis at mid-court, court-side.


Good call. Imagine the hilarity if someone being outraged when someone returns the volley! Hiw dare they!!

:lmao:


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> Ah but like your little buddy you were goading, obviously.
> 
> Something you're best at.


Nope, not your mouse either.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Called on what?


Called you on all your BS tactics.



groovetube said:


> You're the one who decided to...mock people for not having a gun for protection.


Where? Show me the quote.



groovetube said:


> ...and you want to accuse me of derailing?


As a matter of fact, I apologized for derailing the thread myself. Defensive, much? Where did I say you derailed the thread? Show me the quote. 



groovetube said:


> When you're done...calling people 'pussies if they don't own guns


Where did I say that? Show me the quote.

You're either going to have to back up your accusations or you're going to be shown to be a liar. Either way, your call.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Where did I say that? Show me the quote.
> 
> You're either going to have to back up your accusations or you're going to be shown to be a liar. Either way, your call.


This will be the longest wait of your life. Don't even bother asking, because there won't be anything but whining and sniveling and an uncomfortable explosion of emoticons in place of substance.


----------



## FeXL

Well, it won't be any different than what I witnessed today, then.

I guess he has a third option, he could retract his accusations. Like I said, I don't care which it is, as long as the false accusations stop. I'm way tired of them, I'm sure everyone else on the receiving end is, too.

I predict a long & difficult couple of weeks for my young friend...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Well, it won't be any different than what I witnessed today, then.
> 
> I guess he has a third option, he could retract his accusations. Like I said, I don't care which it is, as long as the false accusations stop. I'm way tired of them, I'm sure everyone else on the receiving end is, too.
> 
> I predict a long & difficult couple of weeks for my young friend...


Typical modus is to leave for awhile, then start up again and pretend none of it ever happened.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Called you on all your BS tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> Where? Show me the quote.
> 
> 
> 
> As a matter of fact, I apologized for derailing the thread myself. Defensive, much? Where did I say you derailed the thread? Show me the quote.
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I say that? Show me the quote.
> 
> You're either going to have to back up your accusations or you're going to be shown to be a liar. Either way, your call.


I showed you the quote, your mocking of 'pussification', unless now you want to lie about, or alter your story a little. "ooh nook! I meant...blah blah!!!! Yeah I can hear it now. Your veiled jabs are quite clear. I guess your definition of someone who doesn't have a gun to pull out in the face of violence,, has been 'pussified'. Backed up by your other jabs about 'manhood'. Like seriously? Are you really, that insecure that you have to oull this macho stuff on an internet forum? Really?

Oh DO tell us about 'pussification', and 'manhood'... :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

I see your little sidekick seems to show up after your posts. Doin his little bit as usual. Good boy.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Well, it won't be any different than what I witnessed today, then.
> 
> I guess he has a third option, he could retract his accusations. Like I said, I don't care which it is, as long as the false accusations stop. I'm way tired of them, I'm sure everyone else on the receiving end is, too.


I stand by what I said, and not only quoted it already, but pointed out again. And who else is on the receiving end? I seem to hear an awful lot of complaints about you and your cohorts though.



FeXL said:


> I predict a long & difficult couple of weeks for my young friend...


My, that sounds to me like a threat. Why is it, that when debating conservatives, I often see things ending in threats? Oh, I see, it's just a... observation. But you really gotta wonder when people get to this point... on an internet forum. Seriously.

And I don't think we're that much different in age.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> Good call. Imagine the hilarity if someone being outraged when someone returns the volley!.


OK, but I was going for the whiplash of the back and forth action.



SINC said:


> Nope, not your mouse either.


If you are referring to me, I should let you know that I'm no ones 'mouse'.

I'm not Dutch, but I am an Uncle. :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

iMouse said:


> If you are referring to me, I should let you know that I'm no ones 'mouse'.


Nothing personal. You're just perceived as groovetube's mouse. His cheering section, as it were.


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> OK, but I was going for the whiplash of the back and forth action.
> 
> 
> 
> If you are referring to me, I should let you know that I'm no ones 'mouse'.
> 
> I'm not Dutch, but I am an Uncle. :lmao:


I really wouldn't worry to hard about it. It's seemingly primary purpose here is to goad, which is why I and others have it on ignore. It never fails though, if I get into a back forth with one of it's buddies, it's guaranteed you'll see it's name right after almost every reply from the person I'm arguing with. I sort of imagine the character on the Flinstones, the one that goes 'yeah yeah, I'm HIP! I'm HIP!'


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> blah, blah, blah...


Groove:

You have made specific accusations. I asked for specific examples of said accusations. As yet, you have not furnished them.

As a result, I am calling you out. If you can come up with specific, non edited quotes wherein I say directly & exactly what you accuse me of, I'll retract. Otherwise, my accusation stands.

You, sir, are a bald-faced liar.

In addition, reported.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> Groove:
> 
> You have made specific accusations. I asked for specific examples of said accusations. As yet, you have not furnished them.
> 
> As a result, I am calling you out. If you can come up with specific, non edited quotes wherein I say directly & exactly what you accuse me of, I'll retract. Otherwise, my accusation stands.
> 
> You, sir, are a bald-faced liar.
> 
> In addition, reported.


Good, perhaps your threat can be considered as well. I'm pretty sure that's against the rules, unless you've edited it out.

And I did furnish the quote. If you didn't mean what what I saw, then perhaps you should frame your post differently.

But it wasn't I, who used the term pussification, started discussing 'manhoods' (sorry but that's just a little creepy...) and questioning whether people had the wherewithall to stand up and protect themselves and/or others from an attack.

I didn't think it worthy of a report, other than the threat from you I saw here:


FeXL said:


> I predict a long & difficult couple of weeks for my young friend...


But, good luck. I won't go back to see if you edited out your "pussification" remark. But I quoted it in an earlier post, so your accusation of "bald faced liar", well that, I can report.


----------



## groovetube

FeXL said:


> The pussification continues...
> 
> Hayward school to sponsor toy gun exchange
> 
> 
> 
> Gotta love the progressive nanny state-ism. As always, they deal with the effect instead of the cause...


The obvious reference is that, if you don't get to play with toy guns, then your a "pussy". Sorry but it's pretty clear there's no hiding behind anything.

How's that "bald faced liar" accusation thing working out for ya.


----------



## bryanc

Haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just skimmed the last few pages and saved them for posterity as a textbook perfect example of how insecure powerless males frequently use their opposition to gun control as a crutch for their feelings of sexual inadequacy. 

Absolutely classic; Freud would love it.

I'll bet he drives a big loud motorcycle and is proud of his consumption of lots of red meat too. What a cartoon.


----------



## groovetube

Tread carefully Bryanc, lest you get a veiled threat of how your next few weeks might get "long and hard"


----------



## Macfury

bryanc said:


> Haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just skimmed the last few pages and saved them for posterity as a textbook perfect example of how insecure powerless males frequently use their opposition to gun control as a crutch for their feelings of sexual inadequacy.
> 
> Absolutely classic; Freud would love it.
> 
> I'll bet he drives a big loud motorcycle and is proud of his consumption of lots of red meat too. What a cartoon.


And you are the poster boy for...?


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> And you are the poster boy for...?


Better yet, who are you the poster boy for?


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> Better yet, who are you the poster boy for?


Sorry, I'm not the one getting giddy about stereotypes.


----------



## FeXL

In what hazy, smoke-filled universe does this



> Hayward school to sponsor *toy gun* exchange


equal this?



groovetube said:


> *You're the one who decided to* call people names and *mock people for not having a gun for protection.*


You haven't provided evidence to back accusation one and you haven't addressed two & three yet.



groovetube said:


> There's all kinds of juvenile jabs about whether people have enough 'manhood' to stand up and protect people, and *you want to accuse me of derailing?*





groovetube said:


> *When you're done* pulling the 3 year old act of screaming about 'manhoods' and *calling people 'pussies if they don't own guns*... and can get back to the topic of gun control and ownership, perhaps the derail will end.


Again, you've managed some wonderful obfuscation, created a threat out of mid-air and non-answered everything. Keep playing that victim card though, I think you can still get some mileage out of it. Par for the course, another content-free post by groovetube.



groovetube said:


> How's that "bald faced liar" accusation thing working out for ya.


So far, 100%.

In the face of any evidence to the contrary, you're still a liar.


----------



## FeXL

bryanc said:


> Haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just skimmed the last few pages and saved them for posterity as a textbook perfect example of how insecure powerless males frequently use their opposition to gun control as a crutch for their feelings of sexual inadequacy.
> 
> Absolutely classic; Freud would love it.
> 
> I'll bet he drives a big loud motorcycle and is proud of his consumption of lots of red meat too. What a cartoon.


ROTFLMFAO! Tears in my eyes, thank you! Been a long time since I laughed that hard.

Yep, great big Harley Ultra Classic, not that loud though. No secret on these boards, I mention it often. I try to eat red meat at least twice a day, too. Pretty typical for anybody who lives in Alberta.

Great sleuthing, though.

Kinda reminds me of that scene in _The Usual Suspects_ where, after everybody is shown getting picked up by the cops, they're conducting the interviews. Cop tells one guy, "We can place you in Queens on that date".

Guy replies, "I live in Queens..."

Har, har, har...

BTW, I see your powers of psychological analysis are running about par with your climate science knowledge. Don't leave your fish job...


----------



## iMouse

"You there, behind the grand-stand, stand still laddie!!!"


----------



## FeXL

bryanc said:


> Haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just skimmed the last few pages and saved them for posterity as a textbook perfect example of how insecure powerless males frequently use their opposition to gun control as a crutch for their feelings of sexual inadequacy.
> 
> Absolutely classic; Freud would love it.
> 
> I'll bet he drives a big loud motorcycle and is proud of his consumption of lots of red meat too. What a cartoon.


BTW...

If proud red meat eating, big loud motorcycle riding guys who state flat out that they will do whatever they can to protect their family, friends & even complete strangers from harm (and have done so in the past) are termed sexually inadequate, insecure powerless males, what exactly do you call capable males who would tuck tail & run, or hide, from the threat, leaving others to fend for themselves?

Wonderin' what your extensive psychological knowledge says about that?

Jes' tryin' ta understand that ol' progressive mindset, ya know. Sum days it's puzzlin'...


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> "You there, behind the grand-stand, stand still laddie!!!"


That's OK. bryanc's used to a moving target from his Global Warming experience...


----------



## iMouse

FeXL said:


> That's OK. bryanc's used to a moving target from his Global Warming experience...


You shouldn't attach a meaning to my post that was not intended. You are incorrect, as usual.

The reference was to a group of unruly boys, getting into mischief at every opportunity.


----------



## FeXL

Then perhaps you should make your meaning a touch less transparent. You used "laddie", singular, not "laddies", plural. I thought you meant me alone.


----------



## iMouse

FeXL said:


> Then perhaps you should make your meaning a touch less transparent. You used "laddie", singular, not "laddies", plural. I thought you meant me alone.


That's because it's lyrics taken from "The Wall", by The Who.


----------



## groovetube

iMouse said:


> That's because it's lyrics taken from "The Wall", by The Who.


you mean Pink Floyd. And yes it was singular.

Be careful about post interpretations lest you too be called a 'bald faced liar'.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> You mean Pink Floyd. And yes it was singular.


How silly of me, of course it was.

God knows I have heard the damn thing enough times on the Mighty Q.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Be careful about post interpretations lest you too be called a 'bald faced liar'.


See, groove, that's what makes you a liar.

Instead of just reading the damn post & accepting it at face value, you're trying to interpret it, twist it into something that's not there, get all torqued up, respond to the post from your victimized perspective, get called on it, _et voila!_ Instant fabricated issue!

You still haven't provided any proof of your accusations. This is not going to go away by ignoring it. Deal with it or have it follow you for a _very_ long time.

Proof, retraction or your a liar. 

Everybody on these boards is watching this. You will note that not one of your little support group is calling me on the question, either. They, too, know the answer. The only thing holding up resolution of the issue is your denial.

Your call...


----------



## groovetube

Does this somehow make you feel better? Hilariously enough, there has been a couple others who has mocked your macho crap as well.

I posted your quote multiple times. I stand by it. You can me whatever name you like, I really couldn't give 2 craps.

Perhaps, you should fire up your printer, and print yerself off a shiny gold stamped certificate to hang on your wall. SOmething along the lines of 

'this is to certify, that FeXL, has not been "pussified', is the master of all manhoods, and wishes everyone to know on any and all forums, that he will, and has been a hero and has a gun to git ya if'n you dare come near my house. 

Home of the free, land of the brave'

And post it for ALL to see.

Good for you.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> I posted your quote multiple times.


You've posted nothing that answered anything.

Three accusations, three answers. That's all I'm looking for.

Far better to eat crow while it's still warm, my friend...


----------



## groovetube

Sorry pal but I stand by what I said. Others are mocking you for the same thing. Perhaps you haven't noticed.

Post some more home of the free land of the brave macho I gotta gun stuff.

It's entertaining. Mainly because it's an internet forum for gawd's sake! :lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## fjnmusic

iMouse said:


> That's because it's lyrics taken from "The Wall", by The Who.


One of my favorite concept albums was Tommy, by Pink Floyd.


----------



## Sonal

fjnmusic said:


> One of my favorite concept albums was Tommy, by Pink Floyd.


Who?

Which one's Pink?


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> Which one's Pink?


The one that you let love again.


----------



## fjnmusic

Sonal said:


> Who?
> 
> Which one's Pink?


Are all these your guitars?


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Mainly because it's an internet forum for gawd's sake!


So, what does that mean? Just because it's an internet forum you can suddenly lie, steal, cheat, be two-faced? Open season, no bag limit? No repercussions?

I seem to recall multiple times in the past you getting all sulky about drummer jokes. Or is it only what offends you that's offside?

ehMac is more than just "an internet forum", it's also a community. In any community I've ever been involved in, online or not, decorum exists. You have openly misrepresented my posts & I'm calling you on that. 

You are a liar.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Sorry pal but I stand by what I said. Others are mocking you for the same thing. Perhaps you haven't noticed.


No, the usual suspects are making noises towards something completely unrelated to you lying. They're commenting on your "macho" thing.

Not a single person has come on this thread and noted, "FeXL, you're wrong. groovetube did not misrepresent your words. He's not lying.", despite the fact that this happened two days ago.

Rather telling, no?


----------



## groovetube

keeping reaching.

I'm not the one hollering about 'manhood', guns, and asserting how you'd git the bad guys and be a hero. So who's spouting the macho stuff?

I don't think anyone is interested in our disagreement (pissing contest) beyond some of the macho mockery that was posted.

I've had enough of this crap, so rant by yourself.


----------



## Sonal

FeXL said:


> Rather telling, no?


No. Can't speak for anyone else, but once the pissing match starts, I start skimming posts and wait for the thread to derail into a cheerier place in the hopes that the pissers take the hint and drop the subject.

Is someone lying? Don't care.
Is this tiresome? Yes.
Will either of your penises shrink if you let this go? No, but don't ask me to check. 

Now, can we go back to making bad music puns and letting this thread go to a quiet place for a bit before it goes back on topic of guns? That'd be awesome.


----------



## Macfury

I'm actually quite interested in this, and I do enjoy seeing a liar getting his comeuppance.

Take this as a detour sign and work your puns around it for awhile. Perhaps contribute to the awesome "Why was I banned" thread in the meantime.


----------



## FeXL

Sonal said:


> Is someone lying? Don't care.


Sonal, I have nothing but the utmost of respect for you on these boards. Thank you for your comment.

However, in the sentence that I quoted lies the rub. I care. It's my words that are being misrepresented here, it's me that is being accused of posting something I clearly didn't, it's my integrity that is being put to question.

That needs addressing & resolution.

As to your comment about "Rather telling, no?", there are people on these boards who climb down my throat instantly if I post anything that remotely resembles error or inaccuracy (not complaining, just making the observation). In the complete absence of _any_ comment or proof indicating otherwise, my observation stands.

groovetube is a liar.

Again, I (once again, that's me groovetube, not you) apologize for the derail.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> keeping reaching.
> 
> I'm not the one hollering about 'manhood', guns, and asserting how you'd git the bad guys and be a hero. So who's spouting the macho stuff?
> 
> I don't think anyone is interested in our disagreement (pissing contest) beyond some of the macho mockery that was posted.
> 
> I've had enough of this crap, so rant by yourself.


None of this is in question or related to my particular concern about you.

You flat out lied about the content of my posts.

Address the issue.


----------



## groovetube

I addressed the issue, multiple times. I read what I read, and made my call. I stand by it. PERIOD. It's all there for anyone to see, and as they said, they don't care.

And nor do I.

Go peepee contest with someone else. Tell them all about 'manhood', 'pussification', or whatever it is you do.

I'm done.


----------



## Macfury

Tail between legs.


----------



## groovetube

Sonal said:


> No. Can't speak for anyone else, but once the pissing match starts, I start skimming posts and wait for the thread to derail into a cheerier place in the hopes that the pissers take the hint and drop the subject.
> 
> Is someone lying? Don't care.
> Is this tiresome? Yes.
> Will either of your penises shrink if you let this go? No, but don't ask me to check.
> 
> Now, can we go back to making bad music puns and letting this thread go to a quiet place for a bit before it goes back on topic of guns? That'd be awesome.


Well from here I'll let them celebrate their manhood together on their own.

Who am I to intrude?


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> I addressed the issue, multiple times. I read what I read, and made my call. I stand by it. PERIOD. It's all there for anyone to see, and as they said, they don't care.


Yes, it is all there, isn't it? In black & white... beejacon



groovetube said:


> I'm done.


Funny, you said that last post. Same problem with reality...


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Who am I to intrude?


Only when the next time you lie comes upon us.


----------



## Birdwatcher

I still love your description of you-know-who here.


----------



## FeXL

Birdwatcher said:


> I still love your description of you-know-who here.


I know naught of what you speak...


----------



## FeXL

FeXL said:


> Only when the next time you lie comes upon us.


Further on the above...

Ya see, groove, that's the problem. Once you get the reputation for being a liar, everything you say, or have said, comes into question.

Has he actually ever had a gun pointed at him? Or did he create that story to curry favour for his argument? That sad tale a long time ago about being an addict. Was he just pulling at everyone's heartstrings? How much of that was true? All? Some? None? Is he actually a drummer in a band or is that just some childhood fantasy?

I don't know.

I noted a couple days back that this was going to be a long couple weeks for you. You immediately got a wild hair up your backside and fabricated some hare-brained idea that I was delivering some sort of veiled threat. 

This, denying your culpability & having to face it in public, was what I was referring to. I've never seen you back down from anything you've posted here on ehMac, right or wrong, so I was pretty confident you weren't going to back down on this. As predictable as the day is long...

You can unlock your door. Big, bad, scary, red meat eating, motorcycle riding FeXL ain't comin' out to see you and never was.

I'm also very interested in your response to this problem. While you've obfuscated, wiggled, denied, emoticon'd and moved the goalposts all over the place, you haven't shown any anger. If someone had called me a liar on public boards & I purely knew it to be untrue, after a few measured responses I'd have come unglued, especially if the accusations continued. I'da been on the mods like white on rice. Purdy sure that would be the reaction of most people.

But you? No. Just the usual snipes along with multiple threats to not respond again, perhaps hoping that the problem will go away (got a tip for ya: it ain't). You even noted that you hadn't contacted the mods. Deep down inside I think you know you're wrong but your stubbornness & pride are stopping you.

Nasty thing, pride.

Are you willing to throw away all your credibility on these boards because of pride, groove? Everybody can see it except you.

Think about it...


----------



## mrjimmy

FeXL said:


> Everybody can see it except you.
> 
> Think about it...


Besides you, and a few resident SDs, no one cares.

Why don't you take your pissing contest to the land of the PM and save us all from your thread jacking. Seriously.


----------



## Macfury

I find it fascinating, FeXL. Please carry on.


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> I find it fascinating, FeXL. Please carry on.


I brought popcorn, want some?


----------



## mrjimmy

Like I said, a few resident SDs...


----------



## bryanc

It is nice to see that MF can be unpartisan in his goading; but this really has gotten tiresome. FeXL, you've been called out over your tedious macho schtick for several pages now; isn't it enough? Can you bring anything to this discussion other than name-calling? We're not interested in your sexual inferiority complex.


----------



## groovetube

mrjimmy said:


> *Besides you, and a few resident SDs, no one cares.*
> 
> Why don't you take your pissing contest to the land of the PM and save us all from your thread jacking. Seriously.


That's what I think too. But look who's all in for the fight.

Big surprise! 

I'm sorry to the others I participated this long in the childish pissing contest.


----------



## margarok

SINC said:


> I brought popcorn, want some?


I signed up for nachos and salsa.


----------



## Macfury

margarok said:


> I signed up for nachos and salsa.


This chapter of the serial is entitled: "The Yellow Stripe."


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> This chapter of the serial is entitled: "The Yellow Stripe."


SD. Contributing nothing. So much for the ehMac the 'community'. More like ehMac, a collection of sniping, goading children.


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> SD. Contributing nothing. So much for the ehMac the 'community'. More like ehMac, a collection of sniping, goading children.


Your posts here contribute nothing mrjimmy.


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> Your posts here contribute nothing mrjimmy.


Good comeback SD.


----------



## Sonal

FeXL said:


> However, in the sentence that I quoted lies the rub. I care. It's my words that are being misrepresented here, it's me that is being accused of posting something I clearly didn't, it's my integrity that is being put to question.


I appreciate your respect. Thank you.

See the thing is, IMO, the beauty of forums I everything is out there for everyone to see. So if I genuinely thought something someone else said damaged your integrity, I could go back and see for myself what happened, why, and interpret accordingly. It's not like real life where either people weren't there to see it happen or everyone has to rely on memory... I can check, go over the whole history, see exactly how it all went down.

I don't need for one person or another person to admit anything. Sure, a couple of posts calling something out over something is pretty fair... but after a while, it's just tiresome.

When I say I don't care, it's not that I think lying and misrepresenting people is okay... it's that nothing anyone has said on this particular issue has changed my opinion of anyone here. At this point, I know who most of you are and what you generally stand for and (hopefully) have a pretty good idea of what you meant regardless of how someone else interprets it.... I have my own opinions to go on.

In any case, I'm on a @$%Q#^ diet... keep the popcorn, pass me an apple.


----------



## groovetube

mrjimmy said:


> Good comeback SD.


except I think you mainly contribute to the topic, I don't think I've seen much in the way of goading, or sniping from you.


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> I don't need for one person or another person to admit anything. Sure, a couple of posts calling something out over something is pretty fair... but after a while, it's just tiresome.


It may not matter to you if the person apologizes, but the victim of those lies has the right to pursue the issue. Some things are more important than whether you are entertained by the process.


----------



## Sonal

Macfury said:


> It may not matter to you if the person apologizes, but the victim of those lies has the right to pursue the issue. Some things are more important than whether you are entertained by the process.


It's not an issue of entertainment. If one person feels their integrity in this community has been damaged, then this member of the community says, not to me it hasn't.... it's not as though this other person has such sway over me that I instantly think that because he said something I should assume that he's right without checking for myself. (Note that that's true of just about everyone--I check for myself.)

But in some ways, it's more like a bar argument that's going on too long.... if neither of the combatants are willing to let this go for the sake of the other patrons, can they at least take their grudge match elsewhere? Though if everyone else is entertained, well, okay, it's just me then.


----------



## groovetube

Sonal said:


> It's not an issue of entertainment. If one person feels their integrity in this community has been damaged, then this member of the community says, not to me it hasn't.... it's not as though this other person has such sway over me that I instantly think that because he said something I should assume that he's right without checking for myself. (Note that that's true of just about everyone--I check for myself.)
> 
> But in some ways, it's more like a bar argument that's going on too long.... if neither of the combatants are willing to let this go for the sake of the other patrons, can they at least take their grudge match elsewhere? Though if everyone else is entertained, well, okay, it's just me then.


I think the couple that despise me (obviously) are entertained.

Though I must say, it's rather startling to see a conservative pull the victim card! 

Beyond that, I think everyone's tried of it. So I won't continue it, regardless of the goading.

Again sorry for even going there. My mocking of the macho stuff went on too long.


----------



## kps

...


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> ...


yup :lmao:

Good to see you.


----------



## fjnmusic

At least we're not all complaining about how mean the new owners are now.


----------



## mrjimmy

Sonal said:


> Though if everyone else is entertained, well, okay, it's just me then.


Not just you.


----------



## groovetube

fjnmusic said:


> At least we're not all complaining about how mean the new owners are now.


I'm the new meanie in town now! :lmao:


----------



## FeXL

mrjimmy said:


> Besides you, and a few resident SDs, no one cares.
> 
> Why don't you take your pissing contest to the land of the PM and save us all from your thread jacking. Seriously.


Then don't look. No law forcing you to come here, no law stopping you from adding something salient to the gun thread.

BTW, WTF is an SD?


----------



## Macfury

Sonal said:


> Iut in some ways, it's more like a bar argument that's going on too long.... if neither of the combatants are willing to let this go for the sake of the other patrons, can they at least take their grudge match elsewhere? Though if everyone else is entertained, well, okay, it's just me then.


There isn't even a grudge or any kind of hatred. It's merely one member calling out another for being a liar. Given the history I've seen here, the member won't own up and I suspect it will probably end soon enough with the typical plea to other members, begging them to try to make it stop, crying victim, then an inane and unbecoming plea to reasonableness festooned with a bunch of HEE-HAW emoticons.


----------



## FeXL

bryanc said:


> It is nice to see that MF can be unpartisan in his goading; but this really has gotten tiresome. FeXL, you've been called out over your tedious macho schtick for several pages now; isn't it enough? Can you bring anything to this discussion other than name-calling? We're not interested in your sexual inferiority complex.


What tedious macho schtick? Give me examples over the course of "several pages".

What name calling? Give me examples.

Just a friendly warning, don't fall into the same trap groovetube did.

As to your amateur psychology, if I want some of that I'll go ask a zebrafish embyro...


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> I think the couple that despise me (obviously) are entertained.


You give yourself far too much credit. I don't despise you, I just know your a liar.

Thought you weren't coming back here.

Got a coupla buds saying "Don't pick on poor groovetube", figgered you take advantage of the momentum? Lovin' it. 

Notice none of them said you haven't misrepresented my words?


----------



## mrjimmy

FeXL said:


> BTW, WTF is an SD?


One who fiddles with feces.


----------



## mrjimmy

FeXL said:


> What tedious macho schtick?





FeXL said:


> Just a friendly warning, don't fall into the same trap groovetube did.


Why don't we start with this?


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> Why don't we start with this?


You must be an extremely gentle fellow to see this as macho schtick.


----------



## groovetube

never in my time here have I seen such childish whining and crying! And the sidekicks, running around clapping their hands shouting in glee!

I mocked someone's constant big boy macho shootem up hero yer turnin kids into pussies barrage, and somehow, I'm a liar. Or I damaged someone's credibility.

Well suck it up princess, it's a big bad world out there. Everyone here is practically anonymous on an internet forum, and I'm damaging someone's credibility? LOL.

I've never seen such screaming, such a pathetic display of sheer crying over this. After all the mocking of my manhood, and references of "pussification" and the endless goings on about what a hero someone is, I don't feel bad for sending it all right back. Stuff it in their pipe for all I give two craps.

I'm sorry this caused a drag for other members. But for the love christ grow up and move on.


----------



## Macfury

I thought it would come to this. On his knees, begging for FeXL to leave him alone. Poor victim.

(Thought he wasn't going to show up here any more.)


----------



## FeXL

mrjimmy said:


> Why don't we start with this?


How is that macho?

It's like telling somebody "Careful coming down those steps, I just slipped." As in, I've seen it before, don't do it again. As in, that's why we're butt deep in this mess, don't add to it.

Jeezuz, what's it like to live in constant fear? Is everything a conspiracy with you guys?


----------



## groovetube

mrjimmy said:


> Why don't we start with this?


I don't think they see it. They see themselves as victims clearly, perhaps they'll go downtown and hold up signs and protest.

The whole macho, mocking others thing, they really don't get that they started it. I simply pushed it right back. I guess, that may have been too much for them. The macho bullies generally get really mad at that, obviously...

And that line, sounds pretty threatening... lest you be subjected to being called a bald faced liar.:lmao:


----------



## Macfury

Thought he wasn't coming back.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> I don't think they see it. They see themselves as victims clearly, perhaps they'll go downtown and hold up signs and protest.
> 
> The whole macho, mocking others thing, they really don't get that they started it. I simply pushed it right back. I guess, that may have been too much for them. The macho bullies generally get really mad at that, obviously...
> 
> And that line, sounds pretty threatening... lest you be subjected to being called a bald faced liar.:lmao:


Nice deflection!

Not really.

Why don't we back up a bit & try to deal with the fact that you misrepresented my posts, liar. Three simple accusations with no foundation in truth.

Once that's done, we can all sit back & congratulate ourselves because we got someone supporting us, hmmm?



Macfury said:


> Thought he wasn't coming back.


He can't help himself. Somebody is finally onside! :love2:

Nobody has disproved that he's a liar, but they're tearing into that big, bad FeXL, for sure.


----------



## iMouse

groovetube said:


> I've had enough of this crap, so rant by yourself.


He already has a thread for that.

Please don't cede him another.



Sonal said:


> I appreciate your respect. Thank you.


The manner in which that flows off his keyboard might make you think that he actually feels that way.

That could be a mistake.



kps said:


> ...


OK, shoot the Engineer without the token ring, unless he's already dead. 



Macfury said:


> Thought he wasn't coming back.


You and your friend live for his participation. It gives you both purpose.


----------



## Macfury

iMouse said:


> He already has a thread for that.
> 
> Please don't cede him another.
> 
> 
> 
> The manner in which that flows off his keyboard might make you think that he actually feels that way.
> 
> That could be a mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, shoot the Engineer without the token ring, unless he's already dead.
> 
> 
> 
> You and your friend live for his participation. It gives you both purpose.


Thought you weren't coming back.


----------



## FeXL

iMouse said:


> He already has a thread for that.
> 
> Please don't cede him another.


<sigh> 



iMouse said:


> The manner in which that flows off his keyboard might make you think that he actually feels that way.
> 
> That could be a mistake.


Contrary to others on this board, Sonal has never treated me with anything but respect. I try to return what I am given, good & bad.



iMouse said:


> You and your friend live for his participation. It gives you both purpose.


Actually, what I live for is for him to admit his mistake. If he did that & never posted again, I would not miss him as I rarely responded to anything he posted in the first place.


----------



## SINC

Whoda thunk it?

Toddlers Killed More Americans Than Terrorists Did This Year


----------



## iMouse

Evil-doer.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Whoda thunk it?
> 
> Toddlers Killed More Americans Than Terrorists Did This Year


The terrorist threat has been greatly over-rated.


----------



## margarok

When my step-son was young (about 8 years old), he spent the night with a friend and came home the next day telling how his friend and he had snuck into his parents bedroom and his friend had shown him where all his father's guns were hidden. Under the bed, in a wardrobe, in an overcoat in the closet sort of stuff. I was shocked that a seven year old kid had been shown where the guns were hidden.

He hadn't. He'd found them on his own.

This is the problem irresponsible gun owners ignore. Kids like to snoop around and since guns are "interesting", they will go find them if they aren't locked away.

I called the mother and tattled on the boy. We never let Vince go there again.


----------



## iMouse

Of course they'll snoop. The offspring of most animals ape their parents.

The more the parents carry-on about guns, the more curious the kids become.


----------



## speckledmind

:d


----------



## John Clay

iMouse said:


> Of course they'll snoop. The offspring of most animals ape their parents.
> 
> The more the parents carry-on about guns, the more curious the kids become.


There's nothing wrong with curiosity. It's a lack of respect that's the issue.

I know a few people with firearms and children. There's an understanding that the kids can look at and handle the guns whenever they want, but they have to ask first. Makes sure they're taught the proper handling procedures, and fosters a respect for firearms that many children just don't have (through no fault of their own).


----------



## FeXL

So, 10 days back I posted a link to an article wherein it was noted that 25 people in NYC had been shot, despite recently implemented gun control.

One of the usual suspects stepped right up to the plate & noted "Anyone who thinks that a measure would over night change things is delusional". He was correct & for that, I apologize. No, really. It is far too presumptuous to actually expect results in any form of short order.

It's obvious that it takes years, no, decades, to get results. Perhaps even centuries...

This past weekend in Chicago:

6 dead, at least 41 injured in city’s most violent weekend in 2013

Now, some of you are actually going to read a portion of that news story. Fewer will actually finish it. Those that complete it will come across a statement at the end from a police spokesman that reads:



> “While we’ve had fewer murders to date this year than any year since the mid-1960s, there’s more work to be done and we won’t rest until everyone in Chicago enjoys the same sense of safety,” Collins wrote.


Some if you are going to want to jump up screeching, "See, I told you so! Gun control works!" The problem is, you just lost sight of the pea under the walnut. You are assuming that a drop in the murder rate = a drop in the number of gun killings = gun control is effective. Unfortunately, none of those statements are equivalencies.

I visited the Chicago Police Dep't Murder Reports website & downloaded the pdf "2011 Murder Report". That's the most recent data they have listed. Two things:

1) On page 23 is "TABLE 12: WEAPONS USED TO COMMIT MURDERS, 2011*". Handguns are listed as being responsible for *351 murders* in 2011. Rifles, 1. Shotguns, 5. Unknown/Other, 5. 

Why is the hue & cry about AR style "assault" rifles?

2) On page 25 is a graph titled "FIGURE 10: PERCENTAGE OF MURDERS THAT WERE SHOOTINGS AND STABBINGS, 1991 TO 2011"

What the graph illustrates is that from a low of 69% in 1991, the percentage of murders that were shootings has increased to a high of 83.4% in 2011. That is the important statistic. Despite being subject to what is arguably the tightest, most restricting gun control in the US, death by firearm has risen by nearly 15 percentage points from 1991 to 2011 in Chicago.

All this in spite of the fact that Illinois has had gun control since _*1982*_, 31 years ago.

As such, my impertinent question to you, groove, is how long do you feel we should wait for any kind of positive results? Another 31 years? 50 more? A hundred? 

At what point do we just admit the abject failure of gun control & deal with the cause, not the effect?


----------



## FeXL

Further on the BS...

5-year old cap gun offender can’t expunge his “record”

Kid brought his orange-tipped cap gun onto the school bus & got a 10 day school suspension, later revised to 3 days.

Eighth-Grader Who Refused to Remove NRA Shirt Could Face Year in Prison

So, the most offensive thing they could find about this kid was his NRA t-shirt?

What do you think these two kids are going to take away from their respective experiences?

Jeezuz...


----------



## Kosh

FeXL said:


> What do you think these two kids are going to take away from their respective experiences?
> 
> Jeezuz...


Adults are idiots?


----------



## iMouse

FeXL said:


> Eighth-Grader Who Refused to Remove NRA Shirt Could Face Year in Prison.


*Could !! *

I'd like to see that happen. only for the subsequent fall-out. beejacon

And that sounds like sexual abuse to me.


----------



## mrjimmy

High River flood: Guns seized by police as angry residents confront RCMP | Canada | News | National Post

Interesting quote:



> “This is the reason the U.S. has the right to bear arms,” said Charles Timpano, pointing to the group of Mounties.


I'm sure the Mounties feel quite justified in seizing Mr. Timpano's guns if that's his reasoning.


----------



## SINC

mrjimmy said:


> High River flood: Guns seized by police as angry residents confront RCMP | Canada | News | National Post
> 
> I'm sure the Mounties feel quite justified in seizing Mr. Timpano's guns if that's his reasoning.


Here is another interesting quote when a town is being guarded by the RCMP and no one is allowed into the community. In short it is locked down by the police:



> He did confirm that officers relied on forced entry to get into numerous houses during the early stages of the flood because of an “urgent need.”


Seems to me all those guns were more than secure and under RCMP control long before they decided to become 'break and enter artists' and illegally enter homes to seize guns.

High River residents have every right to be angry at the RCMP for conducting an unnecessary witch hunt for weapons.


----------



## mrjimmy

SINC said:


> Here is another interesting quote when a town is being guarded by the RCMP and no one is allowed into the community. In short it is locked down by the police:
> 
> Seems to me all those guns were more than secure and under RCMP control long before they decided to become 'break and enter artists' and illegally enter homes to seize guns.
> 
> High River residents have every right to be angry at the RCMP for conducting an unnecessary witch hunt for weapons.


Being angry with, and alluding to a violent act are two different things. With a hot headed response like that, he shouldn't be able to own guns.

I'm sure the RCMP had reasons for doing what they did. There are always two sides to a story.


----------



## eMacMan

mrjimmy said:


> ....
> I'm sure the RCMP had reasons for doing what they did. There are always two sides to a story.


Yep it's called God Syndrome. Had a taste of it here with Mounties chasing pedestrians off bridges claiming they were unsafe. One of those bridges an hour or so earlier had supported a very large crane with no issues whatsoever. The other had seen a backhoe move across it numerous times agin with no ill effects.


----------



## mrjimmy

eMacMan said:


> Yep it's called God Syndrome. Had a taste of it here with Mounties chasing pedestrians off bridges claiming they were unsafe. One of those bridges an hour or so earlier had supported a very large crane with no issues whatsoever. The other had seen a backhoe move across it numerous times agin with no ill effects.


I'm sure the RCMP are just sitting around rubbing their hands together waiting for the moment they can screw with the residents they protect.

There are always two side to every story.

Thinly veiled threats of violence doesn't give anyone in this situation any sympathy or credibility.


----------



## eMacMan

mrjimmy said:


> I'm sure the RCMP are just sitting around rubbing their hands together waiting for the moment they can screw with the residents they protect.
> 
> There are always two side to every story.
> 
> Thinly veiled threats of violence doesn't give anyone in this situation any sympathy or credibility.


Let's see here; The Mounties broke into residences and "liberated" firearms, supposedly to keep them from being looted. Now the only ones there to loot them are the Mounties and the Soldier Boys. So either the Mounties firmly believe that some of their members or else some of the Army guys were going to steal those weapons or the Mounties were lying. If they were lying it is very likely the real reason would make them look worse not better.

We do them no favours giving them the benefit of the doubt. The action and the excuse given speak quite eloquently.


----------



## mrjimmy

eMacMan said:


> Let's see here; The Mounties broke into residences and "liberated" firearms, supposedly to keep them from being looted. Now the only ones there to loot them are the Mounties and the Soldier Boys. So either the Mounties firmly believe that some of their members or else some of the Army guys were going to steal those weapons or the Mounties were lying. If they were lying it is very likely the real reason would make them look worse not better.
> 
> We do them no favours giving them the benefit of the doubt. The action and the excuse given speak quite eloquently.


My benefit of the doubt certainly isn't going to residents who make veiled threats of violence. That immediately makes me feel the RCMP's actions were justified. Remember Mayerthorpe?

As a resident, I would feel much safer knowing that a stockpile of weapons was locked up rather than sitting in an abandoned house waiting for some crime of opportunity.


----------



## SINC

The only 'crime of opportunity' committed was by the RCMP who broke into and entered the homes of absentee owners, without either permission nor warrants. The guns were in a no-go zone set up by the RCMP themselves and no threat to anyone.


----------



## John Clay

SINC said:


> The only 'crime of opportunity' committed was by the RCMP who broke into and entered the homes of absentee owners, without either permission nor warrants. The guns were in a no-go zone set up by the RCMP themselves and no threat to anyone.


+1 Yep.

Heads better roll over this.


----------



## eMacMan

mrjimmy said:


> My benefit of the doubt certainly isn't going to residents who make veiled threats of violence. That immediately makes me feel the RCMP's actions were justified. Remember Mayerthorpe?
> 
> As a resident, I would feel much safer knowing that a stockpile of weapons was locked up rather than sitting in an abandoned house waiting for some crime of opportunity.


Zonkers! Just imagine how safe you would have felt in Nazi or East Germany, the Soviet Union or Communist China. Just a few of the places that come to mind when we talk about warrantless breaking and entering by National Police forces.


----------



## mrjimmy

eMacMan said:


> Zonkers! Just imagine how safe you would have felt in Nazi or East Germany, the Soviet Union or Communist China. Just a few of the places that come to mind when we talk about warrantless breaking and entering by National Police forces.


Are you seriously comparing the actions of the RCMP to that of Nazis etc.?

Do you remember Mayerthorpe? Did you read the quote by the 'responsible' gun owner?

Two sides...


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> Are you seriously comparing the actions of the RCMP to that of Nazis etc.?


Sounds about accurate.

The RCMP and military had secured the town. There was no justification for seizing private property.

Here's my quote - "No warrant, no entry."


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Sounds about accurate.
> 
> The RCMP and military had secured the town. There was no justification for seizing private property.
> 
> Here's my quote - "No warrant, no entry."


Remember Mayerthorpe?


----------



## eMacMan

mrjimmy said:


> Are you seriously comparing the actions of the RCMP to that of Nazis etc.?
> 
> Do you remember Mayerthorpe? Did you read the quote by the 'responsible' gun owner?
> 
> Two sides...


Well if the actions of the RCMP in High River make you feel safe, then similar but more extreme actions should surely make you feel even safer.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> Remember Mayerthorpe?


What about it?


----------



## SINC

mrjimmy said:


> Do you remember Mayerthorpe? Did you read the quote by the 'responsible' gun owner?
> 
> Two sides...


I recall Mayerthorpe vividly. I knew and was even threatened personally by James Rosco on one occasion.

Instead of placing the blame for the tragedy directly on the RCMP superiors who botched the operation by leaving rookie officers there overnight knowing Roscoe was at large, they then framed two innocent young men who did no more than give Roscoe a lift home to try and avert blame. (That ride was given under threat by an armed crazy man as well.)

I have little sympathy for a tragedy largely of their own making. The loss of life of course is horrendous, but there are, as noted, two sides to every story. Sadly most people do not know this 'other' side.


----------



## mrjimmy

From the Globe And Mail:



> The town, south of Calgary, remains officially off-limits to residents, many of whom have complained that the police were confiscating firearms from their homes. Ms. Redford was annoyed it remains an issue despite RCMP assurances that the guns would be returned.
> 
> *“The RCMP went in and secured a community that had been evacuated. As part of that work, as I understand it, they went into houses where there were firearms that weren’t properly secured. As opposed to leaving them sitting on fireplace mantels in a town that was evacuated, they secured those guns,” she told reporters.*
> 
> *“There is no suggestion that the people will not be able to have their guns back again,* and I really hope that we can focus on more important matters at hand, like getting 12,000 people back into High River, than to continue to circulate this story.”
> 
> On Friday, Ottawa sided with the residents.
> 
> “We expect that any firearms taken will be returned to their owners as soon as possible,” PMO spokesman Carl Vallée said. “We believe the RCMP should focus on more important tasks such as protecting lives and private property.”
> 
> *The RCMP said it took firearms that had been left ”in plain view” by residents as they moved belongings out of their basements to make sure they wouldn’t be stolen*. They will be returned to owners as soon as it is practical, or police will keep the guns until the owners can store them safely, Assistant RCMP Commissioner Marianne Ryan said.
> 
> *“The last thing any gun owner wants is to have their guns fall into the wrong hands. *Residents of High River can be assured that firearms now in possession of the RCMP are in safe hands, and will be returned to them as soon as is practically possible,” she said in a statement.
> 
> *RCMP Cpl. Darrin Turnbull did not have the exact number of firearms now being stored at the High River detachment, but said it is “a few hundred”.
> 
> “I know there were some rumours earlier in the day and yesterday that it was thousands; it is not that,” he said.*
> 
> The RCMP said it also seized a number of vehicles that it said posed public safety hazards in the town. They will also be returned, police said.
> 
> *Canadian law requires that guns be unloaded and locked away when stored.*
> 
> High River, population 13,000, was worst-hit by last week’s flooding. Much of the town remains under water, and officials say it’s too dangerous for residents to be allowed back in. That has left municipal leaders under fire from residents anxious to assess the damage at their home.
> 
> Danielle Smith, leader of Alberta’s Official Opposition Wildrose Party and the MLA who represents High River, said on Twitter s*he doesn’t have a problem with RCMP seizing loose guns.* “The problem is if residents have trouble getting them back,” she said. She added that it’s unclear how many guns Mounties seized.


Two sides...


----------



## eMacMan

mrjimmy said:


> From the Globe And Mail:
> 
> 
> 
> Two sides...


Now they're really stretching. The town remans completely locked down. Only ones around to break and enter remain the Mounties and the Army.


----------



## SINC

eMacMan said:


> Now they're really stretching. The town remans completely locked down. Only ones around to break and enter remain the Mounties and the Army.


I suspect the good citizens of High River have about as much respect for the Globe and Mail right now as the RCMP.


----------



## BigDL

Come on give your heads a shake. The owners of the guns should have left these items in proper storage and had the flood water have a go at them. 

There is no reason in the world to have inanimate objects left out in a dangerous manner.

The police did have reasonable and probable grounds to enter homes in an area where an emergency situation existed. It is/was well known not all people followed the mandatory evacuation notices. 

Police were required to insure people were not left in distress. Leave your oh so precious gun out in plain view, then the gun will be secured for you. It is your property but it is property that violates public safety. 

You may only have a gun and bullets when authorized to do so. This is Canada remember you have no rights to possess or use a gun in anyway, except in a lawful manner.

Keep your gun secured legally let the flood have at'er, you'll do just fine. No one will touch your precious guns and keep them safe for you. :-(


----------



## eMacMan

BigDL said:


> Come on give your heads a shake. The owners of the guns should have left these items in proper storage and had the flood water have a go at them.
> 
> There is no reason in the world to have inanimate objects left out in a dangerous manner.
> 
> The police did have reasonable and probable grounds to enter homes in an area where an emergency situation existed. It is/was well known not all people followed the mandatory evacuation notices.
> 
> Police were required to insure people were not left in distress. Leave your oh so precious gun out in plain view, then the gun will be secured for you. It is your property but it is property that violates public safety.
> 
> You may only have a gun and bullets when authorized to do so. This is Canada remember you have no rights to possess or use a gun in anyway, except in a lawful manner.
> 
> Keep your gun secured legally let the flood have at'er, you'll do just fine. No one will touch your precious guns and keep them safe for you. :-(


First of all this is the third attempt at an explanation, which given previous RCMP escapades, makes the story extremely suspect. Especially as earlier versions have the looters using handgun registries to target the break and enter locations.

With window reflections any would be thief would have to run a blockade of Mounties and the Army then press his nose to the Window to see those firearms, as indeed would the Mounties. Then again the only looters seem to be Mounties.

Now with the town inundated with flood water, why were the Mounties going around pressing their noses to peoples windows then performing illegal break and enters. If the Mounties have nothing better to do than that, then it is indeed High River time to let those frustrated homeowners back in to their homes to try and salvage what may be salvaged.

EDIT: We are now into version 4. Turns out the guns were in plain view only after the Mounties broke in through locked doors and left muddy jackboot tracks as they looked around.


----------



## BigDL

eMacMan said:


> First of all this is the third attempt at an explanation, which given previous RCMP escapades, makes the story extremely suspect. Especially as earlier versions have the looters using handgun registries to target the break and enter locations.
> 
> With window reflections any would be thief would have to run a blockade of Mounties and the Army then press his nose to the Window to see those firearms, as indeed would the Mounties. Then again the only looters seem to be Mounties.
> 
> Now with the town inundated with flood water, why were the Mounties going around pressing their noses to peoples windows then performing illegal break and enters. If the Mounties have nothing better to do than that, then it is indeed High River time to let those frustrated homeowners back in to their homes to try and salvage what may be salvaged.
> 
> EDIT: We are now into version 4. Turns out the guns were in plain view only after the Mounties broke in through locked doors and left muddy jackboot tracks as they looked around.


Well the only version I've encountered via the media deals with entry based on the very lawful "reasonable and probable" grounds.

Your reply seems to condone the support of unlawful and dangerous gun handling and storage. Is this really true? Do you understand that in Alberta as is the case in the rest of Canada you do not have a constitutional right to posses or use guns and ammunition?

Do most Conservatives support this flagrant disregard for public safety? I've seen the statement from the Conservative's PMO that supports this total disregard for public safety. 

The Premier of Alberta, a Progressive Conservative, supports the manner that the Provincial Police (as is the case in most Canadian Provinces the RCM Police works as the Provincial Police) acted during this emergency situation. As did the leader of the Loyal Opposition of the Legislature, Wildrose Party Leader Danielle Smith (another variant of conservatism as I understand it.)



> Danielle Smith, leader of Alberta’s Official Opposition Wildrose Party and the MLA who represents High River, said on Twitter she doesn’t have a problem with RCMP seizing loose guns. “The problem is if residents have trouble getting them back,” she said. She added that it’s unclear how many guns Mounties seized.


----------



## iMouse

> Danielle Smith, leader of Alberta’s Official Opposition Wildrose Party and the MLA who represents High River, said on Twitter she doesn’t have a problem with RCMP seizing loose guns.
> 
> “The problem is if residents have* trouble getting them back,*” she said. She added that it’s unclear how many guns Mounties seized.


Only with the ones they fancy, naturally.


----------



## John Clay

iMouse said:


> Only with the ones they fancy, naturally.


And who knows what condition they'll be in. Cops aren't known for treating people's property with respect and care.


----------



## mrjimmy

iMouse said:


> Only with the ones they fancy, naturally.


If they were registered there shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> If they were registered there shouldn't be a problem.


Come again?

The most expensive rifles I've seen were non-restricted, and thus not registered.


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Come again?
> 
> The most expensive rifles I've seen were non-restricted, and thus not registered.


From Wikipedia:



> Originally the program required the registration of *all non-restricted firearms* but this requirement was dropped on April 6, 2012 by the coming into force of Bill C-19.[2][3] Bill C-19 also mandated the destruction of the non-restricted records of the registry as soon as feasible.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> From Wikipedia:


I don't know what you're getting at. The LGR has been abolished outside of Quebec, and records were destroyed.


----------



## eMacMan

John Clay said:


> I don't know what you're getting at. The LGR has been abolished outside of Quebec, and records were destroyed.


Explains why the original explanation of using the gun registry to find and seize those fire firearms disappeared so quickly.

As I said earlier the story does keep changing which usually indicates that someone is lying. 

Does make you wonder if the data was really destroyed or simply hidden.


----------



## eMacMan

Couple of comments from the local papers



> So the government orders them out, the citizens comply and lock the doors behind them. The government then goes INTO those homes that they ordered the citizens out of saying they are looking for people who may need rescuing. They then go room to room confiscating firearms. Not just a few, a substantial amount. Something stinks, and its not floodwater.





> everyone's a ciminal - "The guns are now in the local cop shop and can be picked up when the proof of ownership is produced."
> especially now that the registry is ....gone.


Wonder how many receipts for those guns are rotting in sewage soaked floodwater.

BTW breaking down someones door would no doubt make things easier for looters. Not only that but the muddy jackboot prints inside would make any looters denials seem more plausible.


----------



## kps

mrjimmy said:


> If they were registered there shouldn't be a problem.


Man the ignorance here is staggering.

There is no registry -the records were destroyed and Quebec just lost their case to salvave their portion.

Next, it's funny how this is the only place where the RCMP were doing this and coincidentally it also happens to be Danielle Smith's riding.

Also interesting that out of 13,000 residences they knew which doors to jackboot to gain entry in order to seize non-restricted firearms from law abiding owners.

The law is simple, in this country you can store your non-restricted firearms anywhere you want provided it's empty of ammunition, has a trigger lock, or the bolt is out, or in a case. A cased gun in a closet or under the bed is legally stored. 

I didn't hear anything about restricted firearms being seized. Probably because if there were any they were lawfully stored in a steel SAFE as the law requires. Didn't see any safes being seized or floating in police dinghies. If a person only owns non-restricted hunting firearms they don't need to "Fort Knox" their rifle or shotgun.

Please some of you apologist, explain to me how any of this is a public safety issue in a closed town which is flooded empty of the residents and secured from entry. Firearms legally kept in a locked house are a safety concern?. Does the RCMP kick your door in when you leave for vacation because there is a firearm in the house? What in the world does this have to do with Mayerthorpe? Are you equating law abiding hunters and other legal firearms owners with a deranged criminal? 

We have a charter in this country protecting us from unlawful search and seizure, the RCMP broke that and needs to be held accountable for this police state action. Heads need to roll. I'll be interesting who authorized this. I can't believe it happened in Alberta of all places.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> Man the ignorance here is staggering.


Agreed.


kps said:


> I didn't hear anything about restricted firearms being seized. Probably because if there were any they were lawfully stored in a steel SAFE as the law requires. Didn't see any safes being seized or floating in police dinghies. If a person only owns non-restricted hunting firearms they don't need to "Fort Knox" their rifle or shotgun.


Just wanted to point out that a safe is not required for restricted firearms - a locked opaque case and trigger lock meet the minimum requirements.


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> Just wanted to point out that a safe is not required for restricted firearms - a locked opaque case and trigger lock meet the minimum requirements.


Make sure that is not for transporting only, otherwise, safe or steel gun cabinet is the absolute minimum.


----------



## Sonal

High River citizens right to be suspicious as RCMP changes story over removal of guns | Full Comment | National Post

This seems a fairly reasonable take, but please note the place where the writer uses the word 'if'.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> Make sure that is not for transporting only, otherwise, safe or steel gun cabinet is the absolute minimum.


Nope.

Storing, Transporting and Displaying Firearms - Royal Canadian Mounted Police



> Restricted and prohibited firearms
> - Attach a secure locking device so the firearms cannot be fired *and* lock them in a cabinet, container or room that is difficult to break into; *or*
> - Lock the firearms in a vault, safe or room that was built or modified specifically to store firearms safely.
> - For automatic firearms, also remove the bolts or bolt carriers (if removable) and lock them in a separate room that is difficult to break into.


----------



## iMouse

Difficulty of entry poses no problem for the RCMP is this instance.

They had all day, as they were unobserved, and all the tools necessary at their disposal.

This still stinks, especially if they targeted certain homes where law-abiding citizens live.


----------



## BigDL

eMacMan said:


> ...BTW breaking down someones door would no doubt make things easier for looters. Not only that but the muddy jackboot prints inside would make any looters denials seem more plausible.


The RCM Police "breaking down someones door" who, why, when, where did that happen?


----------



## John Clay

BigDL said:


> The RCM Police "breaks down someones door" who, why, when, where did that happen?


Where have you been?

The doors in High River didn't open themselves.


----------



## mrjimmy

kps said:


> Man the ignorance here is staggering.
> 
> There is no registry -the records were destroyed and Quebec just lost their case to salvave their portion.


No ignorance here at all, simply bad wording. What I meant to say was if a gun registery still existed, there would be little to no concern regarding their theft by the RCMP. I won't be so hasty in my responses in the future . 



kps said:


> Next, it's funny how this is the only place where the RCMP were doing this and coincidentally it also happens to be Danielle Smith's riding.


Hat made of tinfoil?



kps said:


> Also interesting that out of 13,000 residences they knew which doors to jackboot to gain entry in order to seize non-restricted firearms from law abiding owners.


How do you know they were law abiding? Jackboot? Really? I understand your frustration but why don't you save the hyperbole for when the facts come out.



kps said:


> The law is simple, in this country you can store your non-restricted firearms anywhere you want provided it's empty of ammunition, has a trigger lock, or the bolt is out, or in a case. A cased gun in a closet or under the bed is legally stored.
> 
> I didn't hear anything about restricted firearms being seized. Probably because if there were any they were lawfully stored in a steel SAFE as the law requires. Didn't see any safes being seized or floating in police dinghies. If a person only owns non-restricted hunting firearms they don't need to "Fort Knox" their rifle or shotgun.


So they can leave them out in the open?



kps said:


> Please some of you apologist, explain to me how any of this is a public safety issue in a closed town which is flooded empty of the residents and secured from entry. Firearms legally kept in a locked house are a safety concern?. Does the RCMP kick your door in when you leave for vacation because there is a firearm in the house? What in the world does this have to do with Mayerthorpe? Are you equating law abiding hunters and other legal firearms owners with a deranged criminal?


Did you read this quote below? Who's to say he would not follow up on this? Or others?



> “This is the reason the U.S. has the right to bear arms,” said Charles Timpano, pointing to the group of Mounties.





kps said:


> We have a charter in this country protecting us from unlawful search and seizure, the RCMP broke that and needs to be held accountable for this police state action. Heads need to roll. I'll be interesting who authorized this. I can't believe it happened in Alberta of all places.


We also have laws regarding the safe storage of firearms.


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> Nope.
> 
> ]


Ok then, me personally always had safes or steel cabinets, besides...there isn't a case big enough to store all of my stuff.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> No ignorance here at all, simply bad wording. What I meant to say was if a gun registery still existed, there would be little to no concern regarding their theft by the RCMP. I won't be so hasty in my responses in the future .


Hardly. Proof of registration isn't proof of ownership.

Not too long ago, there was someone stealing firearms from a dealer (in BC, I think) and selling them all over the country over the internet. The registrations were transferred, and the sales were done properly - except with stolen property.

When the thief was busted, the RCMP and local agencies tracked down the stolen guns through the registry and confiscated them, without compensation if memory serves.


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Hardly. Proof of registration isn't proof of ownership.
> 
> Not too long ago, there was someone stealing firearms from a dealer (in BC, I think) and selling them all over the country over the internet. The registrations were transferred, and the sales were done properly - except with stolen property.
> 
> When the thief was busted, the RCMP and local agencies tracked down the stolen guns through the registry and confiscated them, without compensation if memory serves.


You expect the purchaser of stolen property to be compensated?

I can't speak to this anecdote because it is _only an anecdote_. If the dealer in BC didn't report these weapons stolen then that is the issue. In most cases, the weapon was/ is registered to the owner.


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> Ok then, me personally always had safes or steel cabinets, besides...there isn't a case big enough to store all of my stuff.


Have you considered Guns Anonymous?


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> You expect the purchaser of stolen property to be compensated?
> 
> I can't speak to this anecdote because it is _only an anecdote_. If the dealer in BC didn't report these weapons stolen then that is the issue. In most cases, the weapon was/ is registered to the owner.


No, I don't expect compensation - was just pointing out that registration doesn't equal proof of ownership.

There's a false sense of security when a government agency authorizes a transfer - you expect everything to be on the up and up.


----------



## kps

mrjimmy said:


> Hat made of tinfoil?
> 
> 
> 
> Not my hat, but interesting accusation nevertheless. I'm itching to find out how this plays out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know they were law abiding? Jackboot? Really? I understand your frustration but why don't you save the hyperbole for when the facts come out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Alright you can change "jackboot" to "jackwaiters" if that makes you happy.
> 
> Why would you suspect them to not be law abiding? You suspect High River to be full of Roszkos? Who's wearing the tin foil now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So they can leave them out in the open?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why not, if they're within the law?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you read this quote below? Who's to say he would not follow up on this? Or others?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This isn't the US and this thread is already far too contaminated with US crap. Sonal's intent in renaming this thread was intended (I believe) to be closer to home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We also have laws regarding the safe storage of firearms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which have been revealed to you including John Clay's direct link to the RCMP's site. So what's your point?
Click to expand...


----------



## eMacMan

BigDL said:


> The RCM Police "breaking down someones door" who, why, when, where did that happen?


Uh I can assure you those people forced to evacuate High River did not leave their doors unlocked. They were told the RCMP was there to protect their property not to loot it.

By breaking through their doors the Mounties also create another problem. People coming back to High River will be facing a tremendous challenge in cleaning out flood damaged property and tearing out dry wall and insulation. The delay has already been so long that they will undoubtedly be dealing with black mold as well. Now before they can do any of that other stuff they will have to find a way to secure their damaged door, thanks to the guys who were supposed to be protecting their property.

I also think that others facing evacuation for whatever reason, and knowing now that the Mounties cannot be trusted, may be far more reluctant to leave property undefended. Should this result in avoidable deaths I wonder how willing the RCMP brass will be to accept responsibility


----------



## BigDL

eMacMan said:


> Uh I can assure you those people forced to evacuate High River did not leave their doors unlocked. They were told the RCMP was there to protect their property not to loot it.
> 
> By breaking through their doors the Mounties also create another problem. People coming back to High River will be facing a tremendous challenge in cleaning out flood damaged property and tearing out dry wall and insulation. The delay has already been so long that they will undoubtedly be dealing with black mold as well. Now before they can do any of that other stuff they will have to find a way to secure their damaged door, thanks to the guys who were supposed to be protecting their property.
> 
> I also think that others facing evacuation for whatever reason, and knowing now that the Mounties cannot be trusted, may be far more reluctant to leave property undefended. Should this result in avoidable deaths I wonder how willing the RCMP brass will be to accept responsibility


 I will accept your premiss that doors were left locked by home owners on its face.

I still do not see any facts regarding breaking down doors. Where are the confirmed reports by reporters stating the RCM Police broke down doors and left houses open to the elements.

Are you slinging hyperbole here as suggested earlier or are you speaking factually when you say "...BTW breaking down someones door would no doubt make things easier for looters. Not only that but the muddy jackboot prints inside would make any looters denials seem more plausible. "


----------



## SINC

BigDL said:


> I still do not see any facts regarding breaking down doors. Where are the confirmed reports by reporters stating the RCM Police broke down doors and left houses open to the elements.


Fact from the National Post:



> *He did confirm that officers relied on forced entry to get into numerous houses during the early stages of the flood because of an “urgent need.”*


High River flood: Guns seized by police as angry residents confront RCMP | Canada | News | National Post

What other method could they have possibly used to enter locked private homes?


----------



## mrjimmy

.


> Not my hat, but interesting accusation nevertheless. I'm itching to find out how this plays out.
> 
> *Feels mighty tinfoiley to me.*
> 
> Alright you can change "jackboot" to "jackwaiters" if that makes you happy.
> *
> Hyperbole is hyperbole. Completely up to you.*
> 
> Why would you suspect them to not be law abiding? You suspect High River to be full of Roszkos? Who's wearing the tin foil now?
> 
> *It's as fair an assumption as saying they are.*
> 
> 
> Why not, if they're within the law?
> 
> *The way in reads in the press, out in the open literally means out in the open. As in, resting against a chair. Is that legal? *
> 
> This isn't the US and this thread is already far too contaminated with US crap. Sonal's intent in renaming this thread was intended (I believe) to be closer to home.
> 
> *This has nothing to do with the U.S. This was a Canadian alluding to the fact that if they were armed, the RCMP would be in trouble.*
> 
> Which have been revealed to you including John Clay's direct link to the RCMP's site. So what's your point?
> 
> *Again, it reads in the press that they (RCMP) were gathering guns that were not stored safely.*


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> The way in reads in the press, out in the open literally means out in the open. As in, resting against a chair. Is that legal?


Yes.


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Yes.


It isn't according to the link you posted.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> It isn't according to the link you posted.


Show me where it says it isn't legal for non-restricted firearms. All it says is you need a trigger lock, or the bolt removed.

Reading comprehension is a dying art


----------



## BigDL

SINC said:


> Fact from the National Post:
> 
> 
> 
> High River flood: Guns seized by police as angry residents confront RCMP | Canada | News | National Post
> 
> What other method could they have possibly used to enter locked private homes?


Locksmiths, from the media reports I heard. As a former boy scout makes sense to me, go prepared.


----------



## SINC

"Forced entry" is not a term used for or by locksmiths. They would need a team of locksmiths to cover that many homes and that is unlikely in a flooded town.


----------



## eMacMan

Uh there was little or no need to enter homes. Evacuees would have registered, from the registration info Mounties would have known which homes had been safely evacuated. I know Calgary's evacuation instructions included how to mark your home so that authorities knew no-one was inside. Only homes where owners did not register, mark or were out of town would have needed searching.

As to locksmiths. Seriously can anyone even imagine the Mounties using a lock smith when they had battering rams and marshal law covering their heinés? 

Had the Mounties not rendered the homes un-secure there would have been no problem with the firearms. Walk within a few feet of a house and it is almost impossible to see inside. Known as reflections on the windows. No interior lights because the power is out so those guns were equally invisible at night. Between the mounties and the army I am pretty sure any one walking right up to a window to peer in would be hustled off to the clink in a huge hurry.

BTW the need for urgent entry is a late arrival to the story. Original story had the Mounties breaking in to secure very visible firearms, until numerous people pointed out how ludicrous that was.


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Show me where it says it isn't legal for non-restricted firearms. All it says is you need a trigger lock, or the bolt removed.
> 
> Reading comprehension is a dying art


Ooh very testy Mr. Clay. There is no need for that.

I said:



> The way in reads in the press, out in the open literally means out in the open. As in, resting against a chair. Is that legal?


You said:



> Yes.


Your link said:



> Non-restricted firearms
> 
> Attach a secure locking device, such as a trigger lock or cable lock (or remove the bolt) so the firearms cannot be fired; or
> 
> *Lock the firearms in a cabinet, container or room that is difficult to break into.*


Now, I don't think they meant leaning on a chair when they wrote that, do you?

Comprehension intact.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> Ooh very testy Mr. Clay. There is no need for that.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your link said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, I don't think they meant leaning on a chair when they wrote that, do you?
> 
> Comprehension intact.


Definitely not intact. You missed the bolded "or" before that statement. Either trigger lock it, remove the bolt OR lock it in a cabinet. Only one of 3 is necessary.


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Definitely not intact. You missed the bolded "or" before that statement. Either trigger lock it, remove the bolt OR lock it in a cabinet. Only one of 3 is necessary.


Ah yes, a well deserved mea culpa. It seemed like common sense to me that you would lock weapons in a safe/ secure room etc. 

Still, it would be interesting to know how many of the seized weapons were not stored in the proper manner. My guess is many.


----------



## kps

mrjimmy said:


> .





> Not my hat, but interesting accusation nevertheless. I'm itching to find out how this plays out.
> 
> Feels mighty tinfoiley to me.


Stranger things have been happening in Canadian politics lately than the possibility of this. I heard this on TV, not sure who's behind it.




> Why would you suspect them to not be law abiding? You suspect High River to be full of Roszkos? Who's wearing the tin foil now?
> 
> It's as fair an assumption as saying they are.


Not true, statistically firearms owners a far more law abiding than non firearms owners. That's a fact. The RCMP also runs a background check on every licensed firearms owner each and every day. 




> Why not, if they're within the law?
> 
> The way in reads in the press, out in the open literally means out in the open. As in, resting against a chair. Is that legal?


As already mentioned by JC, yes it is. As a matter of fact all it needs to be is empty. Does not need the bolt out, or trigger lock or cased as long as it's in your house or even vehicle as long as it is a non-restricted firearm. Unfortunately the whole firearms act is so vague that cops interpret this whole mess of regulations as they wish. If you have it cased they'll say you should have also trigger locked it or taken the bolt out or this this or that and charge you with unsafe storage or transport just to assert their authority. Then in court it is like... "well we erred on the side of caution(safety)" etc etc. while bankrupting the gun owner with legal fees, confiscating his property which will never be returned or actually stolen from the police lockup. 

If you by any chance think I'm making this up, go to CSSA or NFA websites and read some of the horror stories from ordinary firearms owners caught in some overzealous cop's net.




> This isn't the US and this thread is already far too contaminated with US crap. Sonal's intent in renaming this thread was intended (I believe) to be closer to home.
> 
> This has nothing to do with the U.S. This was a Canadian alluding to the fact that if they were armed, the RCMP would be in trouble.


Nonsense.



> Which have been revealed to you including John Clay's direct link to the RCMP's site. So what's your point?
> 
> Again, it reads in the press that they (RCMP) were gathering guns that were not stored safely.


Bull crap! The press is doing nothing more than regurgitating what the cops tell them.

Are you seriously telling us that all the homes busted into by the RCMP had their legally owned firearms in plain view from the outside and stored in an unsafe manor (i.e. loaded)? I highly doubt it.


----------



## mrjimmy

Wow, you guys sure are passionate about your guns. Perhaps that is part of the problem.


----------



## John Clay

mrjimmy said:


> Wow, you guys sure are passionate about your guns. Perhaps that is part of the problem.


Being passionate about a hobby is a problem now? :lmao:


----------



## mrjimmy

.


kps said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> *He said it. Not me. How else would you interpret it?*
> 
> Bull crap! The press is doing nothing more than regurgitating what the cops tell them.
> 
> Are you seriously telling us that all the homes busted into by the RCMP had their legally owned firearms in plain view from the outside and stored in an unsafe manor (i.e. loaded)? I highly doubt it.
> 
> *The thing is, neither of us know, and once passion is involved, logic seems to fly out the window.*


----------



## mrjimmy

John Clay said:


> Being passionate about a hobby is a problem now? :lmao:


It is when your hobby kills people.

annnnnd cue the old 'people kill people' chestnut (among others).


----------



## kps

mrjimmy said:


> It is when your hobby kills people.
> 
> annnnnd cue the old 'people kill people' chestnut (among others).


Show me the stats you wild and wooly Hoplophobe. Shooting sports are amongst the safest.

Many hobbies have an element of danger far worse that shooting at paper targets or a clay disk under controlled conditions of a range.

In over 30 years of owning both, restricted and non-restricted guns, I have yet to kill, injure or maim anyone and neither have my guns. 

You're right Mr.J, I am taking this a personally because i've been part of the Canadian gun culture for a very long time and I know it fairly intimately and the people in it. They are nothing like the antis and gun grabbers like to portray us and it saddens me when Ehmacers I have respect for follow that trend while remaining ignorant of the factual truth.


----------



## iMouse

mrjimmy said:


> It is when your hobby kills people.
> 
> annnnnd cue the old 'people kill people' chestnut (among others).


I prefer stamps myself.

The worst casualty caused by collecting stamps would be a paper cut.

<That was Dad, not me.>


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> I prefer stamps myself.
> 
> The worst casualty caused by collecting stamps would be a *paper cut*.


Followed by infection and painful death....


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> Followed by infection and painful death....





> But my point is we can assume that the body can fight off the relatively small infection from a small papercut without treatment. Is it possible that you could die from an infection in just one cut? sure.
> 
> You could also bleed to death if your blood doesn't clot.
> 
> But in the schema of what is reasonable, when do a whole bunch of little infections become sepsis that the body cannot deal with?


Source.

More than you want to read on such a trivial subject, unless you're bored, and think there might be a laugh or two in the thoughts.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> Source.
> 
> More than you want to read on such a trivial subject, unless you're bored, and think there might be a laugh or two in the thoughts.


As a chemo patient I know all about the risk of infections and having to spend 4 days in isolation due to having an immune system rated as zero while being pumped full of antibiotics.


----------



## iMouse

The very reason I cannot allow myself to become sick.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> The very reason I cannot allow myself to become sick.


Sorry to read you're going through the same thing. Keep positive!


----------



## iMouse

The wink missed the mark there.

My charges are the ones at risk, and I would prefer not killing any of them. 

Stay strong.


----------



## kps

iMouse said:


> The wink missed the mark there.
> 
> My charges are the ones at risk, and I would prefer not killing any of them.
> 
> Stay strong.


Thanks and understood.


----------



## kps

Time for a little levity...


----------



## iMouse

kps said:


> Thanks and understood.


[highjack]

Where are you doing your Chemo??

We could actually know each other. :lmao:

[/highjack]


----------



## kps

No need to hijack---PM sent.


----------



## mrjimmy

kps said:


> Show me the stats you wild and wooly Hoplophobe. Shooting sports are amongst the safest.
> 
> Many hobbies have an element of danger far worse that shooting at paper targets or a clay disk under controlled conditions of a range.
> 
> In over 30 years of owning both, restricted and non-restricted guns, I have yet to kill, injure or maim anyone and neither have my guns.
> 
> You're right Mr.J, I am taking this a personally because i've been part of the Canadian gun culture for a very long time and I know it fairly intimately and the people in it. They are nothing like the antis and gun grabbers like to portray us and it saddens me when Ehmacers I have respect for follow that trend while remaining ignorant of the factual truth.


First off I want to say keep up the good fight with your treatments. My very dear loved one has gone through it and I've been the 'wingman' for quite some time now. It's amazing the highs and lows and the incredible journey of self discovery that comes with it. All the best. I mean that.

As far as this whole gun thing, right off the top, I'm a city boy so that obviously tempers my views to a great degree. Basically, guns in the city are used to intimidate and kill people. Guns in the country are too but they also used to kill animals. That to me is the essence of guns and their purpose.

Guns were invented as an efficient killing machine. Their popularity has soared because of this. When a 90lb granny can take down a 300lb man, it's an efficient killing machine. The sporting aspect is secondary to their purpose. Their purpose is to kill. I think you'll find, that viewpoint (in some form or another) is shared by many on the 'anti' side. 

Sure there are exceptions. People who use guns to hunt the food they eat. I understand the necessity. Armies and law enforcement; again, it would be nice to live in a world where you didn't need it but that's simply not the reality. Those are the only reasons I see guns being needed; a necessity.

Sport hunting? I abhor this. Taking a life for sport with a gun? Unjustifiable. Truly not a responsible inhabitant of this planet. Inexcusable. Many share this viewpoint.

Target practice? I'm sure it's lots of fun and a real rush but is it worth defending so vigorously? I don't think so. I think there is much more psychology to gun ownership. This is where you get more to the heart of the passion.

Generally speaking, I find gun enthusiasts to be at times, a bit of a boisterous lot. Drunk on the sort of machismo (male or female) that power brings. Guns make you feel powerful. Figuratively, you can turn a 99lb weakling into a big strapping man just by holding the weapon. This is often seen in their attitude and defence mechanisms. These can be the same people who feel the need to drive the biggest SUV or truck, the biggest boat, you get the picture.

Now this isn't necessarily my viewpoint of all gun owners or those on this board that vigorously defend their weapons, but on occasion, the talk takes on that 'tough guy' flavouring. It is not uncommon in these sorts of debates where someone with my views is considered a 'wuss' and the gun owner 'a real man'. Would anyone disagree?

The irony of these beliefs and assertions isn't lost on most but they exist nonetheless. At the end of the day, he who has the gun has an advantage over he who doesn't.

So basically, this is where I come from in this whole debate. I understand the being passionate aspect of your hobby I just feel that the object does more harm in this world than good.


----------



## kps

mrjimmy said:


> First off I want to say keep up the good fight with your treatments. My very dear loved one has gone through it and I've been the 'wingman' for quite some time now. It's amazing the highs and lows and the incredible journey of self discovery that comes with it. All the best. I mean that.


Thanks, appreciate it.




> Guns were invented as an efficient killing machine. Their popularity has soared because of this. When a 90lb granny can take down a 300lb man, it's an efficient killing machine. The sporting aspect is secondary to their purpose. Their purpose is to kill. I think you'll find, that viewpoint (in some form or another) is shared by many on the 'anti' side.


Here's where we differ. In the scenario above, you call it an efficient killing machine where I would call it a defensive machine. A firearm can save and protect life just as take life. The firearm is simply a tool to an end.




> Sport hunting? I abhor this. Taking a life for sport with a gun? Unjustifiable. Truly not a responsible inhabitant of this planet. Inexcusable. Many share this viewpoint.


So force fed cattle pumped full of antibiotics, steroids and who now what else living in a dirty overcrowded feed lot only to end up with a pneumatic steel bolt in its head is better? I hunted to fill my freezer. BTW, it is a requirement of your hunt that the harvested animal be consumed. Hunters contribute more to conservation than all the pretenders out there in actually protecting our wildlife. Please read this : Hunting in Ontario - Natural Resources Management Division - Ontario Government, Ministry of Natural Resources



> Target practice? I'm sure it's lots of fun and a real rush but is it worth defending so vigorously? I don't think so. I think there is much more psychology to gun ownership. This is where you get more to the heart of the passion.
> 
> Generally speaking, I find gun enthusiasts to be at times, a bit of a boisterous lot. Drunk on the sort of machismo (male or female) that power brings. Guns make you feel powerful. Figuratively, you can turn a 99lb weakling into a big strapping man just by holding the weapon. This is often seen in their attitude and defence mechanisms. These can be the same people who feel the need to drive the biggest SUV or truck, the biggest boat, you get the picture.


I have met the same kind in the Golf culture (lol) or the martial arts culture, the police. the military etc. Many believe only cops and the military should have guns, but I could fill 20 pages with links of cops and military stories of misuse of their firearms. 



> Now this isn't necessarily my viewpoint of all gun owners or those on this board that vigorously defend their weapons, but on occasion, the talk takes on that 'tough guy' flavouring. It is not uncommon in these sorts of debates where someone with my views is considered a 'wuss' and the gun owner 'a real man'. Would anyone disagree?
> 
> The irony of these beliefs and assertions isn't lost on most but they exist nonetheless. At the end of the day, he who has the gun has an advantage over he who doesn't.


I defend my firearms ownership not weapons. A pitchfork could be a weapon.

I lean right in my attitude toward much of this and believe in castle laws and self defence, not necessarily with firearms, but I'll defend firearms ownership if that's what it'll take.



> So basically, this is where I come from in this whole debate. I understand the being passionate aspect of your hobby I just feel that the object does more harm in this world than good.


That's fine, you don't like guns, nothing wrong with that, just don't misunderstand those of us who own and use firearms for sporting purposes.


----------



## eMacMan

FWIW I talked to one of the High River evacuees. She seems to be under the impression that every home in High River is being broken into. Not to look for people who need assistance, but to evaluate the homes condition before letting the owners back in. Why they don't systematically contact the owners and ask for a key is beyond me. Everyone is indeed registered including contact info.

Keep in mind that the evacuees know very little more than we do so the info above is only marginally more likely to be accurate than lame-stream reports.


----------



## iMouse

I would like to know what law/statute/whatever they invoked to break into people's homes.

Was Martial Law, or a Canadian wussy version of same, declared?


----------



## eMacMan

iMouse said:


> I would like to know what law/statute/whatever they invoked to break into people's homes.
> 
> Was Martial Law, or a Canadian wussy version of same, declared?


Yes. Still the feeling is that the Mounties are taking it to the extreme. The lack of communication with those out of their homes is almost obscene.


----------



## groovetube

It's interesting how when the cops overstep in this case when it involves guns, suddenly the PMO steps in, but when they spent a billion dollars trampling on many innocent people's right to peacefully protest at the G20, not a peep was heard.

Priorities I suppose.


----------



## BigDL

Good point!


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> It's interesting how when the cops overstep in this case when it involves guns, suddenly the PMO steps in, but when they spent a billion dollars trampling on many innocent people's right to peacefully protest at the G20, not a peep was heard.
> 
> Priorities I suppose.


Didn't see anyone in High River burning cop cars or smashing storefronts. Majority of the G20 crowd were professional agitators and protesters like at the Occupy Wall street gig. They follow and disrupt every meeting. Wonder who pays for all their travel costs. Besides it wash't the PMO with the "secret law" remember? It was that lying coward McGuinty.


----------



## groovetube

Actually, no. The vast majority were not professional agitators. It was a very small minority amongst many many peaceful people excersizing their right to peacefully protest. They were simply the excuse to trample on people's rights.

There are a lot of cues to the skulduggery, from the 'secret law' to the cop car left in the middle of the street unattended a few hundred feet from my office. Never mind the sheer insanity of holding this in downtown Toronto.

As far as I know, the PM and PMO are not connected to the RCMP, but they still felt the need to step in and condemn to actions.

Not so much with the G20.


----------



## iMouse

The difference is that Harper was losing face in the international community.

His vanity knows no bounds.


----------



## mrjimmy

groovetube said:


> As far as I know, the PM and PMO are not connected to the RCMP, but they still felt the need to step in and condemn to actions.
> 
> Not so much with the G20.


I'm sure once the dust clears they (the PMO) will spin it as an over zealous staffer with 'the brass' knowing nothing about it. Same way they get back benchers to forward the Government's agenda with their private member's bills.


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> Didn't see anyone in High River burning cop cars or smashing storefronts. Majority of the G20 crowd were professional agitators and protesters like at the Occupy Wall street gig. They follow and disrupt every meeting. Wonder who pays for all their travel costs. Besides it wash't the PMO with the "secret law" remember? It was that lying coward McGuinty.


To be fair the handful of professional agitators were hired to make sure that the media did not relay the message(s) the protestors were attempting to communicate. Their other purpose was to give the cops an excuse to put an end to the protests which were presumably an embarrassment to King Harpo.

Sadly they were successful on both counts.


----------



## eMacMan

I can now reliably relay that the RCMP did indeed batter down everyones door in High River. For the most part belongings were not disturbed, other than the reported officially sanctioned looting of guns.

Of course those returning homeowners who only had flooded basements, are now faced with having to quickly secure their homes at a time when contractors services are at a premium. This is not simply a matter of installing a new lock. The entire door, jamb and usually trim and perhaps even the framing have to be replaced on a few thousand homes that otherwise suffered relatively minor damage. 

Obviously where the house is a complete write-off this is not a major concern, but a large number of High River homes are not write-offs.

On the plus side the volunteer turnout has been tremendous and a huge spirit boost for those residents dealing with an overwhelming mess.


----------



## SINC

There was never any doubt in my mind that they broke through front doors to perform their non warrant search and seizure action. RCMP top brass have now ordered the detachment to return all firearms to owners.


----------



## FeXL

I don't know how much credibility Bloomberg had in the first place but, whatever...

Credibility of Bloomberg and Mayors Against Illegal Guns suffers enormous blow



> At a New Hampshire stop on the Mayors Against Illegal Guns “No More Names” bus tour, organizers read the names of people killed by “gun violence” during the six months since the tragedy in Newtown. But there was something amiss: i*ncluded among the names read was Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the Boston Marathon bombers.* Observers were outraged.
> 
> ...
> 
> But the story didn’t end there. Tsarnaev was not the only gun “victim” on the bus tour’s list. *It turns out that one of every 12 names on the Bloomberg “victim” list are crime suspects – including the likes of California cop killer Christopher Dorner.* Bloomberg and MAIG’s worldview is so skewed, they think murderers are actually victims!


Bold mine.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I don't know how much credibility Bloomberg had in the first place but, whatever...


Nanny Bloomberg is a disgrace.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Nanny Bloomberg is a disgrace.


Yep and Weiner is the most likely replacement. Not sure what that says about Nu Yokkers but I'm pretty sure it is not flattering.


----------



## johnp

North Carolina Gun Owners Will Soon Be Able To Carry Firearms At Bars And Playgrounds

"On Tuesday, North Carolina lawmakers approved a bill allowing gun owners with concealed-carry permits to bring their weapons to playgrounds, bars, and public recreation areas, although bar owners will still be permitted to deny entry to armed patrons. Gov. Pat McCrory (R) is expected to sign the expansive bill into law soon. The measure will also allow concealed-carry permit holders to keep their guns in cars parked on school campuses. The bill was stripped of an especially extreme provision that would have eliminated the requirement for background checks or handgun permits."

North Carolina Gun Owners Will Soon Be Able To Carry Firearms At Bars And Playgrounds | ThinkProgress


----------



## FeXL

I'd read a headline that there had been some changes in NC, but hadn't followed it up. The removal of the provision is a good thing.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> I'd read a headline that there had been some changes in NC, but hadn't followed it up. The removal of the provision is a good thing.


Methinks it was put in there to give the Democrat wing a token victory.


----------



## kps

TEAM CSSA E-NEWS - August 08, 2013

** Please share this E-news with your friends **

COMMENTARY: GENEROUS OFFER FROM THE SHOOTING EDGE

High Lake residents who want free storage and/or access to industrial firearms cleaner can take advantage of an offer from JR Cox at The Shooting Edge in Calgary. The front page of the August edition of the marketing publication, Canadian Access to Firearms (Canadian Access to Firearms), displays the following offer:

"The entire Edge Group family would like to personally thank everyone across Canada for your support during our recent flood in Alberta. We were fortunate in that the business remained dry and only a small number of staff was affected, but the sincere outpouring of assistance was humbling. Again, thank you!

However, there are many that still need assistance. For this, we freely offer our services for: 1) temporary storage of firearms for anyone needing to keep them in a safe and dry place; and 2) free use of our industrial firearms cleaner.

Just come on in and ask to speak to one of our managers and we will make this as simple and easy for you. There is no membership, payment, or small print necessary to make use of this offer. As long as it is legal, we will help in any way we can.
JR -- Owner"

The CSSA believes this is western hospitality at its best. Meanwhile, the RCMP offered to store firearms for High River residents, too. Many local gun owners don't trust the motives of the police after having their firearms confiscated during the flood.

There is widespread speculation that the RCMP removed guns from private homes after some High River residents complained vehemently that they were being unfairly barricaded from their homes and belongings. The question remains – did police use the firearms licence database to collect guns from specific addresses because they feared a public backlash to their roadblocks?

While suspicion mounts that the RCMP confiscations were a pre-emptive strike against gun owners, it is heartening to see The Shooting Edge offer real help to the affected firearms community at no charge.


COMMENTARY: PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT SENSE IN SHOOTING SPORTS

Practising your shooting technique won't make you perfect, but it does make perfect sense.

Like most sports, there is a feeling of real accomplishment, confidence and enjoyment when you strive for your personal best. Whether you are a target shooter, game hunter or varmint plinker, you soon discover that the more you train, the more you hit.

Sport shooters have an added incentive to get out to the range or into the bush. The adversarial anti-gun faction hopes that responsible gun owners will abandon shooting altogether when they get frustrated enough. That's why they try to increase shooters' frustration by pressing for shooting range closures, Draconian laws, and expensive court procedures designed to kill your spirit. We must not let them succeed.

Every time a sport shooter pulls the trigger, the scales tip in our favour. You do the firearms community and yourself a favour. With summer soon on the wane, there is more to enjoy than corn on the cob. Hunting season is on the way, and all sporting activities benefit from a bit of training camp. Unfortunately, a few hunters fire their rifles only when there is game in their cross-hairs. Every ethical hunter wants to drop their quarry in its tracks for humane reasons, and the probability increases with practice.

In effect, every sport shooter is on trial during the hunting season. Shooting mishaps are exploited by some media agencies in an effort to turn the anti-gun screws ever tighter. The responsible behaviour of the individual in the field is good for the entire firearms community. Know your equipment, understand the potential of your ammo, and always know what lies behind your target. It's to our credit that the vast majority of responsible gun owners pay near-manic attention to safety. But, it takes just one miscalculation to turn a great day into a tragedy. While we must appreciate the gravity in our sport, we need not let it weigh us down – have fun, too!

Firearms- and archery-related sports in Canada generate more than a billion dollars in commercial gain for sporting goods stores, dealers, manufacturers and yes, the government. Gun owners dedicate their time, money and expertise to their country's heritage. Sport shooters have every right to be proud of their heritage activities and the expertise they develop. The CSSA is proud to play a role in maintaining and expanding the shooting sports in Canada.

We congratulate all those firearms clubs and ranges that sponsor myriad competitions and special events that demonstrate to Canadians we are here to stay.

-------

HIGH RIVER CONFISCATIONS CONTINUE TO CONFUSE: They were little more than collectibles, said High River resident Greg Kvisle: a 1912 Winchester and a plain old rifle that had long sat above his grandfather’s fireplace in Saskatchewan. Mr. Kvisle didn’t keep ammunition around the house. He wasn’t a hunter. The guns were left unlocked, he said, but they were hidden in a storage closet in his basement, thankfully untouched by rising water.

“The room was full of stuff and they were in a corner behind a bunch of boxes. They weren’t available to be grabbed easily, let’s put it that way,” he said.

But the RCMP took his weapons anyway, he said. In June, as tensions between police and some of the 13,000 residents locked out of their flood-ravaged town reached a fever pitch, the RCMP said it had seized unsecured weapons that were left in plain view. Not so, Mr. Kvisle countered: although he hadn’t locked his arms as demanded by the Firearms Act, he believes the police entered his home at least three times during the weeks-long mandatory evacuation. On the third visit, they took his guns, he said. His weapons have since been returned.

Many High River residents remain flummoxed by police actions during the flood. The gun seizure, in particular, prompted a chastisement from Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Meanwhile, the commission for public complaints against the RCMP is still investigating police actions there and is expected to report in the fall. Wildrose opposition leader Danielle Smith, also the MLA for the town, is slated to hold a meeting with gun owners in the next month to get a better idea of just what happened in High River after flood waters swamped entire neighbourhoods, prompting police to bar residents from their homes for weeks.

As the town suffered a state of local emergency, police and army personnel entered thousands of homes looking for pets, bodies and stranded flood victims in need of help. In the process, they said, 539 weapons were secured. The RCMP began returning the weapons at the end of June, however owners without a Possession and Acquisition License would have to store their guns with friends who were properly licensed.

The Firearms Act does allow non-prohibited guns to be stored in plain sight, as long as they are either disabled or secured with a trigger lock. However, during a state of emergency police are given wide latitude to enter homes and seize property.

Josee Valiquette, a spokesperson for the RCMP, said that as of Wednesday, 517 — almost all of the guns — had been returned to their owners. In addition, 132 firearms had been brought into the police for safekeeping. A further 94 were surrendered by owners who wished to see the weapons destroyed.

The police also collected half-a-million rounds of ammunition that were turned in due to the catastrophe.

“They realized they had other things to take care of than firearms right now,” Ms. Valiquette said.

But for some, the gun seizure was just the apogee of a long and frustrating back-and-forth between police and High River residents. Rob Giles, a gun owner and safety instructor, said his vaulted weapons weren’t seized, but emergency officials left his door lying in his yard while he struggled to gain access to his home.

“For 10 days they walked through the house with crap on their boots and looked in drawers,” he said, adding that he returned home to find his cupboards askew. He predicts whoever entered his home caused about $2,000 worth of damage to his door and floor — a cost he plans to recuperate in a class-action lawsuit if the RCMP don’t come through with a cheque.

Not every gun owner was incensed by the police’s actions. Terry Plunkett, who keeps prohibited antique weapons from the Second World War, said police didn’t touch his property — it was properly stored and secured.

“There were no signs of anything. They just went into the house to check to see if everything was there and that if there had been anyone in the house, that everyone had been OK. They saw nothing and moved nothing and changed nothing,” he said. “I think it was a little bit of hysteria, myself. The police were trying to get into the homes to make sure everyone was out of there are there were no problems. With this firearm thing, it’s more that people are trying to make something out of it.”

Mr. Kvisle concedes his weapons were returned to him with little fuss. But the lesson he’s learned from the flood has been stark: “I just don’t understand, in areas where there were no people left and the houses were all high and dry, why were they going through houses two and three times and doing all this damage to homes?” he asked. “All it says is that next time this happens, I’m not leaving my home. I have to protect my home from police, now, as well as looters.” (National Post – August 7, 2013)


------

THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

The CSSA is the voice of the sport shooter and firearms enthusiast in Canada. Our national membership supports and promotes Canada's firearms heritage, traditional target shooting competition, modern action shooting sports, hunting, and archery. We support and sponsor competitions and youth programs that promote these Canadian heritage activities. 

Website CSSA Canadian Shooting Sports Assoc. (target shooting, shotgun, rifle, pistol, biathlon, free pistol, cowboy shooting, SASS, IPSC, PPC, IPDA, full-bore rifle, gun ban, gun control, handgun ban, C68, gun registry, confiscation, gun rights, self defens


----------



## FeXL

So, remember that newspaper editor who published the addresses & names of gun owners a while back? Sadly, she's out of work. 

BANG! Editor Fired After Publishing Gun-Owner Map

Ha!


----------



## FeXL

Some interesting info on mass gun shootings.

The Facts about Mass Shootings 



> “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”


----------



## Macfury

Victimizing fish in a barrel is no fun if one of the fish might shoot back.


----------



## FeXL

Oh, the iron...

Request for gun permits in Newtown set to double last year's numbers: police



> And the surge appears to be fueled by worried residents like 66-year-old Nancy Ellis, a soon-to-be gun-toting grandma who claims Connecticut’s draconian new gun control laws are infringing on her constitutional rights.


----------



## FeXL

What a snake in the grass...

Executive Action: Obama To Ban Importation of Ammo, Magazines and Gun Accessories Without Congressional Approval

Yes, there's a bright side. American ammo will now be manufactured by Americans. However, in light of Obama's determination to make gun ownership illegal, how many businesses are going to step up to the plate...


----------



## FeXL

Obummer...

CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted



> The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."


Further:



> Does anyone recall this study getting extensive media coverage or the administration plugging its key findings? Of course not. It doesn't support their anti-Second Amendment, anti-gun ideology. It's therefore ignored as if it never happened at all.


----------



## Macfury

Obama is such a weasel.


----------



## FeXL

Bringing a taser to a gun fight...

'Point 'em out, knock 'em out': Brutal game ends when assault victim fires his concealed handgun



> The game was called "point 'em out, knock 'em out," and it was as random as it was brutal.
> 
> The object: Target an innocent victim for no other reason than they are there, then sucker punch him or her.
> 
> But on this day in Lansing, there would be no punch. The teen-age attacker had a stun gun. He did not know his would-be victim was carrying a legally concealed pistol.
> 
> The teen lost the game.


Wonder if the teen learned anything from this little exercise or if it just hardened his resolve to get shot again at some point in the future...


----------



## Macfury

You know what they say: when seconds count, the police will be there in minutes...


----------



## FeXL

If I'd have done something stupid like that as a teenager, I'd have been more worried about my old man finding out. He would have kicked my butt all over the home 1/4 section. I hope this kid's father did too...


----------



## vancouverdave

Run, hide, fight. 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5VcSwejU2D0&desktop_uri=/watch?v=5VcSwejU2D0


----------



## Macfury

vancouverdave said:


> Run, hide, fight.
> 
> RUN. HIDE. FIGHT. Surviving an Active Shooter Event - English - YouTube


Good video, except it doesn't say what you should do with your gun. 

Also, why do they not let us see that fire extinguisher connect with Vin Diesel's head?


----------



## SINC

Oh boy!

Gun Bill in Missouri Would Test Limits in Nullifying U.S. Law:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/u...shes-nullification-boundary.html?src=mv&_r=1&


----------



## groovetube

from the article referring to the 159 arrested that would be able to sue the arresting officers:



> As a result of this effort,* a total of 267 firearms, more than 25 ounces of methamphetamine, more than 3 pounds of crack cocaine/cocaine, more than 7 pounds of marijuana and more than 1½ pounds of heroin were purchased or seized.* On July 10, 2013, over 150 law enforcement officers searched for the remaining defendants who were not already in custody. Those not arrested at the time of this release are now considered fugitives.
> 
> Of the 159 defendants, 99 are being prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, 47 are being prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Illinois, 11 are being prosecuted by the St. Louis City Circuit Attorney’s Office, 1 is being prosecuted by the St. Clair County State’s Attorney’s Office and 1 is being prosecuted by the Madison County State's Attorney's Office. As a whole, the defendants have been the subjects of 1,718 felony arrests and 78% of the defendants are previously convicted felons.


Nothing like cheering for these criminals being able to sue the arresting officers! :lmao:


----------



## groovetube

OOPS: Senator Who Advocates Arming Teachers Accidentally Shoots Teacher With Rubber Bullet | ThinkProgress

what could possibly go wrong???

OOPS! :lmao:


----------



## kps

CANADIAN SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION / CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION

TEAM CSSA E-NEWS - August 30, 2013

** Please share this E-news with your friends **

COMMENTARY: HARVARD GUN CONTROL STUDY RESURFACES SIX YEARS LATER

For reasons that appear unclear, the great Harvard gun control study by Dr. Gary Mauser and lawyer Don Kates has gone viral across the continent – again.

Google shows lots of web sites are carrying a story this week that appears to be news. But, the study cited by Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy was actually released in 2007. Mauser and Kates produced the carefully researched and footnoted paper entitled, Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence.

www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

While the study may not technically be "news" in 2013, there is every reason to revisit it. Perhaps this is an indication that our society didn't have the stomach for the conclusions made by Mauser and Kates in 2007, but the masses have matured enough to accept it now, some six years later. If John Q. Citizen is prepared to consider that gun control doesn't work, it would indeed be reason to celebrate.

In light of such studies conducted under the harsh glare of the scientific method, the anti-gun groups and left-leaning media stubbornly ignore the facts. The Harvard study and many others provide evidence that escalating gun control does not curtail gun crime. It further concludes that systematic government disarmament of the masses has the opposite effect.

Recent stats compiled by the Library of Parliament reveal that scrapping the gun registry in April 2012 did not increase firearms crime in Canada. While it's too early to suggest there is a trend, some provinces report a drop in firearms crimes since the registry was axed. As we predicted, there was no pent-up crime wave lying in wait for the Harper government's sensible initiative. We now implore the government to scrap the other hollow legislative encumbrances that gun owners detest.

It is notable that Quebec – the sole province fighting to keep its registry data – reported more firearms crime since April 2012, even with its registry still intact. Statistically and morally, there is no argument to either retain the registry or build a new one.

Could it be the dog days of summer that have taken the hot air out of the gun-haters? The anti-gun messengers have all but disappeared in recent months. The sum total of media outreach from the Coalition for Gun Control brain-trust is a half-hearted media release that warns it will intervene before the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) to support Quebec's attempt to preserve its registry database. Meanwhile, the SCC has so far shown no interest in listening to Quebec's feeble plea.

The Province of Quebec and the Coalition both ignore the fact that Quebec firearms owners have exchanged tens of thousands of guns. The CSSA launched "The Great Canadian Gun Registry Shuffle" exactly a year ago to illustrate that the registry data is hopelessly incomplete and outdated.

The gun-haters' targets have left the building. The Province and the Coalition know that, too, but they need an action item to win Quebeckers' hearts, minds, votes and wallets. Canadians everywhere have reported shuffling more than half a million guns, and there must be well over a million firearms we don't know about that have found new homes.

The Canadian public is coming around to understanding that gun control doesn't reduce crime. Soon they will take the plunge and admit that gun control creates crime. Take a bow, responsible firearms owners – you are helping to educate a nation.

Small wonder that anti-gun groups have fallen silent in recent months. Could it be they're running out of ammunition?


HARVARD STUDY SHOOTS HOLES IN GUN CONTROL: Once again, a study from an organization that you would never accuse of being “gun-loving” or “right-wing” seems to disprove the myth that the availability of handguns increases murder rates. In fact, it doesn’t.

The Harvard study attempts to answer the question of whether or not banning firearms would reduce murders and suicides. Researchers looked at crime data from several European countries and found that countries with higher gun ownership often had lower murder rates.

Russia, for example, enforces very strict gun control on its people, but its murder rate remains quite high. In fact, the murder rate in Russia is four times higher than in the “gun-ridden” United States, cites the study. "Homicide results suggest that where guns are scarce other weapons are substituted in killings.” In other words, the elimination of guns does not eliminate murder, and in the case of gun-controlled Russia, murder rates are quite high.

The study revealed several European countries with significant gun ownership, like Norway, Finland, Germany and France – had remarkably low murder rates. Contrast that with Luxembourg, “where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, had a murder rate nine times higher than Germany in 2002.”

The study found no evidence to suggest that the availability of guns contributes to higher murder rates anywhere in the world. ”Of course, it may be speculated that murder rates around the world would be higher if guns were more available. But there is simply no evidence to support this.”

Further, the report cited, “the determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the prevalence of some form of deadly mechanism.” Meaning, it’s not guns that kill people. People kill people. (Small Government Times.com -- August 20, 2013)

-------


STAB ASSAILANT WITH YOUR GUN LOCKER KEY: It must be a bit bracing to be home when a bad guy is trying to break into your house...

According to a story in the Calgary Sun, "police believe the homeowner went to a basement window when a man smashed through it Monday night, and threatened the would-be intruder to stay out. "It is alleged a short time later, after getting ammunition, the (homeowner) returned to the window and fired a .22-calibre rifle several times, but the suspect had already fled on a bike.

"Gary Paul Bucci, 68, is charged with unsafe storage of firearm and careless use of firearm." Ahh, but things are never as straightforward as they seem. The story goes on to say the alleged bad guy was already in court for attacking a woman in the house. So, was it wrong for Bucci to squeeze off a few rounds, as it's alleged, after buddy had taken off? Maybe, but let's not judge too quickly. There is a larger issue here.

The real crime is Bucci had to go find his ammunition while an accused violent intruder was trying to come through his basement window. In Canada, your ammunition is supposed to be stored in a separate place from your firearms, which have to be locked up in a government-approved gun safe. So, if you are a firearms owner, and you follow all the storage rules, an intruder instantly has a huge advantage.

If he enters at night, you might be able to stab the bad guy with the key to your gun locker. Perhaps you could swat him with the voluminous set of rules that firearms owners must follow. The common sense thing to do is to keep a loaded shotgun beside your bed. Some slimeball has already attacked a woman in the house. You know there's a high likelihood that he'll come back.

If he does, you also know there's no way the police are going to arrive until after said slimeball has left a lot of blood on the floor. The UN won't protect you. There's no time to search for the root causes of violence. In a situation like that, it's either self-protection or it's no protection at all, and it's just not good enough to lay in bed with a set of keys under your pillow.

In Bucci's case, he hobbled over on 68-year-old, busted-up knees to try to protect a woman who had already been attacked once. He was lucky his warning to stay out and his unloaded .22 rifle were enough to put the run on the aforementioned slimeball. It could have turned out much differently.

I've got an idea. Instead of charging Bucci, how about we give him a medal for being man enough to put himself between a thug and a frightened victim. Then let's talk about how our firearm storage laws tilt the field in favour of violent criminals. (By Monte Solberg – QMI Agency – August 26, 2013)

-------


----------



## FeXL

Why would the US Army, who does not use the AK-47 platform, be accepting bids to supply nearly 600,000 30 round AK-47 magazines?

Fast Magazine Swap


----------



## John Clay

FeXL said:


> Why would the US Army, who does not use the AK-47 platform, be accepting bids to supply nearly 6 million 30 round AK-47 magazines?
> 
> Fast Magazine Swap


Well, they do use them in training. The order is for almost 600k, not almost 6 million. 600k fits in with training needs.

The blog you quote has misread the RFP, including the line number with the amount of magazines requested.


----------



## FeXL

Thx, number fixed.


----------



## FeXL

Two Colorado politicians pushing for gun control recalled.

Angela Giron ousted in Colorado recall election, thanks supporters in Pueblo



> Giron and Senate President John Morse of Colorado Springs are the first state lawmakers in state history to be recalled. Morse, of Colorado Springs conceded earlier in the night, losing his seat to former Colorado Springs City Councilman Bernie Herpin.
> 
> The recall could have a chilling effect in other states, where Democrats have been encouraged by President Barack Obama to pass controls on guns, including background checks, limits on ammunition magazines and other measures.


Good.

Finally, some accountability.


----------



## FeXL

And, what you can't legislate out of existence, either by hook or by crook, you tax to death...

Massive New Gun Taxes Proposed



> The bill includes the following provisions:
> 
> * Increase in federal excise tax on handguns (both pistols and revolvers) from 11% to 20%
> * Increase in federal excise tax on ammunition from 11% to 50%
> * Increase in NFA tax (pre-’86 autos, SBRs, suppressors, etc.) from $200 to $500
> * Increase in NFA AOW tax from $5 to $100
> * Increase in special (occupational) tax for importers, manufacturers, and dealers
> * Adds semiautomatic pistols “chambered for cartridges commonly considered rifle rounds, configured with receivers commonly associated with rifles and capable of accepting detachable magazines” to the list of items taxable as NFA items (26 USC § 5845)


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> And, what you can't legislate out of existence, either by hook or by crook, you tax to death...
> 
> Massive New Gun Taxes Proposed


It's a good thing they will never get this through the House.


----------



## SINC

Here we go again:

Washington Navy Yard shooting kills at least 12: Gunman dead, two suspects at large | National Post


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Here we go again:


Jumping to conclusions & flying off the handle in 3, 2,...


----------



## FeXL

Eighteen people shot in Chicago in less than four hours Thursday night.

If Obama Had A Son …



> Problem : Gang shootings using illegal handguns in 100% Democratic inner cities
> 
> Solution : Confiscate legally owned rifles from law abiding rural Republicans


Yep...

Chicagoland: Eighteen Shot in Four-Hour Period, 13 in One Incident



> Would it be out of line to ask what a 3-year-old was doing out at that time of night? It’s weird, but I don’t hear Barack Obama, Dick Durbin and Rahm Emanuel squealing about gun control. Dare we say it’s time for Gang Control? Perhaps we can institute background checks and waiting periods in Chicago before you’re allowed to join a gang. Sounds preposterous? Makes more sense than trying to disarm the law-abiding public whenever there’s a mass shooting, like this past Monday in Washington. Better yet, how about outlawing gangs entirely? Or are we more concerned with the rights of gangbangers?


----------



## FeXL

The real Navy Yard scandal



> It’s always the weapon and never the shooter. Twelve people are murdered in a rampage at the Washington Navy Yard, and before sundown Sen. Dianne Feinstein has called for yet another debate on gun violence. Major opprobrium is heaped on the AR-15, the semiautomatic used in the Newtown massacre.
> 
> Turns out no AR-15 was used at the Navy Yard. And the shotgun that was used was obtained legally in Virginia after the buyer, *Aaron Alexis, had passed both a state and federal background check.*


Bold mine.

The real cause?



> On Aug. 7, that same Alexis had called police from a Newport, R.I., Marriott. He was hearing voices. Three people were following him, he told the cops. They were sending microwaves through walls, making his skin vibrate and preventing him from sleeping. He had already twice changed hotels to escape the men, the radiation, the voices.
> 
> Delusions, paranoid ideation, auditory (and somatic) hallucinations: the classic symptoms of schizophrenia.


----------



## FeXL

Every mass shooting in US has taken place where guns are banned - expert



> ...one thing people need to recognize is that *with just two exceptions every single mass shooting in the US has taken place where guns are banned*, where victims are unable to go and defend themselves...


Bold mine.



> ...let’s say somebody who was a criminal was stalking you and your family, was threatening you. Would you feel safer putting a sign in front of your home that said your home is a gun-free zone? Would that make it less likely that they would attack you?
> 
> ...
> 
> I don’t know anybody in the US, even gun control advocates, that would put up a sign like that. And yet, even though nobody would put up a sign like that in front of their own home, we end up putting these signs in front of movie theatres or in front of schools, or even in front of military bases.


I have a little cartoon to that end...


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> The real cause?


...can anyone provide us with figures to indicate the amount of funding the NRA has contributed or lobbied for with regard to improved mental health care in the USA?

Yeah. Thought not.


----------



## John Clay

CubaMark said:


> ...can anyone provide us with figures to indicate the amount of funding the NRA has contributed or lobbied for with regard to improved mental health care in the USA?
> 
> Yeah. Thought not.


Perhaps they would, if they weren't already fighting on all fronts to stop the gun grabbers.


----------



## groovetube

who is grabbing guns?


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> ...can anyone provide us with figures to indicate the amount of funding the NRA has contributed or lobbied for with regard to improved mental health care in the USA?
> 
> Yeah. Thought not.


A little less than the enviro wacko lobbyists.


----------



## FeXL

CubaMark said:


> ...can anyone provide us with figures to indicate the amount of funding the NRA has contributed or lobbied for with regard to improved mental health care in the USA?
> 
> Yeah. Thought not.


Perhaps you can furnish us with the same figures from Bloomberg's MAIG?

Don't bother, the question was rhetorical.


----------



## FeXL

What's this? Has Obama lost his mind? This is gonna leave a mark...

Obama shifts $45 million for armed cops in schools — a la NRA



> *It’s almost like a page right out of the National Rifle Association playbook*: The Obama administration has announced millions of dollars in funding to put armed officers in the nation’s schools.
> 
> Specifically, the Department of Justice said $45 million is going to “create 356 new school resource officer positions,” CNN reported. The money is coming from Community Oriented Policing Services grant dollars — and first up on the list of intended recipients is Newtown, Conn., the site of the massive Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The money to Newtown will fund two new officers in the town’s schools, Breitbart reported.


Bold mine.

Progressive heads. Exploding everywhere...


----------



## kps

Atleast interpol gets it.



> CCRKBA Supports Interpol Chief's Idea About Armed Citizens
> PR Newswire
> 
> BELLEVUE, Wash., Oct. 22, 2013
> 
> BELLEVUE, Wash., Oct. 22, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms concurs with Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble's suggestion earlier today that an armed citizenry is one way to meet the threat of terrorism like the attack on a Nairobi, Kenya shopping mall last month.
> 
> In remarks moments after today's opening of the 82nd annual gathering of Interpol's governing body in Cartagena, Colombia, Noble made this observation: "Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly? What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."
> 
> "Finally, someone gets it," CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb observed. "Secretary General Noble is spot-on about armed citizens being able to defend themselves and others in dangerous situations. The right of self-defense is the oldest human right, and in far too many places around the world, that right is shamefully unrecognized."
> 
> "This is a no-brainer," he continued. "In his remarks today, Mr. Noble wondered 'How do you protect soft targets?' In this country, such places are universally designated 'gun-free zones.' We're talking about shopping malls, college campuses, public schools, restaurants, movie theaters and other places where guns are not allowed. These are places consistently targeted by criminals and crazies because they know people will not be able to fight back."
> 
> "Societies have to think about how they're going to approach the problem," Noble said. "One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that."
> 
> Gottlieb, co-author of America Fights Back: Armed Self-defense in a Violent Age and co-sponsor of the upcoming "Guns Save Lives Day" in December, said Noble has literally "cracked the code" when it comes to deterring criminal and terrorist attacks. He referred people to GunsSaveLives.com for more details on the Dec. 15 event.
> 
> "You make it possible for citizens to fight back," he said, "to be the true first responders; to make it so difficult and even deadly for outlaws to succeed that they simply stop trying. We have tried disarmament and even appeasement, and all we've gotten is a body count. It is time for the victims to become the victors."
> 
> With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (The Common Sense Gun Lobby Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms) is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> Read more: CCRKBA Supports Interpol Chief's Idea About Armed Citizens - Press Release - Digital Journal


CCRKBA Supports Interpol Chief's Idea About Armed Citizens - Press Release - Digital Journal


----------



## groovetube

Just imagine for a second, a movie theatre when a gunman starts shooting. 20 theatre goers pull out their guns and start shooting as well.

All this in the dark. Do you really think this is a better idea?

Perhaps the reason schools shopping malls etc are targeted is because that's where large numbers of people are.


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> Just imagine for a second, a movie theatre when a gunman starts shooting. 20 theatre goers pull out their guns and start shooting as well.
> 
> All this in the dark. Do you really think this is a better idea?
> 
> Perhaps the reason schools shopping malls etc are targeted is because that's where large numbers of people are.


a) Better than the alternative
b) Not all CCWers would start shooting at once. Look at the reports of CCWers at other mass shootings. Many didn't shoot at all, because they didn't have a clear shot.
c) Look at the locations of mass shootings in the States. Many/most have been in gun-free zones. The theatre in Aurora, CO was a gun-free theatre. Other theaters in town were not. It's naive to think that someone who planned their attack to that extent would not seek out gun-free zones with unarmed targets.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> J
> All this in the dark. Do you really think this is a better idea?


The chief of Interpol thinks it is and so do a lot of others…..


----------



## Macfury

John Clay said:


> a) Better than the alternative
> b) Not all CCWers would start shooting at once. Look at the reports of CCWers at other mass shootings. Many didn't shoot at all, because they didn't have a clear shot.


Only when the critic doesn't know a gun from a pea shooter, or a trained gun owner from a frisbee shooter, are such critiques offered.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> a) Better than the alternative
> b) Not all CCWers would start shooting at once. Look at the reports of CCWers at other mass shootings. Many didn't shoot at all, because they didn't have a clear shot.
> c) Look at the locations of mass shootings in the States. Many/most have been in gun-free zones. The theatre in Aurora, CO was a gun-free theatre. Other theaters in town were not. It's naive to think that someone who planned their attack to that extent would not seek out gun-free zones with unarmed targets.


Do you have any proof that the shooter in that theatre researched which one allowed guns and which didn't?

I've heard this line about how mass shooting only occur at these public locations because they don't allow guns. I'm just not quite buying this argument. I think they occur there because obviously, they are going to public places where there are lots of targets.



kps said:


> The chief of Interpol thinks it is and so do a lot of others…..


That's nice that they do. Personally, I know that not everyone carrying is trained, and has a reasonable ability to think straight when bullets are flying. Spend some serious time stateside, and I don't mean just passing through, and you'll know what I mean. :roll eyes:

Though I'm sure there are plenty of anonymous internet folk who will spout how everyone is a trained marksmen in these situations. Morons...

If the level of gun ownership is such that so many guns are floating around in the states, why aren't there armed security guards around?


----------



## SINC

It always amazes me how ill-informed anti gun folks are, twisting reality to suit their desired outcome. Anyone who has a carry permit has been trained and to call them 'marksmen' shows how little is understood about guns and their safe use.


----------



## groovetube

no they're not. They're not trained to deal with the kind of situations described. Don't give me this crap. They're trained in safety, how to shoot etc etc but not for that.

Concealed carry in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Classroom instruction would typically include firearm mechanics and terminology, cleaning and maintenance of a firearm, concealed carry legislation and limitations, liability issues, carry methods and safety, home defense, methods for managing and defusing confrontational situations, and practice of gun handling techniques without firing the weapon. Most required CCW training courses devote a considerable amount of time to liability issues.


I know people with conceal permits, and the training isn't extensive by any means at all. Anyone who has spent time down there would know this.

I'm sure the last bit will get the puppy dog wagging his tail. :lmao:


----------



## SINC

Thanks for posting the link that confirms my statement to be true. From the link:



> Training requirements
> 
> Some states require concealed carry applicants to certify their proficiency with a firearm through some type of training or instruction. Certain training courses developed by the National Rifle Association that combine classroom and live-fire instruction typically meet most state training requirements. Some states recognize prior military or police service as meeting training requirements.
> 
> *Classroom instruction would typically include firearm mechanics and terminology, cleaning and maintenance of a firearm, concealed carry legislation and limitations, liability issues, carry methods and safety, home defense, methods for managing and defusing confrontational situations, and practice of gun handling techniques without firing the weapon. Most required CCW training courses devote a considerable amount of time to liability issues.*


----------



## groovetube

Did you even see my post? I quoted the exact bit you bolded.

it confirms that they get some basic training on safety, the rules, and some very basic instructions on some situations.

This, not by a long shot, confirms what you insinuated that people with concealed permits are well trained for these sorts of situations. Bull.

And I know very well this is bull.



> Most required CCW training courses devote a considerable amount of time to liability issues.


Yeah. So don't hand this crap off as fact.

This, coming from someone who left his bushmaster unattended by his front door wide open... :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Thanks for posting the link that confirms my statement to be true. From the link:


This is what comes from not reading one's own links!


----------



## groovetube

oh look it's wagging it's tail already.

Didn't take long


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> This, not by a long shot, confirms what you insinuated that people with concealed permits are well trained for these sorts of situations. Bull.
> 
> And I know very well this is bull.
> 
> Yeah. So don't hand this crap off as fact.


Apparently you invent what I say as well. Here it is again:



SINC said:


> It always amazes me how ill-informed anti gun folks are, twisting reality to suit their desired outcome. *Anyone who has a carry permit has been trained* and to call them 'marksmen' shows how little is understood about guns and their safe use.


I stated, "Anyone who has a carry permit has been trained", and that is confirmed by your own link. And I say again anyone who claims they know what they are talking about when they call concealed weapons carriers 'marksmen' are clueless about guns.

Now, tell us all again how you are always right . . . 3, 2 . . .


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> Apparently you invent what I say as well. Here it is again:
> 
> 
> 
> I stated, "Anyone who has a carry permit has been trained", and that is confirmed by your own link. Get over it. And I say again anyone who claims they know what they are talking about when they call concealed weapons carriers 'marksmen' are clueless about guns.


now you're splitting hairs. Yes they are "trained", however, if you've been reading the thread, you would know, that isn't the point! Of course concealed permit holders have to take training classes. You're merely stamping about something we _*already know*_.


----------



## SINC

See, he is still right.


----------



## groovetube

well there's your last refuge.

As always. Get help. It may do you some good.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> That's nice that they do. Personally, I know that not everyone carrying is trained, and has a reasonable ability to think straight when bullets are flying. Spend some serious time stateside, and I don't mean just passing through, and you'll know what I mean. :roll eyes:


Groove how the heck would you know how serious my time in the US was or wasn't I spent 16 yrs delivering and sleeping unprotected in places like Hunt's Point Market, Fulton fish market when Gotti ran it, I was in LA's little Korea delivering keg beer a week after the Rodney King riots, Philly, KC, Lartedo TX waiting for Mexican veggies to cross the border, Miami, etc and not in some club with armed bouncers or other safe venue. Don't roll your eyes at me trying to make yourself look like you know what you talking about when you know zero about my 16yr trucking career and even less about firearms and the people who own them and use them.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Groove how the heck would you know how serious my time in the US was or wasn't I spent 16 yrs delivering and sleeping unprotected in places like Hunt's Point Market, Fulton fish market when Gotti ran it, I was in LA's little Korea delivering keg beer a week after the Rodney King riots, Philly, KC, Lartedo TX waiting for Mexican veggies to cross the border, Miami, etc and not in some club with armed bouncers or other safe venue. Don't roll your eyes at me trying to make yourself look like you know what you talking about when you know zero about my 16yr trucking career and even less about firearms and the people who own them and use them.


I wasn't insinuating that you don't experience down there. I know that you do. And you know I do as well.

I merely pointing out that as someone who has spent some real time down there, you would know what I'm talking about. (That was mainly directed at the others that say they have but you know damn well they haven't...)

You know how many yahoos are running around with guns thinking themselves rambo, of course you do. It's insane.

Probably the worst state for that has to be new jersey. Hands down. Though the closest I got to being near someone shot was that nail biter of a night in that syracuse hotel room, when someone was shot outside our room. But NJ took the cake for yahoos.

Trained my flipping ass...


I have no problem with the idea that rained official personal are armed in those 'no gun zones'. I think that should be allowed, especially stateside! That I'll agree on.

But to allow anyone with a permit to take part? no thanks.


----------



## SINC

kps said:


> Groove how the heck would you know how serious my time in the US was or wasn't


He doesn't know kps and his posts prove it, but ask him, he's always right, and knows better than anyone else on the board on ny subject. He's one smart, uh, er, well, you know.


----------



## groovetube

Oh stuff in your sock sinc, I've met kps personally we can argue and walk away friends without your crap thanks.

Now go see a doctor about your little problem and stop bugging us with it K?


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Clearly you have some psychological problems.





groovetube said:


> Get help. It may do you some good.





groovetube said:


> Now go see a doctor about your little problem and stop bugging us with it K?


I've had about enough of this bull****, too.

Turn it off, groove...


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> I've had about enough of this bull****, too.
> 
> Turn it off, groove...


When ya got nuttin' FeXL, you resort to name calling and lies.


----------



## John Clay

FeXL said:


> I've had about enough of this bull****, too.
> 
> Turn it off, groove...


+1.

You've brought the level of decorum of this thread down several notches all on your lonesome, groovetube.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> +1.
> 
> You've brought the level of decorum of this thread down several notches all on your lonesome, groovetube.


I wasn't the low life who attacked just for the hell of it. I kept it on topic, yet each and every time, since pulls his whole whiner crap.

So no, I didn't bring it down by my lonesome, he did. For anyone who thinks I shouldn't respond to it, I'm tired of the attacks by the usuals, and I will fire right back since there's no mods.

cry me a sob story. You want it all better, then tell since to grow up and keep it on topic. Adults can disagree hotly, and move on. That guy, not so much.


----------



## groovetube

SINC said:


> When ya got nuttin' FeXL, you resort to name calling and lies.


Coming from them who constantly attack someone personally every time (lowlifes do that), I'll take that as a compliment.

You keep attacking and I'll hit right back bucko. You want it to end, stop being such a jerk. I won't take it any longer. Sorry.

Few more members no longer participating because you guys. Keep it up, it'll be a ghost town here!


----------



## kps

Take it easy boys, it ain't worth a heart attack. Settle yourselves down and have nice alcoholic libation.

Interpol is European and the chief cop at Interpol isn't like some sherif in Tupelo Mississippi or Cheyenne Wyoming. There isn't a huge gun culture in Europe like in the US and legal firearms are not easily obtained by private citizens, as a matter of fact, there are outright bans on handguns and semi-automatic firearms in many EU countries. 

So when the Chief of interpol goes on to suggest allowing civilians (assume trained) to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from terror attacks it makes total sense to me.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Take it easy boys, it ain't worth a heart attack. Settle yourselves down and have nice alcoholic libation.
> 
> Interpol is European and the chief cop at Interpol isn't like some sherif in Tupelo Mississippi or Cheyenne Wyoming. There isn't a huge gun culture in Europe like in the US and legal firearms are not easily obtained by private citizens, as a matter of fact, there are outright bans on handguns and semi-automatic firearms in many EU countries.
> 
> So when the Chief of interpol goes on to suggest allowing civilians (assume trained) to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from terror attacks it makes total sense to me.


The training is the key for me. It needs to be more extensive that's offered in the us currently.

And cheers.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Coming from a pair of misogynist liars who constantly attack someone personally every time (lowlifes do that), I'll take that as a compliment.


Are you calling me a misogynist liar?

Somebody please quote this post so the coward can read it.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> The training is the key for me. It needs to be more extensive that's offered in the us currently.
> 
> And cheers.


You're fixated on the US, the US is a lost cause. There are as many guns in the US as are in the rest of the world. LOL

We need to stop comparing us or anyone else to what the firearms and crime situation is in the US.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> You're fixated on the US, the US is a lost cause. There are as many guns in the US as are in the rest of the world. LOL
> 
> We need to stop comparing us or anyone else to what the firearms and crime situation is in the US.


True. I can't disagree with you there.


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Are you calling me a misogynist liar?
> 
> Somebody please quote this post so the coward can read it.


Read on coward. (Glad to oblige F)

Sometimes people describe themselves better than we here ever could:


----------



## groovetube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m_DzRLVMXc

:lmao:


----------



## SINC

Ah yes, the drummer comes through. Beat again, eh?


----------



## SINC

groovetube said:


> Few more members no longer participating because you guys. Keep it up, it'll be a ghost town here!


You've driven away far more than anyone now. You just are such a know-it-all, you don't even realize it.


----------



## groovetube

Liar.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Coming from a pair of misogynist liars who constantly attack someone personally every time (lowlifes do that),


Man up groove. Who are you calling misogynist liars?

You start bandying around terminology like that, you'd better be pretty specific who you're personally attacking.

Again, who are you calling misogynist liars?


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> Man up groove. Who are you calling misogynist liars?
> 
> You start bandying around terminology like that, you'd better be pretty specific who you're personally attacking.
> 
> Again, who are you calling misogynist liars?


Hmm, no men here apparently, eh FeXL? No surprise is it?


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Read on coward. (Glad to oblige F)
> 
> Sometimes people describe themselves better than we here ever could:





SINC said:


> Ah yes, the drummer comes through. Beat again, eh?





SINC said:


> You've driven away far more than anyone now. You just are such a know-it-all, you don't even realize it.





groovetube said:


> Liar.





FeXL said:


> Man up groove. Who are you calling misogynist liars?
> 
> You start bandying around terminology like that, you'd better be pretty specific who you're personally attacking.
> 
> Again, who are you calling misogynist liars?





SINC said:


> Hmm, no men here apparently, eh FeXL? No surprise is it?


I will happily snail-mail a 10 spot to the first person who can point out the relevance to the topic in any of these most recent posts. Personally I have better things to do with my time than continuing to read this drivel.


----------



## kps

Gotta put this back on topic:


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> I will happily snail-mail a 10 spot to the first person who can point out the relevance to the topic in any of these most recent posts. Personally I have better things to do with my time than continuing to read this drivel.


I only accept EMTs.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> I will happily snail-mail a 10 spot to the first person who can point out the relevance to the topic in any of these most recent posts. Personally I have better things to do with my time than continuing to read this drivel.


I agree entirely.

That said, I can't help but notice you've been very selective in your choice of posts to highlight.

The post of mine you quoted was in response to a personal attack. Interestingly, that one never made your list. I suggest we look at cause & effect. Eliminate the cause, there won't be an effect...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> I agree entirely.
> 
> That said, I can't help but notice you've been very selective in your choice of posts to highlight.
> 
> The post of mine you quoted was in response to a personal attack. Interestingly, that one never made your list. I suggest we look at cause & effect. Eliminate the cause, there won't be an effect...


I simply selected every post after the last on topic post. Was trying to make a point, not write a novel!

Anyways the snow is settling in. Time to arm myself bring home dinner for a few days.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> Gotta put this back on topic:


hilarious


----------



## kps

Why does this not surprise me….

Now we need to get rid of the rest of C-68.




> Firearms instructors are scrambling to cope with a sudden increase in demand for gun safety courses.
> 
> Enrolment has jumped by more than 20 per cent in the past year as younger hunters and more women head into the woods and to shooting ranges.
> 
> The end of the federal long gun registry also plays a role in the upswing, says firearms instructor Bob Kierstead. He says the creation of the firearms registry by the federal government in 1993 turned young people away from hunting and the use of guns.
> 
> Peter Palmer
> Peter Palmer of the Natural Resources department says the lowering of the hunting age to 12 years is one reason behind the increase in participation in gun safety courses. (CBC)
> 
> "The very, very restrictive legislation that came in on firearms in general, and that turned a lot of the young people away from it," said Keirstead. "Too many hoops to jump through and they turned away from it. That was the big thing that we saw."
> 
> Peter Palmer, the co-ordinator of hunter education courses for the Department of Natural Resources, says enrolment in courses increased 23 per cent after the long gun registry was abolished last year.
> 
> Palmer says the lowering of the hunting age to 12 years from 14 years of age also played a role, along with new media portraying hunting in a positive light.
> 
> "With the media showing hunting in a very, very positive light, with Wild TV and, you know, outdoor shows, people are looking at hunting and saying, `You know, I haven't done it in a while. I think I'm going to get back in it,'" said Palmer. "And they are benefiting from it as a family."
> 
> Keirstead says he's surprised and pleased to see more women signing up for firearms safety courses.
> 
> "With our firearm courses, the percentage of female participation is increasing and for the first time in New Brunswick, we had an all-female firearm course," said Keirstead.
> 
> Share Tools




Gun safety courses deal with surge in registrations - New Brunswick - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Yeah, but everybody knows it's not _serious_ training.

/sarc...


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> Yeah, but everybody knows it's not _serious_ training.
> 
> /sarc...


Serious or not, increased interest safeguards our hunting heritage and shooting sports. 

The government bureaucrat created courses are a beginning, a starting point and a licensing requirement. Where one takes it afterward, is up to them.


----------



## FeXL

Brilliant...

VA Supreme Court: state has no duty to protect students from gunmen on campus 



> "Based on the limited information available to the commonwealth at the time prior to the shootings in Norris Hall, it cannot be said that it was known or reasonably foreseeable that students in Norris Hall would fall victim to criminal harm," the court wrote. "Thus, as a matter of law, the commonwealth did not have a duty to protect students against third party criminal acts."


So, I guess concealed carry is allowed on Virginia Tech campus, then?


----------



## FeXL

More chickens coming home to roost.

New York Loses Firearms Company To South Carolina Because Of Gun Control Laws



> American Tactical Imports is leaving Rochester for South Carolina, blaming the move in part on the state’s gun-control law passed in January.
> 
> “As one of the gun industry’s top importers and manufacturers of firearms and firearm-related accessories, ATI’s decision to relocate is two-fold,” the company said in a news release. *“ATI believes it is imperative that a firearms importer and manufacturer do business within a state that is friendly to the Second Amendment rights of the people.*


My bold.

Good.


----------



## kps

Meanwhile in Toronto

Got $20,000?

Toronto tailor introduces bulletproof three-piece suits - The Globe and Mail


----------



## Macfury

That would leave one hell of a bruise!

Meanwhile from the same page:

Alarm as 3-D printed gun parts turn up in U.K. gang raid - The Globe and Mail

I think this effectively ends any notion of gun control as we know it. The plastic 3D printers can do this, but the more expensive laser sintering machines can create pure metal objects.


----------



## kps

+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






Defense Distributed - YouTube


----------



## kps

It was bound to happen. We've been saying this for years.

Hipster among younger Albertans embracing hunting - Calgary - CBC News


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> It was bound to happen. We've been saying this for years.
> 
> Hipster among younger Albertans embracing hunting - Calgary - CBC News


oh jeez. There goes the neighbourhood as they say 

Well at least the scraggly beards are out there doing something I guess. Maybe the darwin effect will cull the herd I donna 

Here in Toronto they just smugly saunter around drinking unheard of beer brands, and driving Harley's their dads bought them.


----------



## chasMac

kps said:


> It was bound to happen. We've been saying this for years.
> 
> Hipster among younger Albertans embracing hunting - Calgary - CBC News


Critters needn't be too worried:

Hipster farmers abandoning urban chickens because they’re too much work | National Post


----------



## kps

chasMac said:


> Critters needn't be too worried:
> 
> "nationalpost.com/2013/07/09/hipster-farmers-abandoning-urban-chickens-because-theyre-too-much-work"


Yeah, and they stink too. LOL


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> oh jeez. There goes the neighbourhood as they say
> 
> Well at least the scraggly beards are out there doing something I guess. Maybe the darwin effect will cull the herd I donna
> 
> Here in Toronto they just smugly saunter around drinking unheard of beer brands, and driving Harley's their dads bought them.


I drink "unheard of beer brands" mostly Czech and German Pilsners. Have a swig of Staropramen or Czechvar(original Budwiser) or Golden Pheasant.

Here in the GTA and even up here every shooting club is FULL and not taking any new members or very sporadically. Hunter training booked solid…I love it!


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> I drink "unheard of beer brands" mostly Czech and German Pilsners. Have a swig of Staropramen or Czechvar(original Budwiser) or Golden Pheasant.
> 
> Here in the GTA and even up here every shooting club is FULL and not taking any new members or very sporadically. Hunter training booked solid…I love it!


Silverdale is still taking new members, though that may be to their detriment. They're adding several new ranges, which should help with the influx of new members. Unfortunately, idiots still make it through the licensing process. Just the other day, an RO sent someone home for loading a rifle on a green flag...


----------



## Macfury

John Clay said:


> Silverdale is still taking new members, though that may be to their detriment. They're adding several new ranges, which should help with the influx of new members. Unfortunately, idiots still make it through the licensing process. Just the other day, an RO sent someone home for loading a rifle on a green flag...


Sounds like the guy I met who tried to pull-start a chainsaw while holding the blade between his knees.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> I drink "unheard of beer brands" mostly Czech and German Pilsners. Have a swig of Staropramen or Czechvar(original Budwiser) or Golden Pheasant.
> 
> Here in the GTA and even up here every shooting club is FULL and not taking any new members or very sporadically. Hunter training booked solid…I love it!


Well K you didn't look like a hipster to me, and I bet you actually like those beers and aren't doing because it's 'ironic'. 



John Clay said:


> Silverdale is still taking new members, though that may be to their detriment. They're adding several new ranges, which should help with the influx of new members. Unfortunately, idiots still make it through the licensing process. Just the other day, an RO sent someone home for loading a rifle on a green flag...


wonderful.


----------



## John Clay

Macfury said:


> Sounds like the guy I met who tried to pull-start a chainsaw while holding the blade between his knees.


More than once, I've seen someone pick up a gun and try to shoot it sideways. They, too, were sent home.


----------



## pm-r

Macfury said:


> Sounds like the guy I met who tried to pull-start a chainsaw while holding the blade between his knees.



You mean like this guy??


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> Silverdale is still taking new members, though that may be to their detriment. They're adding several new ranges, which should help with the influx of new members. Unfortunately, idiots still make it through the licensing process. Just the other day, an RO sent someone home for loading a rifle on a green flag...


My guess? Most are members on a waiting list for other clubs. Silverdale is also a for profit *business *as opposed to most clubs, which are non-profits. From what you say, they stand to make a bundle.


----------



## Macfury

pm-r said:


> You mean like this guy??


Yeah. Someone knocked him down before he could pull.


----------



## kps

pm-r said:


> You mean like this guy??


I can start a chainsaw like that due to the chain lockout on my Stihl, would I trust it in that position…not on your life.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> My guess? Most are members on a waiting list for other clubs. Silverdale is also a for profit *business *as opposed to most clubs, which are non-profits. From what you say, they stand to make a bundle.


That's entirely possible, though I'm not really sure why. All the other ranges have (usually) more restrictive rules, and certainly fewer ranges. I'm on the waiting list for Guelph, but I don't think it would be a much better experience there.


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> That's entirely possible, though I'm not really sure why. All the other ranges have (usually) more restrictive rules, and certainly fewer ranges. I'm on the waiting list for Guelph, but I don't think it would be a much better experience there.


Guelph suffers from it's smallness, but is a good club and has an indoor range which I believe Silverdale lacks. 

<humour>I was hoping Ford would reopen what Miller shut down, but I don't see that happening anytime soon. </humour>

I wish someone would open something like this here:




+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

So, recall Bloomberg's MAIG (Mayors Against Illegal Guns)? Twenty-three of them have not been re-elected.



> Bloomberg's Anti-Gun Lobby Takes Another Huge Hit With 23 Reelection Failures





> The 23 mayors who lost re-election were opposed and confronted by the National Rifle Association and represented more than 10 percent of MAIG membership. In addition, 69 Mayors Against Illegal Guns members chose to retire and not seek re-election. Many of the mayors who retired represented cities in New York and Connecticut, both states that have implemented harsher gun control laws since last year.


----------



## FeXL

If you can't outlaw firearms, you close down the source of raw materials for ammo...

EPA Closure of Last Lead Smelting Plant to Impact Ammunition Production 



> The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is not content to infringe on property rights; recent actions taken against the country's last lead smelting facility will affect the right to keep and bear arms, as well, by substantially impacting the production of ammunition. As of December 31, 2013, the lead refining plant will close for good.


Chinese ammo, anyone?


----------



## kps

FeXL said:


> If you can't outlaw firearms, you close down the source of raw materials for ammo...
> 
> EPA Closure of Last Lead Smelting Plant to Impact Ammunition Production
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese ammo, anyone?


I already use CN ammo as well as Eastern European. Not to worry FeXL, Obama will be gone soon enough and so will the stupidity.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> If you can't outlaw firearms, you close down the source of raw materials for ammo...
> 
> EPA Closure of Last Lead Smelting Plant to Impact Ammunition Production
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese ammo, anyone?


Does explain all those recent government purchase of ammo. 

On the plus side, most of those purchases were not the military, so in the future if Bush III or Bush IV want to wage war they may find themselves completely at the mercy of the Chinese to supply the needed ammunition.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> I already use CN ammo as well as Eastern European. Not to worry FeXL, Obama will be gone soon enough and so will the stupidity.


I don't know that whether Obama is in or not will make any difference apparently.

Missouri smelter gains attention from conspiracy theorists | MSNBC



> It is, to be sure, a wonderfully creative argument, and I’ll gladly give conservatives credit for their remarkable imaginations. There is, however, one noticeable flaw in the conspiracy theory.
> 
> *The EPA first went after the Doe Run Co. and its smelting operation in 2008. President Obama took office in 2009. If enforcement of environmental safeguards was used to secretly undermine access to ammunition, the plot was launched by the notorious gun-grabbers in the Bush/Cheney administration.*
> 
> Keep this in mind when your wacky uncle who watches Fox all day sends you an all-caps email on the subject.


Oops.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I don't know that whether Obama is in or not will make any difference apparently.
> 
> Missouri smelter gains attention from conspiracy theorists | MSNBC
> 
> 
> 
> Oops.


MSNBC is a well known left wing media outlet whose bias is obvious. The government mass purchases by NSA, the military and others of ammunition was reported long before the smelter's announced shutdown. So there may be a grain of truth to it. 

Look, ammo prices will go up, that's all, it'll continue to be available. Lead acid batterie same thing, as well as other products using lead.

Who's right and who's wrong? History usually reveals these things eventually.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> MSNBC is a well known left wing media outlet whose bias is obvious. The government mass purchases by NSA, the military and others of ammunition was reported long before the smelter's announced shutdown. So there may be a grain of truth to it.
> 
> Look, ammo prices will go up, that's all, it'll continue to be available. Lead acid batterie same thing, as well as other products using lead.
> 
> Who's right and who's wrong? History usually reveals these things eventually.


Oh KPS, yes I know they have a leftie bias. But, if the EPA went after them before Obama took office, then this who Obama take away our conspiracy is just a bunch of crap. Bush/Cheney is just as after your guns as Obama is.

Perhaps instead of giving blanket huge tax cuts, they can be targeted to companies who create full time jobs in the US, and companies who are targeted by the EPA, like this lead smelter, then perhaps large cuts can be offered to offset costs.

Ah but that makes too much sense.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> MSNBC is a well known left wing media outlet whose bias is obvious. The government mass purchases by NSA, the military and others of ammunition was reported long before the smelter's announced shutdown. So there may be a grain of truth to it.
> 
> Look, ammo prices will go up, that's all, it'll continue to be available. Lead acid batterie same thing, as well as other products using lead.
> 
> Who's right and who's wrong? History usually reveals these things eventually.


kps, some people have no concept of the EPA as its own left-wing operation, so they have difficulty understanding this.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> Oh KPS, yes I know they have a leftie bias. But, if the EPA went after them before Obama took office, then this who Obama take away our conspiracy is just a bunch of crap. Bush/Cheney is just as after your guns as Obama is.
> 
> Perhaps instead of giving blanket huge tax cuts, they can be targeted to companies who create full time jobs in the US, and companies who are targeted by the EPA, like this lead smelter, then perhaps large cuts can be offered to offset costs.
> 
> Ah but that makes too much sense.


The "grain of salt" I was talking about is the additional ("10 fold") demands asked for by the EPA. It seems that the smelter would or could have complied with most of the demands but not all, preferring instead to shut down. Did the administration play a part in it, who knows. This is conjecture on my part, but could be the case.


----------



## kps

Macfury said:


> kps, some people have no concept of the EPA as its own left-wing operation, so they have difficulty understanding this.


Environmental bureaucrat's wings usually flutter more on the left side. The rest of the government bureaucrats usually lean that way as well.


----------



## Macfury

kps said:


> Environmental bureaucrat's wings usually flutter more on the left side. The rest of the government bureaucrats usually lean that way as well.


The EPA acts as its own social policy wing under the guise of environmentalism. It makes me laugh that most of their carefully crafted nonsense is going to be undone by 3-D ptrinting and additive manufacturing in the next 5 years.


----------



## groovetube

kps said:


> The "grain of salt" I was talking about is the additional ("10 fold") demands asked for by the EPA. It seems that the smelter would or could have complied with most of the demands but not all, preferring instead to shut down. Did the administration play a part in it, who knows. This is conjecture on my part, but could be the case.


were there additional demands recently beyond what was asked in 2008? I hadn't found that information.

It does sound like a whole lotta conjecture, without any shred of evidence. Interesting too that this was the last lead smelter. What happened to the others? Lefties close those too? 



kps said:


> Environmental bureaucrat's wings usually flutter more on the left side. The rest of the government bureaucrats usually lean that way as well.


If pushing for cleaner air is considered 'leftie', well, so be it  People are dying of cancer from pollution, so the constant looking the other way stuff hasn't served the population very well at all. Characterizing this as leftie, is rather interesting. At least one side is looking out for human beings...


----------



## Macfury

I love the term "low-information voter" recently coined in the US.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> If pushing for cleaner air is considered 'leftie', well, so be it  People are dying of cancer from pollution, so the constant looking the other way stuff hasn't served the population very well at all. Characterizing this as leftie, is rather interesting. At least one side is looking out for human beings...


Killing America: EPA Induced Lead Crisis




> After Doe Run Co. spent millions of dollars to meet the EPA’s requirements, the EPA decided to reduce the air-emissions requirements tenfold, from 1.5 µg/m3 (micrograms of lead per cubic meter of air) to .15 µg/m3, an impossible requirement to meet economically, which was most likely the EPA’s intention from the start.
> 
> *When there has not been a single person proven to be harmed by the lead emissions at the old rate, the increasingly stringent requirements pushed by this radical EPA will do far more harm than good to our nation, its economy, and its people.*


Bold mine.

Funny what you can learn when you're not just reading the Toronto Star...


----------



## FeXL

NYS goes full on Nazi; SAFE act to encourage people to inform on neighbors if they have too many bullets

This sums it up for me:



> So, we have Cuomo encouraging people to spy on and turn in their neighbors for a $500 bounty with no safeguards for the accused, nor any punishment for the accuser should their accusation be without merit. This situation is so vulnerable to abuse it’s pathetic.


----------



## SINC

.



+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## FeXL

So, Colorado, having recalled two idiots in September for their gun-control bent, are now targeting a third.

David, Goliath, and Colorado’s next gun-rights recall



> On Oct. 4, the secretary of state approved a new petition to recall a third Democratic state senator whose gun-grabbing extremism made national headlines this spring. Evie Hudak represents Senate District 19, which encompasses Arvada and Westminster in the metro Denver area. During a legislative hearing in March on the Democrats’ plan to ban students from carrying concealed firearms on campus, a condescending Hudak rebuked pro-concealed carry advocate and rape victim Amanda Collins.
> 
> ...
> 
> *Hudak’s dishonest defense of disarming and disempowering women sent a chilling message from government to constituents: About to be raped, assaulted or murdered? The odds are against you. Don’t bother to fight back.*


This time, however, the ultimate stakes a just a bit higher:



> Democrats hold Colorado’s state Senate by an 18-17 margin. Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper’s fate also hangs in the balance.


You go, Colorado!


----------



## kps

Told you so….

CANADIAN SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION / CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION

TEAM CSSA E-NEWS - November 25, 2013

** Please share this E-news with your friends **

CSSA E-News – 25 November 2013 – draft


COMMENTARY

TORONTO GUN CRIMES DOWN 85% SINCE REGISTRY SCRAPPED

It must be Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair's worst dream – his own force's stats show that gun crimes are on the wane and he was wrong.

“The registry has worked extremely well for us,” Blair told CTV News on April 20, 2010. “That information, if lost to us, would directly impact on our ability to conduct criminal investigations and to keep our officers and our communities safer.”

Sorry about that Chief, but there have been a mere 21 gun deaths-injuries so far this year, compared with 144 last year. The year isn't over yet, but with just over a month to go, Toronto has an 85 percent decrease so far. Lawful gun owners must be tempted to tell their anti-gun friends, “We told ya so.” There is no relationship between a gun registry and public safety, period. Could someone please phone Quebec and tell them before they make a big, expensive mistake?

Gun owners were right about the registry, and we are right about Authorizations to Transport, 10-year licensing, and a host of other legislative items that can be changed to our advantage an no one's disadvantage. It makes us wonder why the current government is so (ahem) gun-shy about making more red-tape changes that bestow fairness upon gun owners without jeopardizing safety. When will they realize they need our votes?

If the anti-gun faction doesn't like it, show 'em Toronto's crime stats.

-------

To see the Toronto Police Service Crime Statistics: Toronto Police Service :: To Serve and Protect

To see what Tony Bernardo of CSSA/CILA had to say to Sun TV's Brian Lilley about it: Don't mourn the gun registry : Prime time : SunNews Video Gallery

-------
To join or donate to the CSSA, visit: CSSA: Membership 
------
CANADIAN SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION / CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION

E-Mail: [email protected] 
Website CSSA Canadian Shooting Sports Assoc. (target shooting, shotgun, rifle, pistol, biathlon, free pistol, cowboy shooting, SASS, IPSC, PPC, IPDA, full-bore rifle, gun ban, gun control, handgun ban, C68, gun registry, confiscation, gun rights, self defens


----------



## FeXL

There ya go, bein' all difficult & contrary with facts an' stuff. Ain't hardly fair... 

A little graphic to emphasize the point:


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> There ya go, bein' all difficult & contrary with facts an' stuff. Ain't hardly fair...
> 
> A little graphic to emphasize the point:



I donno... k?


----------



## FeXL

‘I Won’t Enforce It’: Pro-2nd Amendment Stance Helps New York Sheriff Dominate In Re-Election Bid



> Back in May, one county sheriff pledged not to enforce the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement (SAFE) Act, a bill that came early in the post-Newtown backlash of knee-jerk gun control legislation that swept through the Nation’s social progressivism outposts.
> 
> That sheriff, Tim Howard of Erie County, signed on to a lawsuit against the SAFE Act along with other New York sheriffs, and famously told The Buffalo News: “I won’t enforce it.”
> 
> Howard was up for re-election this year, and he faced two opponents in the general election in early November. But Howard’s stance on gun control resonated with Erie County voters. Here’s how The Buffalo News revisited Howard’s political arc after *he won his third term in office*:


My bold.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> There ya go, bein' all difficult & contrary with facts an' stuff. Ain't hardly fair...
> 
> A little graphic to emphasize the point:


To be completely fair DC and Chicago are cities founded by and run entirely for, the benefit of professional criminals.

Whatever gun control laws exist in these cities are entirely for the protection of the criminals who run these cities.


----------



## FeXL

In post 1385 of this thread I linked to an article about a third Colorado Dem senator facing recall and the possible fallout. Curiously (not!), she's decided to resign instead of possibly ending up on her butt outside the Capitol. As such, a new Dem senator gets a free ride into her spot & Dems maintain their senate majority.

Colorado Dem resigns rather than face a recall for supporting gun control laws



> Colorado Democratic state Sen. Evie Hudak, the third legislator facing the prospect of a recall for her support of tough new gun control laws, resigned on Wednesday rather than risk losing her seat in a special election.
> 
> Had that happened, power in the state senate would have shifted to the Republican Party. With Hudak’s resignation, however, Democrats can appoint her successor and hold onto a one-seat majority. Democrats also control the state House.


Wonder what kind of compensation she'll be receiving for this magnanimous gesture...


----------



## kps

CANADIAN SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION / CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION

TEAM CSSA E-NEWS - December 02, 2013


** Please share this E-news with your friends **

COMMENTARY: CANADA'S BUREAUCRATS RUN ROUGHSHOD OVER OUR RIGHTS

Read the headline above again.

Perhaps the saddest thing about life in 2013 is that responsible firearms owners can only agree and sigh, “Yeah, so what else is new?” There are so many left-wing activists-slash-bureaucrats on the federal government's payroll that our individual rights are but a dim memory. If you don't believe us, the proof is the news this week.

To its great credit, our elected representatives kiboshed an anti-gun study poised to invoke pseudo-science against responsible gun owners. Some bureaucrats hidden in the bowels of Environment Canada issued a tender for a study into the effects of lead at shooting ranges. The intent was clearly designed to end badly for the shooting sports. (See story below)

Herein lies the proof that some bureaucrats do think we're the bad guys.

When a Canadian Press reporter asked for comments from CSSA/CILA spokesman Tony Bernardo, he explained that numerous lead studies have already been conducted by anti-gun advocates with the intention of bringing our heritage activities to an abrupt end. The Harper government saw through the Environment Canada subterfuge and recalled the tender.

It's heartening to know the government is keeping an eye on the public service that is supposed to be working for all Canadians. Millions of international dollars have already been wasted on anti-lead studies that pretend boogieman hunters, anglers and sport shooters are harming the environment. The tail is trying to wag the dog once again. We can only hope the bureaucrats who tried to slide the tender past Parliament are soon posted to a weather station on Baffin Island.

COMMENTARY: RCMP AND CBC STIR THE HIGH RIVER PROPAGANDA POT

The RCMP and CBC have conspired to dismiss systemic firearms theft by police officers in High River, Alberta.

The cops and the CBC say confiscating the firearms of flood victims is perfectly acceptable behaviour. They even gleefully pronounce the Harper government's inquiries into the heavy-handed RCMP raid as “political interference.” They expect the federal government to ignore the thuggery when its national police force breaks into private residences to confiscate legal firearms. The officers left behind copious damning evidence when they targeted gun owners' homes using government firearms records. They even filmed themselves rooting through homes to swipe guns that were safely stored. O Canada, indeed.

The CBC story of November 28 claims: “An email from an unidentified RCMP special tactical operations (STO) member describes the operating procedures in place for those searches. 'We did not search for firearms and only firearms that were in the open/in plain sight were to be noted and secured. The purpose of the searches were for people and animals in distress.' The officer added that no STO members seized firearms from gun cabinets, whether they were locked or not.”

So who's lying – the RCMP or 1,900 High River homeowners who claimed for damages? One can answer this question with another question. Given the excessive damage in so many homes, which of these two groups has the incentive to bend the truth?

The RCMP have concocted some fabulous fiction through it's willing media shill, the CBC. Had the Harper government not put the RCMP on notice early in this witch hunt, we can only shudder at the treatment High River residents might have been forced to endure. As it was, police busted down doors and dragged mud throughout many homes and severely damaged many homes. It is most unsettling that the RCMP and CBC insist that police took only “unsecured” firearms – the smash-and-grab tactics surely prove that most of the guns were secured.

Both the RCMP and CBC smugly note that a few High River residents volunteered to give police “109 firearms surrendered for safe-keeping.” There may well have been some residents who were worried that their firearms could be under water or vulnerable. The news report, however, suggests that a few surrendered guns justifies confiscating 542 others from absentee residents. High River RCMP said they received 94 guns for destruction, too. We wonder if they remembered to hand out cheap cameras in return.

A few police officers and a few CBC broadcasters believe they should be allowed to make the rules as they go. They are determined to make guns go away because they believe it's the righteous road to public safety and national security.

How so many educated people can be so wrong is a puzzle for the ages.

--------------

FEDS CANCEL ENVIRONMENT CANADA WITCH-HUNT ON LEAD AMMO: The federal government has cancelled a tender for a study on the environmental impact of lead shot and bullets.
The tender was issued earlier this month by Environment Canada, but immediately ran into opposition from shooting groups.

Tony Bernardo, spokesman for the Canadians Shooting Sports Association, called the study complete nonsense — a perspective shared by the Conservative government. Paul Calandra, parliamentary secretary to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, has told the Commons the tender is dead.

He called it a waste of taxpayers' dollars. Calandra says the government will continue to support hunters and sport shooters.

"We know that the Liberals and the NDP probably would have continued this study on the grounds that the environmental impact of bullets on the forest floor would have been a good pretext for onerous environmental restrictions on the use of bullets," Calandra told the Commons.

"And they probably would bring back the long gun registry."

In announcing the tender for the study, Environment Canada said it would have looked at the impact of regulations on lead shot.

"In 1995, ammunitions were estimated to have contributed to releasing over 1,000 tonnes of lead in the Canadian environment; however regulations that entered into force in 1997 were expected to address half of these releases,'' the department said.

Bernardo dismissed the study as little more than another effort to make things difficult for firearms enthusiasts. (The Canadian Press – November 27, 2013)

-------

WOW – CBC BLAMES CONSERVATIVE STAFFERS FOR HIGH RIVER CONCERN: Documents obtained by CBC News show just how much pressure Conservative staffers exerted on the Mounties to justify why they seized hundreds of firearms from evacuated homes at the height of the Alberta floods last spring.
The emails paint a picture of a police force trying to juggle political demands with the "basic police work" of ensuring the public's safety in an emergency situation.

The correspondence, obtained under Access to Information, begins on June 20, 2013, when the RCMP asked for help from the Canadian Forces because there were roughly 150 people trapped in trees and on rooftops.
Insp. Don McKenna explained the need for helicopters and boats with big engines to power through debris-filled water. By June 25, the Mounties reported having rescued 38 people, locating 327 people in evacuation zones after entering 4,688 buildings, 754 of them by force.

But what the RCMP found in some of those homes created another operational challenge. An email from an unidentified RCMP special tactical operations (STO) member describes the operating procedures in place for those searches.

"We did not search for firearms and only firearms that were in the open/in plain sight were to be noted and secured. The purpose of the searches were for people and animals in distress."

The officer added that no STO members seized firearms from gun cabinets, whether they were locked or not. In total, the documents show the Mounties seized 542 firearms, 93 of them coming from a single residence. When the people of High River found out, many were incensed.

On June 28, the Calgary Herald ran a story with the headline, "'Hell to Pay:' Residents angry as RCMP seize guns from High River homes." It only took a few hours for Mark Johnson, the director of issues management in the office of former Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, to send a link to that story to the RCMP and asked, "Is this taking members away from the work of disaster recovery?"

Subsequent emails indicate there were also some phone calls from the minister's office asking how many guns had been taken. The inquiries did not go over so well inside RCMP national headquarters.

Sgt. Julie Gagnon wrote to her colleagues, "They are getting involved in basic police work where we are only ensuring the safety/security of the population. Police do that kind of work when they go to residences that are unsecured. This is not taking them away from doing other things, they have to do it."

Her boss Daniel Lavoie asked why political staffers needed the numbers, as did Alberta's Deputy Commissioner Dale McGowan.

"I'm not sure we should be releasing the number as it is quite a statement with that many unsecured guns out there. A bit of a political issue I would think," wrote McGowan. That was an understatement.

The very next day, the Prime Minister's Office publicly rebuked the RCMP by saying the force "should focus on more important tasks such as protecting lives and private property." It added that all firearms should be returned to their owners as soon as possible.

Looking back on it, Staff Sgt. Abe Townsend says the statement was not appreciated. "They acted within the law and in the best interests of the community. The negative comments surrounding the manner in which the members were conducting their duties was discouraging," the RCMP staff relations representative said.

The Alberta government had also taken an interest in the High River gun situation. On June 27, Solicitor General Jonathan Denis wrote to McGowan to thank the Mounties for their dedication and commitment but also to get clarification on whether weapons taken from private dwellings were being stored or confiscated. He also asked if there was a plan to tell Albertans how to retrieve their lawful property.

Back in High River documents show the two officers tasked with documenting each gun and making sure it wasn't stolen property were under a great deal of strain. On June 29, Staff Sgt. Ian Shardlow replied to a request to start returning firearms, "We are stuck at two resources to accomplish this. We have processed the guns from the first zone… we have a couple of concerns regarding the logistics of accomplishing this."

The next day Shardlow reported having returned several firearms, including $25,000 worth of guns to someone who he said was happy with how the RCMP handled the seizures. There was one procedural hiccup though. Shardlow wrote that he had been unable to reach the Canadian Firearms Centre to obtain transport permits for restricted firearms in cases where evacuees were not returning to their flood-damaged homes.

By July 5, officers had returned 164 firearms but something else was happening. While several residents continued to slam the RCMP for kicking down their doors and taking their guns, others in High River started bringing their guns and large quantities of ammunition to the Mounties for safekeeping.

On July 10, people had surrendered so many firearms at the local detachment that lack of space was becoming an issue.

Cst. Matt Allen asked for permission to rent a small shipping container."That would put two garage bays here at the detachment back in service. As of tonight's totals we have 109 guns in storage at the request of the owners. I anticipate this number will increase in the coming weeks."

One month later, the RCMP reported that 517 firearms had been returned, 94 had been turned in for destruction and 132 remained in storage along with 500,000 rounds of ammunition.

"The firearms in storage are made up of a small amount originally secured during the flood but the vast amount of them have been brought in after the flood by owners who have no place to safely store them for the time being," wrote Cst. John Rotheisler.

-------

QUEBEC MEDIA MAKE FEEBLE EFFORT TO SHOW GUN REGISTRY WORKS: Some 19 months after Canada's long-gun firearms registry was scrapped by Parliament, the Quebec media are still mining it for propaganda dressed as news. Gun owners' addresses are limited to the first two digits in postal codes “gleaned from the Canadian gun registry data, recently obtained and made available by La Presse. The data go to Jan. 2012, and at more than 900 MB and nearly 8 million rows, it’s a dataset that requires some serious data tools to tackle”...

The Canadian gun registry: a portrait of Montreal | Montreal Gazette


----------



## eMacMan

Of course the reason the homes were unsecured was that the Mounties bashed the doors down.

As to how necessary that was is up for debate. Usually High River residents know when a flood is coming and have time to make a fairly calm retreat. In this case notice was quite short and there was at least some reasonable grounds to think that not everyone had gotten the message in time. 

The reaction of the residents I have talked to varies greatly. Where home and contents were a write off, the loss of a door was not a big deal. Where damage was limited to basement flooding there was more concern as the Mounties actions put the homes intact contents at risk. I have not talked directly to anyone whose guns were seized so I am depending on news reports as to what their reactions are.


----------



## kps

I'll be interesting how they'll explain the booted in doors and seized firearms of homes that were not flooded.


----------



## Macfury

It's on such issues that I completely lose respect for the Canadian left. Since it involves seizure of guns, they happily turn a blind eye to violations of liberty.


----------



## SINC

kps said:


> I'll be interesting how they'll explain the booted in doors and seized firearms of homes that were not flooded.


Really? You think the RCMP will even offer an explanation? Good luck with that, although the best you can expect is that the 'we were protecting the safety of the public' line they so often use when nothing else works will be put forth.


----------



## kps

SINC said:


> Really? You think the RCMP will even offer an explanation? Good luck with that, although the best you can expect is that the 'we were protecting the safety of the public' line they so often use when nothing else works will be put forth.


Trust me, I'm not expecting miracles, but seizing firearms from locked homes where there is no threat or evidence of flooding is going to be more difficult.


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> Trust me, I'm not expecting miracles, but seizing firearms from locked homes where there is no threat or evidence of flooding is going to be more difficult.


Unfortunately after the Mounties booted them, the homes were no longer locked. Certainly most of the homeowners were desperately trying to maintain contact with authorities to learn the condition of their homes, so with undamaged homes there seems to be no reason why the Mounties/Troops could not have obtained keys rather than resorting to the battering ram.


----------



## FeXL

Good article on the state of lead recycling & manufacturing in the US.

What the Media is Not Telling You About Future Lead Ammo Shortages



> Col. West argued that without lead, gun manufacturers cannot make conventional ammunition, and accuses Obama of using backdoor gun control tactics to weaken the 2nd Amendment.


Sum? The lead will go to the 80% market share: batteries, not ammo.


----------



## FeXL

TSA agent confiscates handgun, saves the day!

TSA agent confiscates sock monkey's pistol



> May said the TSA agent went through the bag, through the sewing supplies and found the *two-inch long pistol.*
> 
> “She said ‘this is a gun,’” said May. “I said no, it’s not a gun it’s a prop for my monkey.”
> 
> “She said ‘If I held it up to your neck, you wouldn’t know if it was real or not,’ and I said ‘really?’” said May.
> 
> The TSA agent told May she would have to confiscate the tiny gun and was supposed to call the police.


My bold.

The stupid, it burns...


----------



## FeXL

Terrible...

72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston



> Boston – National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.


----------



## Dr.G.

FeXL said:


> Terrible...
> 
> 72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston


"Live free, or die." (the official motto of the U.S. state of New Hampshire)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAFz5YNCTGc]Battle of Lexington - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## kps

Sun's documentary with Lorne Gunter regarding the illegal searches for firearms in High River.

Full documentary: Broken Trust


----------



## screature

Dr.G. said:


> "Live free, or die." (the official motto of the U.S. state of New Hampshire)
> 
> Battle of Lexington - YouTube





FeXL said:


> Terrible...
> 
> 72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston


I really don't understand how over 200 years later how this is relevant.


----------



## FeXL

screature said:


> I really don't understand how over 200 years later how this is relevant.


The doom of man is to forget...


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> I really don't understand how over 200 years later how this is relevant.


Neither do I. Hanging on to the days of canons and muskets just isn't a realistic way to look at the problem. If anyone thinks they're going to protect themselves against the US government with their collection of bushmasters even with a 30 round clip, that pretty much speaks volumes for the credibility of the position. 

We have a drastically different reality in 2013 than we did in 1800. But it seems almost insurmountable to make this point even though it's obvious. I think I posted a video here some time ago, where it depicted a gunman going into a business to shoot people, except, he had a musket. He managed to shoot one person, but didn't get past loading the musket to get another shot.

Somehow, the point of the video, didn't take.


----------



## screature

Dr.G. said:


> "Live free, or die." (the official motto of the U.S. state of New Hampshire)
> 
> Battle of Lexington - YouTube





FeXL said:


> Terrible...
> 
> 72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston





FeXL said:


> *The doom of man is to forget*...


If you are referring to what happened in the Alberta floods it is not relevant as there was no violent confrontation. 

I am not necessarily defending what they did but I can also understand why they did what they did, i.e. possible looting and such.

Cripes I can't remember what I had for dinner two nights ago... Relative to the history of mankind the incident that you are referring to that should not be forgotten is just a blip, a nanosecond...

Think about it. How much did the government have to do to raise awareness of the history of 1812 and what it means to this country as a significant point in history and you are going to post some obscure event from the 1700's of American history as being relevant to this day?

There are *way* more important things to remember IMO.

Sorry FeXL IMO it is a real stretch.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> If you are referring to what happened in the Alberta floods it is not relevant as there was no violent confrontation.
> 
> I am not necessarily defending what they did but I can also understand why they did what they did, i.e. possible looting and such.
> 
> Cripes I can't remember what I had for dinner two nights ago... Relative to the history of mankind the incident that you are referring to that should not be forgotten is just a blip, a nanosecond...
> 
> Think about it. How much did the government have to do to raise awareness of the history of 1812 and what it means to this country as a significant point in history and you are going to post some obscure event from the 1700's of American history as being relevant to this day?
> 
> There are *way* more important things to remember IMO.
> 
> Sorry FeXL IMO it is a real stretch.


scetature, the War of 1812 and the American Revolutionary war are extremely important events to me and many others. As is the signing of the Magna Carta and many more events that happened "long ago." I also see them as extremely relevant to today. If they aren't important to you, so be it, but I see no reason for you to argue that they should be forgotten.


----------



## screature

Macfury said:


> scetature, the War of 1812 and the American Revolutionary war are extremely important events to me and many others. As is the signing of the Magna Carta and many more events that happened "long ago." I also see them as extremely relevant to today. If they aren't important to you, so be it, but I see no reason for you to argue that they should be forgotten.


MacFury you misunderstood my post or I did not express myself well...

What I was saying is that the government had to spend millions of dollars to remind Canadians of the significance of the war of 1812... an event that every Canadian* should* be aware of.

So, compare that to the historical event that FeXL referred to and he basically says we should remember this event (lest we forget kind of thing) that happened in the US over 200 years ago...

There are plenty of more significant and recent events that we should remember that are all too soon forgotten.

Cripes gt couldn't even remember that MPs including the PM were involved with Adscam.

So a relatively minor event that happened over 200 years ago in a foreign country that I can guarantee you that 99% of Canadians have never heard of is not worth the synapses to remember IMO and is not in any way relevant to current circumstances. At least IMO.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> MacFury you misunderstood my post or I did not express myself well...
> 
> What I was saying is that the government had to spend millions of dollars to remind Canadians of the significance of the war of 1812... an event that every Canadian* should* be aware of.
> 
> So, compare that to the historical event that FeXL referred to and he basically says we should remember this event (lest we forget kind of thing) that happened in the US over 200 years ago...?
> 
> There are plenty of more significant and recent events that we should remember that are all too soon forgotten.
> 
> Cripes gt couldn't even remember that MPs including the PM were involved with Adscam.
> 
> So a relatively minor event that happened over 200 years ago in a foreign country that I can guarantee you that 99% of Canadians have never heard of is not worth the synapses to remember IMO and certainly not in anyway relevant to current circumstances.


FeXL is drawing attention to how the media _would cover the event_ of 200 years ago if it happened today. 

But I agree that people should also demonstrate more awareness of recent events--as demonstrated all too well by the example you provided. People should be more embarrassed about blundering along and making things up as they go.


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> MacFury you misunderstood my post or I did not express myself well...
> 
> What I was saying is that the government had to spend millions of dollars to remind Canadians of the significance of the war of 1812... an event that every Canadian* should* be aware of.
> 
> So, compare that to the historical event that FeXL referred to and he basically says we should remember this event (lest we forget kind of thing) that happened in the US over 200 years ago...?
> 
> There are plenty of more significant and recent events that we should remember that are all too soon forgotten.
> 
> Cripes gt couldn't even remember that MPs including the PM were involved with Adscam.
> 
> So a relatively minor event that happened over 200 years ago in a foreign country that I can guarantee you that 99% of Canadians have never heard of is not worth the synapses to remember IMO and is not in any way relevant to current circumstances. At least IMO.


ha ha oh screature had to get that in... but to use your defence of conservatives, there was no evidence they were involved in adscam, and were subsequently not charged.

However I agree with what you're saying about these historical events. Macfury has changed things around, make it sound like you are saying that they have no importance. I don't think you've said that. It seems you merely said that these events, or specifically the one in question isn't really relevant to the current topic really.

And that I agree on.


----------



## screature

Macfury said:


> *FeXL is drawing attention to how the media would cover the event of 200 years ago if it happened today.*
> 
> But I agree that people should also demonstrate more awareness of recent events--as demonstrated all too well by the example you provided. People should be more embarrassed about blundering along and making things up as they go.


Ok that wasn't my "take away", I will have to read it again.


----------



## screature

groovetube said:


> *ha ha oh screature had to get that in..*. but to use your defence of conservatives, *there was no evidence they were involved in adscam, and were subsequently not charged*.
> 
> However I agree with what you're saying about these historical events. Macfury has changed things around, make it sound like you are saying that they have no importance. I don't think you've said that. It seems you merely said that these events, or specifically the one in question isn't really relevant to the current topic really.
> 
> And that I agree on.


Thought that would get your ire up. 

Let's see if you have to eat any crow shall we when it comes to the Senate "scandal" and your calling for heads to roll. beejacon


----------



## groovetube

screature said:


> Thought that would get your ire up.
> 
> Let's see if you have to eat any crow shall we when it comes to the Senate "scandal" and your calling for heads to roll. beejacon


well I never said heads -would- roll, though one has already it seems. But I think they should!


----------



## SINC

screature said:


> Thought that would get your ire up.
> 
> Let's see if you have to eat any crow shall we when it comes to the Senate "scandal" and your calling for heads to roll. beejacon


Careful not to get his ire up. You might get his colourful dressing down like I did. Potty mouth just does not quite describe it. 

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/46939750/groove meltdown copy 2.png


----------



## FeXL

screature said:


> If you are referring to what happened in the Alberta floods it is not relevant as there was no violent confrontation.
> 
> I am not necessarily defending what they did but I can also understand why they did what they did, i.e. possible looting and such.
> 
> Cripes I can't remember what I had for dinner two nights ago... Relative to the history of mankind the incident that you are referring to that should not be forgotten is just a blip, a nanosecond...
> 
> Think about it. How much did the government have to do to raise awareness of the history of 1812 and what it means to this country as a significant point in history and you are going to post some obscure event from the 1700's of American history as being relevant to this day?
> 
> There are *way* more important things to remember IMO.
> 
> Sorry FeXL IMO it is a real stretch.


You missed by a country mile.

MF nailed it.


----------



## Macfury

screature said:


> Ok that wasn't my "take away", I will have to read it again.


I think we also agree that there is a wide chasm between deciding which events are meaningful to us, and simply not being informed about much of anything, past or present.


----------



## screature

FeXL said:


> You missed by a country mile.
> 
> MF nailed it.


Ok sorry FeXL, my bad.


----------



## groovetube

Ok I've read the article link. There's is nothing to suggest that it was written to show how the media would portray such an event in today's media. None whatsoever.

That completely misses the mark, because what the article -does- try to do, is make a direct comparison, to the founding forefathers (a recurrent theme in gun rights activists...) who were being disarmed by a foreign power in America because of fears of an uprising. 

That, is simply, NOT the case with what is happening here in 2013, no matter what crazy birthers/Obama's a Muslim/blah blah theory gets cooked up. I've said this already, but if anyone thinks, that US government with it's supercharged military is worried about a collection of nut jobs with assault rifles with 30 round clips, they're certifiably insane in my opinion.

No matter how many times the gun rights activates try to compare themselves to the founding forefathers of America, (visions of nut jobs dressed up in Paul Revere outfits shouting in hewn canoes come to mind...) it just simply isn't the case.

That's my take on it.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> That's my take on it.


Another country mile miss...


----------



## FeXL

screature said:


> ok sorry fexl, my bad.


np


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> That, is simply, NOT the case with what is happening here in 2013, no matter what crazy birthers/Obama's a Muslim/blah blah theory gets cooked up. I've said this already, but if anyone thinks, that US government with it's supercharged military is worried about a collection of nut jobs with assault rifles with 30 round clips, they're certifiably insane in my opinion.


I'd say they're genuinely worried - which is what's really at the root of the recent attempts at gun control. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq - a small number of insurgents have kept hundreds of thousands of soldiers busy for over a decade, with no end in sight.

If there were an actual revolution in the US, you can be assured that all the military might of the US wouldn't do much good - they're geared towards fighting a country, not urban combat with innocents everywhere. Especially when the "enemy" is Bob from down the street.

For what it's worth, I'm very much pro-2nd Amendment, and I'm insulted to be lumped with the "birthers/Obama's a Muslim" crowd. I'm also a liberal and a democrat. Can't paint all us "gun nuts" with the same brush.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> I'd say they're genuinely worried - which is what's really at the root of the recent attempts at gun control. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq - a small number of insurgents have kept hundreds of thousands of soldiers busy for over a decade, with no end in sight.
> 
> If there were an actual revolution in the US, you can be assured that all the military might of the US wouldn't do much good - they're geared towards fighting a country, not urban combat with innocents everywhere. Especially when the "enemy" is Bob from down the street.
> 
> For what it's worth, I'm very much pro-2nd Amendment, and I'm insulted to be lumped with the "birthers/Obama's a Muslim" crowd. I'm also a liberal and a democrat. Can't paint all us "gun nuts" with the same brush.


I'm sorry John, I don't mean to lump all pro 2nd amendment with them. I know plenty of liberals down there who also feel strongly about the 2nd amendment.

But on the issue of urban warfare, I think that things have changed quite a bit since the US has been fighting these very types of wars for a decade now, certainly small items like interstates being built in such a way to allow tanks to mobilize with them, tells me that the US army is likely far more prepared in that regard than we might think.

I still think it's a stretch to think the minority of citizens who would arm themselves in a revolution is beyond a real stretch. Using revolution talk from hundreds of years ago to me just seems crazy.

It's not going to happen in my opinion.


----------



## screature

John Clay said:


> I'd say they're genuinely worried - which is what's really at the root of the recent attempts at gun control. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq - a small number of insurgents have kept hundreds of thousands of soldiers busy for over a decade, with no end in sight.
> 
> If there were an actual revolution in the US, you can be assured that all the military might of the US wouldn't do much good - they're geared towards fighting a country, not urban combat with innocents everywhere. Especially when the "enemy" is Bob from down the street.
> 
> For what it's worth, I'm very much pro-2nd Amendment, and I'm insulted to be lumped with the "birthers/Obama's a Muslim" crowd. I'm also a liberal and a democrat. Can't paint all us "gun nuts" with the same brush.





groovetube said:


> I'm sorry John, I don't mean to lump all pro 2nd amendment with them. I know plenty of liberals down there who also feel strongly about the 2nd amendment.
> 
> But on the issue of urban warfare, I think that things have changed quite a bit since the US has been fighting these very types of wars for a decade now, certainly small items like interstates being built in such a way to allow tanks to mobilize with them, tells me that the US army is likely far more prepared in that regard than we might think.
> 
> I still think it's a stretch to think the minority of citizens who would arm themselves in a revolution is beyond a real stretch. Using revolution talk from hundreds of years ago to me just seems crazy.
> 
> It's not going to happen in my opinion.


Funny thing... I agree with you both to varying degrees.


----------



## FeXL

groovetube said:


> Using revolution talk from hundreds of years ago to me just seems crazy.


Not even in the neighbouring county, let alone in left field. Again, despite being told three times that wasn't what the article meant.


----------



## eMacMan

John Clay said:


> I'd say they're genuinely worried - which is what's really at the root of the recent attempts at gun control. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq - a small number of insurgents have kept hundreds of thousands of soldiers busy for over a decade, with no end in sight.
> 
> If there were an actual revolution in the US, you can be assured that all the military might of the US wouldn't do much good - they're geared towards fighting a country, not urban combat with innocents everywhere. Especially when the "enemy" is Bob from down the street.
> 
> For what it's worth, I'm very much pro-2nd Amendment, and I'm insulted to be lumped with the "birthers/Obama's a Muslim" crowd. I'm also a liberal and a democrat. Can't paint all us "gun nuts" with the same brush.


I think that police training has changed over the past ten to twelve years. It feels like they are now being trained to believe there are no innocents, even though less than 0.1% of the population falls into the total 5#!7 head category.


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> For what it's worth, I'm very much pro-2nd Amendment, and I'm insulted to be lumped with the "birthers/Obama's a Muslim" crowd. I'm also a liberal and a democrat. Can't paint all us "gun nuts" with the same brush.


As a firearms owner you can consider yourself a "liberal and a democrat" as long as you do not vote that way.. All Liberal governments since Trudeau Sr. passed anti firearms legislation. Mulcair also said that he would implement stiffer laws and even bans. Trudeau Jr. will probably follow Paul Martin's threat to ban handguns. On top of that both would probably revive the useless and expensive registry.

If you want to call me a one issue voter, so be it.


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> I think that police training has changed over the past ten to twelve years. It feels like they are now being trained to believe there are no innocents, even though less than 0.1% of the population falls into the total 5#!7 head category.


That is very true. The idiocy amongst LEOs, CFOs and Crown prosecuters is unbelievable.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> As a firearms owner you can consider yourself a "liberal and a democrat" as long as you do not vote that way.. All Liberal governments since Trudeau Sr. passed anti firearms legislation. Mulcair also said that he would implement stiffer laws and even bans. Trudeau Jr. will probably follow Paul Martin's threat to ban handguns. On top of that both would probably revive the useless and expensive registry.
> 
> If you want to call me a one issue voter, so be it.


Yep. I'm a one-issue voter at this point. The only thing that could sway me is if the Conservatives reopened the abortion debate.


----------



## groovetube

I'd be interested to see if Trudeau actually said he'd restore the registry, or ban handguns. (if he did I missed it). From what I've seen so far, he's tried to position himself a little into Harper's territory, given his support of the oil sands etc., but time will tell.

In other news, in Toronto the good, 10 to 14 shots fired at Queen subway station:
Subway service remains suspended on stretch of Yonge line after shooting at Queen Station | CP24.com


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> I'd be interested to see if Trudeau actually said he'd restore the registry, or ban handguns. (if he did I missed it). From what I've seen so far, he's tried to position himself a little into Harper's territory, given his support of the oil sands etc., but time will tell.


Too bad you missed it, I guess you'll have to look it up, I'm not doing it for you. Widely reported in the firearms community which I belong to and keep close tabs on.


----------



## groovetube

thanks KPS, I did indeed miss that.


----------



## kps

groovetube said:


> thanks KPS, I did indeed miss that.


Young Trudeau has flipped flopped on the issue, but I recall a news video clip where he said that he would consider bringing the registry back if elected. Lately he said that the registry was a failure, all this, after years of voting against it's dismantling. He's not a trusted name in the firearms community based on long history of Liberal gun grabbing, specifically bill C-68 . As far as the Martin handgun ban issue it's probably still in the Lib's policy book, just dormant .


----------



## kps

Pretty good analysis here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z59CoXf90sA


----------



## eMacMan

I consider gun control a secondary voting issue, consistently balancing the budget would be a primary issue. Having said that I really feel Canadians best interests are served by minority governments. 

A minority government simply is not going to court disaster by trying to implement gun control, or change abortion laws. These areas split too closely down the middle.

While much less gets done with a minority, one has to ask how many bills are really in the best interest of the taxpaying citizen. My answer would be very few indeed.


----------



## kps

eMacMan said:


> I consider gun control a secondary voting issue, consistently balancing the budget would be a primary issue. Having said that I really feel Canadians best interests are served by minority governments.
> 
> A minority government simply is not going to court disaster by trying to implement gun control, or change abortion laws. These areas split too closely down the middle.
> 
> While much less gets done with a minority, one has to ask how many bills are really in the best interest of the taxpaying citizen. My answer would be very few indeed.


Agreed. Every government's priorities should be balanced financials, healthcare and civil rights.


----------



## John Clay

eMacMan said:


> Having said that I really feel Canadians best interests are served by minority governments.
> 
> A minority government simply is not going to court disaster by trying to implement gun control, or change abortion laws. These areas split too closely down the middle.
> 
> While much less gets done with a minority, one has to ask how many bills are really in the best interest of the taxpaying citizen. My answer would be very few indeed.


I could not agree more. A minority government is the best government.


----------



## eMacMan

kps said:


> Agreed. Every government's priorities should be balanced financials, healthcare and civil rights.


Agreed. 

Interestingly not one of the major parties comes through on more than one of those points. The Cons in particular have a very strange conception of fiscal responsibility. Liberals and Cons both support almost identical versions of the anti-privacy Bill C30/C13, not to mention that Senate bill which extended Canada's version of the anti-patriot act.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> I could not agree more. A minority government is the best government.


I agree on the minority government thing. Though it's a fact that with minority governments, more can actually get done. (from the quoted member in your post, not you)


----------



## John Clay

groovetube said:


> I agree on the minority government thing. Though it's a fact that with minority governments, more can actually get done. (from the quoted member in your post, not you)


For sure. I just mean that with a minority government, neither side can ram their agenda through - they have to find a middle ground, which more accurately represents the wishes of the citizens.


----------



## groovetube

John Clay said:


> For sure. I just mean that with a minority government, neither side can ram their agenda through - they have to find a middle ground, which more accurately represents the wishes of the citizens.


absolutely. Problems always happen when one or the other gets a majority.


----------



## FeXL

Surprise, gun free zone fails again. But so does the over coddling of today’s youth



> In the most recent school shooting in Colorado *the shooter, who was not repelled by the magic pixie dust powered “Gun Free Zone” sign,* was not a mass shooter but a student with a specific target in mind.
> 
> 18 year old Karl Halverson Pierson walked into Arapahoe High School armed with a shotgun and 2 Molotov cocktails looking to kill the Librarian and Debate Coach Tracy Murphy after Murphy had benched him during the last debate competition.


Bold mine.

Once again: Gun free zones are an open invitiation...


----------



## John Clay

FeXL said:


> Surprise, gun free zone fails again. But so does the over coddling of today’s youth
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Once again: Gun free zones are an open invitiation...


I recall reading that the shooter was also pro-gun control.


----------



## Macfury

John Clay said:


> I recall reading that the shooter was also pro-gun control.


Some auto thieves are also in favour of making car alarms illegal!


----------



## FeXL

John Clay said:


> I recall reading that the shooter was also pro-gun control.


Yeah, I ran across that a couple times, too. Speculation being what it is, there has been some talk that he may have been a martyr. I don't know. There's been some talk about his political bent, too. I don't understand what that accomplishes, I guess people just want to point fingers.

Frankly, the fact that he was an attempted killer is information enough for me.


----------



## FeXL

There were a number of conflicting stories out about the timeline and details regarding what actually happened at Arapahoe High School. 

Now it appears that there was an armed deputy at the school, in his capacity as school resource officer, who confronted the shooter within about 80 seconds. 

GOOD GUY WITH A GUN: Armed school officer stopped Arapahoe High School shooting



> They are now stating that the entire incident was over in just 80 seconds because there was an armed sheriff’s deputy on staff who was alerted over the school’s radio system, who cornered the shooter in the library. It now appears that once the shooter heard the deputy identify himself as a law enforcement agent, he committed suicide.


The presence of this armed deputy saved lives.

Period.


----------



## FeXL

FeXL said:


> There's been some talk about his political bent, too. I don't understand what that accomplishes, I guess people just want to point fingers.
> 
> Frankly, the fact that he was an attempted killer is information enough for me.


So, what I noted in the quote still stands.

However, when the lefty MSM suddenly doesn't want to talk about the perp because of his left leaning politics, it becomes an issue in & of itself.

The highly inconvenient Arapahoe High School shooter



> All of a sudden, the left-wing media doesn’t think the political views of a crazed gunman are worth discussing. Under the media rules of engagement set forth after the Tucson shooting in 2011, we should be having a huge national conversation about the Left-Wing Climate of Hate right now, and asking how the bitter personal attacks favored by leftists – who are currently fond of asserting that anyone who disagrees with President Barack Obama is a subhuman racist monster – drove student Karl Pierson, 18, of Colorado to attack the Arapahoe High School, critically injuring a fellow student before killing himself. Every American should be asking how Pierson’s devotion to socialism and communism led him to violence. MSNBC hosts should be flogging themselves live on the air for their role in creating the Climate of Hate that led to this outburst of youthful violence, citing their own words from 2011 to explain why they must be held to account.


Yup.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. Eliminate the gun registry & crime rates go down. Who knew?

Homicides down in Canada, stats show



> Canada's homicide rate in 2012 was the lowest it's been since 1966, Statistics Canada reported Thursday.


----------



## FeXL

Recall a few months back that the CEO of Starbucks announced a 



> gun-free zone policy for his company's stores.


How's that gun-free zone working out for Starbucks?



> Police are searching for a man who held up at Colorado Springs Starbucks Sunday morning.
> 
> Employees told officers that after the suspect walled in, he pulled out a gun and demanded money from the register. He left after employees gave him money. No one was injured.


I'm thinking that if there would have been a legally armed citizen or two having a nice cup of joe in that store, there wouldn't have been a robbery, either...


----------



## FeXL

CO Sheriff: Gun control laws ‘hurt law-abiding citizens’



> New laws in CO mandate universal background checks and ban magazines that carry more than 15 rounds. [Sheriff John] Cooke and the majority of his fellow sheriffs (55 of 62 total) in the state say they won’t be enforcing these laws.


Good read.


----------



## FeXL

And, from the other end of the spectrum...

D.C. Murder Rate is Up in 2013 Despite Strict Gun Laws



> *Washington D.C. prides itself on having some of the strictest gun control laws in the country. In fact, Emily Miller has spoken on how it’s almost impossible for a law abiding citizen to even legally own a handgun, and even then you are only allowed to OWN the gun not BEAR it.
> 
> Much to the confusion of gun-ban activists in the district NBC has reported that the murder rate in D.C. has actually gone up for the first time in 5 years.*


Yeah, I bolded the whole quote.


----------



## FeXL

A further comparison with the DC murder rate.

Gun Control And Murder Rates: A Tale Of Two (Washington) Cities



> Washington, D.C. has some of the nation’s most prohibitive gun laws.
> 
> ...
> 
> As a result, *there are no civilian CCW permits and barely 40,000 legally-owned firearms among the entire District’s population of just over 630,000*. And 103 people have been murdered so far in 2013, for a murder rate of 16.3 per 100,000.


Meanwhile, in Washington state...



> Washington State’s population is 6.8 million, and the state has issued more than *400,000 CCW permits.*
> 
> ...
> 
> Seattle is the biggest city in ‘the other’ Washington, and has a population of approximately 634,000. *Of those 634,000 fewer than 25 were murdered, for a homicide rate of 3.79 per 100,000.*


All bold mine.


----------



## eMacMan

At the risk of being labeled a racist I will point out the obvious: 50% of DCs population is black, whereas less than 8% of Seattle-ites are black. Figures from the 2012 US census.


----------



## FeXL

There was some discussion to that end in the comments.

The commenter noted race & household income. He uses Wiki numbers, which I don't endorse, but I imagine the stats could be obtained from the census bureau.

I found the discussion interesting.


----------



## John Clay

eMacMan said:


> At the risk of being labeled a racist I will point out the obvious: 50% of DCs population is black, whereas less than 8% of Seattle-ites are black. Figures from the 2012 US census.


Is it racist to point out facts now?


----------



## FeXL

John Clay said:


> Is it racist to point out facts now?


I hope you're being facetious but, in case you're not, yes. You'd be surprised how creative certain segments of the political spectrum (cough-left-cough) become when their argument starts falling apart.

Witness the US...


----------



## John Clay

FeXL said:


> I hope you're being facetious but, in case you're not, yes. You'd be surprised how creative certain segments of the political spectrum (cough-left-cough) become when their argument starts falling apart.
> 
> Witness the US...


Oh, I know some people will jump at any excuse to call someone a racist. I'm merely suggesting that the statement of fact should not result in labelling someone a racist.

If it's true, it isn't an insult.


----------



## FeXL

So, Beretta USA has been based in Maryland. They didn't exactly cotton to the gun politics there & have been looking to hang their shingle elsewhere. Virginia was on a shortlist.

Ain't no more...

Beretta Passes on Building Factory in VA over McAuliffe Gun Control Stance



> Beretta USA's general counsel Jeff Reh said, "The anti-gun ads that McAuliffe ran in northern Virginia were particularly offensive. And the fact that he could gain a voting advantage by doing so caused us additional concern."


----------



## eMacMan

So since we have been speaking of really bad presidents current and past we might as well talk about one of the very worst.

100 years ago yesterday late in the evening Congress passed and President Wilson signed the act the created the Federal Reserve Bank. The probability is extremely high that a quorum was not present as most Congressmen and Senators would have been on their way home for Christmas.

This act took control of US money out of the hands of Congress and turned it over to a privately owned foreign bankster controlled corporation.

Wilson later referred to this saying; He believed he had betrayed his country. That betrayal continues to haunt the United States to this day. 

BTW For those who are unaware of this, the IRS is the collection/terrorism branch of the Federal Reserve Bank, which is still a privately owned and foreign based corporation. Neither the Federal Reserve Bank nor the IRS are part of the US Government.


----------



## John Clay

eMacMan said:


> BTW For those who are unaware of this, the IRS is the collection/terrorism branch of the Federal Reserve Bank, which is still a privately owned and foreign based corporation. Neither the Federal Reserve Bank nor the IRS are part of the US Government.


Well, that's not true. The IRS is an agency within the Department of Treasury, and is most assuredly a government organization. The IRS and Federal Reserve are not linked, either. Tax dollars go to the government, not the Federal Reserve.

Where do you come up with this crap?


----------



## FeXL

Ummm...

Wrong thread?


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> Well, that's not true. The IRS is an agency within the Department of Treasury, and is most assuredly a government organization. The IRS and Federal Reserve are not linked, either. Tax dollars go to the government, not the Federal Reserve.
> 
> Where do you come up with this crap?


You got three and a half hours?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfpO-WBz_mw


----------



## SINC

Irony 101: 

We are told not to judge all Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics. On the other hand, we are also encouraged to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.

How is that supposed to work?


----------



## John Clay

SINC said:


> Irony 101:
> 
> We are told not to judge all Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics. On the other hand, we are also encouraged to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.
> 
> How is that supposed to work?


What about Muslim gun owners? Are they just ****ed?


----------



## mrjimmy

AK-47 creator Mikhail Kalashnikov wrote of regrets over gun's invention, ‘unbearable pain in my soul' | National Post

Interesting where his thoughts went as he neared the end of his life.


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> AK-47 creator Mikhail Kalashnikov wrote of regrets over gun's invention, ‘unbearable pain in my soul' | National Post
> 
> Interesting where his thoughts went as he neared the end of his life.


Deathbed confessions! Just like people in the film and television industry need to be held responsible for all deaths and injuries inspired by popular entertainment.

Kalashnikov should have asked forgiveness instead, for ripping off the design of the German MP 44 rifle.


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> Deathbed confessions! Just like people in the film and television industry need to be held responsible for all deaths and injuries inspired by popular entertainment.


Nonsense. You're grasping for a comparison.

A gun has but one function, which Kalashnikov knew all too well.


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> A gun has but one function, which Kalashnikov knew all too well.


Yes. The defense of one's country!


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> Yes. The defense of one's country!


Apparently that meant little at the end.


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> Apparently that meant little at the end.


Certainly not to the priest who wrote the missive.


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> Certainly not to the priest who wrote the missive.


Irrelevant. We're talking about Kalashnikov.


----------



## SINC

Some people never do understand. It's not about some inanimate object, nor its inventor. If there is any evil involved, it is with the human element who picked up that weapon and misused it. No one can deny that reality.


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> Irrelevant. We're talking about Kalashnikov.


From your article:



> Kalashnikov’s daughter, Elena, was quoted by Izvestia* as saying that a local priest could have helped her father write the letter, which was typed and carried his signature.*
> *
> The letter contrasted sharply with past statements by Kalashnikov*, who had repeatedly said in interviews and public speeches that he created the weapon to protect his country and couldn’t be blamed for other people’s action.


So believe what you will. I might have accepted a letter penned in his own hand.


----------



## mrjimmy

SINC said:


> Some people never do understand. It's not about some inanimate object, nor its inventor. If there is any evil involved, it is with the human element who picked up that weapon and misused it. No one can deny that reality.


If you climb into a car and intentionally plough into someone, you've 'misused' it. You pick up a gun and shoot someone, you've used it correctly.

Regardless of this, my post was regarding the _inventor's_ remorse. He obviously was questioning that reality.


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> From your article:
> 
> So believe what you will. I might have accepted a letter penned in his own hand.


Grasping.

He signed it. As good as being penned in his own hand.


----------



## SINC

mrjimmy said:


> If you climb into a car and intentionally plough into someone, you've 'misused' it. You pick up a gun and shoot someone, you've used it correctly.
> 
> Regardless of this, my post was regarding the _inventor's_ remorse. He obviously was questioning that reality.


Like I noted, some people just don't get it. It was a conscious human decision to use the weapon to shoot another person. The weapon itself is inanimate and had no part in that decision.


----------



## mrjimmy

SINC said:


> Like I noted, some people just don't get it. It was a conscious human decision to use the weapon to shoot another person. The weapon itself is inanimate and had no part in that decision.


Some people like Kalashnikov?


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> If you climb into a car and intentionally plough into someone, you've 'misused' it. You pick up a gun and shoot someone, you've used it correctly.


When you shoot or frighten off an aggressor, you are using it correctly. When you shoot someone innocent you've misused it.

If you make film and television programs glorifying gun violence, you are guilty of promoting a culture of firearms misuse. 



mrjimmy said:


> He signed it. As good as being penned in his own hand.


Not to me. If you want to sacrifice your critical faculties to make a point, you're welcome to it.


----------



## SINC

mrjimmy said:


> Some people like Kalashnikov?


No, people like you.


----------



## mrjimmy

SINC said:


> No, people like you.


My post was regarding Kalashnikov. Did you read it?


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> Not to me. If you want to sacrifice your critical faculties to make a point, you're welcome to it.


I'm sacrificing nothing. You are grasping.


----------



## SINC

mrjimmy said:


> My post was regarding Kalashnikov. Did you read it?


Certainly, but I don't accept you supposedly speaking for him.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Certainly, but I don't accept you supposedly speaking for him.


SINC, jimmy is _certain_ that the typed note was written by Kalashnikov...


----------



## mrjimmy

SINC said:


> Certainly, but I don't accept you supposedly speaking for him.


Hardly. 

My original comment:



> Interesting where his thoughts went as he neared the end of his life.


Guess addressing this must be threatening to your opinion of guns.

Make sure to stay on script.


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> SINC, jimmy is _certain_ that the typed note was written by Kalashnikov...


And you're _certain_ it's not. Who wins MaccyF?


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> And you're _certain_ it's not. Who wins MaccyF?


Nobody. The origin of the note is unknown. In the meantime, I will assume he did not change his lifelong views.


----------



## SINC

mrjimmy said:


> Hardly.
> 
> My original comment:
> 
> 
> 
> Guess addressing this must be threatening to your opinion of guns.
> 
> Make sure to stay on script.


It's not me who struggles with bias towards inanimate objects.


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> Nobody. The origin of the note is unknown.


Except he signed it.

Good enough for basically every document on the planet. Is it that troubling to you that he could have felt this way?


----------



## mrjimmy

Macfury said:


> In the meantime, I will assume he did not change his lifelong views.


Ah ha! Now I see what frightens you.

Night night.


----------



## groovetube

mrjimmy said:


> Except he signed it.
> 
> Good enough for basically every document on the planet. Is it that troubling to you that he could have felt this way?


Wow. I guess it's -that- threatening! :lmao:


----------



## Macfury

mrjimmy said:


> Except he signed it.
> 
> Good enough for basically every document on the planet. Is it that troubling to you that he could have felt this way?


Not particularly troubling. Even Henry VIII made some sort of deathbed confession, so anything is possible, even if it is not likely. In this case, however, the fact that the priest typed out the message and that it deviates so radically from Kalashnikov's lifelong message makes me very suspicious that the typed message was not his.

If the message turned out to be that of Kalashnikov without a doubt, I would lose no sleep over it. Why would it change my opinion?

I am more likely to blame the entertainment industry for glorifying firearms.


----------



## groovetube

Man shot dead in Florida movie theatre in texting spat | CTV News

Good thing he was carrying, that'll teach anyone that texting will not be tolerated and will be met by force!


----------



## Dr.G.

Gorilla Sales Skyrocket After Latest Gorilla Attack | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

Interesting.


----------



## kps

Dr.G. said:


> Gorilla Sales Skyrocket After Latest Gorilla Attack | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
> 
> Interesting.


 I wonder how much the Gorilla registry is going to cost? Write your MP and put a stop to it now.


----------



## Max

Gotta love the Onion for its equal-opportunity skewering of sacred cows.


----------



## Dr.G.

kps said:


> I wonder how much the Gorilla registry is going to cost? Write your MP and put a stop to it now.


Well, this is a US event, so it may not come to Canada. We don't have 2nd Amendment protections.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep gorillas shall not be infringed."


----------



## kps

As a Canadian, I support gorilla ownership along with strong poop and scoop laws.


----------



## Dr.G.

kps said:


> As a Canadian, I support gorilla ownership along with strong poop and scoop laws.


:clap::clap::clap::clap:XX)


----------



## eMacMan

I currently have timeshare ownership of 308 of these beasts. I absolutely agree much, much,........ much stronger poop and scoop regulations are in order.

FWIW they are absolutely useless when it comes to protecting me from other gorillas, but very prone to stealing my wallet.


----------



## FeXL

Colo. Democrats blamed for $80M hit to economy by pushing out gun firm Magpul



> “The magazine ban did not garner one Republican vote in the House or Senate, and now as a result of this one-sided, Democrat-sponsored law, more than 200 people will lose their jobs and their ability to provide for their families,” said [Republican state Rep.] Ms. Saine in a statement. “[T]his move will cost the state of Colorado over $80 million a year in revenue.”


Jes' luvs it when those chickens come home to roost...


----------



## kps

Jus' luv it when your order arrives before the factory move.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> Jus' luv it when your order arrives before the factory move.


Nice!

I'm sticking with LAR mags, myself. Though if Magpul made LAR mags, I'd be all over those. I've got a bunch of their stuff, but not enough stickers.


----------



## kps

I got 10 LAR mags and 5 30/5 Magpul mags. I doubt Magpul would cater to the Canadian market.


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## John Clay

kps said:


> I got 10 LAR mags and 5 30/5 Magpul mags. I doubt Magpul would cater to the Canadian market.


They already make a 10 round PMAG. They could simply rebrand it as a 10 round LAR PMAG and ship a few thousand up here


----------



## FeXL

Executive Order on Gun Research Backfires on Obama 



> In the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy, President Obama issued a list of Executive Orders. Notably among them, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was given $10 million to research gun violence.


What did they find? (Annotated list inside)



> The CDC report is overall a blow to the Obama Administration’s unconstitutional agenda. It largely supports the Second Amendment, and contradicts common anti-gun arguments. Unfortunately, mainstream media failed to get the story they were hoping for, and their silence on the matter is a screaming illustration of their underlying agenda.


----------



## kps

John Clay said:


> They already make a 10 round PMAG. They could simply rebrand it as a 10 round LAR PMAG and ship a few thousand up here


the importer would be sold out in a day.and*'d be pissed because I woulld ihavemissed the order deadline .


----------



## FeXL

Former Member of Bloomberg’s Anti-Gun Group Explains Why He Left



> _It did not take long to realize that MAIG’s agenda was much more than ridding felons of illegal guns; that under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, *MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.* I don’t believe, never have believed and never will believe that public safety is enhanced by encroaching on our right to bear arms, and I will not be a part of any organization that does.​_


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Why Beretta left Maryland.

Beretta CEO Cites Maryland’s Disrespect For His Company, Gun Owners As Reason For $45 Million Tennessee Expansion



> Late last month, firearm manufacturer Beretta announced that it will not expand operations in Maryland, where it has operated a manufacturing hub for 35 years. In an open letter this week, Ugo Gussalli Beretta, CEO and president of the company, explained that Maryland’s disrespect for gun rights was the reason for the decision.


----------



## FeXL

Telling the Feds what they can do with their gun laws.

Arizona Senate Takes Up Nullification of Federal Gun Laws



> Arizona state senator Kelli Ward (R-Lake Havasu City) has been joined by various co-sponsors in putting forth the the Second Amendment Preservation Act: an act that considers any federal laws "invalid and void" in Arizona if said laws infringe on the Second Amendment.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Telling the Feds what they can do with their gun laws.
> 
> Arizona Senate Takes Up Nullification of Federal Gun Laws


They should expand that to all infringements.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> They should expand that to all infringements.


Agreed.


----------



## FeXL

Was the Canadian registry actually destroyed?

Canadian Police Using ‘Destroyed’ Long-Gun Registry Data



> Canada’s National Firearms Association now has evidence and testimony from three cases where Canadian police forces have used information from the long-gun registry that was supposed to be destroyed in accordance with an Act of Parliament.
> 
> Today, NFA President Sheldon Clare sent formal complaints to three federal commissions: the Privacy Commissioner, the Information Commissioner and the Commissioner for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.


----------



## FeXL

More chickens going elsewhere to roost...

Remington Sends Cuomo A Message With Alabama Announcement



> Gun maker Remington announced a plan to invest $110 million in a manufacturing facility in Huntsville, Ala., today — a clear signal to the ruling class in its home State of New York that it’s setting down roots in a political climate that values the 2nd Amendment.


----------



## FeXL

Under fire, Detroit police chief won’t back down on encouraging citizens to own guns



> He’d probably say he’s not “encouraging” anyone, just defending their right to do so, but if you read Ed’s post about this last month you know better. And no wonder: In Detroit more than most places, when seconds count, the police are many minutes away.


As in most places...

The Chief:



> _“In fact, there’s been research … by the Department of Justice and some scholars that armed citizens, good citizens, can have a deterring effect on violent crime,” he said. “While I sit here with lots of optimism and encouragement that crime is declining, we still have incident after incident where individuals like elderly people get dragged out of their cars at gunpoint.
> 
> “There was a study done comparing the U.S. to Great Britain that suggested that home invasions, while people were in the house, were less likely in the United States than in Great Britain. And the reason why is because the suspects know there’s a greater likelihood that people in America are more likely to have guns inside their homes. So they tend to wait until the home is vacant to commit the home invasion.
> 
> “In England, suspects, because of the restrictive gun laws, 50 percent of the home invasions are committed while the people are in their homes…​_


----------



## FeXL

Swiss Arms Confiscated



> Effective 10:00 pm eastern tonight the RCMP has reclassified the Swiss Arms Classic Green carbine from non-restricted (and restricted) to prohibited status. There are approximately 1,000 -1,800 of these firearms in the public. The government will not be offering compensation and will be demanding that the firearms, which cost between $3,000 - $4,000 be surrendered. The government is suggesting that all affected firearms owners contact the distributers from which the firearms were purchased for reimbursement.


Yeah, right...


----------



## Macfury

Can you imagine the waste involved in targeting such a small number of weapons? When I was a kid, the RCMP was a police force I thought of with respect. I now think of them as statist clowns.


----------



## SINC

The RCMP, once the pride of Canada, has sunk to little more than a copy of a southern US sheriffs department with similar mentality towards the rights of the people they are supposed to be serving.


----------



## FeXL

MILLER: New Jersey bill is outright gun ban on .22-caliber rifles and leads to confiscation



> The New Jersey Assembly’s Law and Public Safety Committee was scheduled to hold a public hearing on Monday (postponed for snow) about a bill that reduces the maximum magazine capacity from 15 to 10.
> 
> Since the legislation covers both detachable and fixed magazines, it has the effect of to banning popular, low-caliber rifles.
> 
> The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs gave the draft legislation to top firearms experts in the country to determine what guns would fall under the expanded ban.
> 
> They discovered that the bill would affect tube-fed, semi-automatic rifles because the magazine cannot be separated from the gun.
> 
> Thus, the experts found that at least 43 common rifles would suddenly be considered a prohibited “assault firearm,” such as the .22 caliber Marlin Model 60, Remington Nylon 66 and Winchester 190.
> 
> Just having one such gun would turn a law-abiding owner into a felon overnight


----------



## FeXL

Oh, the iron...

Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms after finding most cops in the state are on the list



> Connecticut has been making news due to their hastily passed gun registration laws. According to some sources as few as 15% of gun owners have actually registered their firearms. News Blogs have been warning state officials are talking about mass confiscations of the unregistered firearms.
> 
> Plans for these confiscations hit a snag when a legislative intern dared to ask a question. “Who will be going door to door to take all the guns away?” asked the 21-year-old college senior.
> 
> Reportedly multiple people in the room in the most sarcastic voices they could muster said “the police”.
> 
> The unnamed intern then pointed at the list and said, “my dad’s name is on the list, and he is the police chief. I see three other names on this list of family members, all cops.”


Oops...


----------



## Macfury

FBI's 10 Most Dangerous Cities to Live In



> The FBI has released its list of the country's 10 most dangerous cities to live in.
> 
> The agency looked at crime stats in cities with 75,000 residents or more.
> 
> Camden, New Jersey, tops the list with the highest crime rate in the nation.
> 
> Flint, Michigan, comes in second.
> 
> Detroit, Michigan, is third. It recorded as many homicides last year as New York City, which has about 12 times the population.
> 
> Oakland, California, comes in fourth, and St. Louis, Missouri, is fifth.
> 
> Cleveland, Ohio; Gary, Indiana; Newark, New Jersey; Bridgeport, Connecticut; and Birmingham, Alabama, round out the list.
> _
> A common trend among all of the cities on the list - a struggling economy._


Another common trend--all run by anti-gun Democrats.


----------



## Macfury

Sen. Yee indicted on arms trafficking, public corruption charges - latimes.com

Yee was one of the most outspoken anti-Second Amendment politicians in the US. Guess he wanted to corner the market on weapons.


----------



## FeXL

BREAKING: First Defensive Gun Use in Chicago Illinois by Carry Permit Holder!



> It has begun in Chicago! The law abiding citizens of Chicago will no longer sit idly by as criminals and thugs take over their city.
> 
> Here we have the first ever documented defensive gun use in Chicago by a carry permit holder!


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Another common trend--all run by anti-gun Democrats.


Further on that trend...

Chicago: 35 Shooting Victims in 36 Hours Over Weekend



> During a 36-hour period over the weekend of April 11, 35 people were shot in Chicago, causing four fatalities in a city with some of the strictest gun control laws in the country.
> 
> Chicago Police responded to 26 separate shooting incidents over the weekend, but over half the shootings occurred in only a 12-hour period on Saturday.


All duck hunters & skeet shooters...NOT!


----------



## heavyall

Localized gun restriction without border-style checkpoints have no tooth to make a difference. Such restrictions need to be much broader in scope and enforcement to actually take effect.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> Localized gun restriction without border-style checkpoints have no tooth to make a difference. Such restrictions need to be much broader in scope and enforcement to actually take effect.


What enforcement would work to prevent criminals from getting guns. At this point you can print up a gun on a 3-D printer if you're really keen.


----------



## eMacMan

The more we learn about the High River gun seizures the less sense it makes.



> ....
> On June 24, High River RCMP reported to their bosses in Edmonton that they had completed their search of every home in town, 3,337 in all. There were still about 300 people living in the town of 13,000, despite the province’s mandatory evacuation order. But other than that, everything seemed calm.
> 
> That same day, units of the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry from Edmonton were requesting a return home since there was “no further danger to civilians (life and limb) and evacuations not requested.”
> 
> All 31 people rescued by police and the military seem to have been plucked from their homes within the first 24 hours. Then things slowly settled down.
> 
> So how come Mounties felt the need to kick in nearly 1,300 doors after June 24, nearly double the number (674) they had kicked down in the first four days of flooding? The logical answer is that they had stopped looking for stranded survivors and had, instead, started focusing on disarming the civilian population.
> .....





> ...
> But nearly half the guns they seized, they seized on their second trip to most homes _after they had been in them once already and determined there were no survivors cowering inside._
> 
> And as Young discovered last week in police records, Mounties also confiscated several pellet guns, bows and arrows, crossbows, “musket powder” and “2 bayonets.”
> 
> Apparently, in addition to concerns about retaliation by angry homeowners, Mounties also seemed paranoid about uprisings by Boy Scouts, First Nations, medieval Flemish yeomen, British Redcoats and Imperial Japanese infantry circa 1941.
> 
> Good thing they didn’t locate any disruptors or blowguns, so they didn’t also have to be on the lookout for Klingons or indigenous Kuna warriors from South America.


Kicking down doors of High River gun controversy | Columnists | Opinion | Edmonton Sun


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> What enforcement would work to prevent criminals from getting guns. At this point you can print up a gun on a 3-D printer if you're really keen.


People can commit all kinds of crimes if they're really keen. You could make a bomb if you really wanted to, doesn't mean bomb making should be legalized.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> People can commit all kinds of crimes if they're really keen. You could make a bomb if you really wanted to, doesn't mean bomb making should be legalized.


So you would like to have the US work harder to eliminate guns, much has it has successfully eliminated drugs by making them illegal?


----------



## heavyall

Same principle. Just because you can't catch them all, (or your current tactics so far don't catch them all), doesn't mean it's a good idea to have things like crack, heroin, meth, etc openly available.


----------



## Macfury

Increased surveillance of e-mails and telephone calls in addition to surprise home inspections by police should get you closer to that ideal.


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> Increased surveillance of e-mails and telephone calls in addition to surprise home inspections by police should get you closer to that ideal.


Of drug and arms traffickers? I'm all for that. Just being a known associate of a criminal organization should get you on such a list, IMO.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> Of drug and arms traffickers? I'm all for that. Just being a known associate of a criminal organization should get you on such a list, IMO.


Of everyone-you never know who might have a gun or a drug.


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> Of everyone-you never know who might have a gun or a drug.


I assure you sir, there is No Such Agency.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> I assure you sir, there is No Such Agency.


If we all agree to that security comes before freedom, everything is possible.


----------



## FeXL

Those nasty Texas concealed carry guys.

Texas Concealed Carry Law Saves Woman From Being Mugged



> _That’s when the stranger, who was armed, stopped the would-be thieves and forced them to lie on the ground while they waited for the police to arrive.​_


Oh, wait...


----------



## FeXL

Those nasty guns, er, anti-depressants.

How Zoloft & Prozac are Linked to Child Suicides & Mass Shootings



> _* James Holmes the Colorado batman shooter, had taken 100 milligrams of Vicodin immediately before he shot up the movie theater
> * Christopher Pittman was on antidepressants when he killed his grandparents
> * Eric Harris , one of the gunmen in the Columbine school shooting, was taking Luvox and Dylan Klebold, his partner, had taken Zoloft and Paxil
> * Doug Williams , who killed five and wounded nine of his fellow Lockheed Martin employees, was on Zoloft and Celexa
> * Michael McDermott was on three antidepressants when he fired off 37 rounds and killed seven of his fellow employees in the Massachusetts Wakefield massacre
> * Kip Kinkel was on Prozac when he killed his parents and then killed 2 children and wounded 25 at a nearby school
> * In fourteen recent school shoots, the acts were committed by persons taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs, resulting in over 100 wounded and 58 killed
> * In other school shootings, information about the shooter’s prescription drug use and other medical history were kept from public records​_


News you won't see in the MSM...


----------



## FeXL

Missouri Senate Votes to Nullify Federal Gun Laws



> By a vote of 23-8 today, the Missouri state Senate passed an “emergency” bill that seeks to nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books, “whether past, present or future.”


Yesssss!


----------



## CubaMark

*How very typical.*

*Safety-equipped 'smart guns' being run out of town by U.S. gun lobby*










_As every true lover of freedom and the Second Amendment knows, Barack Obama spends most of his time scheming to take away America's guns.

Pay no attention to the relaxed gun laws since Obama's first election, or the record increase in gun sales on his watch. Almost as many guns were produced during Obama's first four years than all eight years of George W. Bush's administration.

Obviously, Obama's crafty operatives know that allowing all that accumulation of firepower will just give them more guns to impound when they make their move.

As everyone knows, right, Washington is working on a diabolical project: a "smart gun" that the government will be able to deactivate remotely, probably at the very moment its owner is stoutly defending himself or his household against federal agents.

OK, that's about as far down the road to conspiracy-town as I care to travel.

But I'm not making all this up. One needs surf no further than the esteemed Forbes website to find this: "Smart guns may be susceptible to government tracking or jamming. How hard would it be for the government to require manufacturers to surreptitiously include in computer-enhanced weapons some circuitry that would allow law enforcement to track — or even to disable — the weapons?"

*Death and delusion in a nation of assault rifles*

Gun websites, which tend to take a more dire view than Forbes, are, well, up in arms._

* * * 

_Some smart guns contain sensors that scan the owner's biometric information, or recognize a grip. Some recognize fingerprints.

Others, like the German-made Armatix iP1, won't work unless the shooter is wearing a special wristwatch transmitter.

In other words, smart gun technology might prevent the hundreds of children who stumble upon guns in their homes every year from shooting themselves or someone else, as they do now.

Or perhaps some teen intent on stealing his mother's guns to slaughter schoolchildren might find that they won't operate in anyone else's hands._

(CBC)


----------



## John Clay

CubaMark said:


> *How very typical.*
> 
> *Safety-equipped 'smart guns' being run out of town by U.S. gun lobby*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _As every true lover of freedom and the Second Amendment knows, Barack Obama spends most of his time scheming to take away America's guns.
> 
> Pay no attention to the relaxed gun laws since Obama's first election, or the record increase in gun sales on his watch. Almost as many guns were produced during Obama's first four years than all eight years of George W. Bush's administration.
> 
> Obviously, Obama's crafty operatives know that allowing all that accumulation of firepower will just give them more guns to impound when they make their move.
> 
> As everyone knows, right, Washington is working on a diabolical project: a "smart gun" that the government will be able to deactivate remotely, probably at the very moment its owner is stoutly defending himself or his household against federal agents.
> 
> OK, that's about as far down the road to conspiracy-town as I care to travel.
> 
> But I'm not making all this up. One needs surf no further than the esteemed Forbes website to find this: "Smart guns may be susceptible to government tracking or jamming. How hard would it be for the government to require manufacturers to surreptitiously include in computer-enhanced weapons some circuitry that would allow law enforcement to track — or even to disable — the weapons?"
> 
> *Death and delusion in a nation of assault rifles*
> 
> Gun websites, which tend to take a more dire view than Forbes, are, well, up in arms._
> 
> * * *
> 
> _Some smart guns contain sensors that scan the owner's biometric information, or recognize a grip. Some recognize fingerprints.
> 
> Others, like the German-made Armatix iP1, won't work unless the shooter is wearing a special wristwatch transmitter.
> 
> In other words, smart gun technology might prevent the hundreds of children who stumble upon guns in their homes every year from shooting themselves or someone else, as they do now.
> 
> Or perhaps some teen intent on stealing his mother's guns to slaughter schoolchildren might find that they won't operate in anyone else's hands._
> 
> (CBC)


Given how unreliable electronics are, I certainly don't want them anywhere *near* any device that absolutely must function when needed.

Just wait until the first story about a "smart" gun being jammed during the commission of a robbery/home invasion/whatever. It's a simple RF signal, and just as simple to jam.


----------



## FeXL

Remington to NY State: B-bye...

Remington to NY: Pound Sand; Firearms Maker Moving Large Portion of Operation to Alabama



> It was really just a matter of time until Remington (which is now comprised of numerous brands under the Freedom Group) began to pull its operations out of anti-gun New York.
> 
> It has been announced that Remington will be moving production of two of its most popular firearms lines, its Bushmaster AR-15 rifles and R1 1911 from New York to the more gun friendly Alabama.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Remington to NY State: B-bye...
> 
> Remington to NY: Pound Sand; Firearms Maker Moving Large Portion of Operation to Alabama


I believe New York is quite happy with its slide into economic oblivion.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I believe New York is quite happy with its slide into economic oblivion.


They must. They've made no changes. Just like California. Love it when the chickens come home to roost...


----------



## CubaMark

*See, it's things like this that perpetuate the various Southern stereotypes... just surreal....*

*In Georgia, You Can Carry a Gun, But You Need a Prescription for a Vibrator*












> Giving out prescriptions for vibrators seems more like a doctor's bad pick-up line than good public policy. But in Sandy Springs, Georgia, you really do need a medical reason – and a doctor's prescription – to buy a sex toy.





> Davenport has multiple sclerosis, which she says has impacted her sex life with her husband, and she credits sex toys with saving her marriage. Yet her doctors still won't write her a prescription.
> 
> Leaving aside the bizarreness of the policy itself – people should be able to buy sex toys for the sheer fun of it – it seems ironic that a woman with a real medical condition is being denied sex toys, when you consider that the vibrator was actually invented to cure a (fake) medical condition: hysteria.





> now, in states like Alabama, you can openly carry a gun but not buy a butt plug.


(Alternet)


----------



## FeXL

CubaMark said:


> *See, it's things like this that perpetuate the various Southern stereotypes... just surreal....*


Trying to reconcile this with the Gun Control Thread topic...


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL - the juxtaposition of needing a license to buy a sex toy, but guns are unrestricted. One gives people pleasure, the other -well, the other gives *some* people pleasure, but can also be a lethal weapon. It's a commentary on the gun regulation context.


----------



## FeXL

Oh... For a minute there I thought that you were trying to illustrate that most people were adept enough to handle a firearm, whereas very few were equipped to handle a vibrator.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Oh... For a minute there I thought that you were trying to illustrate that most people were adept enough to handle a firearm, whereas very few were equipped to handle a vibrator.


Hmmmm.... maybe you've hit upon a great anti-guns campaign! An amnesty - turn in your gun, get a vibrator / butt plug / sex toy of your choice! Brilliant!


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> FeXL - the juxtaposition of needing a license to buy a sex toy, but guns are unrestricted. One gives people pleasure, the other -well, the other gives *some* people pleasure, but can also be a lethal weapon. It's a commentary on the gun regulation context.


The mere use of that phrase demonstrates misunderstanding of Canadian law in the extreme. Surely you cannot mean that Mark?


----------



## Macfury

CM is right, both guns and butt plugs should be carried with equal freedom. However, I believe this should go into CM's new Butt Plug thread.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> The mere use of that phrase demonstrates misunderstanding of Canadian law in the extreme. Surely you cannot mean that Mark?


Canadian law? We're talking about Georgia, Don!


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> CM is right, both guns and butt plugs should be carried with equal freedom. However, I believe this should go into CM's new Butt Plug thread.


I seriously have no interest in discovering the sexual inclinations of you folks... a mystery best left untapped.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> I seriously have no interest in discovering the sexual inclinations of you folks... a mystery best left untapped.



Us folks? You're the only one who has ever introduced the topic of butt plugs on EhMac.


----------



## FeXL

See, that's the problem with the logic of declaring "Gun Free Zones". They actually assume that the particular type of idiot who would use a gun to commit a crime is bright enough to read...

Restaurant with 'No Weapons, No Concealed Firearms' Sign Robbed at Gunpoint



> A Durham, North Carolina restaurant with a sign on its front door reading, "No Weapons, No Concealed Firearms," was robbed at gunpoint on May 19.


----------



## eMacMan

Not mentioned in this article but heard on the news that the shooter had recently stopped taking prescription SSRIs. That seems to be an almost certain prescription for tragedy.

Parents of Santa Barbara Killer Rushed to Intervene, But Too Late


----------



## FeXL

2012 FBI Homicide Stats Are Out – Hammers & Fists Killed 3.5X More Than Rifles



> However, just how often are these weapons used to kill people? In 2012, 322 people were killed with rifles. Note, this includes ALL kinds of rifles – semi-automatic, lever action, single shot, etc.
> 
> As a comparison, 1,589 people were killed with knives, 518 people were killed with blunt objects (such as hammers and bats), and 678 were killed with Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.). This means that blunt objects and fists/feet combined killed about 3.5x more people than rifles in 2012 (322 total rifle deaths, 1,196 deaths by blunt objects and personal weapons combined).


----------



## SINC

FeXL said:


> 2012 FBI Homicide Stats Are Out – Hammers & Fists Killed 3.5X More Than Rifles


It was facts like these that helped kill the Canadian long gun registry, a travesty against long gun owners from the get go.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## FeXL

Yup, CM, I can see the parallels.

Owning a .22 to take care of a gopher problem is exactly like having a fleet of personal nukes...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Yup, CM, I can see the parallels.
> 
> Owning a .22 to take care of a gopher problem is exactly like having a fleet of personal nukes...


I suspect that for the left, a basic distrust of humanity informs most of their ideas.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I suspect that for the left, a basic distrust of humanity informs most of their ideas.


If more of them were trustworthy, they wouldn't own that issue in the first place...


----------



## Macfury

Detroit gets it!

Detroit police chief says armed citizens are curbing crime - Washington Times



> Detroit has experienced 37 percent fewer robberies than it did last year, and Police Chief James Craig is crediting armed citizens for the drop.
> 
> “Criminals are getting the message that good Detroiters are armed and will use that weapon,” Chief Craig, who has been an open advocate for private gun ownership, told The Detroit News in an interview. “I don’t want to take away from the good work our investigators are doing, but I think part of the drop in crime, and robberies in particular, is because criminals are thinking twice that citizens could be armed.
> 
> “I can’t say what specific percentage is caused by this, but there’s no question in my mind it has had an effect,” he added.
> 
> In addition to the drop in robberies, Detroit has seen 22 percent fewer break-ins of businesses and homes and 30 percent fewer carjackings in 2014 than during the same period last year.
> 
> Chief Craig said, however, that he doesn’t think gun ownership deters criminals from attacking other criminals.
> 
> “They automatically assume another criminal is carrying,” he said. “I’m talking about criminals who are thinking of robbing a citizen; they’re less likely to do so if they think they might be armed.”


----------



## SINC

What a surprise.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> Detroit gets it!
> 
> Detroit police chief says armed citizens are curbing crime - Washington Times


For sure it's the gun carrying citizens that are responsible for the drop.

It's not the fact that the city went bankrupt, 1 quarter of the population has left since 2009 and there are sprawling vacant houses and neighborhoods.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> For sure it's the gun carrying citizens that are responsible for the drop.
> 
> It's not the fact that the city went bankrupt, 1 quarter of the population has left since 2009 and there are sprawling vacant houses and neighborhoods.


Agreed. The lack of police protection, the run-down neighbourhoods and lack of economic opportunity should have increased the rate.


----------



## CubaMark

What is the _proportional_ drop in crime, if any? Taking into account the decline in population, are there really '...37 percent fewer robberies...' over the same period last year? A percentage drop is meaningless without the proper data to put it in context.


----------



## Macfury

> Detroit has experienced 37 percent fewer robberies in 2014 than during the same period last year, 22 percent fewer break-ins of businesses and homes, and 30 percent fewer carjackings.


From The Detroit News: Detroit police chief gives credit to armed citizens for drop in crime | The Detroit News

Detroit Population in 2013: 701,475 
Detroit Population 2013 | World Population Statistics

Rate of decline approximately 7,500 residents per year--or 1%.
Suburbs gain while Detroit population drops below 700,000 | The Detroit News


----------



## CubaMark

Jeebus.... Just read the first article you linked ("Detroit police chief gives credit...")

Armed citizens may not be all that you guys think it's cracked up to be:

_In the latest incident, police say an 88-year-old who was beaten and robbed inside his east side home last week probably thought he was defending himself against attackers *when he opened fire Monday on a television news crew*.

On Thursday, a woman appeared on his front porch asking for help, and when he opened his door, two men rushed in, assaulted him and tied him up with a phone cord before robbing him of several items.

A reporter from Channel 2 (WJBK) knocked on the man’s door on Arndt Street Monday, and conducted a short interview, although the man, whose name was not released, would not open his door.* After a crew from Channel 7 (WXYZ) came onto the man’s porch, he fired a single shot. *No one was hurt, and the bullet lodged into a tree._​
Scared citizens firing indiscriminately at anything that moves.... maybe we should have a look at 'accidental death' from firearm statistics from the same period to balance out the drop in the crime rate....?


----------



## Macfury

That's normal for Detroit. The reduced crime rate is not.

But go ahead and look up the accidental death from firearms statistics for us and show us how these have eclipsed the reduction in other crimes.

Or simply turn to Democrat headquarters--Chicago--and see what gun control has done for them lately. Murders are down following the 2013 passage of Illinois concealed-carry regulations, though it may be too early to make the correlation.




CubaMark said:


> Just read the first article you linked ("Detroit police chief gives credit...")
> 
> Armed citizens may not be all that you guys think it's cracked up to be:
> 
> _In the latest incident, police say an 88-year-old who was beaten and robbed inside his east side home last week probably thought he was defending himself against attackers *when he opened fire Monday on a television news crew*.
> 
> On Thursday, a woman appeared on his front porch asking for help, and when he opened his door, two men rushed in, assaulted him and tied him up with a phone cord before robbing him of several items.
> 
> A reporter from Channel 2 (WJBK) knocked on the man’s door on Arndt Street Monday, and conducted a short interview, although the man, whose name was not released, would not open his door.* After a crew from Channel 7 (WXYZ) came onto the man’s porch, he fired a single shot. *No one was hurt, and the bullet lodged into a tree._​
> Scared citizens firing indiscriminately at anything that moves.... maybe we should have a look at 'accidental death' from firearm statistics from the same period to balance out the drop in the crime rate....?


----------



## John Clay

Finally - some positive changes to the Firearms Act.
Sun News : Feds overhaul gun laws with new 'common sense' firearms act


----------



## FeXL

Very interesting...

Federal judge rules DC ban on gun carry rights unconstitutional



> A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Saturday overturned the city’s total ban on residents being allowed to carry firearms outside their home in a landmark decision for gun-rights activists.
> 
> Judge Frederick Scullin Jr. wrote in his ruling in Palmer v. District of Columbia that the right to bear arms extends outside the home, therefore gun-control laws in the nation’s capital are “unconstitutional.”


----------



## FeXL

Good.

Upstate New York braces as Remington Arms packs up to leave



> An upstate New York lawmaker said the loss of manufacturing jobs in the state last month is due to an anti-gun administration that has ignored pleas from local officials to be involved in the negotiating process.
> 
> “Remington talks have come to a halt,” said Assemblyman Marc W. Butler (R.-Newport), whose district includes the Village of Ilion, where the Remington Outdoor Company has been located for almost 200 years. “We are losing 105 jobs at the Ilion primary plant,” said Butler.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Good.
> 
> Upstate New York braces as Remington Arms packs up to leave


All of the New Yorkers on the dole or in government unions keep voting the Democrats back in. Who cares about manufacturing jobs? Build an economy based on government workers and food stamps instead.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> All of the New Yorkers on the dole or in government unions keep voting the Democrats back in. Who cares about manufacturing jobs? Build an economy based on government workers and food stamps instead.


Perfect! Until they run out of Other People's Money...


----------



## FeXL

So, is gun control about safety or politics?

Half of Felon Gun Possession Crimes in Milwaukee Never Charged



> Over the past two years, Milwaukee leaders have been making demands of state leaders to help them solve the city’s crime problem. One demand being made by Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn is for a state law change requiring a 3-year mandatory sentence for illegally possessing a firearm. But while Barrett and Flynn continue to push for the mandatory minimum, a Media Trackers investigation shows that the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office may make their case for mandatory minimums a moot point.
> 
> In an open records request to the Milwaukee Police Department, Media Trackers requested information on all MPD police reports forwarded to the DA’s office with the recommended charge of “Possession of a Firearm by a Felon” – a felony under current law — during June, July and August of 2013. What Media Trackers found was that nearly half of those cases referred to the DA’s office by the MPD were never charged.
> 
> *Of the 142 cases recommended for charges by the MPD between June and August of last summer, a year later Media Trackers was unable to locate any charge related to illegally possessing a firearm in 68 of those cases – a stunning 47.8% of the time – using WCCA.*


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Always do as I say, not as I do...

Anti-gun Missouri Dem. arrested with 9mm pistol, refuses breathalyzer test



> Earlier this week, Missouri state Senator Jamilah Nasheed, a Democrat who has sponsored several anti-gun bills, was arrested while protesting in front of the Ferguson Police Department, The Blaze reported Tuesday. What made the arrest interesting is that Nasheed was carrying a 9mm handgun with extra ammunition.


Further:



> But her arrest and news that she was in possession of a firearm brought charges of hypocrisy. According to attorney Eric Vickers, Nasheed needs the gun for her own protection and Nasheed says she holds a concealed carry permit. But if Nasheed had her way, other Missourians would not have the same right.


"I'm worth protecting. You aren't..."


----------



## Macster Blaster

FeXL said:


> Good.
> 
> Upstate New York braces as Remington Arms packs up to leave


Kudos to the company for standing up for themselves.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me sum just desserts...

Officer Who Slapped Legal Gun Owner Over Illegal Search Has Resigned and Been Arrested



> Earlier today we brought you the story of the sheriff’s deputy in New York who slapped a legal gun owner after the owner respectfully declined a warrantless search.
> 
> We are now getting word that the officer in question, Sergeant Shawn R. Glans, was resigned from his post today shortly before being arrested on the charges of official misconduct and harassment.


More:



> That’s when the Deputy slaps Fitch while saying “you want to f*cking resist?”. He then took the car keys and threw them to his partner, telling him to search the car.
> 
> When Adam Roberts, the passenger in the car who was surreptitiously filming the entire incident, told the deputy “that was intense”, Glans responded by saying, “you like that huh? I can get a lot more intense.”
> 
> Roberts asked if he was going to slap him around and the deputy had a few more choice words:
> 
> *“I’ll rip your head off and sh*t down your neck”*


Bold from the link.

Nice...


----------



## Macfury

Why law enforcement officers should have a monopoly on guns?



FeXL said:


> I jes' luvs me sum just desserts...
> 
> Officer Who Slapped Legal Gun Owner Over Illegal Search Has Resigned and Been Arrested


----------



## FeXL

This is true gun control.

Austin, TX Police Officer Shoots Gunman from 100 yards, With a Pistol, While Holding Reins to Horses



> 312 feet. 104 yards. One shot. Probably one handed, while holding onto two 1000 pound animals. Lucky shot? Maybe, but it’s quite impressive.


----------



## FeXL

What could possibly go wrong?

PSA encourages kids to steal parents’ guns, hand over to teachers



> A startling new anti-gun ad released by a San Francisco-based production company encourages children to commit a series of crimes by stealing their parents’ guns and turning them over to school officials, The Daily Caller reported Monday.
> 
> Sleeper 13 Productions released the controversial video on Dec. 13. It shows a pouty, young boy wandering into his parents’ bedroom, stealing a handgun out of their dresser drawer and then shoving it into his backpack.
> 
> The boy then carries what is presumably a loaded weapon into his classroom. After class, he approaches the teacher, takes the gun out of his backpack and slams it onto her desk.


----------



## FeXL

Again, what could possibly go wrong?

Company to Sell Fake, Decoy Guns to People Who Want to Appear to Be Armed, but Not Own Firearms



> It appears that a new company is set to begin selling fake guns/holsters to people who want to appear to be armed but don’t want to go through the actual hassle of owning and training with a firearm.
> 
> Because we all know that you just strap a firearm to your body and all trouble will magically leave you alone forever (please not heavy sarcasm in that sentence).


----------



## FeXL

In a word, no...

Does Gun Control = Death Control?



> The United States does not have the highest firearm homicide rates of all countries, or of all developed countries. Among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, Mexico has the highest firearms homicide rate, with a rate about 3 times higher than the US rate. _We should note that guns are banned for all civilians in Mexico._ Furthermore, “civilized” countries like Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Colombia and Venezuela have some of the highest homicide rates in the world.
> 
> According to the very same sources quoted above, Israel and Switzerland have very high gun possession rates, and their firearm homicide rates are extremely low. Switzerland had a firearms homicide rate of 0.77 per 100,000 people in 2012 and Israel has a rate of just 0.09 per 100,000.


Italics from the link.

It ain't the duck hunters...



> Most gun deaths are urban homicides - maybe four a week in Chicago. In fact, eleven American cities – Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit, Los Angeles, Jacksonville (Fla.), Miami, Orlando, Omaha, Atlanta, Aurora, IL, and Dallas, account for over 70% of all American gun homicides – with a weekly rate of nearly 30 shootings.


Draw from this what you will.



> Narrowing further, according to the 2013 DOJ crime statistics, 53% of all US homicides are committed by black young men (15 to 30) in urban violence with handguns. Blacks are about 14% of US population; but young black men are about 13% of the total black population. So, 13 X 14 = 1.82, less than 2% of our population commits more than half of all American gun murders.


----------



## IllusionX

Toddler shoots both parents with handgun. 

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6588900


----------



## FeXL

RCMP rebuked for firearms seizures during 2013 Alberta floods



> In a report released Thursday, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP said that officers who conducted the “warrantless” seizures were *undersupervised*. The subsequent anger in the population was badly handled by the RCMP communications teams, the report also found, as citizens complained that “their homes were forcibly entered, and in some cases windows were broken, doors were kicked in and firearms were taken.”


M'bold.

WTF is "undersupervised"? What a crock. 

Where is the accountability? Where are the penalties, the firings?


----------



## Macfury

Happy to see this in the papers:

Ottawa free to destroy Quebec's gun-registry data, top court rules - The Globe and Mail


----------



## SINC

Macfury said:


> Happy to see this in the papers:
> 
> Ottawa free to destroy Quebec's gun-registry data, top court rules - The Globe and Mail


A fitting end to bad legislation by the Liberals. Now, where's that delete key?


----------



## CubaMark

*NSFW (Language)*





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## SINC

Not real sure what a foul mouthed Aussie ridiculing American handgun laws has to do with a defunct Canadian long gun registry, but hey whatever turns ya on.


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> Not real sure what a foul mouthed Aussie ridiculing American handgun laws has to do with a defunct Canadian long gun registry, but hey whatever turns ya on.


Considering that this thread began with a U.S. elementary school shooting, I thought it not beyond the intended scope...


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Considering that this thread began with a U.S. elementary school shooting, I thought it not beyond the intended scope...


Not even related.


----------



## FeXL

Related to the post in the Miscellaneous Links thread.

Licensed Gun Owner Saves Two Children From Carjacker



> A northern Pennsylvania man with a licensed carry permit prevented a criminal from stealing a car from a mother with her two children in the back seat.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Related to the post in the Miscellaneous Links thread.
> 
> Licensed Gun Owner Saves Two Children From Carjacker


Congratulations, FeXL! You've found a single example of a responsible gun owner committing a heroic act. Unquestionably, a win for the pro-gun crowd!

It absolutely balances out the more than 44-thousand shootings so far in 2015


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Congratulations, FeXL! You've found a single example of a responsible gun owner committing a heroic act. Unquestionably, a win for the pro-gun crowd!
> 
> It absolutely balances out the more than 44-thousand shootings so far in 2015


CM, you know the numbers you provide from that site have been cooked, right?


----------



## FeXL

Oh, so it's sheer numbers that impress you. Well, why didn't you say so...

Deaths and Mortality

Halfway down the page is a link to a PDF, _Deaths: Final Data for 2013, tables 1, 7, 10, 20_

Let's take a look at some data, shall we? How about Table 18...

Total deaths by injuries in the US in 2010: 192,945.
Firearm totals: 33,636 of which 21,175, nearly 2/3, are suicide.

Falls: 31,240
All Transportation: 37,427
Poisoning: 48,545

Why aren't you frothing at the mouth about falls, vehicle accidents or poisoning anywhere on these boards?



CubaMark said:


> It absolutely balances out the more than 44-thousand shootings so far in 2015


----------



## Macfury

The numbers also include shootings of criminals by police.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> The numbers also include shootings of criminals by police.


And the larger number of Police shootings of unarmed non-criminals.

Leaves out the deaths by medical and pharmaceutical malfeasance


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Why aren't you frothing at the mouth about falls, vehicle accidents or poisoning anywhere on these boards?


I don't "froth", thank you very much.

Why are *you* focusing on _deaths_, when I'm talking about _shootings_? Trying to deflate the numbers?

I'm not against firearms in general. I am against a rabid political culture that promotes gun ownership as the end-all, be-all of personal liberty. The arguments presented are a sad collection of jokes. Gun violence can be reduced, as can vehicle accidents, poisonings, etc. 

That's why we have federal agencies that attempt to impose standards, regulate products and procedures, etc. The latter being things that the gun lobby fights tooth-and-nail to prevent. You are making the case for me, you know!?


----------



## FeXL

'Cause I was under the impression that the whole point of gun control is to minimize deaths. If it's not, then please enlighten me.



CubaMark said:


> Why are *you* focusing on _deaths_, when I'm talking about _shootings_?


Well, if you don't froth then I guess I'm not rabid.

It may not be the single be-all, end-all. However, it is certainly a portion of the equation & the part that government fears the most.



CubaMark said:


> I am against a rabid political culture that promotes gun ownership as the end-all, be-all of personal liberty.


Well, until it can be proven otherwise in a US court of law, it is the right of the people enshrined in the constitution.



CubaMark said:


> The arguments presented are a sad collection of jokes.


Why, yes. Yes, it can. So, let's take a look at the demographics: young, black males living without a male father figure in cities that are largely Democratic by far are not only the shooting group but the dying group. Figger out a way to fix that problem without infringing upon the rights of every other law-abiding gun owner in the country, you've got a solution. 

Until then, hands off.



CubaMark said:


> Gun violence can be reduced...


And why are the solutions not working? Because, in typical political fashion, the idiots seeking a solution are looking at the effect, not the cause.



CubaMark said:


> That's why we have federal agencies that attempt to impose standards, regulate products and procedures, etc. The latter being things that the gun lobby fights tooth-and-nail to prevent.


I may as well, 'cause your so-called solutions aren't working...



CubaMark said:


> You are making the case for me, you know!?


Curious how, as gun ownership has gone up in the US over the last 20 years or more, fatalities have gone down...


----------



## FeXL

Despite strict gun laws down under...

Spike in handgun crimes reveals nation’s secret problem



> *The black market for guns is bigger than previously understood* and crimes involving handguns are rising sharply, shows never-before-seen data published today by _The New Daily_.
> 
> Australians may be more at risk from gun crime than ever before with the country’s underground market for firearms ballooning in the past decade.
> 
> Previously unseen police statistics show that the number of pistol-related offences doubled in Victoria and rose by 300 per cent in New South Wales. At least two other states also saw a massive jump in firearms-related offences during the same period.


M'bold.

A government making a decision based on erroneous numbers? Stunning...


----------



## FeXL

Well, well, well...

D.C. police Chief Cathy Lanier urges public to ‘take down’ active gunman if they can



> In a surprising comment, Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier is encouraging ordinary citizens to subdue or even kill active gunmen if they can as the “best option for saving lives before police can get there.”
> 
> During an interview Sunday on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Chief Lanier was asked what should people do if they are in the vicinity of an active shooter like the ones who terrorized Paris on Nov. 13.
> 
> “Your options are run, hide, or fight,” the D.C. police chief said. *“If you’re in a position to try and take the gunman down, to take the gunman out, it’s the best option for saving lives before police can get there.”*


This is ironic for at least 2 reasons.

First of all, the obvious: This advice coming from a police chief, especially the DC police chief.

Second, CCW is notoriously difficult to get in DC. I read recently that there are only something like 42 permits issued to citizens in DC right now.

Interesting, nonetheless...


----------



## Macfury

DC is a small area surrounded by states with far more sense. I think the chief is hoping that more robust folk from Virginia, Maryland and Delaware may save them while commuting.




FeXL said:


> Well, well, well...
> 
> D.C. police Chief Cathy Lanier urges public to ‘take down’ active gunman if they can
> 
> 
> 
> This is ironic for at least 2 reasons.
> 
> First of all, the obvious: This advice coming from a police chief, especially the DC police chief.
> 
> Second, CCW is notoriously difficult to get in DC. I read recently that there are only something like 42 permits issued to citizens in DC right now.
> 
> Interesting, nonetheless...


----------



## eMacMan

Suspect in custody after shooting at Planned Parenthood

This shooting for a change seems genuine, that is not carefully created to promote the interests of the anti-gun crowd. I base that on the following: There was no drill going on at the time, the gunmen wounded far more than he killed, and the cops took the gunman alive. Beyond that he appears to have been just an overall nutbar, not an FBI radicalized pro-lifer.

That said Obushma, could have waited for the corpses to cool before pounding his anti-gun drum.



> COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) — A gunman burst into a Planned Parenthood clinic and opened fire, launching several gunbattles and an hourslong standoff with police as patients and staff took cover under furniture and inside locked rooms. By the time the shooter surrendered, three people were killed — including a police officer — and nine others were wounded, authorities said.
> 
> For hours, police had no communication with the shooter other than intermittent gunfire from inside the Colorado Springs clinic. As the standoff progressed, officers inside the building herded people into one area and evacuated others.
> 
> Officers eventually moved in, shouted at the gunman and persuaded him to surrender, police said. About five hours after the attack started, authorities led away a man wearing a white T-shirt.
> 
> Police identified him as 57-year-old Robert Lewis Dear of North Carolina. Jail booking records indicate Dear is due in court on Monday.





> Dear spent time at a small cabin in North Carolina with no electricity or running water about a half-mile up a twisty dirt road near Black Mountain, a neighbor said. On Saturday, there was a cross made of twigs on the wall of the pale yellow shack.
> 
> "If you talked to him, nothing with him was very cognitive — topics all over place," said James Russell, who lives a few hundred feet down the mountain.





> President Barack Obama condemned the violence.
> 
> "This is not normal. We can't let it become normal," he said in a statement. "If we truly care about this — if we're going to offer up our thoughts and prayers again, for God knows how many times, with a truly clean conscience — then we have to do something about the easy accessibility of weapons of war on our streets to people who have no business wielding them. Period. Enough is enough."


----------



## eMacMan

More on the shooter here.

Colorado Springs shooting suspect lived solitary, mysterious life

Note: He was not one of the normal Planned Parenthood Protesters, and the so-called source of his anti-abortion comments seems to be NBC.

Other than that, he was shooting away from the clinic and retreated inside when the cops closed in.

They are going to to do autopsies on the victims a clear indicator that this was a genuine nutbar, not some sort of staged event alá Sandy Hook. Would love to learn if he was or had been on anti-depressants.


----------



## SINC

Here we go again:

San Bernardino police search for three gunmen after reports say 20 victims in mass shooting

12 people killed in shooting at San Bernardino social services facility | abc7.com


----------



## CubaMark

At 6:42 EST, at least two suspects down, not sure about the third. Black SUV stopped and got the crap shot out of it by police. They're checking the vehicle now.

Livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mq5hrUDoYo

*Update 849 EST* The police chief & FBI lead just held a press conference. Highlights:

a third suspect is in custody, but may not be involved
two suspects dead in shootout when cops stopped a black Yukon SUV
1 male; 1 female
no ethnicity or other identifying characteristics noted.
2 long guns ("assault rifles") and handguns recovered.
report of a pipe bomb not confirmed, but bomb squad did blow something up.
reporter asked about info that this was the result of an argument / incident at a holiday party (the conference room at that social services centre had been rented for a party). Chief confirmed he had the same information, but could not say if it was related to the shooting.
next press conference scheduled for around 900 PST.


----------



## SINC

Only two suspects who were man and wife, both killed by police:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/u...ackage-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


----------



## FeXL

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Of course not. Can't let the truth get out when it doesn't follow the narrative...



CubaMark said:


> [*]no ethnicity or other identifying characteristics noted.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Of course not. Can't let the truth get out when it doesn't follow the narrative...


You certainly are consistent(ly ridiculous).

By late evening the suspects had been identified and the information made public. So much for hiding the truth and not disrupting "the narrative" whatever the heck you think that is....

_the suspects: Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, a former county health worker who was born in the United States, and a woman described as his Pakistani-born wife, Tashfeen Malik, 27.

* * *​
Muslim community leader Ayloush described Malik as a Pakistani-born immigrant who lived in Saudi Arabia before marrying Farook. Two FBI officials told The Washington Post that Farook was not under FBI investigation.

* * *​
An ATF official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said two of the weapons were purchased legally, and investigations continued into the other two.
_
(WashingtonPost)​
* * *​
_Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Council for American-Islamic Relations in Los Angeles, told The Washington Post that Farook and Malik had been married for two years and left their 6-month-old child with Farook’s mother that morning.

The couple told the grandmother that they had a doctor’s appointment and needed her to take care of the child,...

* * *​
Farook was a San Bernardino County employee who had worked for five years as an environmental health specialist in the public health department, which was hosting the holiday party where the shooting occurred Wednesday. According to state employee records, Farook’s total compensation in 2013, including salary and benefits, was $71,230.

Farook was born in the United States, Burguan confirmed. Malik was born in Pakistan and spent time in Saudi Arabia before marrying Farook, said the Muslim community leader Ayloush.

Farook was born in Illinois after his parents immigrated to the United States from Pakistan, _
(WashingtonPost)​


----------



## Rps

Just in case you are keeping score, to date, the U.S. Has had 355 mass shootings this calendar year. By police definition, a mass shooting is one which involves 4 people or more. So we are hitting one per day.......at this rate when will these events stop being news?


----------



## FeXL

Yet online blogs had that information posted hours before the reluctance of the FBI to release that information was finally overcome. Perhaps that inconvenient fact is precisely why the FBI finally gave it up...

Curious, idn't it.

And, the progressive narrative is that there is no Muslim terrorism on US soil. Period. It's all white guys with guns, usually killing blacks. 

In this case, seeing as it was a husband & wife, it will be branded as "domestic violence" instead of an act of terrorism...



CubaMark said:


> By late evening the suspects had been identified and the information made public. So much for hiding the truth and not disrupting "the narrative" whatever the heck you think that is....


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Yet online blogs had that information posted hours before the reluctance of the FBI to release that information was finally overcome. Perhaps that inconvenient fact is precisely why the FBI finally gave it up...
> 
> Curious, idn't it.


No. It's not at all curious. If we were talking a week, a month... that would be obvious withholding of information. But less than 12 hours after a mass shooting in which police spent most of the evening combing through backyards and neighbourhoods looking for a possible third shooter, managing a significant crime scene, etc.? No, it's not 'curious' at all that the information came out when it did. I'm surprised it was released that quickly.

That your brain automatically goes to "OMG the evil overlords in their black helicopters who wanna send muslim jihadists to take our guns and oppress us OMG" is an indication that you have some pretty major problems with conspiracy and reality.



FeXL said:


> And, the progressive narrative is that there is no Muslim terrorism on US soil. Period. It's all white guys with guns, usually killing blacks.


Time for someone to do an intervention, and blacklist those right-wing 'news' websites you like to obsess over. I mean... just wow.



FeXL said:


> In this case, seeing as it was a husband & wife, it will be branded as "domestic violence" instead of an act of terrorism...


You really, truly, completely, have absolutely no clue, do you?

:yikes:


----------



## eMacMan

So far no evidence of a parallel drill, but this building has been routinely used by local police for live shooter drills. So much so that one witnesses first reaction was that it was another drill.

Another Sandy Hook, this time with verifiable corpses? Presumably staged to give BO an excuse to Executive Order gun controls?


----------



## BigDL

Rps said:


> Just in case you are keeping score, to date, the U.S. Has had 355 mass shootings this calendar year. By police definition, a mass shooting is one which involves 4 people or more. So we are hitting one per day.......at this rate when will these events stop being news?


Also the San Bernardino shootings were the second mass shootings committed on Dec. 02, 2015. The first shooting of the day  a gunman in Savannah, Ga., shot four people early Wednesday, killing a woman and injuring three men.


----------



## FeXL

Blah, blah, blah...

If the information was out there for online blogs to post about hours earlier, the information was out there for the FBI to post as well.



CubaMark said:


> No, it's not 'curious' at all that the information came out when it did.


Actually, my brain automatically goes to "What an idiot".



CubaMark said:


> That your brain automatically goes to "OMG the evil overlords in their black helicopters who wanna send muslim jihadists to take our guns and oppress us OMG" is an indication that you have some pretty major problems with conspiracy and reality.


On the contrary, I have no doubt, whatsoever... 



CubaMark said:


> You really, truly, completely, have absolutely no clue, do you?


----------



## Dr.G.

Just read this in the NY Times. Very appropriate and true.

"No right is unlimited and immune from reason."


----------



## FeXL

Here's another truth for you: Rarely do anti-gun advocates present "reason"...



Dr.G. said:


> Just read this in the NY Times. Very appropriate and true.
> 
> "No right is unlimited and immune from reason."


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Here's another truth for you: Rarely do anti-gun advocates present "reason"...


Yep. And I believe that "progressive reason" always favours abrogation of any amendment rights to which it it casts its analytical eye--religion, free speech, right of assembly or right to bear arms. Too much freedom going on.


----------



## heavyall

Dr.G. said:


> Just read this in the NY Times. Very appropriate and true.
> 
> "No right is unlimited and immune from reason."


It's a good quote, and a great well-reasoned article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/o...n-america.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0


----------



## Dr.G.

heavyall said:


> It's a good quote, and a great well-reasoned article:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/o...n-america.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0


I agree. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## SINC

Scanner traffic indicates law enforcement may have investigated San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook a week before the attack.

A Missed Warning? | The Weekly Standard


----------



## Dr.G.

This 30 Second Gun Control Commercial Leaves 2nd Amendment Fanatics Speechless «

A powerful ad that will hopefully get some people rethinking their stand on gun control. We shall see. Paix, mes amis.


----------



## Macfury

Dr.G. said:


> This 30 Second Gun Control Commercial Leaves 2nd Amendment Fanatics Speechless «
> 
> A powerful ad that will hopefully get some people rethinking their stand on gun control. We shall see. Paix, mes amis.


The point of the Second Amendment was that firepower should not be concentrated and monopolized in the hands of a government that could easily shift to tyranny. The ad would be effective if it also demanded that the government limit itself to muskets.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> The point of the Second Amendment was that firepower should not be concentrated and monopolized in the hands of a government that could easily shift to tyranny. The ad would be effective if it also demanded that the government limit itself to muskets.


How often, since the passing of the 2nd Amendment, have gun-toting Americans overthrown domestic tyranny?

















:yawn:















**crickets**​
_....yeah, you can get back to me on that one... _ :lmao:​


----------



## Macfury

I'm sure you're confused. It appears to be a natural state with you.

American governments have veered from tyranny simply because they fear an armed populace. Obama's relentless whining about the Second Amendment reflects his frustration at not being able to exact greater control over the American people.



CubaMark said:


> How often, since the passing of the 2nd Amendment, have gun-toting Americans overthrown domestic tyranny?
> 
> :confused
> 
> _....yeah, you can get back to me on that one... _ :lmao:​


​


----------



## Rps

So let me get this straight. You have a Presidential candidate who wants to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., which he thinks helps him defend the Constitutional responsibility of defending the U.S., but won't ban weapons............hmmmmmmmmm.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> So let me get this straight. You have a Presidential candidate who wants to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., which he thinks helps him defend the Constitutional responsibility of defending the U.S., but won't ban weapons............hmmmmmmmmm.


How would these two things be mutually exclusive?


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> How would these two things be mutually exclusive?


What part about constitutional rights do you not understand?

I will amend my post here....if he had said refusal from brining in refugees from countries that have a history of extreme jihadist leanings, then I could buy that, but not a whole religion..


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> What part about constitutional rights do you not understand?
> 
> I will amend my post here....if he had said refusal from brining in refugees from countries that have a history of extreme jihadist leanings, then I could buy that, but not a whole religion..


People outside the US have no Constitutional Rights.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> People outside the US have no Constitutional Rights.


Partially true. They have rights once in the U.S. It would be folly to suggest that such discrimination, if adopted, would only extend to those on the outside, from those on the inside. His comments are not Presidential. It needs to be said that gun control in the U.S. Culture has become an oxymoron.


----------



## Macfury

Trump was speaking about people applying for citizenship. The US is under no obligation to accept anyone as citizens, and non-citizen are not covered by the Constitution. I can't argue about what you think might happen, I can only deal with what was said.

Now what does this have to do with gun control?



Rps said:


> Partially true. They have rights once in the U.S. It would be folly to suggest that such discrimination, if adopted, would only extend to those on the outside, from those on the inside. His comments are not Presidential. It needs to be said that gun control in the U.S. Culture has become an oxymoron.


----------



## Rps

The issue I have with gun control in the U.S. Is that the Supreme Court is constitutionally selective in my opinion. Guns seem to be always okay, but you can have general good rules imposed....such as Ride Programs. We can harp all we want on this issue, but the fact is it is generally accepted that all U.S. Citizens potentially are armed.....this leads to major issues, such as police pulling out guns when they approach a car pulled over for speeding. The assumption is, everyone is armed. This leads to sometimes fatal errors.


----------



## Rps

Also, McFury, not to put too fine a point on it, he stated all from entering, which is not the same as applying for citizenship.


----------



## Macfury

RIDE programs are authorized at the state and local level.

And yes, US citizens are all potentially armed and it does sometimes lead to fatal errors. However, on the balance, I believe the US is well served by the Second Amendment. Unwillingness to treat the mentally ill and enforcing existing gun laws are the elephant(s) in the room.

By the way, Title 8, Section 1182 of the U.S. Code states:



> Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.





Rps said:


> The issue I have with gun control in the U.S. Is that the Supreme Court is constitutionally selective in my opinion. Guns seem to be always okay, but you can have general good rules imposed....such as Ride Programs. We can harp all we want on this issue, but the fact is it is generally accepted that all U.S. Citizens potentially are armed.....this leads to major issues, such as police pulling out guns when they approach a car pulled over for speeding. The assumption is, everyone is armed. This leads to sometimes fatal errors.


----------



## FeXL

Just because you're the Director of the FBI doesn't mean you got a clew...

FBI Director Clearly Doesn’t Know How Guns Are Purchased Online



> Serious question: how many times have you heard a member of the political elite say something completely moronic regarding guns?
> 
> Looking back, it’s an incredible indication that the people who are the strongest advocate for gun control have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. *That’s not hyperbole.*


M'bold.



> California. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) began his question-and-answer period with (James) Comey with a seemingly simple question: “*If I buy a gun on the internet, is it delivered to my home?*”
> 
> Comey, perhaps surprised by the question, seemed to stumble. Graham clarified, asking “if I try to buy a gun on the internet, where do I pick it up?”
> 
> *Looking perplexed, the FBI Director replied “I assume it’s shipped to you, but I don’t know for sure, actually.*”


M'bold.

Your tax dollars at work...


----------



## Dr.G.

Sad to think that Sonal started this thread nearly three years ago on Dec. 14th, 2012, and we are still "discussing" various aspects of mass killings with guns. Truly sad ...................


----------



## Rps

Dr.G. said:


> Sad to think that Sonal started this thread nearly three years ago on Dec. 14th, 2012, and we are still "discussing" various aspects of mass killings with guns. Truly sad ...................


The caliber of debate never changes!


----------



## Dr.G.

Rps said:


> The caliber of debate never changes!


Even sadder to contemplate. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## eMacMan

Rps said:


> The caliber of debate never changes!


I am afraid it has devolved to a level better quantified by micro-caliper rather than caliber.


----------



## BigDL

...not to mention the departure of the OP from this forum.


----------



## Macfury

BigDL said:


> ...not to mention the departure of the OP from this forum.


She's gone to a happier place where freedom of expression is never an issue.


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> She's gone to a happier place where freedom of expression is never an issue.


...soooo what's the emotion of this place?


----------



## Macfury

BigDL said:


> ...soooo what's the emotion of this place?


Blissful, I imagine.


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> She's gone to a happier place where freedom of expression is never an issue.


Sonal is alive and well in Toronto.


----------



## BigDL

Macfury said:


> Blissful, I imagine.


What's that old saying, regarding the connection between ignorance and bliss?


----------



## BigDL

Dr.G. said:


> Sonal is alive and well in Toronto.


Or could be found just down the information superhighway at MacDiscussion - Index.


----------



## Dr.G.

BigDL said:


> Or could be found just down the information superhighway at macdiscussions.com.


:clap:


----------



## fjnmusic

Michael Che's thoughts on gun control...









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> Michael Che's thoughts on gun control...


The _Saturday Night Live_ version of a thoughtful idea? The 13th Amendment overturned any Constitutional notion of slavery. One need only overturn the Second Amendment in prescribed fashion to infringe the right to bear arms.

Crickets?


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> The _Saturday Night Live_ version of a thoughtful idea? The 13th Amendment overturned any Constitutional notion of slavery. One need only overturn the Second Amendment in prescribed fashion to infringe the right to bear arms.
> 
> Crickets?


As above, the U.S. Supreme Court has always been selective in its rulings. Take the farce of the PAC......you can buy votes as long as you don't say vote for....., money equals free speech hmmmmmmmmmmmm, gun control equals lack of freedom, hmmmmmmmmm.


----------



## Dr.G.

Rps said:


> As above, the U.S. Supreme Court has always been selective in its rulings. Take the farce of the PAC......you can buy votes as long as you don't say vote for....., money equals free speech hmmmmmmmmmmmm, gun control equals lack of freedom, hmmmmmmmmm.


Blackwhite is defined as follows in George Orwell's "1984 ":

“ ...this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. ” 

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Rps

Dr G, I wonder what Orwell would think about the expression: "Hey, it is 2015".


----------



## Dr.G.

Rps said:


> Dr G, I wonder what Orwell would think about the expression: "Hey, it is 2015".


Not sure. He might wonder how an actor such as Ronald Reagan got elected president in 1984, however.


----------



## Macfury

The Supreme Court is not "selective." It rules on the issues and sometimes we don't agree with those rulings. The right to bear arms is not a freedom--it is a right. The PAC ruling simply states that everybody--rich, poor, or businessperson--has the right to be heard during an election as a freedom of speech issue. I don't see any inconsistency here.



Rps said:


> As above, the U.S. Supreme Court has always been selective in its rulings. Take the farce of the PAC......you can buy votes as long as you don't say vote for....., money equals free speech hmmmmmmmmmmmm, gun control equals lack of freedom, hmmmmmmmmm.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

Except Trump never suggested a database. That was an invention of the media.


----------



## Rps

McFury, my friend, I am afraid we are going to agree to disagree on this point.


----------



## Vandave

Rps said:


> The issue I have with gun control in the U.S. Is that the Supreme Court is constitutionally selective in my opinion. Guns seem to be always okay, but you can have general good rules imposed....such as Ride Programs. We can harp all we want on this issue, but the fact is it is generally accepted that all U.S. Citizens potentially are armed.....this leads to major issues, such as police pulling out guns when they approach a car pulled over for speeding. The assumption is, everyone is armed. This leads to sometimes fatal errors.


A lot of Canadians are potentially armed too. 

The police have nothing to fear from law abiding citizens. The police here don't even want to know if you have a firearm in your car when you get pulled over.


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> The right to bear arms is not a freedom--it is a right.


It can be selectively revoked. It has limits. There are approval processes, permits, etc. They can use that word all they want, but it's no more a right than driving is.


----------



## Rps

Vandave, we do not live in a fun culture as extensive as that of our southern neighbours.


----------



## Rps

heavyall said:


> It can be selectively revoked. It has limits. There are approval processes, permits, etc. They can use that word all they want, but it's no more a right than driving is.


Heavyall, I think driving is a privilege, not a right.


----------



## Vandave

Rps said:


> Vandave, we do not live in a fun culture as extensive as that of our southern neighbours.


I don't follow your logic. You're making huge logical leaps.

The first is that law abiding ownership of guns and crime are positively correlated. They are not. They are actually negatively correlated. Gun owners have lower rates of crime than the average population.

The second is that police need to fear law abiding owners transporting firearms. They don't. 

The third is that criminals follow and respect laws. They do not. 

Police need to take whatever precautions they feel are needed to safely approach a vehicle. Violent crime is higher in the US for a number of reasons. It's not well correlated with gun ownership levels. We've seen gun related crime drop by about 50% in the last couple decades while gun sales have skyrocketed.

The 'gun safety' crowd are not very credible to me. They claim to worry about gun safety but they do nothing to improve gun safety. How many gun safety courses have you seen these people put on?


----------



## Rps

Vandave, auto correct strikes again, I meant to post gun culture not fun culture......ironic don't you think.


----------



## fjnmusic

Still, in Canada, gun ownership is a privilege, not a right. In the U.S., it is a right, not a privilege. Which country has a worse record when it comes to homicides, particularly handgun deaths? I believe the founding fathers in the U.S. got it wrong in the U.S. With the second amendment. Canada too has many guns, but we lack the same sense of entitlement to them (for the most part).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rps

Vandave, not sure where you live but I live near Detroit.......believe me it is assumed everyone is carrying a gun.


----------



## Vandave

Rps said:


> Vandave, not sure where you live but I live near Detroit.......believe me it is assumed everyone is carrying a gun.


Toughest gun laws in the US too.

The US doesn't have a gun problem so much as they have a black crime problem. Strip out black on black gun deaths and the gun crime stats are basically the same as here. 

If you do the research you can see the stats yourself. You've made the classic correlation / causation mistake by associating two unrelated things.


----------



## Rps

Actually, Vandave, I haven't. Also, the U.S. Does not have a black crime problem as much as an income distribution problem. It seems for some we still have our heads in the 30s.


----------



## Vandave

Rps said:


> Actually, Vandave, I haven't. Also, the U.S. Does not have a black crime problem as much as an income distribution problem. It seems for some we still have our heads in the 30s.


I think there are many reasons for the problem and poverty is clearly one of the bigger factors. I think there are others such as single parent households, the educational system and even poor cultural role models. 

There is an insane number of black kids killing black kids with guns in major US cities. Cracking down on law abiding gun owners will not change that reality.

Here in Canada, the gun crime stats have fallen since removal of the Gun Registry.


----------



## Rps

Vandave, gun control is not necessarily cracking Down on law abiding gun owners. It is putting in controls in general, which are logical and enforceable.
Where I live we see many young people accidentally killed because the weapons are freely accessible, and loaded, in the house, car, purse, and the children pick them up and go bang. No gun locks, cabinets, separation of bullets and weapons. They are just lying around. These are a substantial number of the gun injuries and deaths recorded......


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Vandave, gun control is not necessarily cracking Down on law abiding gun owners. It is putting in controls in general, which are logical and enforceable.
> Where I live we see many young people accidentally killed because the weapons are freely accessible, and loaded, in the house, car, purse, and the children pick them up and go bang. No gun locks, cabinets, separation of bullets and weapons. They are just lying around. These are a substantial number of the gun injuries and deaths recorded......


But far more deaths caused by swimming pools and tobogganing. Guns are an emotional lightning rod for you..


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Heavyall, I think driving is a privilege, not a right.


It's not a privilege. It is a right that is activated by meeting applicable criteria. Your paternalistic view of such thing is a little disconcerting.


----------



## Vandave

Rps said:


> Vandave, gun control is not necessarily cracking Down on law abiding gun owners. It is putting in controls in general, which are logical and enforceable.
> Where I live we see many young people accidentally killed because the weapons are freely accessible, and loaded, in the house, car, purse, and the children pick them up and go bang. No gun locks, cabinets, separation of bullets and weapons. They are just lying around. These are a substantial number of the gun injuries and deaths recorded......


Then advocate for gun safety. 

Remove taxes on things like gun safety courses and safety goods (e.g. Locks, safes). How about we teach kids about guns in school? To teach kids about water safety, we teach them to swim. 

How about the RCMP offer to store guns for people for free? 

You never hear these ideas from the anti crowd because it's not really about gun safety for them.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> You never hear these ideas from the anti crowd because it's not really about gun safety for them.


It's really about concentrating more power in the hands of government. It's essentially an authoritarian position argued for by beta personalities.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> It's not a privilege. It is a right that is activated by meeting applicable criteria. Your paternalistic view of such thing is a little disconcerting.



It were a right, it could not be taken away. And yet, people have to meet all kinds of criteria before they can get a driver's license, and they can have that "right" to drive removed if they drive dangerously, drive while intoxicated, get enough demerits and so on. Sounds more like the definition of a privilege than a right to me. It's not as all-encompassing as, say, the right to clean air or the right to an education up to a certain age. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

That doesn't make it a privilege. It is a right defined by certain requirements. It can not be taken away if those requirements are met.

If a student is not willing to abide by the laws of the classroom or school, education ceases. Again, a right defined by requirements.



fjnmusic said:


> It were a right, it could not be taken away. And yet, people have to meet all kinds of criteria before they can get a driver's license, and they can have that "right" to drive removed if they drive dangerously, drive while intoxicated, get enough demerits and so on. Sounds more like the definition of a privilege than a right to me. It's not as all-encompassing as, say, the right to clean air or the right to an education up to a certain age.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

Vandave said:


> Then advocate for gun safety.
> 
> 
> 
> Remove taxes on things like gun safety courses and safety goods (e.g. Locks, safes). How about we teach kids about guns in school? To teach kids about water safety, we teach them to swim.
> 
> 
> 
> How about the RCMP offer to store guns for people for free?
> 
> 
> 
> You never hear these ideas from the anti crowd because it's not really about gun safety for them.



I'm not anti-gun, but I definitely believe everybody does not need the right to own and operate a firearm. It's not a Waling Dead world yet. And I definitely do not believe that anyone apart from a police officer NEEDS to own and operate a handgun. Hand guns are designed for only one purpose: to kill people. No one goes hunting with a hand gun. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Not everyone wants one. However, in a world where police are often so slow to respond that their response is often moot, I would not be inclined to deny people a license if they meet reasonable criteria--and criteria that are applied, not merely recorded on the books.



fjnmusic said:


> I'm not anti-gun, but I definitely believe everybody does not need the right to own and operate a firearm. It's not a Waling Dead world yet. And I definitely do not believe that anyone apart from a police officer NEEDS to own and operate a handgun. Hand guns are designed for only one purpose: to kill people. No one goes hunting with a hand gun.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

Rps said:


> Heavyall, I think driving is a privilege, not a right.


My point exactly. Americans use the word "right" with respect to carrying guns, but it clearly is not. It's a regulated, restricted privilege.


----------



## heavyall

fjnmusic said:


> I'm not anti-gun, but I definitely believe everybody does not need the right to own and operate a firearm. It's not a Waling Dead world yet. And I definitely do not believe that anyone apart from a police officer NEEDS to own and operate a handgun. Hand guns are designed for only one purpose: to kill people. No one goes hunting with a hand gun.


For the most part, I AM anti-gun, but even I can't go as far as that. Some people beyond Police really do have a legitimate reason to "need" a sidearm . Brinks drivers. Border security. Certain types of private security personnel. People who work closely with wild animals.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Not everyone wants one. However, in a world where police are often so slow to respond that their response is often moot, I would not be inclined to deny people a license if they meet reasonable criteria--and criteria that are applied, not merely recorded on the books.



I have no problem with that. Mark this day on the calendar. We agree on something. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic

heavyall said:


> For the most part, I AM anti-gun, but even I can't go as far as that. Some people beyond Police really do have a legitimate reason to "need" a sidearm . Brinks drivers. Border security. Certain types of private security personnel. People who work closely with wild animals.



Okay, so then we have a category of people alongside cops who would actually justifiably need a sidearm. The problem down south, as I see it, is that EVERY FRICKIN' CITIZEN feels entitled to have that same right, which stems from a gross misinterpretation of the second amendment of the hallowed American constitution. Criticizing the forefathers there is like a Catholic questioning the Pope; the forefathers were INFALLIBLE. Except that they weren't. And having a well-armed militia to fight back against gov't tyranny is a far cry from the right to keep a Glock in the glove compartment. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

You need only to look at the notes of the founding fathers to determine that individual empowerment and the ability to resist tyranny were primary in their thinking.



fjnmusic said:


> Okay, so then we have a category of people alongside cops who would actually justifiably need a sidearm. The problem down south, as I see it, is that EVERY FRICKIN' CITIZEN feels entitled to have that same right, which stems from a gross misinterpretation of the second amendment of the hallowed American constitution. Criticizing the forefathers there is like a Catholic questioning the Pope; the forefathers were INFALLIBLE. Except that they weren't. And having a well-armed militia to fight back against gov't tyranny is a far cry from the right to keep a Glock in the glove compartment.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Vandave

fjnmusic said:


> I'm not anti-gun, but I definitely believe everybody does not need the right to own and operate a firearm. It's not a Waling Dead world yet. And I definitely do not believe that anyone apart from a police officer NEEDS to own and operate a handgun. Hand guns are designed for only one purpose: to kill people. No one goes hunting with a hand gun.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What percent of handguns end up killing people? 1 in 1000? 1 in 10,000? 100,000? Whatever it is, pretty ****ty design for something only used for one purpose. If I bought a boat and it sunk 99.999% of the time, I would ask for my money back.

A lot of hunters would like to take a handgun with them hunting. It's not the killing part where it's needed but protection from bears after you harvest an animal. If it were legal, I think a very large percentage of hunters would take a handgun. You can't today because it's illegal to do so unless you have a permit that allows you to do so, which can only be obtained by people like security drivers, etc...


----------



## Vandave

Macfury said:


> Not everyone wants one. However, in a world where police are often so slow to respond that their response is often moot, I would not be inclined to deny people a license if they meet reasonable criteria--and criteria that are applied, not merely recorded on the books.


Home defence isn't a legal reason to obtain a license in Canada, at least in my understanding.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> It's not a privilege. It is a right that is activated by meeting applicable criteria. Your paternalistic view of such thing is a little disconcerting.


Not to get into a peaing contest here, but driving is not and has never been a right.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> Home defence isn't a legal reason to obtain a license in Canada, at least in my understanding.


No-I said it should be.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Not to get into a peaing contest here, but driving is not and has never been a right.


You see your rights as flowing from the government, so of course you would say that.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> You need only to look at the notes of the founding fathers to determine that individual empowerment and the ability to resist tyranny were primary in their thinking.


America's founders felt that those in power posed a far greater threat to America than any outside force. This foresight has been proven much too accurate from 1980 on, and many would say dating back before WW II.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> You see your rights as flowing from the government, so of course you would say that.



That's a twist, and I have a hard time believing Rps believes that, much less anyone else. Rights tend to be things we need in order to survive, like the right to clean potable water, which apparently the president of Nestle Waters has been quoted as saying humans DON'T have a right to. In Canada, rights are part of our Constitution (1982), and there are lowly other rights that may be be specified directly in that document, or cases where some rights trump other rights. For example, the a mother's right to life usually trumps the fetus' right to life when it's a case of one or the other. 

Driving? Nope. That's no necessity. Clean air, however, is. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Our right predated the Canadian Constitution. They did not suddenly appear as a result of that document. 

Rights are not predicated on necessity.



fjnmusic said:


> That's a twist, and I have a hard time believing Rps believes that, much less anyone else. Rights tend to be things we need in order to survive, like the right to clean potable water, which apparently the president of Nestle Waters has been quoted as saying humans DON'T have a right to. In Canada, rights are part of our Constitution (1982), and there are lowly other rights that may be be specified directly in that document, or cases where some rights trump other rights. For example, the a mother's right to life usually trumps the fetus' right to life when it's a case of one or the other.
> 
> Driving? Nope. That's no necessity. Clean air, however, is.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> You see your rights as flowing from the government, so of course you would say that.


Yikes. So what, you consider your rights to be whatever you decide them to be? Anarchy?


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> Yikes. So what, you consider your rights to be whatever you decide them to be? Anarchy?


As in the US Constitution, I believe rights to be God-given or natural. Government can only protect them.


----------



## Vandave

Macfury said:


> As in the US Constitution, I believe rights to be God-given or natural. Government can only protect them.


We don't believe that in Canada sadly.

For example, we don't believe in free speech. It has an asterisk here.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> We don't believe that in Canada sadly.
> 
> For example, we don't believe in free speech. It has an asterisk here.


Check for the right to own private property while you're at it.


----------



## Vandave

Macfury said:


> Check for the right to own private property while you're at it.


These things should be taught in school. If kids understood the lack of rights in this country, we might have a chance at taking power back from government.


----------



## Macfury

Vandave said:


> These things should be taught in school. If kids understood the lack of rights in this country, we might have a chance at taking power back from government.


Look at EhMac--many of the insecure folk here are keen to give even more power to their governments.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Look at EhMac--many of the insecure folk here are keen to give even more power to their governments.



With no moderators, it must be more to your liking now. Except the spambots still seem to catch the Fword, but they seem to be just fine with "****," "****" and "asshole." 

Okay, scratch those first two ("tihs" and "ssip" spelled backwards).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Yes.



fjnmusic said:


> With no moderators, it must be more to your liking now.


----------



## FeXL

Nope. Not curious at all...

Report: Obama Told NSC And FBI To ‘Downplay’ Terrorist Angle Of San Bernardino



> The FBI has taken heat for failing to immediately classify the San Bernardino shootings as terrorism, but a new report shows that FBI reluctance could have been due to external pressure from the White House.
> 
> *A source told Jack Murphy of SOFREP that the FBI instantly believed the shooting, which left 14 dead, to be a clear act of terrorism.* The White House, however, didn’t feel the same way and quickly moved in to squash the terror classification.
> 
> *This source added that as soon as the shooting took place, Obama convened a meeting with the National Security Council and the heads of other federal enforcement agencies to discuss a public relations strategy.*


HA!!!



CubaMark said:


> No. It's not at all curious. If we were talking a week, a month... that would be obvious withholding of information. But less than 12 hours after a mass shooting in which police spent most of the evening combing through backyards and neighbourhoods looking for a possible third shooter, managing a significant crime scene, etc.? No, it's not 'curious' at all that the information came out when it did. I'm surprised it was released that quickly.
> 
> That your brain automatically goes to "OMG the evil overlords in their black helicopters who wanna send muslim jihadists to take our guns and oppress us OMG" is an indication that *you have some pretty major problems with conspiracy and reality.*


All bold mine.

Here's a little tip for ya, CM: It ain't a conspiracy if it's actually happening...


----------



## FeXL

Democratic Cities Are A Cesspool Of Violence



> The FBI reports that the top 15 murder cities in the country are all Democratic. Note that the center of every circle is a district(s) which voted Democratic in 2014.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Democratic Cities Are A Cesspool Of Violence


In many cases, they've suffered generations of Democrat governance. Pretty hard to claim that the Democrat party isn't responsible for the fruit of their grand policies.


----------



## FeXL

Obama & his cronies have been the best marketing gunshops could have asked for. During his reign, millions of firearms have been purchased. And, there's still a year left.

Beautiful.

White House Shocked By Gun Sales Surge



> This past Black Friday saw a record number of NICS checks [*185,345*] — the most gun sales in a single day. Ever. Over the last week the supply of modern firearms has been drained from the wholesale distribution channels United States. People are buying guns like it’s going out of style. *If you ask the White House, the fact that record numbers of Americans are exercising their Constitutional right to own a gun is a “tragedy” and they have absolutely no idea why it’s happening. It’s a classic Democrat response — they don’t understand anything about the firearms they demonize and they can’t comprehend the gun owner mentality.*


M'bold.



> I will note that despite the record numbers of guns being sold, the crime rate in the United States continues to drop. The White House is insinuating that these gun purchases will only fuel the “epidemic of gun violence,” but there is no evidence to support their claim. Zero. In fact, it seems the more guns are purchased the more the crime rate drops.


----------



## FeXL

Another angle on that NYT article...

The _New York Times_ Has No Clue How The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban Worked



> Another day, another series of embarrassing errors and obfuscations by gun controllers who are ignorant of how guns, and the laws that seek to control them, actually work.
> 
> In its quest to drive up gun sales even further and make gun control even less popular, the New York Times published yet another overwrought editorial on Friday demanding more gun control.


Further:



> In this paragraph, the New York Times claims that .50-caliber sniper rifles are now flooding the streets due to the expiration of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban:
> 
> _Assault weapons were banned for 10 years until Congress, in bipartisan obeisance to the gun lobby, let the law lapse in 2004. As a result, gun manufacturers have been allowed to sell all manner of war weaponry to civilians, *including the super destructive .50-caliber sniper rifle*, which an 18-year-old can easily buy in many places even where he or she must be 21 to buy a simpler handgun. Why any civilian would need this weapon, designed to pierce concrete bunkers and armored personnel carriers, is a question that should be put to the gun makers who profit from them and the politicians who shamelessly do their bidding.​_
> Those icky guns aren’t just destructive, they’re super destructive. There’s just one teeny, tiny problem with that paragraph: bolt-action .50-caliber rifles were never covered by the federal assault weapons ban.


More:



> And then there’s the fact that a .50-caliber rifle has never been used in a mass shooting in the U.S. Never. That’s probably because those guns are hugely expensive (potentially costing $10,000 or more, not to mention the cost of ammunition) and difficult to lug around given their size and weight (the gun is nearly four feet long and weighs 24 pounds with a loaded magazine). But this is the gun-confiscating _New York Times_ we’re talking about. *Expecting its editorialists to understand the objects about which they are editorializing would be a bridge too far.*


M'bold.

Yeah, pretty much encompasses what I meant when I noted that gun control advocates rarely bring reason to the table.

I have a friend with a half cal. He has over $10k into it with the muzzle brake & other accessories. We've made arrangements for me to test fire it come summer. I look forward to it.

It's massive. Not the sort of thing you just hold up to your shoulder & fire quickly & repeatedly with any degree of accuracy, what with it's weight & bolt action. Reloads are $6 per. 

The _NYT_'s inclusion of this particular weapon in their diatribe is nothing more than cheap theatrics, designed to elicit a particular response.

One more quote:



> What the _New York Times_ predictably fails to tell its readers is that the rifles used by the San Bernardino terrorists were, in fact, illegal. What made them illegal? California has its own version of the expired federal assault weapons ban, which for some reason failed to prevent terrorists from using obtain the weapons and use them to kill people. You read that correctly. *Terrorists hell-bent on death and destruction were somehow still able to get their hands on illegal weapons. Imagine that. Criminals with no regard for laws against murder weren’t dissuaded by laws against the possession of certain weapons. It’s almost like gun laws, like drug laws and early-20th century alcohol laws, don’t do a very good job of keeping banned items out of the hands of criminals who wish to possess them. Weird, right?*


M'bold.

Excellent read.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> I have a friend with a half cal. He has over $10k into it with the muzzle brake & other accessories. We've made arrangements for me to test fire it come summer. I look forward to it.
> 
> It's massive. Not the sort of thing you just hold up to your shoulder & fire quickly & repeatedly with any degree of accuracy, what with it's weight & bolt action. Reloads are $6 per.


$10k ? Must be a M107. Crazy! Pretty sure you can pickup a M99 on sale in the U.S. for $3499. Single shot of course though.

Either way I agree with you the .50 cal rifles while crazy powerful are not likely the choice for the crazy man on a rampage.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> So, let's take a look at the demographics: young, black males living without a male father figure in cities that are largely Democratic by far are not only the shooting group but the dying group. Figger out a way to fix that problem without infringing upon the rights of every other law-abiding gun owner in the country, you've got a solution.


Where do you get your statistics from, FeXL? 'Cause they appear to be the opposite of reality.

*Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Victim by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Offender, 2013* 
(Last year for which data is available)​


----------



## Macfury

You did not break it down by major city, which was FeXL's point--also FBI figures. 




CubaMark said:


> Where do you get your statistics from, FeXL? 'Cause they appear to be the opposite of reality.
> 
> *Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Victim by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Offender, 2013*
> (Last year for which data is available)​


----------



## SINC

And so it begins:

Texas to start New Year with law allowing open carry of handguns | Reuters


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> And so it begins:
> 
> Texas to start New Year with law allowing open carry of handguns | Reuters


The states no longer trust the feds to respect the separation of powers. Expect more.


----------



## CubaMark

*Alberta Needs Stricter Gun Licence Screening: Inquiry Judge*

A fatality inquiry judge is calling for stricter reviews of gun licence applications after a southern Alberta man with a history of mental problems was fatally shot by police.

Corey Lewis, 39, was shot outside his Okotoks home in July 2010 after a standoff with an RCMP tactical team.

He was found holding a dark-coloured umbrella that he had pointed at officers, who thought the object was a weapon.

Provincial court Judge Marlene Graham says she finds it disturbing that Lewis was granted licences for five firearms, including restricted weapons, despite his mental problems, a suicide attempt and a previous emergency protection order.

"I do find that Mr. Lewis's possession of the five long-barreled guns was an integral part of the event leading up to his death,'' Graham wrote in a report released Monday.

"I find that the screening process used to grant the gun licences to Mr. Lewis lacked diligence and common sense and gives me no assurance that public safety, which is the purpose of the Firearms Act, was being sufficiently emphasized throughout the process.''

* * *​
...in the hours before he was shot, Lewis was angry and distraught.

After knocking his wife down and punching his stepson, Lewis's family fled the house, contacted RCMP and told the Mounties that he was in the bedroom with five guns and ammunition.

Some officers entered the house but quickly retreated when Lewis confronted them holding a shotgun.​
(HuffPo)


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> *Alberta Needs Stricter Gun Licence Screening: Inquiry Judge*


It is sad that both the Huffington Post reporter who wrote this story along with the editor who authorized it for publication would use such an outrageous and erroneous headline.

The gun registration and licensing function in Canada is NOT the responsibility of Alberta or any other province. It is a federal law and part of the Criminal Code of Canada and the sole responsibility of the federal government.

It questions the very credibility of the story and what the judge might actually have stated in court.


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> It is sad that both the Huffington Post reporter who wrote this story along with the editor who authorized it for publication would use such an outrageous and erroneous headline.
> 
> The gun registration and licensing function in Canada is NOT the responsibility of Alberta or any other province. It is a federal law and part of the Criminal Code of Canada and the sole responsibility of the federal government.
> 
> It questions the very credibility of the story and what the judge might actually have stated in court.


Not to mention the fact that the officers were unable to tell the difference between an umbrella and a firearm. Says a lot about the caliber of police training nowadays.

Long barreled story or short is that he wanted to commit suicide and was able to manipulate the force into obliging him.


----------



## FeXL

On Weepy's executive gun control.

Speaker Ryan: Obama's gun actions will be "dangerous level" of overreach



> Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, on Monday called President Obama's forthcoming executive action to curb gun violence a "dangerous level of executive overreach."
> 
> "While we don't yet know the details of the plan, *the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will,*" Ryan said in a statement. "No president should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally. The American people deserve a president who will respect their constitutional rights - all of them."


M'bold.


----------



## Macfury

Weepy Obama never cried publicly about victims in San Bernardino or Fort Hood or myriad gun deaths in his home town of Chicago. I suspect that these were tears of anger and frustration over having his Imperial will denied.



FeXL said:


> On Weepy's executive gun control.
> 
> Speaker Ryan: Obama's gun actions will be "dangerous level" of overreach
> 
> 
> 
> M'bold.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> Weepy Obama never cried publicly about victims in San Bernardino or Fort Hood or myriad gun deaths in his home town of Chicago. I suspect that these were tears of anger and frustration over having his Imperial will denied.



Perhaps he reached a saturation level of frustration. I didn't realize there were rules and a timeline about when it's okay to show emotion. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

That guy's "emotion" is purely calculated. 



fjnmusic said:


> Perhaps he reached a saturation level of frustration. I didn't realize there were rules and a timeline about when it's okay to show emotion.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

*Since when do you guys ridicule politicians who show a little emotion?*


----------



## Macfury

I have always belittled Boehner. He was a disgrace as Speaker and his waterworks were embarrassing.



CubaMark said:


> *Since when do you guys ridicule politicians who show a little emotion?*


----------



## eMacMan

Too bad the NRA was completely indifferent too the Clinton, Bush II and Obushma efforts to shred the other Amendments which make up the Bill of Rights. Had they stood up then, they would have effectively blockaded the path Obushma is using to attack the second amendment.


----------



## pm-r

I guess things and times change and just thought I'd drop this in here, and hopefully it fits a bit:


----------



## Macfury

The National Refrigerator Association did not step in because the law did not make it more difficult to buy or sell refrigerators, nor did lawmakers say that their eventual goal was to ban all refrigerators.


----------



## heavyall

Also, not a lot of people just abandoning their firearms in the back lane. People were just leaving their fridges anywhere.


----------



## FeXL

The Numbers Are in: Black Lives Matter Is Wrong about Police



> The kinds of shootings that launched the Black Lives Matter movement — white police officers killing unarmed black men — represent “less than 4 percent of fatal police shootings.” The Post does its best to hype the racial injustice of this statistic, proclaiming that while “black men make up only 6 percent of the U.S. population, they account for 40 percent of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year.” But that claim is misleading on a number of counts.


More:



> Criminals are overwhelmingly male (police killed very few women this year, but no one argues that law enforcement is sexist), and violent criminals are disproportionately black. In fact, *blacks “commit homicide at close to eight times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined.” Even worse, “among males between the ages of 14 and 17, the interracial homicide commission gap is nearly tenfold.”* In 2014, for example, while black Americans constituted only about 13 percent of the population, they represented a majority of the homicide and robbery arrests. *82 percent of all gun deaths in the black community are from homicide.* For whites, 77 percent of gun deaths are suicides.


Just like I said: young, black males from single parent families shooting each other.

And all that without a sociology degree...

Related:

Black Mob Violence: Easier to Find. Harder to Believe.



> It's really just a listening problem, Alsop explained to the Sun. Black people had to resort to violence because white people were just not paying attention.
> 
> Alsop's comments echoed Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, who last year said black rioters needed "space to destroy." The next day she said she had not said it. Then she said she did not mean it. Then she said she did not want to talk about it anymore with white racists who were just trying to make her look bad.


Very revealing...


----------



## FeXL

O, gee, there's a surprise...

Charge: Rahm Emmanuel Suppressed the Shooting Video Until After the Election



> Rahm Emmanuel's city lawyers were willing to offer the family of the slain man a $5 million payout jackpot -- _if_ they played ball and agreed to keep the video secret for "at least several years."


More:



> *But we all know that "accountability" does not exist for Democrats*, because the only institution capable of pressuring misbehaving government actors is the media, and the media is actually the power-center of the Democrat Party. The actual politicians are just the face-men (incredibly enough) who don't have notorious enough histories of alcoholism and infidelity and so can actually sort of win an election. (With the media's help.)


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Obama to Rape Victim: You Probably Won't Be Able To Use a Gun To Stop Your Own Rape Anyway



> After pattering on about his sympathy for Corban and his unearned and patronizing pride for her – *no tears for her rape, notably* – Obama denied that any of his actions would make it more difficult for her to obtain a weapon. He completely ignored that he, like other Democrats, fights concealed carry weapons permits at every turn. Then he got to his real point: women don’t deserve guns, because they are incapable of defending themselves:
> 
> _There are always questions as to whether or not having a firearm in the home protects you from that kind of violence…What is true is that you have to be pretty well-trained in order to fire a weapon against someone who is assaulting you and catches you by surprise. What is also true is always that possibility that firearm in the home leads to a tragic accident.​_
> *So, just to be clear, the President of the United States told a rape victim that she doesn’t need a firearm in the home because she probably won’t be able to defend herself from a rapist anyway, and one of her kids might shoot himself.*


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Curious how that damn firearm didn't just go off in his holster...

To the man I sat next to on the train: I am the gun owner you hate



> When I boarded the commuter rail, you were already in the midst of a spirited phone conversation and didn’t seem to care about how loud you were talking. You were talking with someone about the Paris train attack and the growing epidemic of gun violence in America.
> 
> You spoke about the “murderous NRA” and “bloodthirsty gun nuts” who were causing our schools to “run red with blood.” You spoke profanely of the Republicans who opposed President Obama’s call for “sensible gun control,” and you lamented the number of “inbred ******* politicians” who have “infiltrated Capitol Hill.”
> 
> I found myself amazed at the irony of the situation. While you were spewing your venom, I sat quietly next to you with my National Rifle Association membership card in my wallet and my 9mm pistol in its holster. You were only 12 inches away from my legally owned semiautomatic pistol.


Excellent read.


----------



## FeXL

By all means, please, enact more gun control. 'Cause it's obvious the criminals aren't listening...

Obama’s Disorganized Community: More Than 100 Shot In Gun Control Paradise of Chicago Already in 2016



> You can pretty much guarantee none of the weapons used were legally owned, so of course we need more gun control, or something. Maybe instead of a symbolic empty chair at Obama’s final State of the Union we should have an entire empty section to highlight his abominable failures as both community organizer and president.


----------



## FeXL

I have a couple of friends who do some basic levels of gunsmithing. They've never killed a human & I'm pretty sure they're not going to any time soon. However, as responsible, legal firearms owners, this will affect them.

Weapons Blueprints Banned in the Fine Print of “Sentencing Reform”



> Remember the Obama administration’s efforts to criminalize posting “how-to” gun information on the Internet? That’s in the bill, too.
> 
> Thus, under section 108, anyone putting “technical data” with respect to guns on the Munitions List on the Internet is liable for a five year mandatory minimum prison sentence — even if it is only in a private e-mail.
> 
> And this is because the Obama administration has indicated that it will regard a transmission on the Internet to be a communication with any person or country with access to the Internet.


I wonder if they'd toss my butt in jail if I chewed a piece of toast into the shape of a handgun, took a photo of it & posted it online...


----------



## FeXL

_Very_ interesting.

Quebec facing unexpected resistance to long-gun registry



> Quebec is facing the first signs of revolt over its planned long-gun registry, an unexpected breach in a province regarded as the staunchest defender of gun-control measures in Canada.
> 
> The government of Philippe Couillard tabled legislation for a made-in-Quebec registry last month. The move was expected to get broad support in a province touched by a string of mass school shootings. But some provincial MNAs have started expressing reservations about the registry, and an anti-registry petition has gathered more than 20,300 names online.
> 
> “The [registry] is an error. It’s a mirage,” says Sylvie Roy, an independent MNA who represents a semi-rural Quebec riding.


----------



## CubaMark

_OH dear, how sad for them!_

*Businesses Fighting Back: Texas Gun Lovers Start to Think Open Carry Isn't a Great Idea*

In a strange twist of fate, Texas gun owners are now lamenting the implementation of the new open carry laws which went into effect at the start of the New Year.

Though the right-wing gun nuts should be rejoicing, it seems that the increased leniency has backfired, inspiring more businesses to exercise their rights to bar both open carry and concealed weapons. Needing only an official “30.07”sign to ban openly carried weapons and a “30.06” sign to ban concealed weapons, the number of establishments employing these policies have spiked dramatically in the less than two week period since the legislation went into effect, meaning in that in many cases, gun owners are experiencing even more restrictions than before.

* * *​
NRA board member Charles Cotton wrote:
“I truly wish that open-carry supporters would admit that they were wrong and that there is a problem. If I cannot carry my self-defense handgun into a store because they put up 30.06 and 30.07 signs, then someone’s ability to show their handgun to everyone will have cost me the ability to defend myself.”​
(Trofire)


----------



## Macfury

Just some "progressive" wet dreams. Here's reality:

Open carry in Texas: â€˜Much ado about nothing'? | The Sacramento Bee



> As we predicted, the passage of the open carry law has been a real nonevent,” said C.J. Grisham, president of Open Carry Texas.
> . . . .
> 
> “Yes, it seems some businesses have decided to put up signs, but it’s not as widespread as the media has made it sound,” Grisham said. *“This is the same sort of business reaction that occurred in 1995 when the concealed handgun law was passed, so we expect that within a year or so the hype will die down and the signs will begin disappearing.”*
> 
> Open carry opponents say they won’t go into businesses such as Kroger, Home Depot or Bass Pro Shops that have said licensed Texans may openly carry on their property.
> 
> And open carry supporters say they won’t go into businesses such as Half-Price Books, Torchy’s Tacos or AMC movie theaters that won’t let them openly carry their weapons.


Private property rights are being upheld along with gun carry rights. That's a good day for Texas!



CubaMark said:


> _OH dear, how sad for them!_


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Just some "progressive" wet dreams. Here's reality...


Oh, C'mon! Any article that contains the phrase:



> ...right-wing gun nuts...


must be objective, factual & based on empirical evidence, no?


----------



## CubaMark

Gee, guys, sorry - I thought you might be capable of doing a wee bit of the moving-of-the-fingers-on-a-keyboard and the-clicking-of-a-mouse to check any of your own favourite news sites to corroborate my post.

Of course "Ring of Fire" is a lefty Democrat site - that's quite obvious. Are you denying the quote from the NRA board member? Or the existence of the signs banning open and concealed-carry weapons in local businesses? 

Here, let me help:


Major Texas Grocery Chains Say No to Open Carry (Breitbart - doesn't get more right-wing than this)
Texas Businesses Adapt To Open Carry Law : NPR (NPR)
Allow Open Carry or Not? That Is The Question Texas Restaurants Now Face | Houston Press (Houston Press)
Gun-Free Zone - The Austin Chronicle (Austin Chronicle)
Did Open Carry backfire on Texas gun owners? | | Dallas Morning News (Dallas Morning News)


----------



## Macfury

Why didn't you site Breitbart to begin with CM? Nope.. you chose thw one talking about "right-wing gun nuts" because you can't be objective. 

Regardless, if you knew anything about the intro open of carry laws you would see a few businesses welcoming it and a few businesses banning guns. Pretty dull story.




CubaMark said:


> Gee, guys, sorry - I thought you might be capable of doing a wee bit of the moving-of-the-fingers-on-a-keyboard and the-clicking-of-a-mouse to check any of your own favourite news sites to corroborate my post.
> 
> Of course "Ring of Fire" is a lefty Democrat site - that's quite obvious. Are you denying the quote from the NRA board member? Or the existence of the signs banning open and concealed-carry weapons in local businesses?
> 
> Here, let me help:
> 
> 
> Major Texas Grocery Chains Say No to Open Carry (Breitbart - doesn't get more right-wing than this)
> Texas Businesses Adapt To Open Carry Law : NPR (NPR)
> Allow Open Carry or Not? That Is The Question Texas Restaurants Now Face | Houston Press (Houston Press)
> Gun-Free Zone - The Austin Chronicle (Austin Chronicle)
> Did Open Carry backfire on Texas gun owners? | | Dallas Morning News (Dallas Morning News)


----------



## FeXL

'Cause I'm just not interested enough.

You cite a quote that's got that kind of bull$h!t, _ad hominem_ nonsense in it right off the bat, my desire to address the topic just dropped by an order of magnitude...



CubaMark said:


> Gee, guys, sorry - I thought you might be capable of doing a wee bit of the moving-of-the-fingers-on-a-keyboard and the-clicking-of-a-mouse to check any of your own favourite news sites to corroborate my post.


----------



## FeXL

Curious, haven't seen any mention of this. Oh, wait, it doesn't follow the narrative...

Liberal Media and Gun-Grabbers Ignore Latest CDC Report – It Doesn’t Fit Their Narrative



> The Center For Disease Control has released a detailed report regarding causes of death, using data from 2013. The report was released on February 16th, and nearly a week later, no mention of it by Bloomberg’s Everytown For Gun Safety, which is the research and PAC wing of his gun control efforts.
> 
> *There’s a reason for the silence. They don’t want you to know that gun related homicide doesn’t even crack the top 15 causes of death in America.
> 
> They don’t want you to know that you’re more likely to die by slipping and falling down a staircase than by an “accidental” discharge.* Everytown likes to make “gun violence” out to be a “women’s issue”, but they don’t want you to know that men are nearly seven times more likely to die from someone using a gun in a homicide than women are.


Link's bold.

Good read.


----------



## FeXL

Damn all those duck hunters & skeet shooters who have descended upon the southeast shores of Lake Michigan...

Chicago Homicide Rate Now Double Same Time Last Year



> The city has recorded at least 95 homicides since the first of the year, compared to 47 last year, according to data kept by the Tribune. The city has also more than doubled the amount of people shot - about 420 this year compared to 193 last year.


----------



## FeXL

The laws are just for the little people...

Behind A Phalanx of Armed Security At Oscars, Hollywood Pimps Gun Control



> As is fitting for these Hollywood hypocrites who glorify gratuitous violence for pay, they’ll be surrounded by dramatically increased armed security rivaling that of a military state.
> 
> _This year’s Oscar show will be the first since the terrorist attacks in San Bernardino and Paris which, all told, took the lives of 144 people and injured 390. Law enforcement says there is “no specific information relative to threats” to this year’s Academy Awards, which is good news. *Still, Sunday’s Oscars at the Dolby Theatre in the heart of Hollywood not only will be swarming with hundreds of law enforcement officers, but there also will be SWAT team members with bulletproof vests and tactical gear, bomb-sniffing dogs and sophisticated surveillance equipment (both overt and covert).* There will be metal detectors, and every car entering into the Hollywood & Highland parking facility will be swept.​_
> I guess guns are okay if they can help these phonies buy another jet, or protect their precious little botoxed faces and plastic bodies. Guns are just bad for real Americans.


M'bold.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

See, the problem with these ****ty memes is that they rarely hold up to scrutiny. Most of the toddler shootings involved toddlers killing or injuring themselves. Two involved killing others.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> See, the problem with these ****ty memes is that they rarely hold up to scrutiny. Most of the toddler shootings involved toddlers killing or injuring themselves. Two involved killing others.


Oh, the children only killed or injured _themselves_? Well, that's alright then....


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Oh, the children only killed or injured _themselves_? Well, that's alright then....


Of course it isn't alright. It just makes mincemeat of your ****ty meme.


----------



## CubaMark

*Gun Activist Shot By Her 4-Year-Old To Face Charges*









_Jamie Gilt, the Florida pro-gun activist who was accidentally shot and wounded by her 4-year-old son, is expected to face a misdemeanor charge of allowing a minor access to a firearm, authorities said Tuesday._​(C&L)​*I found this comment to the story amusing:*



> *Grouchy_Larry* • 16 hours ago
> They're not charging the kid. Since he obviously feared for his life while in the presence of a batscat crazy person, he was justified in using lethal force, just like she taught him. Stand you ground, little fella, atta boy.​


----------



## Dr.G.

A travesty of justice. How could a four year old child understand the ramifications of "stand your ground". He should be charged with attempted man slaughter.


----------



## eMacMan

Dr.G. said:


> A travesty of justice. How could a four year old child understand the ramifications of "stand your ground". He should be charged with attempted man slaughter.


Not at all sure how you can have attempted manslaughter. It was a woman who was shot!


----------



## Dr.G.

eMacMan said:


> Not at all sure how you can have attempted manslaughter. It was a woman who was shot!


Personslaughter?


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> Not at all sure how you can have attempted manslaughter. It was a woman who was shot!


You just need to add an apostrophe and...


----------



## FeXL

Thank you, Obama!

Record Gun Sales



> Gun sales broke records yet again in the month of March.
> 
> The FBI performed 2,523,265 firearms-related background checks between March 1 and March 31, according to the agency’s records. That’s a new record for the month. It’s nearly 35,000 more checks than the previous record set in March 2014.
> 
> Despite the new record, March saw the fewest checks of any month so far in 2016.
> 
> The March record is the eleventh straight monthly record for background checks. The unprecedented streak, which began in May 2015, has included all-time records for both monthly and yearly sales. With 7,682,141 checks processed through the FBI’s National Instant Background Check System, 2016 is currently on pace to set another all time yearly sales record.


----------



## FeXL

*Because it's 2015!*

Departing senator's bill looks to give restrictive gun registration



> Is Senate Private Bill S-223 a parting shot by a retiring Liberal senator or a trial balloon being launched by the Trudeau government to see whether there is any taste for a new gun registry?
> 
> Hard to say. What is clear is that if S-223 ever became law, it would be even more restrictive than the 1995 long-gun registration bill, C-68.


More:



> For one thing, *it's more than 70 pages long* and appears to be the work of several, professional lawyers and legislation drafters. Tony Bernardo, executive director of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, says S-223 looks as if "it took a number of Department of Justice lawyers a few months of work to create."


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Oops! Chelsea shot off her mouth on guns, and now Hillary has to pander – and fails



> Hillary Clinton has been eagerly exploiting the only progressive issue on which she can position herself to the left of Bernie Sanders. Coming from a largely rural state, Sanders had the sense to respect his constituents’ need for protection and preference for hunting. Hillary made clear in campaigning for the New York primary, where she dealt what could be the deathblow to the Sanders insurgency, that her aim on campaigning on guns was Sanders
> 
> ...
> 
> Leaving aside the dubious truth of her claim (which garnered three Pinnochios from the Washington Post’s fact-checker), at least it was targeted at Sanders, and focused on crime and violence more than gun ownership per se.
> 
> ...
> 
> Democrats have learned the hard way that making gun ownership an issue in national elections drives up GOP turnout, and turns gun owners who might otherwise vote Democrat into Republican voters.
> 
> *But daughter Chelsea has no such political smarts, and on Thursday let the cat out of the bag.*


M'bold.

Further:



> Despite (or because of?) her educational pedigree from Stanford and Oxford, *Chelsea can be a real dope when she opines on subjects with the self-assurance borne of privilege.* The great John Hinderaker of Powerline eviscerates her analysis of SCOTUS decisions on the Second Amendment:
> 
> _*Chelsea’s comment is stupid.* (Normally I wouldn’t criticize a family member of a candidate, but Chelsea is an adult and Hillary sent her out on the trail as a surrogate.)​_


M'bold.

No argument...


----------



## FeXL

Wah, freakin' wah...

NBC News reports weeping in the Senate gallery over nixed gun bills



> People in the Senate gallery were reportedly weeping after Monday night’s votes.
> 
> In the wake of the Orlando terror attack that took 49 lives at a gay nightclub, four gun control amendments were proposed to be tacked on to a Justice Department spending bill Monday night.
> 
> And one-by-one they were picked off like ducks at a carnival shooting range.


Good.


----------



## MacGuiver

Here's a bullet proof argument delivered with grace and logic for scrapping the second amendment.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-pc5xzRg0E"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-pc5xzRg0E[/ame]


----------



## MacGuiver

Another media debate that highlights the utter ignorance and bias of the media.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD_-JKvSJrc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD_-JKvSJrc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD_-JKvSJrc


----------



## Macfury

MacGuiver said:


> Here's a bullet proof argument delivered with grace and logic for scrapping the second amendment.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-pc5xzRg0E


Thanks for posting... what a jackass!


----------



## MacGuiver

Macfury said:


> Thanks for posting... what a jackass!


No kidding! But I see a trend with many Leftists when confronted with a thoughtful counter argument and logic. Outrage and cry-bullying.


----------



## Macfury

MacGuiver said:


> No kidding! But I see a trend with many Leftists when confronted with a thoughtful counter argument and logic. Outrage and cry-bullying.


It was great to see the moderator apologizing for the rude behaviour of the "progressive" and putting him in his place. Clearly, he's used to having American newspeople support his appalling rants and weepy tantrums.


----------



## Dr.G.

'Thoughts and prayers' do nothing to stop mass shootings in this video game (or in real life) - Trending - CBC News

Prayers do not seem to help.


----------



## Macfury

Dr.G. said:


> 'Thoughts and prayers' do nothing to stop mass shootings in this video game (or in real life) - Trending - CBC News
> 
> Prayers do not seem to help.



Neither do gun control laws it appears. If the feds had simply enforced existing laws, then no gun would have legally fallen into Mateen's hands.


----------



## CubaMark

*Neighborhood in shock after mother fatally shot her two daughters*









Christy Sheats, 42, was shot & killed by police officer after she shot 2 daughters. ​
Fort Bend County Sheriff's deputies say Taylor Sheats, 22, and Madison Sheats, 17, were shot and killed by their mother Christy Sheats, 42, on Friday around 5pm. A Fulshear police officer shot and killed Christy at the home on Remson Hollow Lane when she refused to drop her weapon. Only the husband and father, Jason Sheats, was not harmed.

n eyewitness saw Taylor, Madison and Jason running out of their home. According to the eyewitness, the young women were already wounded. The neighbor said Taylor collapsed on the street and he saw Christy come outside with a gun and then go back inside to reload. When she emerged again, she shot Madison in the back, ...​(ABC News)​
*Mom shoots daughters to death before Texas police kill her*

Officials identified the mother as Christy Sheats, 42, and her daughters as Taylor Sheats, 22, and Madison Sheats, 17, CBS affiliate KHOU reported.

"It's just crazy," Austin Enke, a neighbor who said he went to high school with one of the victims, told KHOU. "The neighborhood's never seen this kind of thing before. It's always quiet. This is surprising. They never showed any kind of thing that was wrong with them whatsoever."

Detectives told the station the woman's husband was in the home at the time of the shooting and ran to a neighbor's place for help.​(CBS News)​

*Texas Woman Killed By Police After Fatally Shooting Her Two Daughters*












> Christy was still holding a pistol, and a Fulshear police officer was forced to shoot her after she refused to put it down, said Troy Nehls, a Fort Bend County Sheriff.
> 
> It is unclear whether Christy was pointing the gun at the responding police officer or at one of her daughters.


In March, Sheats posted the following message to her Facebook account, along with a video from 911Strong:



> *It would be horribly tragic if my ability to protect myself or my family were to be taken away, but that’s exactly what Democrats are determined to do by banning semi-automatic handguns*.


(Jezebel)


----------



## fjnmusic

CubaMark said:


> *Neighborhood in shock after mother fatally shot her two daughters*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christy Sheats, 42, was shot & killed by police officer after she shot 2 daughters. ​
> 
> 
> Fort Bend County Sheriff's deputies say Taylor Sheats, 22, and Madison Sheats, 17, were shot and killed by their mother Christy Sheats, 42, on Friday around 5pm. A Fulshear police officer shot and killed Christy at the home on Remson Hollow Lane when she refused to drop her weapon. Only the husband and father, Jason Sheats, was not harmed.
> 
> 
> 
> n eyewitness saw Taylor, Madison and Jason running out of their home. According to the eyewitness, the young women were already wounded. The neighbor said Taylor collapsed on the street and he saw Christy come outside with a gun and then go back inside to reload. When she emerged again, she shot Madison in the back, ...
> ​(ABC News)​
> 
> 
> *Mom shoots daughters to death before Texas police kill her*
> 
> 
> 
> Officials identified the mother as Christy Sheats, 42, and her daughters as Taylor Sheats, 22, and Madison Sheats, 17, CBS affiliate KHOU reported.
> 
> 
> 
> "It's just crazy," Austin Enke, a neighbor who said he went to high school with one of the victims, told KHOU. "The neighborhood's never seen this kind of thing before. It's always quiet. This is surprising. They never showed any kind of thing that was wrong with them whatsoever."
> 
> 
> 
> Detectives told the station the woman's husband was in the home at the time of the shooting and ran to a neighbor's place for help.​(CBS News)​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Texas Woman Killed By Police After Fatally Shooting Her Two Daughters*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In March, Sheats posted the following message to her Facebook account, along with a video from 911Strong:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Jezebel)



More guns! That's the answer! If the children could have each had their own guns, perhaps they could have killed their own mother before she killed them. Of course, that would make one or the other of them a murderer, but still, better safe than sorry, right? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> More guns! That's the answer! If the children could have each had their own guns, perhaps they could have killed their own mother before she killed them. Of course, that would make one or the other of them a murderer, but still, better safe than sorry, right?


No, it would not have made them murderers.


----------



## SINC

Ah, a new approach . . .

Hawaii just put gun owners on an FBI database — and the NRA is freaking out


----------



## Dr.G.

SINC said:


> Ah, a new approach . . .
> 
> Hawaii just put gun owners on an FBI database — and the NRA is freaking out


Interesting. I can see the NRA and the Libertarian Party going nuts over this law. Wonder how The Donald will react.


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Ah, a new approach . . .
> 
> Hawaii just put gun owners on an FBI database — and the NRA is freaking out


I certainly don't have much faith in the FBI, but the idea seems reasonable on the face of it. Will have to think about it some more. Being placed on a list with daycare workers doesn't seem so bad.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I certainly don't have much faith in the FBI, but the idea seems reasonable on the face of it. Will have to think about it some more. Being placed on a list with daycare workers doesn't seem so bad.


...and yet a Federal long-gun registry in Canada made y'all lose your s**t.

Interesting.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> ...and yet a Federal long-gun registry in Canada made y'all lose your s**t.
> 
> Interesting.


Yes. A federal long gun registry was ridiculous. This is something altogether different.


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> No, it would not have made them murderers.



Please explain.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

It would make them killers in self defense.



fjnmusic said:


> Please explain.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC

The long gun registry did not include the most common weapon of choice by criminals, the handgun. Instead they targeted legal weapons used for hunting, varmint control and game birds, making criminals out of the ordinary folks who refused to register their long guns. It should be noted that handguns have been tightly controlled and required to be registered in Canada since the 1930s.


----------



## CubaMark

*BREAKING: Supreme Court Just Ruled that Domestic Abusers Can't Have Guns*
Voisine v. United States​
_In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that reckless domestic assaults can be considered misdemeanor crimes to restrict gun ownership. The decision comes as a major victory for women's rights and domestic violence advocacy groups._​
(Mother Jones)


----------



## fjnmusic

Macfury said:


> It would make them killers in self defense.



Self defence can still be murder. It depends on whether the person is in imminent danger or whether the other person had a weapon. By the time the kids reached for their own weapons, I imagine mom would have already killed them if she had a gun handy. They would have been better to launch a pre-emptive strike and killed her in her slee (like what the USA did to Iraq). Of course, that would be murder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> *BREAKING: Supreme Court Just Ruled that Domestic Abusers Can't Have Guns*
> Voisine v. United States​
> _In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that reckless domestic assaults can be considered misdemeanor crimes to restrict gun ownership. The decision comes as a major victory for women's rights and domestic violence advocacy groups._​
> (Mother Jones)


That's good!


----------



## Macfury

It's called justifiable homicide.



fjnmusic said:


> Self defence can still be murder. It depends on whether the person is in imminent danger or whether the other person had a weapon. By the time the kids reached for their own weapons, I imagine mom would have already killed them if she had a gun handy. They would have been better to launch a pre-emptive strike and killed her in her slee (like what the USA did to Iraq). Of course, that would be murder.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark

_New info on the Sheats' shooting..._

*Texas mother who killed daughters called family meeting to start rampage*

Authorities in Texas said Monday the woman who killed her daughters called a family meeting before the shooting began.

* * *​
"During that meeting, Christy Sheats held up a gun and shot both girls," the sheriff's office said.

Jason Sheats and the daughters ran outside where Madison Sheats collapsed and died. Jason Sheats ran to the end of the cul-de-sac.

Christy Sheats shot Taylor Sheats one more time on the street. A witness told investigators Christy Sheats then went back into the home, reloaded her gun and shot Taylor once more.

* * *​
Madison Davey, a friend of the Sheats daughters, told KTRK-TV that the two girls were caught up in the troubled marriage of their parents. She said that Jason Sheats told her that Christy Sheats shot her daughters because she wanted him to suffer.

Davey also said that the weapon used in the murders was passed down from Christy Sheats’ great-grandfather “to protect the family.”

The sheriff’s office also revealed Monday that officers had been called out 14 times since 2012 to the Sheats’ home.

* * *​
Sheriff's office spokeswoman Caitilin Espinosa had told People magazine that prior calls had involved a "mental crisis" related to Sheats.​
(FoxNews)


----------



## MacGuiver2.0

CubaMark said:


> _New info on the Sheats' shooting..._
> 
> *Texas mother who killed daughters called family meeting to start rampage*
> 
> Authorities in Texas said Monday the woman who killed her daughters called a family meeting before the shooting began.
> 
> * * *​
> "During that meeting, Christy Sheats held up a gun and shot both girls," the sheriff's office said.
> 
> Jason Sheats and the daughters ran outside where Madison Sheats collapsed and died. Jason Sheats ran to the end of the cul-de-sac.
> 
> Christy Sheats shot Taylor Sheats one more time on the street. A witness told investigators Christy Sheats then went back into the home, reloaded her gun and shot Taylor once more.
> 
> * * *​
> Madison Davey, a friend of the Sheats daughters, told KTRK-TV that the two girls were caught up in the troubled marriage of their parents. She said that Jason Sheats told her that Christy Sheats shot her daughters because she wanted him to suffer.
> 
> Davey also said that the weapon used in the murders was passed down from Christy Sheats’ great-grandfather “to protect the family.”
> 
> The sheriff’s office also revealed Monday that officers had been called out 14 times since 2012 to the Sheats’ home.
> 
> * * *​
> Sheriff's office spokeswoman Caitilin Espinosa had told People magazine that prior calls had involved a "mental crisis" related to Sheats.​
> (FoxNews)


I had a friend lose her young daughter in a similar domestic circumstance but her husband gassed himself and the child to death in the garage. Its shocking what some people can justify in their warped minds.


----------



## SINC

Whoda thunk it?

American gun ownership drops to lowest in nearly 40 years

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ntent=link&utm_medium=website&utm_source=fark


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me a good, old-fashioned law of unintended consequences...

Tennessee Businesses That Disarm Concealed Carry Permit Holders Now Liable for Their Safety



> On July 1, businesses that disarm concealed carry permit holders with gun-free signage will be liable for the safety of those permit holders.
> 
> When the law, contained in SB 1736, takes effect, business owners who demand law-abiding citizens disarm themselves will assume liability for injuries they incur while on the “posted premises.” Moreover, the business owners will be liable for injuries a concealed permit holder incurs while retreating from the business to a vehicle–during an emergency–to retrieve the gun the business owner barred.


----------



## FeXL

And, I also jes' luvs me a good, old-fashioned story that throws into sharp relief the problems created in a too long Democratically controlled city and the futility of gun control laws.

More Than 2K People Have Been Shot in Chicago This Year



> It's only halfway through the year and there have already been more than 2,000 shooting victims in Chicago, far more than recorded in the city this time last year—and far more casualties than the US suffered in the Gulf War. The milestone was passed over the Fourth of July weekend, when police say four people were killed and at least 46 injured in 42 shootings and one stabbing, reports CNN, which describes the mayhem as a "war among criminals" that has caught many innocent people in the crossfire. Police say there have been 319 murders in Chicago so far in 2016, around 50% more than at this time last year. There were 2,988 shooting victims in the city in the whole of 2015.


Bbbb-ut, IT"S THE GUNS!!! TAKE AWAY THE GUNS!!!


----------



## heavyall

FeXL said:


> Bbbb-ut, IT"S THE GUNS!!! TAKE AWAY THE GUNS!!!


That's not a rational argument that you're making. If people are getting shot, obviously the guns have NOT been taken away. Laws only work if they are enforced. You can't ban [anything] from a city by law and expect it to no longer be there if the surrounding area still has unfettered access to that them, and you aren't willing or able to stop and check everyone coming and going from that city (or state). If you don't have border controls, you don't really have a ban yet.


----------



## Macfury

heavyall said:


> That's not a rational argument that you're making. If people are getting shot, obviously the guns have NOT been taken away. Laws only work if they are enforced. You can't ban [anything] from a city by law and expect it to no longer be there if the surrounding area still has unfettered access to that them, and you aren't willing or able to stop and check everyone coming and going from that city (or state). If you don't have border controls, you don't really have a ban yet.


The question is--why is Chicago's situation worse by several magnitudes than those without such bans?


----------



## heavyall

Macfury said:


> The question is--why is Chicago's situation worse by several magnitudes than those without such bans?


There's a few things about that. 

First, Chicago doesn't have an actual "ban". There are many places in the US with similar restrictions, and Chicago has much more relaxed gun laws than they used to even just a few years ago. 

Second, Chicago has had ebbs and flows of really bad crime in general and gun crime in particular since long before the restrictions they do have were put in place -- "why is it so bad there" is a completely different question than "do bans work".

Also, I'm not claiming that bans DO work, I'm only saying that pointing to Chicago as an example of a failed gun ban is not a good argument.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

The activity above is illegal in Toronto-drinking a beer in public, I mean.


----------



## SINC

Indeed the cartoonist is not up to date on Canadian law. I know of no province that allows public consumption of any type of alcohol carried openly in public, therefore the cartoon is an error in fact and should never have been published by the newspaper.


----------



## Dr.G.

From my cold dead hands will they take my beer on a hot summer's day. 

Alexander Keith's Nova Scotia Brewery | Tourism Nova Scotia :love2:


----------



## FeXL

Sorry, I missed this...

Sure it is.

Old saw: when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

So, you initiate gun control laws, taking guns away from law-abiding citizens & the criminals, for reasons unknown, haven't surrendered their firearms. Now, what do you have?

Unarmed citizens & armed criminals. 

Whose killing whom? It's the criminals who are killing not only themselves, but unarmed citizens, as well. 

Gun control does not & will not work because the criminals will always have firearms.

Further, it's not the guns that are killing people, any more than knives jump out of the silverware drawer & stab someone or a truck self-drives & runs down 80 people on a sidewalk or a pressure cooker loads itself up with ball bearings, drywall screws & explosive, then walks down a sidewalk during a marathon & detonates itself, or an unmanned axe that jumps on the closest train & starts swinging itself.

It's the sick, twisted individuals who are using whatever tool they can to maim & kill.

I've noted it before: There are hundreds of millions of firearms in the US alone, along with billions of rounds of ammunition. If guns were truly _the_ problem, everybody on this planet would know.



heavyall said:


> That's not a rational argument that you're making. If people are getting shot, obviously the guns have NOT been taken away.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Whose killing whom?
> 
> If guns were truly _the_ problem, everybody on this planet would know.



Who's (who is). 

Everybody on this planet does know, but many are in great denial. Present company included, it seems. Guns combined with a culture that believes it is entitled to use them for sketchy reasons IS the problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

You nailed it! Woohoo, fjn!!!

It's _exactly_ the *criminal culture* that thinks this way. Not law abiding duck hunters, skeet shooters, varmint plinkers & persons who choose to carry for self-defence against the criminal element.

Finally...



fjnmusic said:


> Guns combined with a culture that believes it is entitled to use them for sketchy reasons IS the problem.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> You nailed it! Woohoo, fjn!!!
> 
> 
> 
> It's _exactly_ the *criminal culture* that thinks this way. Not law abiding duck hunters, skeet shooters, varmint plinkers & persons who choose to carry for self-defence against the criminal element.
> 
> 
> 
> Finally...



Calm your tits, man. Spare me the patronizing tone. Someone hell bent on killing people will make slower progress with a knife than a gun, especially a semi-automatic one. The prevalence of guns combined with the second amendment entitlement concept IS the problem in the USA. We have guns here in Canada, but we don't have anywhere near the homicide rate the USA does, even per capita. Now why do you think that is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MacGuiver2.0

fjnmusic said:


> Calm your tits, man. Spare me the patronizing tone. Someone hell bent on killing people will make slower progress with a knife than a gun, especially a semi-automatic one. The prevalence of guns combined with the second amendment entitlement concept IS the problem in the USA. We have guns here in Canada, but we don't have anywhere near the homicide rate the USA does, even per capita. Now why do you think that is?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Gang culture. We don't have it in Canada the same degree but the US is rife with it. Where we do have high murder rates in Canada, gang violence is most often at the root of it. How many do you think the jihadi would have taken out in Nice with a rifle vs the delivery truck?


----------



## fjnmusic

MacGuiver2.0 said:


> Gang culture. We don't have it in Canada the same degree but the US is rife with it. Where we do have high murder rates in Canada, gang violence is most often at the root of it.



That's a good point, MacGuiver. It's a little like going to Wal-Mart and seeing a parent who has no control of their kids, while your own are behaving just fine. It's something about the way people are raised and what they come to value. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Jeezuz, you're all over the board here...

First off, it wasn't patronizing, it was effusive.



fjnmusic said:


> Calm your tits, man. Spare me the patronizing tone.


Second, this is so rife with holes I don't even know where to begin. 

If speed were truly the main factor in killing people, how come hands & feet in the US kill far more people than long guns? Look at the stats, I'm not going to do your homework for you.

In addition, why don't more people go to explosives if speed is the issue? That truck in Europe was pretty effective, too.

Someone hell bent on killing people will use whatever means at their disposal.



fjnmusic said:


> Someone hell bent on killing people will make slower progress with a knife than a gun, especially a semi-automatic one.


Not even close. The 2nd Amendment says nothing about "entitlement". It guarantees the right of gun ownership to the American people. Period.



fjnmusic said:


> The prevalence of guns combined with the second amendment entitlement concept IS the problem in the USA.


MacGuiver nailed this one.

Take the major cities where gang violence is prevalent (Chicago, Detroit, LA, etc.) out of the equation & US deaths per 100,000 by firearm drops significantly.

These are cities with large black populations, most of which were raised with no father figure in the picture and many siblings having different fathers.



fjnmusic said:


> We have guns here in Canada, but we don't have anywhere near the homicide rate the USA does, even per capita. Now why do you think that is?


----------



## fjnmusic

Ok, have fun with that, FeXL. I'm afraid you're sucking up too much if my time already, and you are monotonous to try to have a conversation with. Seriously, try to have a good day and calm yourself. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Once again, when confronted with actual facts, you fabricate some sort of exit strategy excuse, tuck tail & run.

The monotony here is your predictability...



fjnmusic said:


> Ok, have fun with that, FeXL. I'm afraid you're sucking up too much if my time already, and you are monotonous to try to have a conversation with.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> Once again, when confronted with actual facts, you fabricate some sort of exit strategy excuse, tuck tail & run.
> 
> 
> 
> The monotony here is your predictability...



Nope, you're just kind of boring to talk to, no offense. Your only interest seems to be in "destroying other people's arguments." Been there, done that. If you knew how to actually have a conversation, minus the insults and put downs, I'd make a bigger effort. Have a nice sunny afternoon. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Alas, his majesty grows weary again.


----------



## FeXL

When all the other person is doing is spewing garbage & fear-mongering then, yes, my aim is to destroy their argument.

And, I know you've been there. I do that to yours regularly...



fjnmusic said:


> Your only interest seems to be in "destroying other people's arguments." Been there, done that.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> When all the other person is doing is spewing garbage & fear-mongering then, yes, my aim is to destroy their argument.
> 
> 
> 
> And, I know you've been there. I do that to yours regularly...



And you wonder why the other kids don't like to play with you. Tempting as it is, sometimes I just have to tune you out. It's an important part of removing the toxic people from your life, or at least gaining some distance from them. No offense. Have a swell evening. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

What's it like to be so needy that you have to obsess about someone playing with you?



fjnmusic said:


> And you wonder why the other kids don't like to play with you.


In order to kill a cancer you need chemo or radiation... 



fjnmusic said:


> It's an important part of removing the toxic people from your life, or at least gaining some distance from them.


----------



## fjnmusic

FeXL said:


> What's it like to be so needy that you have to obsess about someone playing with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In order to kill a cancer you need chemo or radiation...



Odd responses from my point of view, but whatever floats your boat. I'm not really interested in killing a conversation, just in having one where people can be respectful of each other's differing points of view. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FeXL

Time & again you've brought up this same, tired, old observation. Every time, I replied the same way. I don't care if anybody "plays" with me. I don't wonder who will respond, if indeed anyone will. I don't tailor my responses in the hopes that someone will respond to them. It matters not to me. I'm fine flying solo. I'm fine with a _good_ team.

You're the one obsessed with people "playing" with you. You're the one that craves to belong to something, no matter how tenuous or desperate. You're the needy one here. "Please, please, please, pretty please with sugar on top, give me some respect. Bring in some moderators so that everybody will play nice." Wah, frickin' wah. Earn your respect!!!

And, once again, got no truck with another point of view, as long as you can defend it. Got zero tolerance for Good Old Boys clubs. You can't/won't/don't. QED...

You called me toxic. Fine. My analogy was to illustrate that sometimes a toxin is needed in order to kill a poison. And, before you get all up in arms, metaphorically speaking...



fjnmusic said:


> Odd responses from my point of view, but whatever floats your boat. I'm not really interested in killing a conversation, just in having one where people can be respectful of each other's differing points of view.


----------



## Macfury

fjnmusic said:


> And you wonder why the other kids don't like to play with you.


Why do you keep saying this? Do you imagine that if you don't like someone's posting style, they can't possibly have rich friendships in the real world?


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> Why do you keep saying this? Do you imagine that if you don't like someone's posting style, they can't possibly have rich friendships in the real world?


We do, Macfury. Of course, my weekly "payout" to you helps to bond our friendship.


----------



## fjnmusic

Dr.G. said:


> We do, Macfury. Of course, my weekly "payout" to you helps to bond our friendship.



Nice. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury

Dr.G. said:


> We do, Macfury. Of course, my weekly "payout" to you helps to bond our friendship.


Price is going up September 1...


----------



## Dr.G.

Macfury said:


> Price is going up September 1...


Luckily, I get paid in US dollars to pay you in Canadian Monopoly money. I made a few smart bets in the Spring and they paid off (e.g., Donald Trump winning the Republican nomination in July paid 1000-1 US .............. and I bet $$113 US).


----------



## FeXL

Prog heads exploding everywhere...

These Gun Owners Are Least Likely Criminals, Report Finds



> Concealed-carry permit holders are nearly the most law-abiding demographic of Americans, a new report by the Crime Prevention Research Center says—comparing the permit holders foremost with police.
> 
> “Indeed, it is impossible to think of any other group in the U.S. that is anywhere near as law-abiding,” says the report, titled “Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States 2016.”


Clarified, for effect: CCW owners, not black, male, fatherless, inner city gangsters...


----------



## FeXL

Further on Gun Control.

Does Gun Control = Death Control?



> The United States does not have the highest firearm homicide rates of all countries, or of all developed countries. Among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, *Mexico has the highest firearms homicide rate, with a rate about 3 times higher than the US rate.* _We should note that guns are banned for all civilians in Mexico._ Furthermore, “civilized” countries like Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Colombia and Venezuela have some of the highest homicide rates in the world.
> 
> According to the very same sources quoted above, Israel and Switzerland have very high gun possession rates, and their firearm homicide rates are extremely low. Switzerland had a firearms homicide rate of 0.77 per 100,000 people in 2012 and Israel has a rate of just 0.09 per 100,000.


Italics from the link, m'bold.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Further on Gun Control.


Ever heard of _context_? Mexico has massively (U.S.-trained and ) armed narco cartels all over the country. That tends to skew the stats just a wee bit.

But I'm sure your take on this will be that Mexico just needs to "arm up" like the good ol' boys in Texas and they'll "take care" of those pesky drug thugs.

Easy as pie, when you've got yer gun in yer hand.

Oh, but wait, that gun in your hand won't do Jack S**t to protect your daughter when she comes out of school to waiting gunmen while you're at work; or your wife's brother, who just by association becomes a target of intimidation, or *anyone else* including yourself when they arrive in their 3- to 5- SUV caravan of fully armed, military-grade, fully automatic high-calibre weapons.

Methinks you've been watching 'waaaay too much of that Holywood John Woo kinda stuff....


----------



## FeXL

I'm quite aware of context. I account for it in all my arguments. How come context is only important to you now?



CubaMark said:


> Ever heard of _context_?


Kind of an awful lot like the 10 major cities in the US where 70% of gun killings happen, idn't it.

Sauce for the goose and all...



CubaMark said:


> Mexico has massively (U.S.-trained and ) armed narco cartels all over the country. That tends to skew the stats just a wee bit.


----------



## FeXL

So, there's a video at the link. I know that very few who endorse gun control will watch it. For those of you who do not, it's f'ing hilarious. The ignorance on display is stunning...

"Common Sense" Gun Control Lies Exposed



> If you’re reading this, you probably know the difference between an automatic and a semi-automatic weapon. You now know more than “common sense gun control” advocates. That’s because you, the fabulous person reading this post, has at least two brain cells to rub together to form a cogent thought. Which makes you seven bajillion times smarter than the average anti-gun loon, who knows as much about guns as a lobster knows quantum physics. *Therefore we’re exposing just how little anti-gun ninnies (who vote) don’t know. It’s frankly a little bit scary. As in holy crap, hide under a blanket.*


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Of course. Can't have any crazed senior citizens running around with firearms. What I don't get is that I thought Progs supported the right to end your life...

New Gun Control Idea: Take Guns from Senior Citizens



> Senior citizens have been among the most adamant Second Amendment advocates in recent years, such as the late Otis McDonald (above), who challenged Chicago’s handgun ban at the U.S. Supreme Court — and won.
> 
> But Frattaroli, who works at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, has expressed concern over what an grandparent with a gun might do to him or herself *via suicide*...


M'bold.

Don't let the bastards get their foot in the door.


----------



## FeXL

The Swiss get it...

Swiss tell EU - Hands off veterans' assault rifles



> Friction between Switzerland and the European Union over the bloc's plans to tighten gun control following a rise in militant attacks could turn into another serious snag in ties already tested by Swiss efforts to curb immigration.
> 
> The proposed directive, which applies to non-EU member Switzerland only because it is part of Europe's Schengen open border system, has raised hackles among the Swiss, who resent intervention from Brussels.


More:



> Under Switzerland's system of direct democracy, groups like ProTELL can gather signatures and put such matters before voters.
> 
> *"With our direct democracy, Swiss people are accustomed to having the last word,"* said ProTell's Dominik Riner. "We're opposed to any and all efforts to make current weapons laws more restrictive."


M'bold.

I can only fantasize...


----------



## eMacMan

Could have put this one in a lot threads, but here will do. 

Interesting that they perform routine toxicology on common thugs but neglect that important aspect of an investigation when it comes to "radicalized" terrorists.




> Blacktongue struck the store clerk in the abdomen with his hatchet, causing a cut. The man with the gun fired two more rounds at Blacktongue, hitting him in the chest and face.
> 
> Blacktongue died of his wounds soon thereafter.Witnesses told investigators they believed Blacktongue tried to kill the store clerk. Toxicology reports indicate he recently took methamphetamine before the attack.
> 
> He had a "substantial criminal history," according to the Sheriff's Office, including a prior conviction of attempted first-degree assault. His wife told a detective he had a history of committing armed robberies.


Entire article here:
No charges for man who shot hatchet-wielding man at Burien 7-Eleven - seattlepi.com


----------



## SINC

Yep . . .


----------



## SINC

.


----------



## FeXL

Bill's Wife should show her altruism first...

Trump: Clinton's bodyguards should drop guns and 'see what happens to her'



> During a rally in Miami, Fla., Trump railed against Clinton’s gun control policies, saying she wants to “destroy your Second Amendment.”
> 
> “I think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons,” he said. “They should disarm. Right? I think they should disarm immediately.


Related:

Hillary Claims That Being Denied Your Own Gun Makes You Safer, But Take Her Gun And You’re Encouraging Her Assassination.



> Typical liberal trash talk from the Clinton campaign about some innocent and truthful remarks from Donald Trump have enlivened the press in the last two days. Trump merely made the obviously accurate statement that since Hillary and her liberal/progressive allies want to take all guns from the possession of normal people, why not remove Hillary’s guns (possessed of course by the private and secret service bodyguards that surround her every minute) and see how secure that makes her feel. After all, liberals always make the argument that your gun threatens you and your family just by being in your home, so the many guns that surround Hillary all day, every day, must be an even greater threat to her. So, following her own logic, Trump suggested getting rid of this evil threat that hangs over Hillary.


----------



## FeXL

Bill's Lying Wife can start.

Hillary Clinton: We Cannot End Terrorism Without Gun Control



> In response to questions from _AARP Bulletin_, Hillary Clinton made clear her position that to be successful, policies for ending terrorism must include gun control for all Americans.


----------



## FeXL

Thx, Dems!!!

Gun sales hit 17th straight monthly record, up 27 percent



> Gun sales hit the 17th consecutive monthly record in September according to FBI data released on Monday, and overall sales are up 27 percent compared to the same period last year.
> 
> A total of 1,992,219 background checks were processed through the bureau's National Instant Criminal Background Check System for the month of September, higher than the 1,795,102 conducted in September 2015.


I wish they'd threaten photography. My sales could use a little boost...


----------



## FeXL

Curious, idn't it...

Telegraph: U.S. Top Country for Gun Ownership, Not Even in Top 10 for Firearm Deaths



> The map and the accompanying Telegraph article were drawn from the Small Arms Survey and the 2012 Congressional Research Serrvice Report. As Breitbart News previously reported, the CRS report shows privately owned firearms jumped from 192 million in the U.S. in 1994 to 310 million in 2009. At the same time, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate–which was 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993–fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by 2000. Gun sales continued to surge and the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate fell to 3.2 in 2011.
> 
> Think about it–as gun ownership rose, the murder rate plummeted in the U.S. Couple that with the fact that only one of the Top 10 countries for gun ownership is also in the Top 10 for firearm-related deaths–Uruguay is number eight for gun ownership number 10 for gun deaths–and the point is clear: More guns correlate with less crime.


Huh. Gun ownership goes up by >50%, gun deaths drop by >50%. And when I noted some time ago on these boards that an armed populace is a polite populace, the left among you jeered...

And, if you take away the numbers from historically (hysterically?) Democratic controlled cities where some of the toughest gun control laws in the country exist (Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans, etc.) the picture improves dramatically.


----------



## FeXL

American Support For An Assault Weapons Ban Just Hit A Record Low



> Support for a so-called assault weapons ban in the U.S. just hit a record low of 36 percent, according to a new Gallup poll released on Wednesday. The poll showed that 61 percent of American adults now oppose a ban. *That level of opposition is the highest ever recorded.*
> 
> Increasing opposition to the 1990’s-era gun ban isn’t just limited to Republicans. Gallup’s data show that opposition to the ban has increased across the board. Barely 50 percent of Democrats currently support the ban today, compared to 63 percent support from Democrats in 1996, just two years after the federal ban was signed into law. Less than a third of independents currently support a ban, while Republican support hovers at 25 percent.


M'bold.


----------



## FeXL

Speaking of unhinged...

Baltimore Sun Columnist: I am More Afraid of White, Legal Gun Owners than Actual Murderers



> The Baltimore Sun recently published an op-ed that is both maddeningly idiotic and hilariously ironic regarding the city’s incredible amount of gun violence.
> 
> In the piece, columnist Tricia Bishop claims that she is more afraid of legal gun owners than she is of those who illegally purchase and use guns in the inner city — you know, the ones who are actually murdering people.


----------



## FeXL

Trump to Support Nationwide Concealed Carry



> Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump -- who said he has a concealed carry permit -- called for the expansion of gun rights Friday, including making those permits applicable nationwide. In a position paper published on his website Friday afternoon, Trump called for the elimination of gun and magazine bans, labeling them a "total failure."
> 
> "Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own," Trump wrote.


----------



## FeXL

Like I said, while the Progs are busy making fools of themselves, don't interrupt.

Washington Post Reporter Doubles Down On Fake News About Guns



> The most shocking assertion by Rosenwald, and one which cast significant doubt on the rest of his reporting, was that a .22 LR rifle–far and away the smallest and weakest readily available rifle caliber on the market–was actually a “high-powered rifle”...


If I need to post a further quote to clarify the ignorance illustrated in that statement, just close your browser window now. There is no hope...

Related:

Progressives Don’t Understand How Gun ‘Silencers’ Work. Here Are Some Facts To Help Them



> A military jet taking off with its afterburner on full blast. A jackhammer. A sandblaster. A freight train. A rock concert. What do these seemingly unconnected sounds all have in common? They’re significantly quieter than the sound of a gun being fired. Even one with a “silencer” attached to it.
> 
> Why is this important? Because there’s a growing movement to make it easier for gun owners to reduce the ear-piercing sounds of the guns being fired, and progressives are outraged by it. They’re outraged by it because they don’t have the slightest idea how so-called gun silencers actually work. Here’s the Washington Post‘s most recent take on the issue in an article headlined “Gun silencers are hard to buy. Donald Trump Jr. and silencer makers want to change that”


Pardon me, sir. Is that an assault silencer?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

So much for the WaPo no longer publishing Fake News stories...


----------



## FeXL

Ah, yes. The Queen's horsemen at it again...

The RCMP is banning the CZ858 rifle: Sign the petition to stop this gun grab!



> For non-gunnies, it's like you having two cars of the same make in your garage but, one day, the police decide your red car is prohibited just because of the colour of paint.


Two identical firearms. One has some engraving. Must be some of that assault engraving...


----------



## CubaMark

*A Young Person Is Shot Almost Every Day In Ontario: Study*

Firearms injure a child or youth almost every day in Ontario, say researchers, who analyzed hospital records to determine which groups of young people are most at risk for gun-related accidents or violent assault.

Their study, published Monday in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, found there were 355 firearm injuries on average each year among children and youth, with about 23 to 25 — or seven per cent — resulting in death.

"Three-quarters are unintentional, so these are accidents that happen, and about 25 per cent are intentional or assault,'' said senior author Dr. Astrid Guttmann, a pediatrician at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children.

When the researchers looked at provincial hospital emergency room records for gun-related injuries, they found Canadian-born youth, particularly males, had the highest rates of unintentional firearm injury — 12 per 100,000 people versus about seven per 100,000 for immigrant males.

** * *​*
Dr. Natasha Saunders, a pediatrician at Sick Kids and the study's lead author, said there has been little Canadian research on children harmed by firearms, and most of that has focused on those who have died.

"Death is clearly a devastating outcome, but near-misses are also a devastatingly significant issue,'' said Saunders, noting the study looks at both gun deaths and injuries, which in some cases can lead to severe disabilities.

"It is our hope that understanding the numbers will contribute to efforts that are already being made to reduce the number of victims of both unintentional firearm injuries in Canadian-born children and youth, as well as firearm assault in subgroups of immigrant children and youth.''

** * *​*
The CPS also urged all levels of government to bring in stricter gun controls.

To reduce the availability of firearms to youth, the organization is calling for several measures, including strategies to curtail illegal importation of firearms into Canada, especially from the U.S., and tighter restrictions on semi-automatic firearms.

Austin said there is a pervasive belief that Canada doesn't have a problem with firearms, primarily because the level of gun deaths in the United States is so "spectacular'' in comparison.

(Huffington Post)​


----------



## SINC

Same old crap. What is lacking is education about handling guns. No need for an uproar over an incident a day. Drivers kill more people than that any given day. Ban cars next?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

CubaMark said:


> *A Young Person Is Shot Almost Every Day In Ontario: Study*
> 
> 
> 
> Firearms injure a child or youth almost every day in Ontario, say researchers, who analyzed hospital records to determine which groups of young people are most at risk for gun-related accidents or violent assault.
> 
> 
> 
> Their study, published Monday in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, found there were 355 firearm injuries on average each year among children and youth, with about 23 to 25 — or seven per cent — resulting in death.
> 
> 
> 
> "Three-quarters are unintentional, so these are accidents that happen, and about 25 per cent are intentional or assault,'' said senior author Dr. Astrid Guttmann, a pediatrician at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children.
> 
> 
> 
> When the researchers looked at provincial hospital emergency room records for gun-related injuries, they found Canadian-born youth, particularly males, had the highest rates of unintentional firearm injury — 12 per 100,000 people versus about seven per 100,000 for immigrant males.
> 
> 
> 
> ** * *​*
> 
> 
> Dr. Natasha Saunders, a pediatrician at Sick Kids and the study's lead author, said there has been little Canadian research on children harmed by firearms, and most of that has focused on those who have died.
> 
> 
> 
> "Death is clearly a devastating outcome, but near-misses are also a devastatingly significant issue,'' said Saunders, noting the study looks at both gun deaths and injuries, which in some cases can lead to severe disabilities.
> 
> 
> 
> "It is our hope that understanding the numbers will contribute to efforts that are already being made to reduce the number of victims of both unintentional firearm injuries in Canadian-born children and youth, as well as firearm assault in subgroups of immigrant children and youth.''
> 
> 
> 
> ** * *​*
> 
> 
> The CPS also urged all levels of government to bring in stricter gun controls.
> 
> 
> 
> To reduce the availability of firearms to youth, the organization is calling for several measures, including strategies to curtail illegal importation of firearms into Canada, especially from the U.S., and tighter restrictions on semi-automatic firearms.
> 
> 
> 
> Austin said there is a pervasive belief that Canada doesn't have a problem with firearms, primarily because the level of gun deaths in the United States is so "spectacular'' in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> (Huffington Post)​



I wonder at what point it actually becomes an issue for some people? Perhaps never? Of course, it can't be gun culture that's responsible for the "spectacular" number of shooting deaths in the US.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I wonder at what point it actually becomes an issue for some people? Perhaps never? Of course, it can't be gun culture that's responsible for the "spectacular" number of shooting deaths in the US.


Lemme know when it becomes real. Right now it amounts to an issue for 0.0010735 percent of Canadians. Time to find another drum to beat for Huff Post. (That's 365 incidents per 34 million Canucks.)

It is not even a non-starter.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Lemme know when it becomes real. Right now it amounts to an issue for 0.0010735 percent of Canadians. Time to find another drum to beat for Huff Post. (That's 365 incidents per 34 million Canucks.)
> 
> 
> 
> It is not even a non-starter.



I'll bet it's a "starter" for the families of the ones who are dead.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> I'll bet it's a "starter" for the families of the ones who are dead.



Well, since only 7% resulted in a death, that makes the amount so small it is but a handful of folks who likely did not store their weapons or ammo correctly and according to law.

Whose fault do you think that is, huh?

This is overblown and so far from an epidemic that it is laughable.


----------



## Macfury

It's a big deal for a family if Dad chokes on a prize in a Kinder Surprise Egg--but I don't want to see them banned.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> Well, since only 7% resulted in a death, that makes the amount so small it is but a handful of folks who likely did not store their weapons or ammo correctly and according to law.
> 
> 
> 
> Whose fault do you think that is, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> This is overblown and so far from an epidemic that it is laughable.



Who says it has to be an epidemic? I believe any accidental death is tragic. Apparently, you do not.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> Who says it has to be an epidemic? I believe any accidental death is tragic. Apparently, you do not.


If you had paid attention to the TV news reports, there were indeed people calling this an epidemic. 

Of course any death is tragic for the family, but it is a real stretch to claim it is tragic to yourself when is is one of a handful and thousands of miles away and involves no one you know personally. 

You must have your hanky handy to wipe away all those tears every single minute of the day when people do die, and will continue to die, due to a 'tragic accident'.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> If you had paid attention to the TV news reports, there were indeed people calling this an epidemic.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course any death is tragic for the family, but it is a real stretch to claim it is tragic to yourself when is is one of a handful and thousands of miles away and involves no one you know personally.
> 
> 
> 
> You must have your hanky handy to wipe away all those tears every single minute of the day when people do die, and will continue to die, due to a 'tragic accident'.



No offense, Don, but you can be a real heartless bastard sometimes. Have a great day. And thank God or whichever deity you prefer that you live in Canada where the second amendment doesn't apply.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> No offense, Don, but you can be a real heartless bastard sometimes. Have a great day. And thank God or whichever deity you prefer that you live in Canada where the second amendment doesn't apply.


See Frank, there you go again, assuming there IS a deity.


----------



## Macfury

If even ONE person's life could be saved by outlawing guitars:



> In October 2011, Danny Kirk, a pastor of a Baptist Church in Texas, was beaten to death with an electric guitar by 33-year-old Derrick Birdow. When police arrived on the scene, they had to use a taser to subdue Birdow who had become increasingly paranoid in the days prior to the murder.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

SINC said:


> See Frank, there you go again, assuming there IS a deity.



And there you go, assuming there isn't. Have a good Tuesday.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> If even ONE person's life could be saved by outlawing guitars:



You may be on to something here, MF....or perhaps just on something.


----------



## eMacMan

Freddie_Biff said:


> No offense, Don, but you can be a real heartless bastard sometimes. Have a great day. And thank God or whichever deity you prefer that you live in Canada where the second amendment doesn't apply.





SINC said:


> See Frank, there you go again, assuming there IS a deity.


Been looking for a spot for this.
Study: Turns out religion is kinda like an opiate - seattlepi.com


> *The brain on God study*
> The group talked 19 young-adult, devout members of the Mormon church into being slid into an MRI machine. Inside, they were exposed to religious doctrine and other church-related speeches, video and images.
> 
> 
> In short, their brains lit up pretty much the same as brains that are exposed to "love, sex, gambling, drugs and music." They ran the experiments several times and got the same results, as stated in the study:


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> You may be on to something here, MF....or perhaps just on something.


Your bad logic always falls apart under scrutiny Freddie.


----------



## SINC

Freddie_Biff said:


> No offense, Don, but you can be a real heartless bastard sometimes. Have a great day. And thank God or whichever deity you prefer that you live in Canada where the second amendment doesn't apply.





Freddie_Biff said:


> Who says it has to be an epidemic? I believe any accidental death is tragic. Apparently, you do not.


Well, let's examine that shall we? Consider this:

*World Death Rate

• 6,316 people die each hour
• 105 people die each minute
• Nearly two people die each second*

If you agonize and grieve over those deaths Frank, you must be in a constant state of grief. Care to explain how that is even remotely possible and how it makes me a heartless bastard because I am not grieving them too?


----------



## Macfury

You're only big-hearted if you support the "correct" social causes with a lot of virtue signalling, SINC .



SINC said:


> Well, let's examine that shall we? Consider this:
> 
> *World Death Rate
> 
> • 6,316 people die each hour
> • 105 people die each minute
> • Nearly two people die each second*
> 
> If you agonize and grieve over those deaths Frank, you must be in a constant state of grief. Care to explain how that is even remotely possible and how it makes me a heartless bastard because I am not grieving them too?


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> Been looking for a spot for this.
> Study: Turns out religion is kinda like an opiate - seattlepi.com


Marx, as usual, was right....


----------



## Macfury

Marx is not right as usual. In fact, almost entirely wrong.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Whose fault do you think that is, huh?


Perhaps they should be teaching gun safety in Ontario schools instead of money management...


----------



## CubaMark

_You know why it's so hard to implement common sense gun control laws?

Because too damn many folks are as bat**** crazy as this worthless piece of human excrement...._ (emphasis mine)

*Woman charged in Sandy Hook parent threat a court no-show*










A Florida woman charged with threatening the parent of a boy killed in the 2012 mass shooting at a school in Newtown, Connecticut, was a no-show Wednesday at change-of-plea hearing and now faces a more severe punishment if convicted.

The lawyer for Lucy Richards told U.S. District Judge James Cohn that she contacted his office Wednesday morning and said she was refusing to come to court for her scheduled hearing to plead guilty. Cohn issued an arrest warrant and said Richards will be held without bond once she's in custody.

"Did she give a reason?" Cohn asked.

"No," said Robert Berube, the public defender representing Richards.

** * **​
She was set to plead guilty to a charge of interstate transmission of a *threat to injure for threatening Lenny Pozner, the father of 6-year-old Noah Pozner who died in the shooting at the Sandy Hook school. Prosecutors said she told them she believed the shooting was a hoax.*

Others linked to the Sandy Hook massacre have reported harassment by conspiracy theorists who argue it was staged to erode support for Second Amendment gun rights. The case comes amid a growing trend toward fake news stories and baseless conspiracy theories, such as the "Pizzagate" case in which a man fired an assault rifle inside a Washington, D.C., pizzeria restaurant after going there to investigate unfounded claims it harbored a child sex abuse ring.

Authorities say *Richards made four voicemail and email threats to Pozner on Jan. 10, 2016, including messages that said "you gonna die, death is coming to you real soon" and "LOOK BEHIND YOU IT IS DEATH." Another threat ended with, "and there's nothing you can do about it.*"

** * **​
Richards previously was barred from visiting websites that promote conspiracy theories and ordered to have no contact with anyone connected to the Sandy Hook mass shooting. She had been free on $25,000 bail.

(Yahoo)​


----------



## Beej

CubaMark said:


> too damn many folks are as bat**** crazy


Yes, ideologies fail to incorporate the diversity of people. That's why implementation usually does not look like the speeches, and can spiral out of control as ideologues insist that reality will look like their plan (saving face? true believers?). New "enemies" are identified as the cause of problems.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> Yes, ideologies fail to incorporate the diversity of people. That's why implementation usually does not look like the speeches, and can spiral out of control as ideologues insist that reality will look like their plan (saving face? true believers?). New "enemies" are identified as the cause of problems.


There's "bat**** crazy" and then there's "mentally ill and probably can't help themselves at this point."


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> There's "bat**** crazy" and then there's "mentally ill and probably can't help themselves at this point."


An interesting distinction. Do you consider them completely separate, or is there some overlap? Use a Venn diagram in your response if possible.


----------



## CubaMark

_Sadly interesting how the gun manufacturers and the NRA wins, regardless of which side of the fence you may be on.... _

*Trump 'gave hate groups a megaphone': Gun sales surge among LGBT, minorities in the U.S.*










At a smoky firing range last weekend near Dallas, Evan Fowler, an openly gay college student with chunky glasses and a Human Rights Campaign sticker on his car, loaded a military-style AR-15 rifle and squeezed off round after round with steady precision.

Target practice. The lanky 22-year-old Bernie Sanders supporter was coaching his fiancé, Kevin Fenton, who favoured a .22-calibre.

** * **​
Fowler and Fenton belong to the new Dallas chapter of the Pink Pistols, a national LGBT gun advocacy group whose membership has spiked since the election of U.S. President Donald Trump. As interest in firearms soars in the queer community, the liberal-leaning couple reckons they'll be at the range a lot.

In the U.S., the Pink Pistols boast more than 9,000 members, with the months around Trump's electoral victory in November providing the biggest bump since the aftermath of the Pulse massacre in Orlando last June, according to organizers.

Gun sellers have also reported unusually strong sales for "non-traditional buyers" such as minorities and women, even though overall sales have cooled due to the election of a gun-friendly Republican government.

** * **​
Jeigh Johnson, who is black and married to another woman. "One of my friends said, 'Our president… gave hate groups a megaphone.'"

Johnson is shopping around for her first AR-15. Before she became a gun hobbyist, her main vice was shoes.
(CBC)​


----------



## Macfury

This piddling increase in gun sales doesn't begin to match the general decline.


----------



## CubaMark

*San Bernardino school shooting: 8-year-old special needs student, teacher killed in murder-suicide* Globalnews.ca


----------



## FeXL

Yeah. And?



CubaMark said:


> San Bernardino school shooting: 8-year-old special needs student, teacher killed in murder-suicide


----------



## FeXL

So, is The Hairdo coming after firearms again?

Rural Liberal MPs ‘awfully nervous’ about upcoming gun legislation, any tinkering could be trouble



> “They’re awfully nervous about what the legislation could be,” a Liberal source told The Hill Times on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject and did not want to be seen criticizing his own party. “They’re afraid it’s a backdoor to a gun registry like we had before.”


Go for it, Ralphie. See how many of those close rural contests you lose with more gun control, a registry by any other name, etc.

Related:

The Trudeau Liberals are planning new firearms legislation, and that has many Canadians – including rural Liberal MPs – very nervous.



> As reported in the Hill Times, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale is working on legislation to rid the streets of “handguns and assault weapons.” And while the government claims they aren’t planning to create a gun registry, there is growing concern over Trudeau’s intentions.


----------



## FeXL

So, yer 24 year old offspring is now considered a "child" or "youth".

Report lacks full story on guns



> Every day a child or youth is shot in Ontario and 75% of those injuries are unintentional, according to a new study from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and The Hospital for Sick Children.


But, let's take a look at a few small, shall we say, issues with the data...

First off, define "child or youth".



> The report reads, “researchers examined data representing all children and youth up to 24 years of age.”
> 
> No one among the general public calls a 24-year-old a child.


Secondly, define firearm.

Cold, Canuck Hands (comments germain)



> Nearly half of unintentional injuries were from BB guns.


They also included stats from "air guns". What does that mean? Pellet rifles? Airsoft "guns"? Paintball "guns"?

So, to recap, you've got an agenda driven "study" that includes "children" up to 24 years old with statistics including such "deadly" firearms as BB & pellet rifles. These numbers were all cribbed together in order to make their specious "one a day" claim.

Related:

Despite Stringent Gun Control, One ‘Child or Youth’ Shot Every Day in Ontario



> The study shows that Canadian-born children and youth are prone to accidental shootings while immigrants of the same age are prone to being shot intentionally. It also shows that children and youth in rural areas were more prone to accidental shootings while those in urban environments were prone to assaults with firearms. The study offers this explanation:
> 
> _*The observed variation in firearm injury by region of origin may have been related to higher participation in Canadian gangs by Indo-Asian, Caribbean and African immigrants than by those from other regions, and it highlights the need to ensure a healthy transition to Canada by these particular at-risk groups.*_​


M'bold.

So, first, for rural kids, accidents are the main cause of injury. This can be addressed with safety courses on proper firearm handling.

Second, re: urban _"At risk groups?"_ Are you $h!tting me? They're doing it to themselves, FFS.

Third, unfortunate that race is not investigated...


----------



## FeXL

51% of murders committed in just 2% of US counties in 2014, all of which are Democratically controlled & have significant gun control laws.

CRPC Research Showing that most US murders occurred in 2% of Counties Covered by Fox News, Washington Times, and Others

More:



> _*Fifty-four percent of the counties in the United States had no murders committed in them in 2014, the most recent year for which the data are available. Just 2% of counties had more than half (51%) of all murders.* And murders within these “dangerous” counties are concentrated in very small areas. The study reinforces observations from cities like Chicago that have extremely high murder rates but where most of the city is considered “safe.”
> 
> The information comes from the Crime Prevention Research Center and shows just how many of the nation’s murders occur in small sections of large cities. Measurements of the data show that small areas around Los Angeles, New York, Detroit and Chicago are particularly plagued by murders. Vast portions of the Central and Mountain states have almost none.​_


M'bold.

A US county murder map.

And hey, we've got a meme for that!!!


----------



## FeXL

There goes the narrative...

Lott: Police Commit More Gun Crimes Than Concealed Carry Permit Holders



> Crime Prevention Research Center’s (CPRC) John Lott points out that *police are convicted of gun crime at a higher rate than permit holders.*
> 
> Lott’s assessment is not for the purpose of disparaging police. Instead, it is to show that concealed carry permit holders are among the most law-abiding citizens, and their armed presence on campus is a deterrent, rather than a cause for concern.
> 
> Writing in the Hill’s May 26 column, Lott highlights the left’s claims that concealed carry permit holders make college campuses less safe. He points out that the left has reacted to proposed campus carry legislation in state after state by warning that armed, law-abiding citizens on campus would make classrooms and universities more dangerous. But the danger has not materialized, even though campus carry has been in effect in some states for 14 years.


M'bold.

Like Neo noted:



> If guns really cause crime...
> 
> ...mine must be defective...


----------



## CubaMark

*8 dead in Mississippi shootings sparked by domestic dispute*










...the suspect himself gave some insight into the events that led to the shootings in an interview with a newspaper.

"I ain't fit to live, not after what I done," Cory Godbolt told The Clarion-Ledger after his arrest. The newspaper recorded video of the suspect talking as he sat with hands cuffed behind his back on a roadside surrounded by law enforcement officers.

Godbolt said he was talking with his wife and members of her family when somebody called authorities.

"I was having a conversation with her stepdaddy and her mama and her, my wife, about me taking my children home," the suspect says on the video. "Somebody called the officer, people that didn't even live at the house. That's what they do. They intervene.

'I ran out of bullets'

"They cost him his life," the suspect said, apparently in reference to the slain deputy. "I'm sorry."

The suspect also said he did not intend for police to capture him alive.

"My intentions was to have God kill me. I ran out of bullets," he said. "Suicide by cop was my intention."
(CBC)​


----------



## FeXL

So, ya wanna talk guns deaths? Good!

Let's talk Michigan, where more people are killed with guns than by traffic accidents. Suicides are the highest, followed by homicides.

Now, we can completely write all the whole suicide numbers because killing oneself is admired by the left as a noble thing and is no longer against the law in many countries.

So, let's focus on homicides. The highest numbers of homicides are in two counties: Wayne and Genesee. Wayne county is one above the bottom right corner of the map, Genesee is two above & slightly to the left of Wayne. Wayne County (population 2,061,162) contains Detroit, Genesee is also a largely urban county (population 436,141).

In Michigan between 2008-2013 there were 3015 homicides by firearm. Unfortunately, there is no data available as to exactly what gun clubs the killers belonged to. Black males are predominantly the victims in gun homicides. No surprise, as black males are doing most of the killing.

Curious, that gun control doesn't seem to be working. Could it be that black males of a certain lifestyle simply refuse to register their weapons?  That many of the political left simply refuse to abide by what their lawmakers proscribe? :yikes: Nah...

Curious that Detroit is a Dem stronghold & has been under Dem rule since 1962.

Of course, we could also compare New Orleans, Chicago, Baltimore, etc., if we were so inclined. All Dem strongholds, all have gun control to varying degrees.

You'd be sorely tempted to think that there was some relationship between lawlessness, the political left and firearms...



CubaMark said:


> 8 dead in Mississippi shootings sparked by domestic dispute


----------



## FeXL

Hey! Now they can all be like the young, black, urban males...

Michigan state house passes concealed carry without permits bill



> There’s something afoot in Michigan which will come as welcome news to Second Amendment supporters around the nation. The state house passed a new bill this week which, if signed into law by Governor Rick Snyder, would make it legal for residents to carry their handguns concealed without needing any special permit to do so.


That said, I agree with this:



> While the idea of more accessible concealed carry is something I support, I’ll confess that even I have a few reservations about another of the bills in this Michigan package. Currently you need to have some basic firearms training to carry but this new proposal would remove that requirement.
> 
> ...
> 
> But eliminating the requirement entirely is worrisome.
> 
> ...
> 
> Since the Michigan bill is broken up into multiple parts, it’s possible that we could get the concealed carry portion passed but hang on to (and improve) the training portion. At least that’s how I’d like to see it play out.


Yep.


----------



## Macfury

Another crazed Bernie supporter on the rampage:

Suspect identified in shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise at baseball practice: AP | CTV News


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Another crazed Bernie supporter on the rampage:


Going to post more about this in the Anti-Prog Thread.


----------



## Freddie_Biff

Macfury said:


> Another crazed Bernie supporter on the rampage:
> 
> 
> 
> Suspect identified in shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise at baseball practice: AP | CTV News




Well at least he wasn't Muslim. Just a good ol' gun lovin' American boy. Travel Ban wouldn't have stopped him.


----------



## Macfury

Freddie_Biff said:


> Well at least he wasn't Muslim. Just a good ol' gun lovin' American boy. Travel Ban wouldn't have stopped him.


Only a Progressive ban would work.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs it when a liberal gets a gun. Fifty shots & five hits, none mortal.

And, he ain't no "good ol' boy". He's a Sanders supporting Prog who thinks death by firearm is a solution. The iron...



Freddie_Biff said:


> Just a good ol' gun lovin' American boy.


----------



## FeXL

You go, girl!

NYT Readers Get Upset When a Black Woman Gets a Gun



> Antonia Okafor is a black graduate student who carries a gun for self-defense and some of the New York Times readership is extremely bothered by it.
> 
> On July 24 Okafor wrote a NYT opinion piece, in which she explained why she owns a gun, why she carries it, and why she thinks campus carry is the most logical way to empower women to protect themselves from predators in the university setting.
> 
> She wrote of life before she carried a gun, of leaving the university classroom late at night, walking “through the sprawling parking lots” to get to her car. She had a rape whistle and a cell phone–neither of which are weapons, much less defensive weapons. She said, “I would pray no one was lurking in dimly lit areas or behind cars.” And she explained her fear was real, rather than imagined, as she had been assaulted as a child.


----------



## CubaMark

*One dead, at least three injured in high school shooting in Rockford, Wash.*










A shooter opened fire at a high school in Washington state Wednesday, killing one person and injuring at least three others, authorities said.

Brian Schaeffer of the Spokane Fire Department told reporters that one person died at Freeman High School in the tiny town of Rockford, south of Spokane, and three injured victims were taken to a hospital.

Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center and Children's Hospital received three pediatric patients, spokeswoman Nicole Stewart said. They were in stable condition, and family members were with them, she said.

Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich said at the scene that the shooter was in custody, The Spokesman-Review newspaper reported.
(Globe & Mail)​


----------



## CubaMark

_Looks like the school may have dropped the ball on early intervention here...._ 

*1 student killed, 3 injured in Washington state high school shooting*










The suspect, who a classmate described as being obsessed with previous school shootings, was taken into custody.

* * *​
...the suspect had brought notes in the beginning of the school year, saying he was going to do "something stupid" and might get killed or jailed. Some students alerted counselors, the teen told AP, but it wasn't clear what school officials did in response.

* * *​
...the shooter had many friends and was not bullied, calling him "nice and funny and weird" and a huge fan of the TV show "Breaking Bad." He also said the suspect was obsessed with other school shootings.

"He watched a lot of school shooting documentaries,"...
(CBC)​


----------



## CubaMark

*Drive-by shooting injures innocent bystander in Kanata*










An innocent bystander was injured in a drive-by shooting in a parking lot at the Kanata Centrum Shopping Centre overnight.

Ottawa police were called to the parking lot off Roland Michener Drive, near the Crazy Horse bar, Jack Astor's Bar & Grill and Boston Pizza, at around 2 a.m. Thursday.

A 28-year-old man suffered a serious injury and was taken to hospital. He was listed in stable condition later Thursday morning and has been co-operating with the investigation...
(CBC)​


----------



## FeXL

If only there was a gun law...

In the mean time, the cops are rounding up all duck hunters, skeet-shooters & farmers in the area. Curious that MotherCorpse hasn't noted what gun club he's from...



CubaMark said:


> Drive-by shooting injures innocent bystander in Kanata


----------



## eMacMan

Again let's do a tox screen and publish the results. If he was on or withdrawing from SSRIs let the world know. If mommy and daddy had been persuaded to put him on amphetamines to combat hyper-activity. Shout it out. Crystal Meth or Fentanyl in his blood? Why not tell us?



CubaMark said:


> _Looks like the school may have dropped the ball on early intervention here...._
> 
> *1 student killed, 3 injured in Washington state high school shooting*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The suspect, who a classmate described as being obsessed with previous school shootings, was taken into custody.
> 
> * * *​...the suspect had brought notes in the beginning of the school year, saying he was going to do "something stupid" and might get killed or jailed. Some students alerted counselors, the teen told AP, but it wasn't clear what school officials did in response.
> 
> * * *​...the shooter had many friends and was not bullied, calling him "nice and funny and weird" and a huge fan of the TV show "Breaking Bad." He also said the suspect was obsessed with other school shootings.
> 
> "He watched a lot of school shooting documentaries,"...
> (CBC)​


​


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> Again let's do a tox screen and publish the results. If he was on or withdrawing from SSRIs let the world know. If mommy and daddy had been persuaded to put him on amphetamines to combat hyper-activity. Shout it out. Crystal Meth or Fentanyl in his blood? Why not tell us?


You've mentioned the tox-screen issue many (many!) times over the years, but I've yet to see any follow-up posts on the outcomes.

As for this case... the article appears to indicate that this guy didn't suddenly snap, but had mental health issues for a long time running.


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> You've mentioned the tox-screen issue many (many!) times over the years, but I've yet to see any follow-up posts on the outcomes.
> 
> As for this case... the article appears to indicate that this guy didn't suddenly snap, but had mental health issues for a long time running.


No follow-ups because I failed to find any. 

Mental health issues begs the question was he on or withdrawing from SSRIs??? Bet you won't see an answer!


----------



## Macfury

No reporting doesn't mean he was on or withdrawing from SSRIs. I wouldn't expect them to report he was NOT taking anti-depressants.



eMacMan said:


> No follow-ups because I failed to find any.
> 
> Mental health issues begs the question was he on or withdrawing from SSRIs??? Bet you won't see an answer!


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> No reporting doesn't mean he was on or withdrawing from SSRIs. I wouldn't expect them to report he was NOT taking anti-depressants.


There are a lot of drugs that are known to scramble brain connections and possibly lead to violence or suicide. It is a listed side effect of SSRIs and some other prescription drugs used in the mental health arena. Withdrawal can be even more dangerous than the use. In any event that is good enough reason to perform tox screens and inform the public of the results. Ditto on certain street drugs.

The continual failure to follow up in this direction is disturbing to put it mildly.


----------



## SINC

Well, what can you say?

Poll: More Americans Have a Gun in Home Than Ever Before


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Well, what can you say?


US gun manufacturer's couldn't have hired a better salesman than Barry. Sales have actually gone down under Trump.


----------



## Macfury

What I'm saying is that it would not make news if the person did NOT show traces of SSRIs.



eMacMan said:


> There are a lot of drugs that are known to scramble brain connections and possibly lead to violence or suicide. It is a listed side effect of SSRIs and some other prescription drugs used in the mental health arena. Withdrawal can be even more dangerous than the use. In any event that is good enough reason to perform tox screens and inform the public of the results. Ditto on certain street drugs.
> 
> The continual failure to follow up in this direction is disturbing to put it mildly.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me a Prog with an opinion on firearms.

MSNBC Guest: Hunters Use Suppressors So Deer Can’t Hear Them



> Former FBI agent Manny Gomez claimed on MSNBC on Monday that hunters use suppressors so that deer cannot hear the gunshots.


And, hey, this topic jes' wouldn't be complete without some Prog idiocy from She Who Will Never Be POTUS, Bill's Wife:

Hillary Clinton: ‘Imagine the Deaths’ If Stephen Paddock Used a ‘Silencer’



> Following the heinous attack that resulted in 400 injuries and 50 deaths at a Las Vegas concert venue, Hillary Clinton tweeted that she could not “imagine the deaths” that would have occurred if the gunman had used a “silencer.”
> 
> Her use of the word “silencer” is leftist-speak for suppressor. It is intended to give the impression that suppressors completely mute a gun–the way they appear to do in Hollywood movies–thereby silencing the gunshot altogether.


There is, however, one tiny little light in the big picture:

CBS fires vice president who said Vegas victims didn't deserve sympathy because country music fans 'often are Republican'



> CBS has parted ways with one of the company’s top lawyers after she said she is “not even sympathetic” to victims of the Las Vegas shooting because “country music fans often are Republican,” when discussing the tragic mass shooting that occurred in Las Vegas late Sunday night.
> 
> “This individual, who was with us for approximately one year, violated the standards of our company and is no longer an employee of CBS. Her views as expressed on social media are deeply unacceptable to all of us at CBS. Our hearts go out to the victims in Las Vegas and their families,” a CBS spokeswoman told Fox News.


The biggest shock to me is that CBS actually claims to have standards... :yikes:


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> And, hey, this topic jes' wouldn't be complete without some Prog idiocy from She Who Will Never Be POTUS, Bill's Wife:
> 
> Hillary Clinton: ‘Imagine the Deaths’ If Stephen Paddock Used a ‘Silencer’


She's right though. 

You don't have to like her to admit it.

Every person interviewed from Vegas has said they heard shots ring out and that is when they reacted or ran. No one knew where the shots came from. The shooter had at least 11 guns. He was a millionaire. I'm sure adding silencers would have been on the shopping list if available. Add that and the devastation would have been even worse.

Normally we could say that her comments were bad timing but the bill was before the house, or was about to be (delayed now). 

It's a crazy thing to see that is the priority of legislation. Makes sense to point it out.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> She's right though.


No, she's not. Have you ever stood beside a firearm with a suppressor when fired?

They ain't "quiet", in any definition of the term.


----------



## SINC

Yep a suppressor has a distinctive sound all its own, and oddly enough does not sound like the imitation sounds they use in the movies.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. A reasonable article on gun control from, of all places, _Reason_.

Automatic Weapons Are Already Heavily Regulated and Gun Control Laws Don’t Work



> So for civilians, the only _legally_ available automatic rifles in the United States under federal law come from the fixed pool of such weapons that existed on May 19, 1986. With a limited supply, shrinking at least a bit over time through attrition, prices for legal machine guns have no place to go but up. A glance at Gunbroker.com, an online listing service (with actual transfers handled by licensed dealers), reveals prices starting in four figures and rapidly going to five for individual weapons.
> 
> Purchasing and owning any NFA firearm, including automatic rifles/machine guns requires undergoing a background check and entering the weapon in the National Firearm Registration and Transfer Record, which is "the central registry of all NFA firearms in the U.S. which are not in the possession or under the control of the U.S. Government," according to the ATF National Firearms Act Handbook. This handbook is an excellent resource for familiarizing yourself with the federal regulation of automatic rifles/machine guns and other NFA firearms. You might want to put aside some time if you decide to peruse it since, including preface and appendices, the book is 220 pages long.
> 
> Which is to say, short of outright prohibition, *automatic rifles are subject to just about every rule and restriction that has been proposed by opponents of easy civilian possession.* If the weapon Paddock used in his rampage was legally acquired and owned, it was done so in accordance with laws intended "to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions" in such firearms in the words of federal regulators themselves.


More:



> But what if Paddock's weapons were illegally acquired, or illegally converted to automatic, or were semiautomatic weapons mistakenly identified as machine guns?
> 
> *Black markets and illegal acts exist everywhere, under every legal regime.* I've written at length about the long history, not just in the United States, but around the world, of overwhelming defiance of gun laws.


Bold mine.

Good read.


----------



## CubaMark

(Bruce MacKinnon / Halifax Chronicle-Herald)​


----------



## pm-r

SINC said:


> Yep a suppressor has a distinctive sound all its own, and oddly enough _*does not sound like the imitation sounds they use in the movies*_.



Surprise, surprise… No. 

Not like all the _*exploding flames*_ from all that butane and propane they seem to like to overuse. At least it's realistic.


----------



## CubaMark

*Australia Offers To Help The U.S. With Gun Law Reform*

Australia knows all about gun law reform. The country has not experienced a mass shooting since the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, and it credits stricter gun control laws enacted after that incident for its dramatic drop in gun violence.

Now, in the wake of the attack in Las Vegas, Australia has extended a helping hand to America, which has endured more than 270 mass shootings this year.

Speaking to Australia’s Channel 9 TV station on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said the country would be more than happy to lend its expertise in this area to the U.S. 

“What Australia can do is share our experience after the mass killing in Port Arthur back in the late 1990s, when 35 people were killed by a lone gunman,” said Bishop, per The Washington Post. “You will recall that [then-Prime Minister] John Howard then introduced national gun laws, which banned automatic and semiautomatic weapons and included a national buyback scheme. We have had this experience. We acted with a legislative response.”

Just last week, Australia concluded a three-month national gun amnesty, in which people could surrender their unregistered, illegal or unwanted firearms to local authorities without fear of penalty or prosecution. More than 26,000 firearms were turned in....
(YahooNews)​


----------



## Rps

CubaMark, the U.S. has more guns than people, recent estimates place the number of guns at well over 300 million, so at the Australian rates that’s only 46,153 months or 3,846 years. But you have to start somewhere.....fear is the answer, once you can take fear away maybe the reason for ownership will drop......changing the culture is a slow process...often requiring radical measures.


----------



## wonderings

Rps said:


> CubaMark, the U.S. has more guns than people, recent estimates place the number of guns at well over 300 million, so at the Australian rates that’s only 46,153 months or 3,846 years. But you have to start somewhere.....fear is the answer, once you can take fear away maybe the reason for ownership will drop......changing the culture is a slow process...often requiring radical measures.


How Australia even thinks they understand the gun control issues the US has is laughable. Was just looking at stats and Australia had 25 guns per 100 people. The US has 112 guns per 100 people and that is from 2007 so is probably even higher now. Sounds like someone in Australia just wants some press. It is not just about guns, it is about culture and that is far more difficult to change. Just taking away guns will do nothing but create more violence, you need to change the minds of a few hundred million people.


----------



## Rps

+1 on your post Wonderings......but you do need to start somewhere. Banning auto and semi auto and military grade weapons would be a good start. First steps in culture change.....maybe....but sensible.


----------



## wonderings

Rps said:


> +1 on your post Wonderings......but you do need to start somewhere. Banning auto and semi auto and military grade weapons would be a good start. First steps in culture change.....maybe....but sensible.


oh I agree, I guess I am just a bit more pessimistic. The guns this nut job used in Vegas were modded to make them fully automatic from what i heard on the radio. I do not think it is a hard thing to turn a semi into a fully automatic killing machine. And again the guns are out there, in the millions. The guns in themselves are not bad, it is the people using them. Not sure how you fix crazy, especially when it seems to come out of the blue as it did with this guy in Vegas.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> No, she's not. Have you ever stood beside a firearm with a suppressor when fired?
> 
> They ain't "quiet", in any definition of the term.


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc_8QMltpnU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc_8QMltpnU[/ame]


Take a look. Sounds a lot quieter to me.

He was on 32nd floor. So there is no point in talking about standing next to a suppressed rifle. 

Everything is louder when you get closer to it.

It's simple. People were alerted to the shooting by the sounds of the shots. And anything that makes those shots quieter is going to cost live in this type of situation.

Time was everything. 59 dead, over 500 injured.


----------



## Beej

smashedbanana said:


> Take a look. Sounds a lot quieter to me.


Thanks for the posted video.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> Take a look. Sounds a lot quieter to me.


Sure does.

It's also a YT video with who knows what type of fidelity in the first place, what type of auto-level controls were in place on the video recorder & what type of monkeying with sound levels has been done in post.

Not convincing.

The article I linked to noted a 30db reduction (from 162 to 132). On a logarithmic scale, that's significant: 3 orders of magnitude. But 132db is still as loud as a jackhammer. You ever heard a jackhammer down the street? Say, 2 blocks (~620') away? Very noticeable, even with traffic as background noise. The shooting distance would have been less than that.

BTW, I have a friend with a legally obtained AR-15 chambered in .223/5.56 & have accompanied him to the range with it. He has no suppressor & I assure you that it's a helluva lot louder than that video, even with ears on.


----------



## FeXL

What's this?! Two WaPo articles in the same day worth reading? :yikes:

I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.



> Before I started researching gun deaths, gun-control policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-sense gun-control reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
> 
> Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way. *We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.*


Yeah, my bold.

Excellent read.

Related (& where the link to the above article comes from):



> What progressives mean when they talk about "common sense gun safety laws" is simple widespread gun confiscation. They claim they _don't_ want that, and yet, every time this issue comes up, they point to Australian and Britain as models of what we should do -- countries in which there was a state-enforced near-complete involuntary disarmament of the population.
> 
> So which is it, progs? Do you want full-on confiscation or not?


The former, of course...

Related, too:

The media doesn't understand guns -- and doesn't want to



> The American political left and mainstream media pundits at large do not understand guns. They are not educated about them and they refuse to learn about them. They could not tell you the difference between an automatic or semi-automatic firearm. They don’t understand what a suppressor does or does not do. It’s safe to say most of them have not heard the term “bump stock” until this week.
> 
> What they are, however, is convinced that we need more laws to prevent mass shootings like the one in Las Vegas from happening ever again – and they will host guest after guest on their shows who are not experts in firearms, or firearm training, to lecture the American public at large about why this needs to happen.
> 
> If anyone out there on that side of the aisle is wondering why your pleas to “do something” are falling on mostly deaf ears,that would be why.


----------



## CubaMark

Is there ever a situation when the pro-gun crowd doesn't think that what we need are just more guns?

Jeebus.

Maybe if the USA had a little more common sense and provided decent medical care (generally) and mental health care (specifically), there wouldn't be so many of these incidents. Maybe eMacMan's right about the influence of prescription medication. 

Sadly, it's the same gun-nut Republican crowd that pushes deregulation of firearms that simultaneously does everything possible to prevent improved health care. 

(Not so) Funny, that.

XX)


----------



## Macfury

Obama could have created all of the mental health care programs he wanted when he had a supermajority.


----------



## FeXL

Precisely whom, anywhere on these boards, has ever advocated for more firearms? Be specific.



CubaMark said:


> Is there ever a situation when the pro-gun crowd doesn't think that what we need are just more guns?


Hey, Progs push the right to kill yourself. That means half to 2/3's of American deaths by firearm shouldn't even show up on your radar. In addition, most American suicides are by older white males, a demographic that Progs despise anyway. 

Why all the sudden concern about "mental health"? 'Cause it pushes the narrative?



CubaMark said:


> Maybe if the USA had a little more common sense and provided decent medical care (generally) and mental health care (specifically), there wouldn't be so many of these incidents.


----------



## Macfury

The left simply wants no American citizen to own guns. Anything is a reason to abrogate the Second Amendment. They can't cancel it, so they chip away a tiny piece at a time--choice of weapon, availability of ammo, etc. If they wanted guns limited only to hunting rifles, it would take about a day for them to start working on a ban on hunting for environmental reasons. 

The right to bear arms was a guarantee that the government could never turn totalitarian--it basically told citizens that the government would never monopolize force and backed the deal by ensuring that citizens would always be allowed to own firearms: "We know you can't trust us, so keep us honest."



FeXL said:


> Precisely whom, anywhere on these boards, has ever advocated for more firearms? Be specific.
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, Progs push the right to kill yourself. That means half to 2/3's of American deaths by firearm shouldn't even show up on your radar. In addition, most American suicides are by older white males, a demographic that Progs despise anyway.
> 
> Why all the sudden concern about "mental health"? 'Cause it pushes the narrative?


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> The left simply wants no American citizen to own guns. Anything is a reason to abrogate the Second Amendment. They can't cancel it, so they chip away a tiny piece at a time--choice of weapon, availability of ammo, etc. If they wanted guns limited only to hunting rifles, it would take about a day for them to start working on a ban on hunting for environmental reasons.
> 
> The right to bear arms was a guarantee that the government could never turn totalitarian--it basically told citizens that the government would never monopolize force and backed the deal by ensuring that citizens would always be allowed to own firearms: "We know you can't trust us, so keep us honest."


Sadly this has not prevented the US government from pretty much demolishing the rest of the Bill of Rights. Moreover if there are more than a dozen honest Congressmen or Senators they have certainly kept their existence well hidden. 

Best way to look at it is this: If the government tells you, you don't need guns, you need a gun!


----------



## Macfury

I agree. In large part, Americans no longer know many of their rights, or care about them when they are abrogated. 



eMacMan said:


> Sadly this has not prevented the US government from pretty much demolishing the rest of the Bill of Rights. Moreover if there are more than a dozen honest Congressmen or Senators they have certainly kept their existence well hidden.
> 
> Best way to look at it is this: If the government tells you, you don't need guns, you need a gun!


----------



## FeXL

Oh, I can _hardly_ wait...

Liberals promise to introduce new gun control legislation this year



> Despite promising more than two years ago to make it harder for “criminals to get, and use, handguns and assault weapons,” the Liberal Party has been slow to enact its promised reforms.
> 
> This spring the Saskatoon StarPhoenix learned that the government had deferred the introduction of a controversial firearm marking scheme by 18 months despite promising to introduce the long-delayed rules “immediately.”


"Clips!!!" "Silencers!!!" "Machine guns!!!" "Assault Weapons!!!"

XX)XX)XX)

The good news is they won't p!$$ off many more than they already have with carbon taxes, legalizing pot, tax changes, killing pipelines, etc, etc, etc...


----------



## FeXL

Before I say anything else, observe her proper weapons handling technique. Too thick to index her trigger finger, yet these idiots are the ones pushing gun control.

DIANNE FEINSTEIN ADMITS GUN CONTROL DOESN’T WORK, INTRODUCES GUN CONTROL BILL ANYWAYS



> Here’s how things work on the left: following a mass shooting liberals demand gun control laws that wouldn’t have stopped the tragedy while citing the shooting as a need for these ineffective restrictions. What they never do is admit that their knee-jerk “solutions” are completely pointless in stopping crime, but all of that changed on Sunday. *In a stunning admission, Dianne “gun grabber” Feinstein said that no gun law current or proposed would have stopped Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock from killing 58 and wounding 500 more. Don’t worry, she’s still pushing gun control legislation anyways, because that’s what liberals do.*


Further (and you've just gotta love this twisted Prog logic):



> “The NRA says that guns don’t kill people. People kill people. Well, cars don’t kill people. People driving cars kill people,” Feinstein said.


:yikes::yikes::yikes:

Can't argue with that now, can we?


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Sure does.
> 
> It's also a YT video with who knows what type of fidelity in the first place, what type of auto-level controls were in place on the video recorder & what type of monkeying with sound levels has been done in post.
> 
> Not convincing.
> 
> The article I linked to noted a 30db reduction (from 162 to 132). On a logarithmic scale, that's significant: 3 orders of magnitude. But 132db is still as loud as a jackhammer. You ever heard a jackhammer down the street? Say, 2 blocks (~620') away? Very noticeable, even with traffic as background noise. The shooting distance would have been less than that.
> 
> BTW, I have a friend with a legally obtained AR-15 chambered in .223/5.56 & have accompanied him to the range with it. He has no suppressor & I assure you that it's a helluva lot louder than that video, even with ears on.


Again, I am not saying an AR-15 is quiet. All I have said it a suppressed AR-15 is quieter and that will make a difference in a situation where sound is the identifying factor in alerting people to a shooting. Especially is THIS scenario where people were 32 floors away and a concert was on. 

Hillary made that point in relation to the bill, the vote and the timing.

For you information,

I know exactly how loud .223/5.56 is
I have fired a C7 and an M16

Can't compare with a jackhammer. Hard to compare a gunshot with anything really. A jackhammer is loud and continuous. If I isolated a jackhammer noise and played it for 1 second then a gap and again and again what would it sound like? A gunshot.


----------



## Beej

smashedbanana said:


> All I have said it a suppressed AR-15 is quieter and that will make a difference in a situation where sound is the identifying factor in alerting people to a shooting.


This is clear to me. Although I would replace "will" with "can". Thanks for your posts.


----------



## Macfury

I think it's important to make a distinction between gun laws that will probably not dissuade motivated killers like the Vegas shooter, and those that will dissuade the laziest and least motivated. Banning silencers would _possibly_ lead to some snipers being discovered a few seconds earlier. Those lower down the criminal food chain probably never even considered the use of silencers to pop off one or two shots. I don't see silencers as being a major issue.

Even the notion of banning bump stocks makes me wonder how many people use them in the course of committing murder? Would the Vegas shooter have been dissuaded without them?

Given that two-thirds of US gun deaths are suicides and a significant number of what's left is gang violence, which laws might dissuade the greatest number of people from committing murder, while respecting the guarantees of the Second Amendment?


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> I think it's important to make a distinction between gun laws that will probably not dissuade motivated killers like the Vegas shooter, and those that will dissuade the laziest and least motivated. Banning silencers would _possibly_ lead to some snipers being discovered a few seconds earlier. Those lower down the criminal food chain probably never even considered the use of silencers to pop off one or two shots. I don't see silencers as being a major issue.
> 
> Even the notion of banning bump stocks makes me wonder how many people use them in the course of committing murder? Would the Vegas shooter have been dissuaded without them?
> 
> Given that two-thirds of US gun deaths are suicides and a significant number of what's left is gang violence, which laws might dissuade the greatest number of people from committing murder, while respecting the guarantees of the Second Amendment?


The challenge is the law now makes it difficult to buy silencers. Not impossible, just difficult. The new bill will make it easier. And good luck getting that door closed again. We've seen even the most basic control legislation fail hard even after Sandy Hook.

We've seen all of the things used in mass shootings that legislation has tried to restrict. Body armour, ar15s, high capacity magazines, etc. etc. Seems prudent to think Silencers will get added to the shopping list. 

Right now under the current restrictions a silencers for AR15s starts at $350. 

I can't speak to the motivations of the shooter. No one can as it seems.

I agree silencers will not impact gang violence or suicide data significantly or at all. The comments about silencers have been in relation to mass shootings only.


----------



## Macfury

I consider mass murderers to be amongst the most motivated killers, so I doubt any legislation will affect them. Mass killings by shooters kill an average of 40 people per year in the US--this year is an anomaly--so about 1 per cent of all gun murders. Would seem to me that silencers and bump stocks are the wrong topic for common sense legislation.


----------



## FeXL

Well, I wonder if the Progs are going to lose their sh...minds over this or if it's suddenly going to be _au courant_ to support firearm use...

Antifa, Which Routinely Attacks Citizens Without Provocation in "Self Defense," Now Pushing Gun Ownership and Shooting Practice, Also for "Self-Defense"



> The leftist media always freaks out about right-wing militias and suvivalists and dangerous gun-crazy anti-government radicals.
> 
> Think they'll freak out about a left-wing terrorist group with a long and bloody history of assaults and vandalism arming up, explicitly for "revolution"?
> 
> Or do you suppose they'll be a bit more sympathetic? Perhaps we'll even see some positive pieces about leftwingers "getting in touch" with America's gun culture.
> 
> Well, you don't have to wait for that -- *the Buzzfeed piece Sexton links and critiques has "bought into" Antifa's line about arming up for "self-defense."* Obviously.


M'bold.

As always, hypocrites...XX)


----------



## FeXL

Further on Progs & weapons.

LGBTQ gun club

I'm going to head down to the last sentence:



> But Trigger Warning members stress that this isn’t an arms race. *They are about empowerment and self-defence, not offence.*


Wait a minute. Are we listening to an NRA ad here? 

I'm guessing the irony went whoosh...


----------



## CubaMark

*Here we go again - another massacre in the USA:*

*At least 20 dead and 30 injured in Texas church shooting*










At least 20 people were killed and 30 injured in a Texas church shooting Sunday morning, law enforcement sources told ABC News.

The alleged shooter is dead, and it appears there is no longer an active threat at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, about 40 miles southeast of San Antonio, police told ABC News affiliate KSAT in San Antonio on Sunday afternoon.
(YahooNews)​
*Not to worry, though.* _Twitter and Facebook are both alight with brave souls selflessly offering their Hopes and Prayers so that this doesn't happen again_ XX)


----------



## FeXL

Soon to be followed by a cadre of leftist gun control nuts...



CubaMark said:


> Not to worry, though. Twitter and Facebook are both alight with brave souls selflessly offering their Hopes and Prayers so that this doesn't happen again


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Soon to be followed by a cadre of leftist gun control nuts...


Please, enlighten us, what is your suggestion as to how to curb gun violence in general, and these unique-to-the-USA mass shootings specifically.

Give it a thunk. I'll go get some popcorn.

XX)


----------



## CubaMark

*UPDATE:* _ Still no official identification of the shooter, but the name going around has changed to _ "*Devin Patrick Kelley*", _a white male in his 20s._

Shooter has been tentatively identified as "Chris Ward". Apparently he shot his family to death first, before turning to other parishoners. 

(From various Twitter posts; cops say shooter has been identified, but haven't officially released his name)


----------



## Macfury

Looks like we have to stamp out atheism.

Texas church shooter Devin Kelley was an 'outcast' | Daily Mail Online


> The Texas church shooter who mercilessly shot dead 26 people and injured 24 others was an 'outcast' who 'preached his atheism' online.





CubaMark said:


> *UPDATE:* _ Still no official identification of the shooter, but the name going around has changed to _ "*Devin Patrick Kelley*", _a white male in his 20s._
> 
> Shooter has been tentatively identified as "Chris Ward". Apparently he shot his family to death first, before turning to other parishoners.
> 
> (From various Twitter posts; cops say shooter has been identified, but haven't officially released his name)


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Looks like we have to stamp out atheism.


Yep. That's the solution.

Thing is, the poor fellow likely had mental issues which were not his fault. He wasn't a bad person. Everybody in the neighbourhood loved him. His mother probably didn't give him enough hugs whilst growing up. He was obviously bullied as a young chap by meanies from the left. 'Course, global warming had a hand in this. Too, he just wasn't thinking about the consequences & merely got caught up in the moment; his adrenaline levels were high. Don't forget that he was oppressed, angry at all the injustices and regularly victimized. He didn't understand his white privilege. After all, it is part & parcel of contemporary living in a big city...


----------



## FeXL

FeXL said:


> Soon to be followed by a cadre of leftist gun control nuts...


Surprise, surprise, surprise......

Obama Uses Texas Church Massacre To Call For Fewer Guns



> Former President Barack Obama used the Texas church shooting that left 26 people dead on Sunday to call for fewer guns.
> 
> Obama said that Americans should ask God for “the wisdom to ask what concrete steps we can take to reduce the violence and weaponry in our midst.”


More:



> Obama, who has taken an unusually active role during his successor’s administration, *offered no specific details* on what those steps to reduce the guns “in our midst” would look like.


Yeah, my bold.

Didn't think so...


----------



## FeXL

I have few issues with the legal side of firearm ownership in the US.

By far, the lion's share of deaths by firearm in the US (not counting suicides, which I remind you, are fine by the left) are with illegal guns & black male shooters. There's your _actual problem_.

What's your solution to the _actual problem_? BTW, taking firearms away from legal, largely law-abiding citizens country-wide is _not_ a solution.



CubaMark said:


> Please, enlighten us, what is your suggestion as to how to curb gun violence in general, and these unique-to-the-USA mass shootings specifically.


----------



## wonderings

Seems guns in the hand of a citizen might have actually done some good. 
"As the shooter left the church, a local resident used his own rifle to engage him, Martin said. The gunman dropped his weapon and fled."
taken from Texas church shooting: Of 26 dead, 8 came from same family - CNN


and more about the man who grabbed his rifle and caused the mass murdered to flee 
The Texas church massacre could have been worse if not for one man - CNN


----------



## Rps

We’ve been down this road before. Gun Culture in the U.S. is just that culture......and cultural changes are glacial in changing. Let’s take a look at a model which worked on changing a culture.....drinking and driving. Would anyone here think drinking and driving is fine, a right? MADD worked and continues to work on this issue. One of the things they did was build a wish list so let’s look at it.

2002, MADD announced its "Eight-Point Plan". This consisted of:

Resuscitating the nation's efforts to prevent impaired driving. ( gun control )

Increasing driving while intoxicated (DWI)/driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement, especially the use of frequent, highly publicized sobriety checkpoints. ( more rigorous check on open carry and carrying loaded weapons in motor vehicles, ride checks for guns )

Enacting primary enforcement seat belt laws in all states. ( not sure what the equivalent would be, maybe draconian enforcement of existing laws )

Creating tougher, more comprehensive sanctions geared toward higher-risk drivers. ( gun carriers )

Developing a dedicated National Traffic Safety Fund. ( similar fund for gun actions )

Reducing underage drinking. ( gun ownership and use )

Increasing beer excise taxes to the same level as those for spirits. ( taxes on weapons and bullets )

Reinvigorating court monitoring programs.[17]

none of these challenge Second Amend Rights...... it would be a good start for a change in culture.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> We’ve been down this road before.


While this is an interesting exercise in and of itself, I believe it fails right out of the gate.

Firearm ownership in the US is a right specifically addressed & guaranteed by the Constitution. It's far more than merely "gun culture". 

Driving a vehicle drunk, sober, stoned or otherwise, is not guaranteed. In my view, driving a vehicle approaches a "cultural" perspective in the US far closer than firearm ownership.


----------



## Rps

FeXL said:


> While this is an interesting exercise in and of itself, I believe it fails right out of the gate.
> 
> Firearm ownership in the US is a right specifically addressed & guaranteed by the Constitution. It's far more than merely "gun culture".
> 
> Driving a vehicle drunk, sober, stoned or otherwise, is not guaranteed. In my view, driving a vehicle approaches a "cultural" perspective in the US far closer than firearm ownership.


Well there is some truth to what you say, however gun ownership, although a “right” does require a licence.......the above recommendations would simply be an augmentation to the licence process.....but as with anything you gotta wanna!


----------



## Macfury

These are false equivalencies. "Gun control" and "drunk driving" are not parallels. That would be "gun ownership" and "the right to buy/drink alcohol". Or "drunk driving" and "shooting people."



Rps said:


> We’ve been down this road before. Gun Culture in the U.S. is just that culture......and cultural changes are glacial in changing. Let’s take a look at a model which worked on changing a culture.....drinking and driving. Would anyone here think drinking and driving is fine, a right? MADD worked and continues to work on this issue. One of the things they did was build a wish list so let’s look at it.
> 
> 2002, MADD announced its "Eight-Point Plan". This consisted of:
> 
> Resuscitating the nation's efforts to prevent impaired driving. ( gun control )
> 
> Increasing driving while intoxicated (DWI)/driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement, especially the use of frequent, highly publicized sobriety checkpoints. ( more rigorous check on open carry and carrying loaded weapons in motor vehicles, ride checks for guns )
> 
> Enacting primary enforcement seat belt laws in all states. ( not sure what the equivalent would be, maybe draconian enforcement of existing laws )
> 
> Creating tougher, more comprehensive sanctions geared toward higher-risk drivers. ( gun carriers )
> 
> Developing a dedicated National Traffic Safety Fund. ( similar fund for gun actions )
> 
> Reducing underage drinking. ( gun ownership and use )
> 
> Increasing beer excise taxes to the same level as those for spirits. ( taxes on weapons and bullets )
> 
> Reinvigorating court monitoring programs.[17]
> 
> none of these challenge Second Amend Rights...... it would be a good start for a change in culture.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> These are false equivalencies. "Gun control" and "drunk driving" are not parallels. That would be "gun ownership" and "the right to buy/drink alcohol". Or "drunk driving" and "shooting people."


Well we can play lawyer all day but the right to buy alcohol and drunk driving seem strongly related to me. Any change requires a will to change.....without that we will be filling up the space here in another 2 weeks with talks about another mass shooting.

We can a least agree you have to start somewhere.....


----------



## Macfury

The US could start by enforcing the laws currently on its books.



Rps said:


> Well we can play lawyer all day but the right to buy alcohol and drunk driving seem strongly related to me. Any change requires a will to change.....without that we will be filling up the space here in another 2 weeks with talks about another mass shooting.
> 
> We can a least agree you have to start somewhere.....


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> The US could start by enforcing the laws currently on its books.


Oh I very much agree there.

An after thought after I posted, maybe a harmonization of state laws into one national one.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Oh I very much agree there.
> 
> An after thought after I posted, maybe a harmonization of state laws into one national one.


I am not a fan of nationalization of anything. If anything, giving the federal government too much power to compel citizens to dance to the same tune is what's causing the cultural schism in the US.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> I am not a fan of nationalization of anything. If anything, giving the federal government too much power to compel citizens to dance to the same tune is what's causing the cultural schism in the US.


Point taken, however some “nationalization” can be beneficial. The trouble is the U.S. is basically 50 countries in 5 economic regions....makes consistent application very difficult.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> Point taken, however some “nationalization” can be beneficial. The trouble is the U.S. is basically 50 countries in 5 economic regions....makes consistent application very difficult.


I think the loose federal structure initially enacted recognized the impossibility of extensive national government.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Looks like we have to stamp out atheism.
> 
> Texas church shooter Devin Kelley was an 'outcast' | Daily Mail Online


Depends on whether you consider the Daily Mail an authoritative new source.

*From the DM opinion / reaction piece to which you linked:*

_Devin Patrick Kelley, the 26-year-old who stormed First Baptist Church in Texas and shot and killed 26 and wounded scores more, was *described by former school classmates as an “outcast” and atheist* who used social media to mock Christianity.

Too bad for the mainstream media, which no doubt would’ve loved to make the case that Kelley was a card-carrying Christian, a Bible-thumping Republican, a tea party type conservative to the core.

Turns out: He’s reportedly a wicked atheist with no moral compass. Hey — that’s rather like many of the left now, isn’t it? Can you say antifa, anyone?

“He had a kid or two, fairly normal, but kind of quiet and lately seemed depressed,” said Patrick Boyce, *who attended New Braunfels High School with Kelley*, the Daily Mail reported. 

“*He was the first atheist I met.* He went [into the] Air Force after high school, got discharged, but I don’t know why.”_​
*Now, contrast that bit of in-depth, investigative reporting with this account from the Independent UK:*

_Kelley was married and it is believed he have *taught a Bible studies* at Kingsville First Baptist Church._​
So the question is, which holds more weight. The opinions of a classmate from a decade ago, or the recent bible-thumping status of the shooter?

I'm not saying that becoming a Christian made him a killer. But neither, apparently, did his high school flirting with atheism.


----------



## CubaMark

wonderings said:


> Seems guns in the hand of a citizen might have actually done some good.
> "As the shooter left the church, a local resident used his own rifle to engage him, Martin said. The gunman dropped his weapon and fled.".....


Why are the "good guys" always so late to the event? Nobody in the church was packing? Texas, an "open carry" state, with all those guns around, did nothing to dissuade this guy from his evil deed? Where's the deterrent that gun rights advocates speak of?


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> Why are the "good guys" always so late to the event? Nobody in the church was packing? Texas, an "open carry" state, with all those guns around, did nothing to dissuade this guy from his evil deed? Where's the deterrent that gun rights advocates speak of?


Well, for one thing church would be the last place anyone would even think of packin' iron. Ya think?

The guy who was armed and engaged him was *right outside the church* and stopped any further bloodshed.


----------



## FeXL

First off, better late than never.

Second, if somebody had actually been packing in church, that would just add fuel to your fire about all those gun-toting crazies. Can't have it both ways. Which is it?

Third, you've always claimed that these stories about gun owners coming to the rescue are one-offs that rarely happen. I invite you to have a gander at this link & read the posts called "[Day of the week] morning feel good stories". Nearly every day he points to multiple stories where legal firearm owners "save the day".

Fourth (and from the same blog), comes this little nugget. Apparently the killer had been convicted of committing domestic violence against his family. This would have been enough to stop him from legally purchasing a firearm.



> So he either purchased the gun he used illegally or he just didn’t bother to be truthful on the form and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) failed to flag his purchase.


So, all the laws in the world either don't stop you from acquiring a firearm if you really want one, or the NICS system broke down somewhere.

Tell me, CM, exactly what gun law would you prescribe that would have stopped this tragedy from happening? Be specific...



CubaMark said:


> Why are the "good guys" always so late to the event? Nobody in the church was packing? Texas, an "open carry" state, with all those guns around, did nothing to dissuade this guy from his evil deed? Where's the deterrent that gun rights advocates speak of?


----------



## wonderings

SINC said:


> Well, for one thing church would be the last place anyone would even think of packin' iron. Ya think?
> 
> The guy who was armed and engaged him was *right outside the church* and stopped any further bloodshed.


Exactly. Was not sure what the point was in that comment. Because people are packing and there are a lot of guns does not mean everyone is walking around, it is actually unfortunate no one was carrying in church as this could have potentially been stopped completely with the only casualty being the man trying to gun everyone down.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> So, all the laws in the world either don't stop you from acquiring a firearm if you really want one, or the NICS system broke down somewhere.
> 
> Tell me, CM, exactly what gun law would you prescribe that would have stopped this tragedy from happening? Be specific...


Every delay in the process of obtaining a firearm is an opportunity to weed out folks who just shouldn't have one, like this guy.

And in the case of Texas in particular (my bold):

Investigators were looking at social media posts Kelley made in the days before the attack, including one appearing to show an* AR-15 rifle* with the caption "She's a bad b****."

The Ruger AR-556 is a variant of the popular AR-15 rifle, known for being highly customisable.

The model which appeared in Kelley's Facebook post has a recommended retail price of $849 (£647).

The magazine-fed, gas-operated, semi-automatic rifle is based on the military's M-16 rifle.

However, unlike the M-16, the AR-15 does not have burst or automatic fire modes. Each pull of the trigger fires one shot.

But *some modifications*, such as the bump-stock used in the Las Vegas shooting, *can significantly increase the rate-of-fire*.

It is unknown whether the Texas church shooter had modified his rifle.

Typically, the AR-15 is loaded with a 30-round magazine, but larger magazines with a capacity for *75 to 100 rounds are also available*. 

There is no limit in Texas to the amount of ammo rifles can be loaded with.

*In Texas, AR-15 rifles can be purchased without a permit or waiting period.*

*The weapon does not need to be registered and people are allowed to openly carry them without a permit. *

While a license is required to carry a handgun in Texas, it is not required for a rifle.
(Independent UK)​


----------



## FeXL

Fine.

So what's your solution? Increase red tape & delays until people just give up?

Stunning...



CubaMark said:


> Every delay in the process of obtaining a firearm is an opportunity to weed out folks who just shouldn't have one, like this guy.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Firearm ownership in the US is a right specifically addressed & guaranteed by the Constitution. It's far more than merely "gun culture".


I'm cool with this. So long as the right is to bear the arms that were in existence at the time that the 2nd Amendment was written:









*Here's What Firearms Looked Like When The Founding Fathers Wrote The Second Amendment*


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

Why not ban Erica Buist after outlawing guns simply leaves more people vulnerable to attacks by criminals using guns?


----------



## Freddie_Biff

CubaMark said:


> I'm cool with this. So long as the right is to bear the arms that were in existence at the time that the 2nd Amendment was written:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Here's What Firearms Looked Like When The Founding Fathers Wrote The Second Amendment*




You make a good point. I don't think they would have permitted semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons as part of the Constitution back in 1776.


----------



## Macfury

The weapons covered at the time it was written represented the state of the art. It was designed to present a force equal to that owned by government at the time. Not sure that you are correct in your assessment. 



Freddie_Biff said:


> You make a good point. I don't think they would have permitted semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons as part of the Constitution back in 1776.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me sum good, ol' fashioned Prog logic on display...



CubaMark said:


> I'm cool with this. So long as the right is to bear the arms that were in existence at the time that the 2nd Amendment was written:


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Rps

CubaMark, how about this....it’s the 311th day of the year and there has been 378 mass shootings in the U.S. in 2017.


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> CubaMark, how about this....it’s the 311th day of the year and there has been 378 mass shootings in the U.S. in 2017.


OK. How many of them have been by _legal_ firearm owners?


----------



## Macfury

According to the database definition, the mass shootings aren't necessarily fatal. In fact, few of them involve fatalities. However, most of them involve unknown criminal assailants.



FeXL said:


> OK. How many of them have been by _legal_ firearm owners?


----------



## Rps

FeXL said:


> OK. How many of them have been by _legal_ firearm owners?


Legal gun ownership isn’t the issue with the above post, it’s the number of mass shootings, which you know very well......I’m not biting FeXL.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> According to the database definition, the mass shootings aren't necessarily fatal. In fact, few of them involve fatalities. However, most of them involve unknown criminal assailants.


Well that’s a relief, and here I thought it was a problem!


----------



## FeXL

Rps said:


> Legal gun ownership isn’t the issue with the above post, it’s the n7mber of mass shootings.


It's precisely my point. The hue & cry from gun control advocates is that we need more laws. 

My point is, legal gun owners are among the most law-abiding people in the US. The lions share of the shootings & killings in the US are conducted by those who already flout the existing laws.

Exactly how are more laws going to change that?

I've asked CM to detail the gun control law he would like to see implemented in the US twice recently. You notice he still hasn't engaged.

Know why? 'Cause his idea of gun control is to eliminate them, period.


----------



## smashedbanana

You can track mass shooting in the U.S. here:

https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> According to the database definition, the mass shootings aren't necessarily fatal. In fact, few of them involve fatalities.....


*Oh!* Well, I mean, _if they're just woundings_, then why are we complaining so much?


----------



## Macfury

Agreed. Do something about skiing accidents instead.



CubaMark said:


> *Oh!* Well, I mean, _if they're just woundings_, then why are we complaining so much?


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> I've asked CM to detail the gun control law he would like to see implemented in the US twice recently. You notice he still hasn't engaged.


Funny. I've been waiting for YOU to answer my question as to what YOUR solution to mass shootings in the USA might be. 



FeXL said:


> Know why? 'Cause his idea of gun control is to eliminate them, period.


Um.... no. I've never said that. I grew up with guns. Had a pellet gun, a .22, and used my dad's rifles when we went out for deer, though I never did kill anything other than the target at regularly scheduled "turkey shoots" where the prize was... a turkey! 

To this day I have the smell of gunpowder etched in my nostrils. 

Responsible gun ownership is fine - we seem to be able to do that in Canada pretty well, especially compared to our neighbours down south. As Michael Moore's documentary a few years back revealed, Canadians actually are, per-capita, owners of more guns than our southern cousins.

So WHY are Americans - and American men, since I can't recall there ever being a woman behind the trigger at these mass shootings - so much more likely to go off on a spree?

Could it be something as simple as the fact that for residents of the USA, access to mental health counselling is far more difficult to obtain? Is the prospect of enormous bills from a shrink a deterrent to seeking assistance? Are we seeing the effects of the U.S. war machine that sends its soldiers abroad to commit atrocities, and come home to little support, leading to violence? Is the gun seen as the simplest way to "solve" a problem?

You can't fix something until you understand it. And given the anti-science (especially anti-social science) stance of American conservatives, combined with their unwillingness to provide universal health care for their citizens, how can you ever generate an understanding of the phenomenon and then attempt to implement solutions?

In the current US climate, there's zero chance of that happening. So the only action that can be taken to attempt to bring down the number of shootings is to restrict access to guns. The fewer there are, the less possibility of an intentional or -the far bigger problem, frankly- accidental shooting. 

On top of all of this is the fact that one cannot have any kind of common sense discussion with folks about gun ownership when you're dealing with coal-rolling, confederate flag-waving, torchlight-marching second amendment fanatics who dominate the discourse (or at least, the news coverage, where U.S. public opinion appears to be formed these days).

Perhaps the only hope for U.S. society is for an expansion of the legalization of marijuana. If everyone is sufficiently stoned, the only thing they care about is whether they can get pizza delivery at 300am.


----------



## Macfury

That's a mouthful--of scatter(gun) solutions. Just sounds like a prog wish list more than anything to do specifically with firearms.


----------



## Beej

First of all, thanks for your thoughts and a mostly polite response.

Some points.



> Canadians actually are, per-capita, owners of more guns than our southern cousins.


Not true. Maybe legal rural gun ownership, but I'm guessing here. Do you have a source?



> Could it be something as simple as the fact that for residents of the USA, access to mental health counselling is far more difficult to obtain?


This is new to me. Does our universal healthcare system cover substantially more psychiatric care than the U.S.? My impression is that they are over diagnosed and over medicated, but that's a superficial understanding.



> On top of all of this is the fact that one cannot have any kind of common sense discussion


You go off the rails here. Best advice is not to go down that road. The U.S. left is looking quite nuts, from a different perspective. Agree to disagree on why "common sense discussion" is failing.


----------



## CubaMark

Beej said:


> First of all, thanks for your thoughts and a mostly polite response.


I'm shocked  that me being polite is seen as unusual. FeXL irks the hell out of me, and MF and I usually have our tiffs, but generally... 



> Not true. Maybe legal rural gun ownership, but I'm guessing here. Do you have a source?


I hadn't caught this nuance to Moore's assertion in Bowling for Columbine. He apparently was referring to Canada vs US gun ownership in terms of _rural hunting rifles_. The USA's mass predominance in handgun ownership leaves them about three times higher than Canada (See: GlobalNews)



> This is new to me. Does our universal healthcare system cover substantially more psychiatric care than the U.S.? My impression is that they are over diagnosed and over medicated, but that's a superficial understanding.


I would defer to anyone who has better knowledge of US psychiatric medical coverage. But given what we do know about the US system, where costs for medical treatment are simply insane, I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine that the mere prospect of seeking psychiatric medical treatment gives people with pause. The deductible alone could put people in jeopardy!



> You go off the rails here. Best advice is not to go down that road. The U.S. left is looking quite nuts, from a different perspective. Agree to disagree on why "common sense discussion" is failing.


You're right. We shouldn't talk about it _at all_. Like racist grandpa at Christmas dinner. Just ignore him and hope he'll fall asleep.


----------



## Beej

CubaMark said:


> I hadn't caught this nuance to Moore's assertion in Bowling for Columbine. He apparently was referring to Canada vs US gun ownership in terms of _rural hunting rifles_.


That sounds more likely, although I doubt nuance had much to do with it. Moore not checking the details when it fits a political statement sounds more likely. That's consistent with the other error in the statement.

It's almost like famous people put no more diligence into posts than ehmacers. 

Edit: I can see how the above line could be interpreted as a personal jab. That was not intended. The joke is about the common practice of giving weight to famous people's statements (usually reported by famous news outlets) but not the claims of casual acquaintances.


----------



## SINC

An interesting read:

*Why the AR-15 Was Never Meant to be in Civilians' Hands*



> Decades ago I wrote in the Atlantic about the creation of the AR-15, which was the predecessor of the military’s M-16 combat rifle and which now is the weapon most often used in U.S. mass gun murders. After the latest large-scale gun massacre, the one in Texas, I did a follow-up post about the AR-15, and then a range of reader views.
> 
> Among the responses I got was from a man who as a young engineer in the Vietnam era had worked, at Colt Firearms, on the M-16. He writes to explain why he is shocked, as he says the AR-15’s famed designer Eugene Stoner would have been, to see this weapon anyplace other than the battlefield.
> 
> “I do not believe that there is any place in the civilian world for a family of weapons that were born as an assault rifle,” he writes at the end of his message. You’ll see the reasoning that takes him there.


https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark


----------



## Macfury

Here's the problem SINC. If gun rights supporters agreed to support a ban on the AR-15, the left simply never stops. It would just change is focus to another firearm or class of firearms. The problem here is with the left's insatiable appetite for stamping out freedom. An attempt to be reasonable never satisfies them.


----------



## eMacMan

Macfury said:


> Here's the problem SINC. If gun rights supporters agreed to support a ban on the AR-15, the left simply never stops. It would just change is focus to another firearm or class of firearms. The problem here is with the left's insatiable appetite for stamping out freedom. An attempt to be reasonable never satisfies them.


Hardly just the left. Witness the damage to the Bill of Rights under the Bush reign of terror, or Bill C51 and the anti privacy act courtesy of the Harpoon. 

The Democrypts however are determined to mop up whatever remnants happen to remain. I expect the mass shootings to continue until they get their way as most of the shootings seem to be clearly staged with the end result of gun control as the goal.


----------



## Macfury

Bush was a moderate prog.



eMacMan said:


> Hardly just the left. Witness the damage to the Bill of Rights under the Bush reign of terror, or Bill C51 and the anti privacy courtesy of the Harpoon.
> 
> The Democrypts merely wish to mop up whatever remnants happen to remain.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> If gun rights supporters agreed to support a ban on the AR-15, the left simply never stops. It would just change is focus to another firearm or class of firearms. The problem here is with the left's insatiable appetite for stamping out freedom. An attempt to be reasonable never satisfies them.


Nailed it.

Once they've got their foot in the door...

In addition, notice that despite CM's claims to the contrary: "No, I never said that [I wanted to eliminate guns entirely]", the _only_ solution he proposes accomplishes precisely that:



> So the only action that can be taken to attempt to bring down the number of shootings is to restrict access to guns. The fewer there are, the less possibility of an intentional or -the far bigger problem, frankly- accidental shooting.


Having achieved that, what kind of a hurry d'ya s'pose they're going to be in to "understand the problem"?

Yep—zero.

And, I jes' luvs me some good, ol' fashioned BS regarding the "anti-science right". Afore you start slappin' that big, fat, broad paintbrush around, CM, you may want to look at the global warming debate. The "anti-science right" is, in fact, the only party actually using science to shore their argument. Same with the economic viability of alternative energy & electric cars.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> Here's the problem SINC. If gun rights supporters agreed to support a ban on the AR-15, the left simply never stops. It would just change is focus to another firearm or class of firearms. The problem here is with the left's insatiable appetite for stamping out freedom. An attempt to be reasonable never satisfies them.


There have been no significant new gun legislation that has successfully passed in decades. If you think that banning or maybe even heavily restricting 1 gun it is going to open up the floodgates then I'm not with you. 

The AR15 has been used in all of the big massing shootings. That doesn't stop the right from lobbying high capacity magazines, silencers, and killing Obama's mandatory wait times. 

If by some miracle the AR15 was banned the NRA would probably be lobbying to get grenade launchers unrestricted the next day...

Please remind me what side passed the Patriot Act.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Nailed it.
> 
> Once they've got their foot in the door...
> 
> In addition, notice that despite CM's claims to the contrary: "No, I never said that [I wanted to eliminate guns entirely]", the _only_ solution he proposes accomplishes precisely that:


CM said restrict. That's not eliminate.




FeXL said:


> Having achieved that, what kind of a hurry d'ya s'pose they're going to be in to "understand the problem"?
> 
> Yep—zero.


That's rich.

The NRA blocks ALL federal funding of any gun death related research. So the right blocks the funding for the research and then you get to say why doesn't the left have the research??





FeXL said:


> And, I jes' luvs me some good, ol' fashioned BS regarding the "anti-science right". Afore you start slappin' that big, fat, broad paintbrush around, CM, you may want to look at the global warming debate. The "anti-science right" is, in fact, the only party actually using science to shore their argument. Same with the economic viability of alternative energy & electric cars.


Your posts end like this a lot. Do you hold the conspiracy hillbilly in and then it comes out after only 5 minutes of typing?


----------



## Rps

And this is why there will never be effective gun control....bickering which covers the intent of any change to the laws. What is needed is a mission statement as to what you wish to achieve then base all changes based on the statement. I still like to approach MADD took to change the culture of drinking and driving....might be a good model for gun control. What we have now is a model that states every time you have a gun crime your solution is to arm yourself......you want to stop drunk driving, educate people how to drink.......perverse logic but in the minds of the NRA that is the correct solution, remember alcohol doesn’t make people drunk people do.......


----------



## Macfury

Do you think that a gun control bill that eliminates AR15s, but reiterates support for the Constitution on all guns below that level would get any support from Democrats?

The Patriot Act was passed by the Bush Administration, with significant Democrat support, then extended twice by Obama.



smashedbanana said:


> There have been no significant new gun legislation that has successfully passed in decades. If you think that banning or maybe even heavily restricting 1 gun it is going to open up the floodgates then I'm not with you.
> 
> The AR15 has been used in all of the big massing shootings. That doesn't stop the right from lobbying high capacity magazines, silencers, and killing Obama's mandatory wait times.
> 
> If by some miracle the AR15 was banned the NRA would probably be lobbying to get grenade launchers unrestricted the next day...
> 
> Please remind me what side passed the Patriot Act.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> Do you think that a gun control bill that eliminates AR15s, but reiterates support for the Constitution on all guns below that level would get any support from Democrats?


Hmm it's an interesting question. A lot of variables in this hypothetical.
I think an outright ban of just the AR15 and its copies would have more chance of passing. Provided it had support in the first place. If you would have to ban the classification then definitely no. The AR15 is a rifle after all. Not sure what classification would work. 

Maybe the better hypothetical solution would be a la Bombardier. A $3000 tax on all AR15 class weapons. Maybe the tax could be a victims of mass casualty fund or the like. 



Macfury said:


> The Patriot Act was passed by the Bush Administration, with significant Democrat support, then extended twice by Obama.


Exactly my point. I think the votes were 50/50. So I think it's a bit unreasonable to say one party favours a suppression of rights more than the other.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> CM said restrict. That's not eliminate.


In CM's parlance, the first means precisely the second.



smashedbanana said:


> The NRA blocks ALL federal funding of any gun death related research. So the right blocks the funding for the research and then you get to say why doesn't the left have the research??


I can find all sorts of interesting statistics on firearms & deaths online authored (and presumably funded) by the US gov't. What further research do you need? Be specific. In addition, I'd be interested in reading a link confirming your conjecture.



smashedbanana said:


> Your posts end like this a lot. Do you hold the conspiracy hillbilly in and then it comes out after only 5 minutes of typing?


Jes' one more little dig at our <snort> compassionate-intellectual-superior-Prog-overlords. After all, how could some ignorant banjo-playin' righty without science on his side possibly win a single argument, despite all evidence (see what I did there?) to the contrary...


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> A $3000 tax on all AR15 class weapons.


Why? For every AR owner who goes off the deep end there are probably thousands who don't.

Why not penalize everybody the same? Somebody gets whacked by a golf club, throw a tax on 'em. Hammers? Same. Knives? You bet. Run over by an automobile? Yep. Hell, the gov't could make millions off this! Talk about self-sustaining.

Precisely what are you accomplishing, save funding another useless gov't bureaucracy?


----------



## CubaMark

*Tehama County, California Shooting Leaves Three Dead Near School*

A series of shootings at multiple locations in rural Northern California left three people dead and several others wounded Tuesday, including students at an elementary school, authorities said.

Law enforcement officers killed the shooter, but it was not clear if authorities counted it among the three deaths.

Tehama County Assistant Sheriff Phil Johnston tells a TV station in the city of Chico that officers are investigating at least five crime scenes in and around the school in Rancho Tehama Reserve, about 130 miles north of Sacramento.

"It was right about 8 a.m. we had multiple shots fired in Rancho Tehama," Johnston said. "That evolved to multiple victims and multiple shots at the school, at the elementary school. I am told at this point the suspected shooter is deceased by law enforcement bullets, that's what I'm told."

Jeanine Quist, an administrative assistant with the Corning Union Elementary School District, said no one was killed at the school with kindergarten through fifth grades but that a "number" of students were wounded.
(NBC)​
*Tehama County shooting: At least five dead at elementary school - students airlifted out*

Eyewitness Coy Ferreira told local media KRCR he was dropping his daughter off a kindergarten around 8am local time when the shooting began.

He said he heard what sounded like a firecracker before a school secretary ran out and told everyone to go into classrooms due to a shooter at the school.

Mr Ferreira told reporters he ran into a classroom with 14 students.

He said bullets flew through the classroom windows, hitting one student who was shot in the foot and chest.

He said a child in an adjacent classroom was shot under the arm. Both children were conscious and talking after they were shot.

Ferreira said he saw a gunman, who looked to be in his 30’s or 40’s, and was dressed in green camouflage clothing as he ran from the school after the brutal attack.

(UK Express)​


----------



## CubaMark

_What does it say about a country that has so many mass shootings, that it's President can't keep them straight when tweeting out his (very sincere, I'm sure) condolences?_

*Donald Trump mixes up mass shootings in 'terrible insult to victims' after attack in California* | The Independent


----------



## smashedbanana

No surprise a AR15 Bushmaster was used in Tehama


----------



## FeXL

From 'bout 2/3rds of the way down the page.

The Morning Rant: J.V. Edition



> Inner city gang violence dwarfs the dangers of white supremacists, real or imagined. When was the last time you read about a racist skinhead committing an act of violence? Because you can pick up any newspaper in America and read about ghetto murders and violence. Every day.
> 
> *But complaining about minority-on-minority violence doesn't get you headlines. Besides, these people don't give a **** about democrat strongholds like Chicago and Newark and Oakland. They can kill each other with impunity as long as they are reliable in the voting booths.*


Nails it.

Blame it on ******, blame it on police brutality, blame it on oppression, blame it on the right. And all the time the _real_ problem is staring them in the face every time they pass by a mirror...


----------



## FeXL

Already on the Books



> "The NRA has fought for 20 years to make sure that people who are adjudicated mentally unfit, that these records are added to the system," Loesch said. "Then we keep seeing these occurrences that are taking place and people are able to purchase a firearm because of human error or because they fell through the system."
> 
> She revealed that 38 states report fewer than 80 percent of felony convictions to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which means there are seven million felony convictions that are unreported.


More:



> "In 2010, you had 80,000 prohibited possessors that tried to purchase a firearm through their 4473. That's an actionable offense. And yet, guess how many of those were prosecuted? 44," Loesch said.
> 
> "This has to change and politicians have to call for it, especially the ones calling for gun control today."


Sums it up for me.

No point in adding even more gun control laws if the extant ones aren't being enforced in the first place.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> No pont in adding even more gun control laws if the extant ones aren't being enforced in the first place.


Not if the goal is to disarm the law-abiding population.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Not if the goal is to disarm the law-abiding population.


Yep. Only one thing matters then. And it ain't got nuttin' to do with enforcing existing laws.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Already on the Books
> 
> Sums it up for me.
> 
> No point in adding even more gun control laws if the extant ones aren't being enforced in the first place.


The "Article" you link to is the NRA's spokeswoman speaking to Fox news. Which is fine but a bit ridiculous to see that person as the clear voice of effective gun legislation.

The unenforced "gun control" legislation being discussed is prosecuting people who lie on their 4473. The form they fill out for background check when they purchase a gun. 80000 liars in one year by their count. So the background checks worked? The fact that the bulk of those people were not prosecuted is not the same thing as them not being investigated. Many offences don't proceed to prosecution.

If anything the NICs should be expanded. Right now private firearm sales don't require the seller to perform a background check. How many of those happen with a party that has a criminal record?


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> The "Article" you link to is the NRA's spokeswoman speaking to Fox news. Which is fine but a bit ridiculous to see that person as the clear voice of effective gun legislation.


Is it any more ridiculous than some screeching, rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth Prog whose never held a gun in it's life before promoting gun control?



smashedbanana said:


> If anything the NICs should be expanded. Right now private firearm sales don't require the seller to perform a background check. How many of those happen with a party that has a criminal record?


My view is that as a private individual, I don't have access to the information to perform a background check. Do you have to fill out a Form 4473 for a private transaction?

And, I don't know.

The article was addressing the Form 4473 specifically.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Is it any more ridiculous than some screeching, rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth Prog whose never held a gun in it's life before promoting gun control?


I haven't seen any of those people you are talking about. And you don't have to have held a gun to want safe and responsible gun ownership.



> My view is that as a private individual, I don't have access to the information to perform a background check. Do you have to fill out a Form 4473 for a private transaction?
> 
> And, I don't know.
> 
> The article was addressing the Form 4473 specifically.


You an individual do not perform a background check. You (a store employee in the only case)get the buyer to fill out a form, then call the 1-800 number or go to the website. The FBI does a background check. The FBI says it generally takes 3 minutes, but in some rare cases can take up to 72 hours. 72 hours is the max they are allowed.

That's the process.

Lying on the form is a felony.

Added:

As many as 28 States do not require the 4473 for private sales.
Background checks are not required for private sales.

The 4473 is to kept by the gun store for 20 years. But that has not been the case in many instances...


----------



## CubaMark

*It's like folks who irrationally love having a gun in their hand intentionally go out of their way to be offensive... As the organizer says in the article below, the date was chosen intentionally "to get attention". I don't care what side of the gun control issue you stand, this is beyond the pale.* 

*Pro-gun rally at Polytechnique memorial shows 'profound lack of respect,'*










A pro-gun lobby group is facing widespread condemnation for its decision to hold a rally at the park commemorating the Polytechnique Montréal massacre, Canada's worst mass shooting.

The rally is planned for Dec. 2, just days before the 28th anniversary of the shooting, and aims to bring attention to what the lobby group calls "excessive firearm control."

Nathalie Provost, who has been a prominent advocate for gun control since surviving the Polytechnique shooting, said Tuesday the planned rally "shows a profound lack of respect for the families of victims."

The Place du 6-décembre-1989, a Montreal park commemorating the 14 women killed on Dec. 6, 1989, has become a "place of peace and commemoration" for all victims of gun violence, said Provost, who was shot four times.

** * **​
Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante said it showed a "lack of judgment" and "lack of respect towards the victims of this tragedy and all women victims of violence." 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called it a "needless and cruel provocation."

Quebec Public Security Minister Martin Coiteux also condemned the move, but said it was within the group's rights to hold the demonstration.

Guy Morin, an organizer with the group behind the demonstration, Tous contre un registre Québécois des armes à feu (All against a Quebec gun registry), acknowledged the choice of location is controversial.

It was chosen, he admitted, to get attention.

He argued the Polytechnique shooting is unfairly used by gun control advocates to further their agenda.
(Yahoo! News)​
*Related:* _École Polytechnique massacre_ | Wikipedia


----------



## FeXL

When did Progs suddenly become concerned about one offending another's feelings?



CubaMark said:


> It's like folks who irrationally love having a gun in their hand intentionally go out of their way to be offensive... As the organizer says in the article below, the date was chosen intentionally "to get attention". I don't care what side of the gun control issue you stand, this is beyond the pale.


----------



## SINC

More fantasy . . .

Poll suggests majority of Canadians back ban on guns in urban areas | CTV News

And what the hell do they propose we do about it?

Ask the gang members who import the illegal guns into urban areas to please stop? Fat chance of this stupidity ever curbing a single piece owned by drug dealers from the streets of Edmonton or any other city in Canada.


----------



## Macfury

Just stop them on the city border... easy, peasy! Look to Chicago for a model to follow.



SINC said:


> More fantasy . . .
> 
> Poll suggests majority of Canadians back ban on guns in urban areas | CTV News
> 
> And what the hell do they propose we do about it?
> 
> Ask the gang members who import the illegal guns into urban areas to please stop? Fat chance of this stupidity ever curbing a single piece owned by drug dealers from the streets of Edmonton or any other city in Canada.


----------



## FeXL

Curious the Progs haven't mentioned this anywhere...

Coles notes version: Mexican illegal alien drug dealer deported 5 times from the US reaches under the seat of a San Francisco park bench, finds a handgun, fires it, fatally shoots Kate Steinle, 32, in the heart. Acquitted on all homicide and assault charges. Not even involuntary manslaughter.

San Francisco’s Shame



> Advocates for illegal immigrants are unrepentant after yesterday’s shocking acquittal on all homicide charges of an illegal-alien confessed killer. The advocates are defending the sanctuary policies that had set in motion the 2015 killing in San Francisco; they have also doubled down on their opposition to any deportation of illegal aliens, criminal or otherwise. If ever there were a clarifying moment regarding what is at stake in the battle for the immigration rule of law, this is it.


Can you imagine the hue & cry from the left if a white male had shot a non-white female refugee with an AR-15 and been acquitted?

Related:

FROM THE COMMENTS: 



> _"You know how it is. You find a gun on the street, you take a few pot shots at some sea lions, and some crazy white chick walks right into your line of fire."_​


----------



## CubaMark

*Yup.*

*Andrew Cuomo* (‏Verified account) 
@NYGovCuomo
6:44 PM - 6 Dec 2017

_66 days after the worst mass shooting in US history, the House GOP just voted to let out-of-state people convicted of violent misdemeanors carry concealed weapons in New York. 

This is a disgrace. #StopCCR_​


----------



## Macfury

*Nope.*

Actually, the bill would allow:

"...a gun owner _with the proper permit_ in any state to carry a concealed firearm _to another state where it is also legal._"

So New York simply needs to make concealed carry illegal, and Cuomo can stop his pissing and moaning.




CubaMark said:


> *Yup.*
> 
> *Andrew Cuomo* (‏Verified account)
> @NYGovCuomo
> 6:44 PM - 6 Dec 2017
> 
> _66 days after the worst mass shooting in US history, the House GOP just voted to let out-of-state people convicted of violent misdemeanors carry concealed weapons in New York.
> 
> This is a disgrace. #StopCCR_​


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> *Nope.*


I jes' luvs me a completely uninformed Prog making a crappy argument and then being cited by yet one more uninformed Prog.

So, Andrew & CM, there were 58 non-suicide shooting deaths in NYC in 130 days in 2017. 

Question 1: Exactly how many of them were committed by legal gun owners?
Question 2: If your response to question 1 was, "Damn few, if any", detail precisely what gun law you would introduce to fix this problem of illegal gun ownership that wouldn't take away any rights from legal, law-abiding gun owners.

Interesting aside, NYC, a city that has some of the strictest gun ownership laws in a state that has some of the most rigid firearms laws in the country, ranks 10th worst in the 28 cities represented in the analysis for gun deaths.


----------



## FeXL

The point has been made on this thread before that the reason gun owners resist even the tiniest infringement or restriction on their right to own firearms is because once that elephant has his foot in the door, there's no holding back.

Below is a cartoon which clarifies the point perfectly.


----------



## WCraig

FeXL said:


> The point has been made on this thread before that the reason gun owners resist even the tiniest infringement or restriction on their right to own firearms is because once that elephant has his foot in the door, there's no holding back.
> 
> Below is a cartoon which clarifies the point perfectly.


Something is aptly illustrated but it isn't what you think. The analogy used is a total straw man. Guns aren't cake. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill things. Some types of guns, like fully automatic rifles with large capacity magazines are particularly efficient at killing humans. Having some restrictions on the most lethal weapons does not take away rights from people who want to own guns for hunting game or for their secondary purposes (target shooting, whatever).

Craig


----------



## Macfury

To put it bluntly, the Second Amendment allows people to carry guns so that they have enough force to withstand a government that no longer respects Constitutional freedoms. It is designed to prevent the government from having a monopoly on deadly force and essentially was government's way of saying that they would respect the Constitution or face the wrath of the citizenry. So yes, having the cake is the equivalent of having the potential to kill people. The ability to protect oneself from intruders is important, of course. The ability to hunt or shoot targets are subsidiary to the others.



WCraig said:


> Something is aptly illustrated but it isn't what you think. The analogy used is a total straw man. Guns aren't cake. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill things. Some types of guns, like fully automatic rifles with large capacity magazines are particularly efficient at killing humans. Having some restrictions on the most lethal weapons does not take away rights from people who want to own guns for hunting game or for their secondary purposes (target shooting, whatever).
> 
> Craig


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

In the context of the original meme, that makes perfect sense. Giving the person the cake results in no tangible benefit for the other person.


----------



## FeXL

One dead 5 year-old child...



> ...we "*Deplorables*" call that "*burying the lede*"...


More:



> Todman faces charges of negligent storage of a firearm and carrying a concealed firearm *by a convicted felon*.


Further, and my emphasis:



> *So, what kind of gun control laws are gonna stop veteran criminals?*


I ask again...


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> I ask again...


Under federal law, those convicted of a felony are forbidden from purchasing or possessing firearms and explosives. Yet as the result of a 1965 amendment to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, convicted felons were allowed to apply to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for "relief" from the "disability" of not being able to buy and possess guns. The "relief from disability" program was established as a favor to firearms manufacturer Winchester, then a division of Olin Mathieson Corporation.1 In 1962 Olin Mathieson pleaded guilty to felony counts stemming from a kickback scheme involving Vietnamese and Cambodian pharmaceutical importers. Under the law as it existed at the time, Winchester could no longer be licensed as a firearm manufacturer. The "relief from disability" program allowed Winchester to stay in business. 



You can thank the NRA for that.

Under your previous Meme you can add that as one of the many pieces of cake the NRA has taken back.

Also you can update it that the cake gets bigger and bigger every day...


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Under federal law, those convicted of a felony are forbidden from purchasing or possessing firearms and explosives. Yet as the result of a 1965 amendment to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, convicted felons were allowed to apply to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for "relief" from the "disability" of not being able to buy and possess guns. The "relief from disability" program was established as a favor to firearms manufacturer Winchester, then a division of Olin Mathieson Corporation.1 In 1962 Olin Mathieson pleaded guilty to felony counts stemming from a kickback scheme involving Vietnamese and Cambodian pharmaceutical importers. Under the law as it existed at the time, Winchester could no longer be licensed as a firearm manufacturer. The "relief from disability" program allowed Winchester to stay in business.


If you're going to quote another website verbatim, at least have the courtesy to link to it:

VPC - Guns for Felons—How the NRA Works to Rearm Criminals



smashedbanana said:


> You can thank the NRA for that.


You can thank the NRA for the provision... and then thank the BATF for approving return of gun rights to convicted felons.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> If you're going to quote another website verbatim, at least have the courtesy to link to it:
> 
> VPC - Guns for Felons—How the NRA Works to Rearm Criminals
> 
> 
> 
> You can thank the NRA for the provision... and then thank the BATF for approving return of gun rights to convicted felons.


For the record I did attempt to link the source but the forum gave me a sql error then a duplicate post error. And I was prevented from posting again for a violation?

Anyways thank you for adding the link.

I don't agree that the ATF is responsible for giving criminals the means with which to make their own jobs worse. So won't be sarcastically thanking them. 

The ATF has a hard enough time going through paper receipts of gun shops that have closed...


----------



## Macfury

They are responsible for approving the permits. So if they are approving permits for dangerous people, they are not making their own job's worse, they are making someone else's job worse--the police.



smashedbanana said:


> For the record I did attempt to link the source but the forum gave me a sql error then a duplicate post error. And I was prevented from posting again for a violation?
> 
> Anyways thank you for adding the link.
> 
> I don't agree that the ATF is responsible for giving criminals the means with which to make their own jobs worse. So won't be sarcastically thanking them.
> 
> The ATF has a hard enough time going through paper receipts of gun shops that have closed...


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> Under your previous Meme you can add that as one of the many pieces of cake the NRA has taken back.
> 
> Also you can update it that the cake gets bigger and bigger every day...


Fine. You think that cake is as big as it was in 1776?

I don't.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Fine. You think that cake is as big as it was in 1776?
> 
> I don't.


I think the cake is substantially larger. There are a few small slices out of it from the few restrictions that have made it through. But even some of those slices have been replaced.

Who could buy a musket in 1776?

A rich white male. That's it.
Where could he buy it?
What selection was available?

2017 - More than 1 gun for every man woman and child in private possession.
No issue with race or sex.
Loopholes for private sale and gunshows.

And let's not forget the cost.

A musket cost $35-$50 in 1776.

Reverse inflate the cost of an AR-15 today at $595. Cheaper and a hell of a lot more powerful in every way...


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> They are responsible for approving the permits. So if they are approving permits for dangerous people, they are not making their own job's worse, they are making someone else's job worse--the police.


I understand what your saying but not sure your point.

Are you saying the BATF is approving permits despite the felonies? i.e. they are not doing their job? Your turn to site a source.

Or are you holding them responsible to the legislative loophole? That same link talks about the 1992 appropriations bill that,

"has prohibited BATF from using appropriated funds to investigate or act upon applications for relief submitted by individuals. BATF claims that as long as this ban remains in place, it cannot process such applications. "


----------



## Macfury

It's a bit nebulous isn't it? My take on it would be that if the BATF has no money allocated to process those requests, then those requests should not be processed. I think that would simply maintain the status quo--the person "disabled" through lack of gun ownership remains "disabled."

As described by NewsMax 

https://www.newsmax.com/fastfeatures/can-a-felon-own/2014/11/17/id/607940/



> A 1965 amendment to the federal Firearms Act of 1938 allows felons who want to own a gun the ability to apply for "relief from the disability of not being able to possess a gun." _If the felon can convince the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms_ that the circumstances surrounding the crime and subsequent felony conviction were such that the felon should not be considered a public safety risk, then the felon may be granted the right to legal gun ownership.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> I think the cake is substantially larger. There are a few small slices out of it from the few restrictions that have made it through. But even some of those slices have been replaced.
> 
> Who could buy a musket in 1776?


Gun control in the US isn't about who can afford a firearm. It's about chipping away at a constitutional right to own firearms.

Period.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Gun control in the US isn't about who can afford a firearm. It's about chipping away at a constitutional right to own firearms.
> 
> Period.


I was responding to your question about whether or not gun rights (the cake) are more or less (bigger or smaller cake) than in 1776.

Well if guns were not available to everyone in 1776 because of their race, sex or means ($$) then in some very important ways guns are MORE accessible today.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> Well if guns were not available to everyone in 1776 because of their race, sex or means ($$) then in some very important ways guns are MORE accessible today.


Doesn't matter. Accessibility is still not the point.

Laws restricting ownership thereof is.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Doesn't matter. Accessibility is still not the point.
> 
> Laws restricting ownership thereof is.


YOU brought up 1776.

When there was no second amendment and no laws about gun ownership.

When a huge portion of the population couldn't buy guns even if they wanted to.

So exactly what was your point?


----------



## Macfury

What if you were an American and I abrogated your right to buy real estate in 2017--and then defended that abrogation by saying that not everybody in 1776 could afford real estate?



smashedbanana said:


> YOU brought up 1776.
> 
> When there was no second amendment and no laws about gun ownership.
> 
> When a huge portion of the population couldn't buy guns even if they wanted to.
> 
> So exactly what was your point?


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> When there was no second amendment and no laws about gun ownership.


DING, DING, DING, DING DING!!!

We have a winnah!

A large cake, freshly baked, neatly iced & not a morsel missing. Very unlike the tattered remnants left today, the missing pieces of which have been implemented under the guise of the Left's "greater good" and oftentimes resulting in precisely the opposite.



smashedbanana said:


> When a huge portion of the population couldn't buy guns even if they wanted to.


I don't know what the proportion of rural to urban was back in the day but you can bet your bottom dollar that every rural family had at least one firearm because that's how they fed & protected themselves. As the male children grew up there would have been a firearm for everyone of them, much the same as with many rural families today.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> DING, DING, DING, DING DING!!!
> 
> We have a winnah!
> 
> A large cake, freshly baked, neatly iced & not a morsel missing. Very unlike the tattered remnants left today, the missing pieces of which have been implemented under the guise of the Left's "greater good" and oftentimes resulting in precisely the opposite.


If as you say the cake is gun rights then the cake has a giant hole in it in 1776. Only white males of means could own a gun. And no one had a right to anything yet.

And the supposition that the cake is remnants today is nonsense. 



> I don't know what the proportion of rural to urban was back in the day but you can bet your bottom dollar that every rural family had at least one firearm because that's how they fed & protected themselves. As the male children grew up there would have been a firearm for everyone of them, much the same as with many rural families today.



That's just your opinion and maybe some Hollywood.

"An 1803 census of guns carried out by the War Department found that only 23.7 percent of adult white males had access to guns, which meant that less than half of the militiamen could be armed -- in the South, only 29 percent could be. "

Taken from "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture." By Michael A. Bellesiles.


----------



## Macfury

No, they had the natural right to own a gun, whether they had the means or desire to do so. 



smashedbanana said:


> If as you say the cake is gun rights then the cake has a giant hole in it in 1776. Only white males of means could own a gun. And no one had a right to anything yet.
> 
> And the supposition that the cake is remnants today is nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's just your opinion and maybe some Hollywood.
> 
> "An 1803 census of guns carried out by the War Department found that only 23.7 percent of adult white males had access to guns, which meant that less than half of the militiamen could be armed -- in the South, only 29 percent could be. "
> 
> Taken from "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture." By Michael A. Bellesiles.


----------



## eMacMan

smashedbanana said:


> That's just your opinion and maybe some Hollywood.
> 
> "An 1803 census of guns carried out by the War Department found that only 23.7 percent of adult white males had access to guns, which meant that less than half of the militiamen could be armed -- in the South, only 29 percent could be. "
> 
> Taken from "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture." By Michael A. Bellesiles.


Given that there was a good deal of Paranoia in the early 1800s about Britain trying to reclaim its colonies, and memories of the British attempting to disarm the colonists, I wonder how honest people would have been on that census?

In Europe and particularly Germany during the 1930s Jews were viewed as whipping boys. How many failed to declare their religion on census forms of that era? Enough to account for more Jews dying in concentration camps than existed in the census?

Today Muslims are the victims of a propaganda campaign almost identical to that directed against 1930s Jews. How many Muslims failed to reveal their religion on the latest census forms?

The purpose of the second amendment is to ensure that the government respects or at least fears the populace as a final check to prevent tyranny. One can argue that post Clinton this check is failing. However the very fact that many members of Congress and the Senate want to seize American firearms is a pretty strong indicator that those controlling these figureheads wish to move even further into the realm of tyranny.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> And no one had a right to anything yet.


Neither were there _any_ restrictions. A whole cake.



smashedbanana said:


> And the supposition that the cake is remnants today is nonsense.


You can't own one of these & you have to have a license to own that and you, over there, you aren't allowed to own anything unless you give up your hat, arse, overshoes & first-born male. How many gun laws in the US today compared to 1776? Dozens? Hundreds?

A far smaller cake...



smashedbanana said:


> That's just your opinion and maybe some Hollywood.


Like I said, I don't know the proportion of rural to urban back then. However, I do have a question. With much of the population living off the land, how did they feed themselves? They weren't vegans. Run over to the neighbour's & borrow his hunting rifle? In a pinch, maybe. But as a regular occurence? Not likely. Certainly weren't any supermarkets to visit. Nobody was raising massive herds of cattle back then & it wasn't as if anybody had the money to buy a side of beef anyway. Swap goods & services? Possibly. But again, unlikely on a full time basis.

They hunted with their own rifles.



smashedbanana said:


> "An 1803 census of guns carried out by the War Department found that only 23.7 percent of adult white males had access to guns, which meant that less than half of the militiamen could be armed -- in the South, only 29 percent could be. "
> 
> Taken from "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture." By Michael A. Bellesiles.


Thanks for the stat.

However, like eMacMan, I also question the veracity of those numbers. The American people as a whole were far less trusting of the gov't then than they are now.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Like I said, I don't know...


A rare admission! :clap:




FeXL said:


> ...I do have a question. With much of the population living off the land, how did they feed themselves? They weren't vegans. Run over to the neighbour's & borrow his hunting rifle? In a pinch, maybe. But as a regular occurence? Not likely. Certainly weren't any supermarkets to visit. Nobody was raising massive herds of cattle back then & it wasn't as if anybody had the money to buy a side of beef anyway. Swap goods & services? Possibly. But again, unlikely on a full time basis.
> 
> They hunted with their own rifles.


There's also trapping, fishing, rearing small animals like chickens and pigs, bow-and-arrow... Surely someone out there has written about the habits of self-sufficient pioneer folk from that period....

The native american population got by pretty darn well in the feeding themselves department before some white guy imported firearms and gunpowder.... damn immigrants!


----------



## Macfury

Nonetheless, gun ownership in early America was high--well over half of homes were armed.

http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1489&context=wmlr


----------



## smashedbanana

eMacMan said:


> Given that there was a good deal of Paranoia in the early 1800s about Britain trying to reclaim its colonies, and memories of the British attempting to disarm the colonists, I wonder how honest people would have been on that census?


Well since the survey I mentioned was by colonials with respects to the militia, the very body that would be called upon to fight the British I'm going to say it's more likely to be correct.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Neither were there _any_ restrictions. A whole cake.
> 
> You can't own one of these & you have to have a license to own that and you, over there, you aren't allowed to own anything unless you give up your hat, arse, overshoes & first-born male. How many gun laws in the US today compared to 1776? Dozens? Hundreds?
> 
> A far smaller cake...


Ridiculous! If you have a no criminal record then the sky is the limit. If you have a criminal record then you need to buy a gun privately or at a gun show. The Las Vegas shooter was able to purchase 33 guns with all checks done. Some states you can purchase in less than 5 minutes.

California is the only exception. In which case drive to Nevada.



FeXL said:


> Like I said, I don't know the proportion of rural to urban back then. However, I do have a question. With much of the population living off the land, how did they feed themselves? They weren't vegans. Run over to the neighbour's & borrow his hunting rifle? In a pinch, maybe. But as a regular occurence? Not likely. Certainly weren't any supermarkets to visit. Nobody was raising massive herds of cattle back then & it wasn't as if anybody had the money to buy a side of beef anyway. Swap goods & services? Possibly. But again, unlikely on a full time basis.
> 
> They hunted with their own rifles.


Um please look up colonial life. They were farmers, fishermen, trappers and hunters. They also came over in groups and formed communities. Along secular or social grounds. So it would have been very common that a couple of men hunted for a community.

Let's not forget what we are talking about either. Muskets. At the time local manufacturing was not in place or widespread. If you had a musket you brought it over from Europe. And very likely you had issues getting it repaired or a supply or powder, etc.

Not to mention hunting with a musket would have sucked. It's slow to load, noisy and not accurate. 

George Washington had serious concerns about the reliability of the guns available.

The French delivered 47000 rifles to the colonies in 1777. And that wasn't because everyone already had one....



FeXL said:


> Thanks for the stat.
> 
> However, like eMacMan, I also question the veracity of those numbers. The American people as a whole were far less trusting of the gov't then than they are now.


Well it's a number, a number borne of research. You don't have one just your opinion.


----------



## FeXL

Fukc you, CM. And the hat yer wearing & the horse your rode in on.

Never once on these boards have I ever claimed to know everything. Whatever my limitations are, I know head & shoulders above whatever the fukc you claim to know.

I thought you were fukcing off for 10 days or 2 weeks & giving us all a reprieve from your wilful ignorance.

However, seeing as yer here, maybe you can clarify your brain fart on Sharia law in the west that is/isn't happening. Perhaps you could pontificate some about that global warming question I posed to you, too.



CubaMark said:


> A rare admission!


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Fukc you, CM. And the hat yer wearing & the horse your rode in on.


At times like this, I have to wonder: what kind of person you are in the real world. Your posts paint a pretty ugly picture.



FeXL said:


> I thought you were fukcing off for 10 days or 2 weeks & giving us all a reprieve from your wilful ignorance.


"wilful ignorance" in the conservative dictionary must mean fact-based information. No wonder you have trouble appreciating reality, and it's liberal bias.



FeXL said:


> However, seeing as yer here, maybe you can clarify your brain fart on Sharia law in the west that is/isn't happening.


It isn't happening. We've talked about this. Or at least, I have, with sources that are verifiable, not the right-wing scaredy-cat-with-a-penchant-for-violence wingnut sources you like to cite.




FeXL said:


> Perhaps you could pontificate some about that global warming question I posed to you, too.


Not an atmospheric scientist. Neither are you. So where does that leave us? I have no interest in spending my free time arguing with you about a matter for which neither you nor I are trained and capable of properly interpreting data. And you already know how much stock I put in your sources.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> Ridiculous!


Didn't answer the question:



> How many gun laws in the US today compared to 1776? Dozens? Hundreds?


Every one of which takes a bite out of that cake.



smashedbanana said:


> Um please look up colonial life.


Just did. I entered "colonial america hunters" into DuckDuckGo and the first non-PDF hit was this:

Hunting Guns in Colonial America.



> In North America, however, land was readily available, and possession of guns was universal as hunting with firearms was a primary means of survival. Rural homes depended on arms to help feed their large families, as well as to provide physical protection and fulfill local militia demands. The heavily wooded terrain of the New World, in turn, provided a bounty of game ranging from turkeys, geese, ducks and game birds to the larger deer, bear, elk and moose.


Now, some here are going to scream blue murder because that's an NRA article but I'm more than willing to read anything on the topic anybody else wants to link to.



smashedbanana said:


> Let's not forget what we are talking about either. Muskets. At the time local manufacturing was not in place or widespread. If you had a musket you brought it over from Europe. And very likely you had issues getting it repaired or a supply or powder, etc.


What has this to do with gun laws?



smashedbanana said:


> Not to mention hunting with a musket would have sucked. It's slow to load, noisy and not accurate.


As above.



smashedbanana said:


> George Washington had serious concerns about the reliability of the guns available.


As above.



smashedbanana said:


> The French delivered 47000 rifles to the colonies in 1777. And that wasn't because everyone already had one....


Never claimed everybody did.

The population of the US in 1776 was about 2.5 million people. According to this PDF, the US population in 1790 was 3.9 million, with 3.7 million rural, nearly 95% of the population. Assuming 95% of the population was rural in 1776, those 47k rifles the French delivered would have been a drop in the bucket, supplying ~1.2% of the colonials.



smashedbanana said:


> Well it's a number, a number borne of research. You don't have one just your opinion.


Yes, it is a number. Borne of questionable research. CM quotes this kind of crap all the time. Doesn't mean it or he is correct.


----------



## FeXL

The only people who find me ugly are the Progs who constantly lose arguments to me.



CubaMark said:


> At times like this, I have to wonder: what kind of person you are in the real world. Your posts paint a pretty ugly picture.


"Wilful ignorance" in the conservative dictionary means somebody who doesn't know $h!t and is incapable of basing a defence upon empirical evidence. IOW, Progs like you.



CubaMark said:


> "wilful ignorance" in the conservative dictionary must mean fact-based information.


You speak of this foreign concept of reality like you use it all the time, yet are unable and/or unwilling to show any of that. Just like your observations below.

Thing is, reality has no bias. It's merely reality. That's why you're so fukced up.



CubaMark said:


> No wonder you have trouble appreciating reality, and it's liberal bias.


I asked simple questions of you. Don't need to be a scientist to answer them. All that is required is a simple, fundamental knowledge of the topic. If you don't possess that knowledge or understanding, that's fine. It's nothing to be embarrassed about. Merely admit it & move on.



CubaMark said:


> It isn't happening.


No, we haven't.



CubaMark said:


> We've talked about this.


The iron... You Progs are the ones running around crying about climate Armageddon, not the sceptics.



CubaMark said:


> Or at least, I have, with sources that are verifiable, not the right-wing scaredy-cat-...


Speaking of violence, shall I link you the 1010 video of exploding children the Progs put out? And others?



CubaMark said:


> ...with-a-penchant-for-violence wingnut sources you like to cite.


Call to authority. Logical fallacy.

One doesn't need to be a scientist to be informed on a subject and to be able to discuss it.



CubaMark said:


> Not an atmospheric scientist. Neither are you.


Leaves us back precisely where we started: your wilful ignorance.



CubaMark said:


> So where does that leave us?


Data? You have data? Show me.



CubaMark said:


> I have no interest in spending my free time arguing with you about a matter for which neither you nor I are trained and capable of properly interpreting data.


That's a copout & you know it. It has nothing to do with anybody's sources and everything to do with the facts of the matter. That you cannot distinguish between the two merely confirms your wilful ignorance.

Admit it & move on.



CubaMark said:


> And you already know how much stock I put in your sources.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Didn't answer the question:
> 
> Every one of which takes a bite out of that cake.


Yes. My point was never that none of the cake has been cut. Rather that overly dramatic amounts as in the meme I have issue with.



FeXL said:


> Just did. I entered "colonial america hunters" into DuckDuckGo and the first non-PDF hit was this:
> 
> Hunting Guns in Colonial America.
> 
> Now, some here are going to scream blue murder because that's an NRA article but I'm more than willing to read anything on the topic anybody else wants to link to.


I'm not going to scream blue murder but its a little ridiculous that you can arbitrarily label my sources as suspect and then present this.



FeXL said:


> What has this to do with gun laws?


This was in relation to the number of guns in 1776



FeXL said:


> The population of the US in 1776 was about 2.5 million people. According to this PDF, the US population in 1790 was 3.9 million, with 3.7 million rural, nearly 95% of the population. Assuming 95% of the population was rural in 1776, those 47k rifles the French delivered would have been a drop in the bucket, supplying ~1.2% of the colonials.


They were not trying to arm everyone. The colonial army was only about 80000 strong.



FeXL said:


> Yes, it is a number. Borne of questionable research. CM quotes this kind of crap all the time. Doesn't mean it or he is correct.


What makes my source crap?


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> I'm not going to scream blue murder but its a little ridiculous that you can arbitrarily label my sources as suspect and then present this.


You're starting to sound like CM. Don't. It's not a good place to be. You're better than that.

The NRA usually uses solid, well-sourced data. Why? 'Cause the gun control nuts would pick the argument apart in seconds if they didn't.

You may not like the source but until evidence is shown otherwise, my argument stands. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, please, feel free.



smashedbanana said:


> This was in relation to the number of guns in 1776


Doesn't matter. It's not about the number of guns or who could afford them or any other issue. This is purely about _gun control laws_ and how much they have affected firearm owners since 1776.



smashedbanana said:


> They were not trying to arm everyone. The colonial army was only about 80000 strong.


Never said they were. You made it sound like there were tons o' guns given to Americans. I showed where, in the big picture, it was nearly nothing.



smashedbanana said:


> What makes my source crap?


Sorry if you took it that way. I find the data immediately suspect for the reason eMacMan noted: mistrust of the gov't at the time. No way in hell I would have been honest about my firearms in that day & age. Not a chance.

Just like I don't trust contemporary census data to be anywhere near accurate. Current religious adherents to The Force, Frisbeetarianism & the Flying Spaghetti Monster notwithstanding...


----------



## SINC

*New Study Estimates How Many Guns Are Carried Each Day in the U.S.*



> Time and again, anti-gun activists continue to claim that people carrying guns increases the risk of crime. They say that without ever citing a single bit of evidence other than their own hysterics. Through it all, however, there’s been no real numbers of just how many guns there are on the streets of the United States.
> 
> Until now, anyway.
> 
> An estimated 3 million Americans carry a loaded handgun on their person every day, according to a new study published in the American Journal of Public Health.
> 
> Researchers from the University of Washington, Harvard University and the University of Colorado conducted the National Firearms Survey in 2015. Of the 4,000 U.S. adults who participated in the online survey, 1,500 of them were handgun owners. They were asked how often they carried a loaded handgun when they were out of their homes.
> 
> The objectives of the study were to “determine the frequency of loaded handgun carrying among US adult handgun owners, characterize those who carry, and examine concealed carrying by state concealed carry laws.”
> 
> In addition to the 3 million who carry daily, researchers found that 9 million Americans carry a gun once a month. People in that category were disproportionately likely to be conservative men ranging in age from 18 to 29 and living the south.
> 
> Four out of five of those who carried said protection was the main reason they armed themselves. About 6 percent said they’d been threatened by someone with a gun in the last five years.
> 
> Wow. It’s almost like there are a lot of guns roaming around the American streets and nothing much ever happens with any of them.
> 
> Shocking, right?


More:

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2017/...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> New Study Estimates How Many Guns Are Carried Each Day in the U.S.


Nails it.

If there was truly a concealed carry problem in the US, you would know it.

Related:

ONE-THIRD Of U.S. Homicide Spike Coming From 5 Chicago Neighborhoods



> Murders in the U.S. rose nearly 9% last year, and one-third of that increase came from just a few neighborhoods in Chicago, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of the FBI’s annual 2016 publication, Crime in the United States.
> 
> While violent crime (homicide, rape, assault, and robbery) also rose nationwide from 2015 to 2016 — over 4% — the data show the increase was not uniform, but rather concentrated in cities like Chicago and Baltimore.


More:



> *Interestingly, the paper’s neighborhood-by-neighborhood analysis claimed that areas where homicides spiked had a “lighter street presence by police following officers’ high-profile killings of young black men.”*
> 
> A Pew Research Center poll from January 2017 showed that an overwhelming number of police officers say widespread protests following high-profile killings of black suspects have made police less willing to conduct basic police work, such as stopping and questioning suspicious people in high-crime neighborhoods, and using an appropriate level of force to diffuse a situation.


M'bold.

Further:



> In Chicago last year, homicides jumped to 771, 58% higher than in 2015, and more than the number of murders in Los Angeles and New York combined. Half of that increase, the analysis showed, came from just five neighborhoods, and is largely attributable to gang warfare. In a “roughly four-mile radius of West Garfield Park,” for example, there are at least 30 gangs.


So, once more I ask: Precisely what gun law(s) would you implement which would not adversely affect the legal gun owners noted in SINC's article above, yet would address the lawlessness noted in my linked article?


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> You're starting to sound like CM. Don't. It's not a good place to be. You're better than that.
> 
> The NRA usually uses solid, well-sourced data. Why? 'Cause the gun control nuts would pick the argument apart in seconds if they didn't.
> 
> You may not like the source but until evidence is shown otherwise, my argument stands. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, please, feel free.


And you are getting condescending. 

I cite an academic article with substantive sourcing and footnotes and then you (a man living in Canada in 2017), can arbitrary dismiss the number because you "feel" you would not have been honest in a census in the US in 1803.

Then you post an article produced by the NRA. An article with zero sources, footnotes, etc. listed. Then you further double-down on it by explaining how an organization with such an obvious bias produces well researched articles only.

Do you see the optics here? Do you smell what you cook?

I must admit your strong pro guns rights posts have drawn me in. I am fascinated by the idea that someone living here can view the US and extoll less gun control. Especially after each mass shooting event.

Unless that is not your view and this is just some twisted way to start an argument and challenge a win for a difficult side. In which case put a knock on your belt, you got another sucker on the internet.

Either way, good luck to you I'm out.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> And you are getting condescending.


No, I'm offering a friendly tip. CM writes off my sources as out of hand without even addressing the argument. If my sources are that easily refuted, a mere wave of his magical debate technique should destroy anything I post. It doesn't. What does that tell you about his ability to defend his own? (Hint: he's got nuttin...)



smashedbanana said:


> I cite an academic article with substantive sourcing and footnotes and then you (a man living in Canada in 2017), can arbitrary dismiss the number because you "feel" you would not have been honest in a census in the US in 1803.


I have no doubt that the census data you quoted is an accurate measure of the information accrued at the time. However, as has been noted, I have grave doubts those numbers tell the whole story and I even gave you a current example.



smashedbanana said:


> Then you post an article produced by the NRA. An article with zero sources, footnotes, etc. listed. Then you further double-down on it by explaining how an organization with such an obvious bias produces well researched articles only.


As I've noted: produce evidence to the contrary & I'll read it.



smashedbanana said:


> I must admit your strong pro guns rights posts have drawn me in.


I'm less pro gun rights & more anti legislation. _Especially_ any legislation that erodes the rights of law abiding citizens & yet does little to nothing addressing those who openly break the law. They address the effect & not the cause. Helmet laws & seat belt laws are two more of my bugaboos that fall under the same category.



smashedbanana said:


> I am fascinated by the idea that someone living here can view the US and extoll less gun control. Especially after each mass shooting event.


How many murders by law-abiding firearm owners in the US as opposed to illegal gun owners? It's minuscule.

Some of the left here decried the Vegas shooting as a horrific event (which, in all agreement, it was.) However, as I pointed out at the time, more people than that are killed in Chicago in any given month with illegal firearms. _One city_.

Where's the hue & cry?



smashedbanana said:


> Unless that is not your view and this is just some twisted way to start an argument and challenge a win for a difficult side. In which case put a knock on your belt, you got another sucker on the internet.


I don't argue for the sake of argument. My time is far too precious for that.

I am very interested in trying to figger out why logic leaves the (usually leftist) argument when many topics, in this case gun control, enter the conversation.

Once again: What gun law would you implement which would not infringe upon the rights of current gun owners yet would address the problem of illegal gun owners?

Anybody?


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Once again: What gun law would you implement which would not infringe upon the rights of current gun owners yet would address the problem of illegal gun owners?
> 
> Anybody?


Those twin goals never seem to animate the ant-gun activists. Any increase in government control is sufficient reason in itself to legislate.


----------



## smashedbanana

Dammit it you've got me posting again. This is what happens when a workaholic takes time off.



FeXL said:


> No, I'm offering a friendly tip. CM writes off my sources as out of hand without even addressing the argument. If my sources are that easily refuted, a mere wave of his magical debate technique should destroy anything I post. It doesn't. What does that tell you about his ability to defend his own? (Hint: he's got nuttin...)





> I have no doubt that the census data you quoted is an accurate measure of the information accrued at the time. However, as has been noted, I have grave doubts those numbers tell the whole story and I even gave you a current example.
> 
> As I've noted: produce evidence to the contrary & I'll read it.


So here's the problem. You are saying my source can be dismissed without providing another source to counter it. But then I have to provide a source to counter yours.



> I'm less pro gun rights & more anti legislation. _Especially_ any legislation that erodes the rights of law abiding citizens & yet does little to nothing addressing those who openly break the law. They address the effect & not the cause. Helmet laws & seat belt laws are two more of my bugaboos that fall under the same category.


I am not so much small government as I'm sure you can guess, but I don't favour more legislation without good reason. I don't see guns as the cause, but I don't see another approach that could have any affect.



> How many murders by law-abiding firearm owners in the US as opposed to illegal gun owners? It's minuscule.
> 
> Some of the left here decried the Vegas shooting as a horrific event (which, in all agreement, it was.) However, as I pointed out at the time, more people than that are killed in Chicago in any given month with illegal firearms. _One city_.
> 
> Where's the hue & cry?


No one works that way. No one looks at the numbers of dead and assigns more or less reaction based solely on that. Robots maybe. Wait a second are you a robot?

There are more factors but a large part is about the victims. In the Vegas case they were concert goers. That's it. Innocent. Could be you or me (I was supposed to be in Vegas the next weekend).

I can't relate to a gang banger getting killed in Baltimore. Truth be told.



> I don't argue for the sake of argument. My time is far too precious for that.
> 
> I am very interested in trying to figger out why logic leaves the (usually leftist) argument when many topics, in this case gun control, enter the conversation.


Logic? That's a bold assertion that logic is completely vacant from one side of the argument.

I mean if you want strictly logic, why do any private citizens have guns at all?

From a practical point of view we can get all our food with minimal effort.
Fences can work wonders against bears and animals.
Modern home security is top notch.

For a second amendment point of view, what can you do with a gun to take down the government?

Say you and 10000 citizens unite with the best over the counter equipment. AR-15s, body armour, lots of ammo, the whole nine yards.
What good is that against a smart bomb dropped from 25000ft?
Or a drone strike?
Or an M1 Abrams Tank?
etc. etc.

That's straight logic. It's not my position. I don't support an outright ban.



> Once again: What gun law would you implement which would not infringe upon the rights of current gun owners yet would address the problem of illegal gun owners?


This question is a trap. Not just by you but by the whole pro-gun side.

What exactly are the rights of gun owners? Its ambiguous. 

Is it enough to own guns?

It seems ANY inconvience becomes a rights challenge by the NRA. Look at Sandy Hook. Mandatory waiting periods seemed reasonable. 
No one taking guns, just a small delay. Lead Balloon. 

Why does there have to be only 1 law that fixes both illegal and legal gun owner violence? The reason these get lumped together is to make the left say "Ban Guns".
Even though its not the desired outcome at all. Its just the only law that could possibly fit both scenarios. And then on we go to a huge constitutional issue. But there has to be something in between.


Here are my questions to you:

Do you see gun violence in the U.S. as a problem?

If yes, what do you think is the solution? Or a solution.

Do you believe that 2nd Amendment was meant to give the people the apparatus to challenge the government?

If yes, then do you think the energy spent fighting all anti-gun legislation is making Americans more in tune with what their government is actually doing? i.e. is that singular interest really actually hurting them?


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> So here's the problem. You are saying my source can be dismissed without providing another source to counter it.


On the contrary, I'm agreeing with the conclusion reached with the data available. I just don't believe that's all the data.



smashedbanana said:


> But then I have to provide a source to counter yours.


Don't have to do anything. Let it stand.



smashedbanana said:


> I don't see guns as the cause, but I don't see another approach that could have any affect.


Then how's about we identify the cause, come up with a solution, apply it, then measure the results to see if it worked or not? Instead of chasing ghosts all the while spending money & wasting man-hours, do something constructive?

You know why? 'Cause damn few on the left want to acknowledge that the problem starts with young black males in inner city neighbourhoods that have been under progressive governance for decades. It's far more convenient for them to point to "GUNS!!!" as the problem than to look in the mirror.



smashedbanana said:


> No one works that way. No one looks at the numbers of dead and assigns more or less reaction based solely on that.


Happens on these boards all the time. CM was up in arms about the Vegas shooting, even started a thread on it, yet never once acknowledged my post in that very thread on the equivalent monthly death toll in one city. To my recollection, he's never addressed any of my posts on blacks killing blacks with illegal firearms.

Why? Doesn't fit his narrative of crazy white guys with automatic weapons.



smashedbanana said:


> There are more factors but a large part is about the victims. In the Vegas case they were concert goers. That's it. Innocent. Could be you or me (I was supposed to be in Vegas the next weekend).
> 
> I can't relate to a gang banger getting killed in Baltimore. Truth be told.


I see a gang-banger getting killed in Baltimore as Darwinism at its finest. The unfortunate truth is that there is frequently collateral damage of innocents.



smashedbanana said:


> Logic? That's a bold assertion that logic is completely vacant from one side of the argument.


On this thread & a select few others (Alternative Energy, GHG Thread among others), all the time.



smashedbanana said:


> I mean if you want strictly logic, why do any private citizens have guns at all?


:yikes: You mean you think it illogical to want to defend your family or to hunt for food or to pursue a hobby or sport?

You have just completely lost me.



smashedbanana said:


> From a practical point of view we can get all our food with minimal effort.


So, I can assume that this same leap of faith applies to growing your own fruit & vegetables, too? After all, we _can_ get it with minimal effort, no?

Matter of fact, why do anything ourselves? There's always a store just down the street, right?

Why? One word: In-de-pen-dence. Freedom from gov't control over our lives. A concept most on the left have zero appreciation for.

You ever see the movie _Demolition Man_? Recall the conversation when Stallone meets up with Denis Leary & Leary notes:



> _I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind if guy who wants to sit in a greasy spoon and think, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol. I want to eat bacon, butter and buckets of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in a non-smoking section. I wanna run through the streets naked with green Jello all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to._


That's why.



smashedbanana said:


> Fences can work wonders against bears and animals.


Jeezuz...



smashedbanana said:


> Modern home security is top notch.


Sure. And when seconds count the cops are only minutes (HA!) away...



smashedbanana said:


> For a second amendment point of view, what can you do with a gun to take down the government?


You don't have to take the gov't down. Same as the Cold War. All you need is a presence.



smashedbanana said:


> Say you and 10000 citizens unite with the best over the counter equipment. AR-15s, body armour, lots of ammo, the whole nine yards.
> What good is that against a smart bomb dropped from 25000ft?
> Or a drone strike?
> Or an M1 Abrams Tank?
> etc. etc.
> 
> That's straight logic.


This is straight bunk & you know it.



smashedbanana said:


> I don't support an outright ban.


Many do. And, as cliche as it sounds, this also gets it dead right: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.



smashedbanana said:


> This question is a trap. Not just by you but by the whole pro-gun side.


No it isn't. It is the _entire_ issue. You cannot apply a gun law, any gun law, to people who already ignore existing laws and expect different results. And every attempt to curb illegal guns will affect the rights of legal gun owners. Period.



smashedbanana said:


> It seems ANY inconvience becomes a rights challenge by the NRA. Look at Sandy Hook. Mandatory waiting periods seemed reasonable.
> No one taking guns, just a small delay. Lead Balloon.


First off, because the amount of change that particular law affects will be almost unnoticeable. Once again, how many deaths at Sandy Hook and how many deaths by illegal gun owners countrywide the exact same day? Sandy Hook happened once. Illegal gun owners happen 24/7/365.

Secondly, because the waiting period is the nose of the camel under the tent. The next bite out of that cake we spoke of earlier.



smashedbanana said:


> Why does there have to be only 1 law that fixes both illegal and legal gun owner violence?


I'm all ears. What's your two pronged solution? Be specific.



smashedbanana said:


> The reason these get lumped together is to make the left say "Ban Guns".


The reason these get lumped together is because they are inseparable. 

And the reason the left says "Ban Guns" is because deep down inside that's precisely what many of them want.



smashedbanana said:


> But there has to be something in between.


Fine. What is it?



smashedbanana said:


> Here are my questions to you:
> 
> Do you see gun violence in the U.S. as a problem?
> 
> If yes, what do you think is the solution? Or a solution.


To a greater or lesser extent and, depending on geography, yes. However, I do not see legal gun owners _anywhere_ as the problem.

The first step towards creating a solution is, as I noted above, to recognize & acknowledge what the problem is. Until that happens, nothing will happen. That said, going after legal gun owners is _not_ the answer. See the meme below.



smashedbanana said:


> Do you believe that 2nd Amendment was meant to give the people the apparatus to challenge the government?


Challenge? No. Maintain a constant reminder? Yes.



smashedbanana said:


> If yes, then do you think the energy spent fighting all anti-gun legislation is making Americans more in tune with what their government is actually doing? i.e. is that singular interest really actually hurting them?


I think the average American is a lot like the average Canadian. Neither of them have an f'ing clue what their gov't is doing to them or how hard.

Is that singular interest actually hurting whom? Gun owners? I'm not sure I understand the question.


----------



## FeXL

So, for those of you who support gun control, I have a question: Precisely what is accomplished from a concern standpoint with a 24 month wait?

Anyone?

Wait Time for Concealed Carry in Riverside County: Two Years



> The wait time for a concealed carry permit in Riverside County, California, now sits at two years.
> 
> That means a law-abiding citizen who applies for a concealed permit out of fear for his life has to find a way to survive unarmed while waiting 24 months to receive a permit allowing him to carry a gun for self-defense.
> 
> According to the Reno Gazzette Journal, *the wait time for applicants who apply for a concealed carry permit in Riverside County “has climbed from a few months to two years.”* This means law-abiding citizens like 56-year-old Steve Perkio have to apply with the understanding that it will literally be years before they get a permit.


Yeah, my bold.

I have another question. Actually, 3 more: How is going from no permit required to a "few month" wait to a 24 month wait not progressively larger bites out of that freedom cake mentioned earlier in the thread? Does this not illustrate clearly why legal gun owners are extremely reluctant to let any gun control legislation pass? Anybody care to speculate what the next step is?


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> So, for those of you who support gun control, I have a question: Precisely what is accomplished from a concern standpoint with a 24 month wait?
> 
> Anyone?
> 
> Wait Time for Concealed Carry in Riverside County: Two Years
> 
> Yeah, my bold.


The 2-year wait is as a result of a backlog. Specifically related to interviews that need to be conducted. There must be a staffing or budget issue not being covered in that article.

I don't support a unreasonable waiting period. 2 weeks or so is prudent. Enough time for someone with suicidal thoughts to maybe be noticed or have a change of heart.



> I have another question. Actually, 3 more: How is going from no permit required to a "few month" wait to a 24 month wait not progressively larger bites out of that freedom cake mentioned earlier in the thread? Does this not illustrate clearly why legal gun owners are extremely reluctant to let any gun control legislation pass? Anybody care to speculate what the next step is?


Again the law is not a 24 month waiting period. That's just whats happening in this county under it's law enforcement.


----------



## smashedbanana

Interestingly as per the previous discussion about mass shootings and silencers:

Police: FL Mosque Shooting Foiled After Man Tried Buying Silencer From Cop – Talking Points Memo


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> The 2-year wait is as a result of a backlog. Specifically related to interviews that need to be conducted. There must be a staffing or budget issue not being covered in that article.


Never claimed it wasn't. 

If this was a 2 year wait for driver's licenses or passports or, gawd forbid, wind turbine permits, Prog heads would be exploding everywhere & Jerry Brown would be hiring a kajillion unionized workers to take care of the backlog.

However, seeing as it's _only_ concealed carry permits, any delay is a good delay and a 24 month delay is even better. They're turning it into a war of attrition & are very motivated to stretch that wait as long as possible.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Never claimed it wasn't.
> 
> If this was a 2 year wait for driver's licenses or passports or, gawd forbid, wind turbine permits, Prog heads would be exploding everywhere & Jerry Brown would be hiring a kajillion unionized workers to take care of the backlog.
> 
> However, seeing as it's _only_ concealed carry permits, any delay is a good delay and a 24 month delay is even better. They're turning it into a war of attrition & are very motivated to stretch that wait as long as possible.


I don't understand your point then. This is a failure of bureaucracy in one county in one state. I'm not saying people there should be happy with that, but it's not accurate to say that mandatory wait period is 24 months. 

And do we really know that it's ONLY conceal and carry permits. Has the author of this article researched every form that needs processing in that county. Maybe a background check for a volunteer takes 36 months. Maybe it takes 4 years to appeal a traffic ticket. Who knows.


----------



## CubaMark

*Yup.* 

*School Shooting in Kentucky Was Nation’s 11th of Year. It Was Jan. 23.*

On Tuesday, it was a high school in small-town Kentucky. On Monday, a school cafeteria outside Dallas and a charter school parking lot in New Orleans. And before that, a school bus in Iowa, a college campus in Southern California, a high school in Seattle.

Gunfire ringing out in American schools used to be rare, and shocking. Now it seems to happen all the time.

The scene in Benton, Ky., on Tuesday was the worst so far in 2018: Two 15-year-old students were killed and 18 more people were injured. But it was one of at least 11 shootings on school property recorded since Jan. 1, and roughly the 50th of the academic year.

Researchers and gun control advocates say that since 2013, they have logged school shootings at a rate of about one a week.

([URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/us/kentucky-school-shooting.html]NYTimes[/URL])​
_Nothing to see here... move along folks..._ :-(


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, detail precisely the gun law you would implement that would deal with this issue.



CubaMark said:


> Nothing to see here... move along folks...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> So, CM, detail precisely the gun law you would implement that would deal with this issue.


More weeping icons?


----------



## CubaMark

*'It's catastrophic': At least 17 dead in Florida high school shooting*










Police said a former student opened fire at a Florida high school on Wednesday, killing at least 17 people and sending scores of students fleeing into the streets in the nation's deadliest school shooting since a gunman attacked an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

The shooter, who was equipped with a gas mask and smoke grenades, set off a fire alarm to draw students out of their classrooms shortly before the school day ended, officials said.

Authorities offered no immediate details on the 19-year-old suspect or any possible motive, except to say that he had been kicked out of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, which has about 3,000 students.

Students who knew the shooter, identified as Nikolas Cruz, described a volatile teenager whose strange behaviour had caused others to end friendships with him, particularly after the fight that led to his expulsion.

* * *​
The attacker used the fire alarm "so the kids would come pouring out of the classrooms into the hall," Sen. Bill Nelson said in an interview on CNN.

"And there the carnage began,"

* * *​
Freshman Max Charles was in class when he heard five gunshots.

"We were in the corner, away from the windows," he said. "The teacher locked the door and turned off the light. I thought maybe I could die or something."

* * *​
As he was leaving the building, he saw four dead students and one dead teacher.

(CBC)​


----------



## CubaMark

*The school shooting in Parkland, Florida today marks the 29th mass shooting in the US in 2018. 
There have only been 45 days in 2018*.​


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> More weeping icons?


Well, he left out the weeping icons this time.

Took a while to post it though. This has been news for some time now.

So, CM, same question (again): Detail precisely the gun law you would implement that would deal with this issue.

And, while yer pondering that, explain why you haven't used the "it's obvious he was a disturbed young man with mental health issues & just never got the help he really needed" defence. Is it because this is firearm related? Another Prog double-standard?

Jes' askin'...

Next, you can ponder this little quoted Prog statistic: In Chicago in 2018, there have been 51 people shot & killed and 213 shot & wounded. That's 264 people shot in Chicago so far this year. One _city_... 

In addition, how many of those shootings dya s'pose were conducted with registered firearms?


----------



## WCraig

I suggest 2 things:

1) Immediately ban high-capacity magazines. In mass shooting situations like this, the shooter will have to carry many more mags and spend much more time changing them. Severe criminal penalties for possessing a mag with greater than X capacity.

2) Implement HUGE taxes on firearm purchases, especially handguns and semi-automatics. You want to own guns, OK...pony up MULTIPLE times the the cost of the gun as taxes. PLUS, similar HUGE taxes on firearms inherited (or gifted). At the same time, offer free service to scrap unwanted guns. Everybody still has the _right_ to own guns, it just costs a lot more. In a couple of generations, the stockpile of weapons will be substantially reduced so that nutbars will have a lot tougher time obtaining the means to kill so many people so quickly.

Craig


----------



## eMacMan

Obviously a mis-understanding as to the term semi-automatic. All this means is that you have to squeeze the trigger each time. Technically even double-action revolvers qualify as semi-automatics. The old Henry, Spencer and Winchester repeating rifles are not semi-automatic as you have to lever a fresh bullet into the chamber after each shot. Still you can empty one in very short order, especially if you are not too worried about precise aim.

I think I can safely predict the following: There will be no tox screen done on the shooter(s) or at least no results released. There will be a sudden push for metal detectors and/or some other latest gadget in schools. Students will become accustomed to seeing cops in full body armour lurking like monsters in the hallways. Once these measures are generally accepted the attacks will abate until the manufactures have some new device they wish to pedal.

Sound like a Soviet era nightmare? That's exactly what it is likely to become. But if your ultimate goal is oppression it has to start in the schools, and events such are the ticket needed to get things rolling.


----------



## SINC

WCraig said:


> I suggest 2 things:
> 
> 1) Immediately ban high-capacity magazines. In mass shooting situations like this, the shooter will have to carry many more mags and spend much more time changing them. Severe criminal penalties for possessing a mag with greater than X capacity.
> 
> 2) Implement HUGE taxes on firearm purchases, especially handguns and semi-automatics. You want to own guns, OK...pony up MULTIPLE times the the cost of the gun as taxes. PLUS, similar HUGE taxes on firearms inherited (or gifted). At the same time, offer free service to scrap unwanted guns. Everybody still has the _right_ to own guns, it just costs a lot more. In a couple of generations, the stockpile of weapons will be substantially reduced so that nutbars will have a lot tougher time obtaining the means to kill so many people so quickly.
> 
> Craig


While I understand the good intentions of people who offer solutions to the gun problem in the US (and Canada to a degree now, especially among the criminal element) few of the ideas offered are workable. In the two suggestions offered here, first banning high-capacity magazines would have little effect given the millions (or perhaps even billions?) of high capacity magazines now in circulation and owned by law abiding gun owners. How would officials propose to gather all such devices for destruction or convince owners to turn them in?

And secondly adding a high tax on guns themselves would only affect law abiding gun owners. The criminal element do not obtain their weapons from legitimate gun stores, rather they deal in the underground market where guns are bought and sold without any taxation at all and many of those weapons untraceable without serial numbers.

Understand that I am not in any way critical of people who offer solutions to the gun issue, but just point out the difficulties I see in trying to enact those suggestions.


----------



## Macfury

I suspect the Florida shooter already knew he would be facing wither death or severe criminal penalties. I doubt taxes would have stopped him either. Or the fear of being traced. The American problem among mass shooters is behavioural and cultural. One part of the problem: in today's climate of political correctness, people have become afraid simply to call out suspicious behaviour for fear of being sued or charged with hate crimes.


----------



## Rps

So I’ll start off by reposting a post on this subject.

We’ve been down this road before. Gun Culture in the U.S. is just that culture......and cultural changes are glacial in changing. Let’s take a look at a model which worked on changing a culture.....drinking and driving. Would anyone here think drinking and driving is fine, a right? MADD worked and continues to work on this issue. One of the things they did was build a wish list so let’s look at it.

2002, MADD announced its "Eight-Point Plan". This consisted of:

Resuscitating the nation's efforts to prevent impaired driving. ( gun control )

Increasing driving while intoxicated (DWI)/driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement, especially the use of frequent, highly publicized sobriety checkpoints. ( more rigorous check on open carry and carrying loaded weapons in motor vehicles, ride checks for guns )

Enacting primary enforcement seat belt laws in all states. ( not sure what the equivalent would be, maybe draconian enforcement of existing laws )

Creating tougher, more comprehensive sanctions geared toward higher-risk drivers. ( gun carriers )

Developing a dedicated National Traffic Safety Fund. ( similar fund for gun actions )

Reducing underage drinking. ( gun ownership and use )

Increasing beer excise taxes to the same level as those for spirits. ( taxes on weapons and bullets )

Reinvigorating court monitoring programs.[17]

none of these challenge Second Amend Rights...... it would be a good start for a change in culture.

Second, the news media continues its incestuous cycle...first the horror, then the emotion, then the history of the shooter if possible, then the history of mass shootings, then the prayers, then did we go to far on our coverage...... what they need to do is layout ground work for a change in their constitution and hammer that daily until the masss get it. I have been involved with organizational cultural change and let me tell you it’s a sloooowoow process. Cultural change of a country takes longer must if you want change you have to seek it and and discipline to act. The first thing is to scrap the “ point of no return” attitude....if you don’t do that no change will come. The key to this is the U.S. has “gotta wanna”.


----------



## Macfury

Already you're calling for a change in the Constitution--which is why proposals such as yours will gain zero traction.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> Already you're calling for a change in the Constitution--which is why proposals such as yours will gain zero traction.


None of the above proposals affect the second amendment.


----------



## Macfury

Rps said:


> None of the above proposals affect the second amendment.


Then why did you say:



> ...what they need to do is *layout ground work for a change in their constitution and* hammer that daily until the masss get it.


----------



## Rps

MacFury, it was a two part post. Part one was proposals that could be put in place if the political will exists. The second part was on what needs to be done if there is to be a cultural change....that piece certainly involves a Constitutional ammendment.


----------



## Macfury

If there is a cultural change, then no amendment should be necessary. 



Rps said:


> MacFury, it was a two part post. Part one was proposals that could be put in place if the political will exists. The second part was on what needs to be done if there is to be a cultural change....that piece certainly involves a Constitutional ammendment.


----------



## Rps

Macfury said:


> If there is a cultural change, then no amendment should be necessary.


I agree 100%, but many times for cultural change you need a driver.


----------



## WCraig

SINC said:


> While I understand the good intentions of people who offer solutions to the gun problem in the US (and Canada to a degree now, especially among the criminal element) few of the ideas offered are workable. In the two suggestions offered here, first banning high-capacity magazines would have little effect given the millions (or perhaps even billions?) of high capacity magazines now in circulation and owned by law abiding gun owners. How would officials propose to gather all such devices for destruction or convince owners to turn them in?


As I said, "Severe criminal penalties for possessing a mag with greater than X capacity." Allow a grace period (1 year?) for people to dispose of soon-to-be illegal mags or have them permanently pinned to the permitted capacity. After implementation, severe fines or jail time for possessing now-illegal mags. There is no political will in the US to control the guns themselves but perhaps controlling such mags could find its way into law. After all, what law-abiding use requires a high-capacity mag?



> And secondly adding a high tax on guns themselves would only affect law abiding gun owners. The criminal element do not obtain their weapons from legitimate gun stores, rather they deal in the underground market where guns are bought and sold without any taxation at all and many of those weapons untraceable without serial numbers.
> 
> Understand that I am not in any way critical of people who offer solutions to the gun issue, but just point out the difficulties I see in trying to enact those suggestions.


The BS about criminal guns is just that. Where do they come from? From easily-available, cheap new models and stolen from the existing enormous base of guns in circulation. So we make it much more expensive to buy new guns. And expensive to pass them on to a new generation. But zero cost to turn them in for scrap. The US arrived at the present situation over a long time. Proposals like these would work to reduce the per capita number of weapons, especially handguns and high-capacity, quick-firing long guns. It will take years but isn't that better than doing absolutely nothing? 

And Second Amendment nuts can't complain. The Constitution didn't guarantee that their guns would be cheap. In fact, I'll bet that 1776 weapons were incredibly expensive compared to a current rifle. And, of course, the firing rate with a 1776 weapon was about one shot per minute. I doubt the founding fathers had any idea that they were enabling all the school shooters...let alone something like Las Vegas.

Craig


----------



## Macfury

I suspect that enforcing existing regulations would go a lot further than promising to upend the Second Amendment.


----------



## FeXL

WCraig said:


> After all, what law-abiding use requires a high-capacity mag?


What law abiding use requires motorcycles & cars with enough power to triple the national speed limit?

I could list at length a number of items similar to the above that make no sense at all, save, because somebody wants one. That's the joy of living in a free country.

In addition, do you really think that criminals (the ones who flout the law already) would turn in their high capacity magazines? Have I got a bridge for you...



WCraig said:


> Proposals like these would work to reduce the per capita number of weapons, especially handguns and high-capacity, quick-firing long guns.


Proposals like this would sell more guns than could be manufactured. Barry, with the shadow of gun control over every day he was SCOAMF, was the best firearms salesman the industry ever had. The bottom has dropped out of firearm sales since Trump took over.



WCraig said:


> It will take years but isn't that better than doing absolutely nothing?


How's about instead of rolling out a whole suite of untested laws, we enforce the existing ones? And listen to people who tell us that there's a person online making threats?



WCraig said:


> And Second Amendment nuts can't complain.


Why are those who stand by the 2nd amendment the nuts? Why aren't those who would attempt to change a constitutionally guaranteed right the nuts? 



WCraig said:


> I doubt the founding fathers had any idea that they were enabling all the school shooters...let alone something like Las Vegas.


Nope, they probably didn't. But that wasn't the point, was it? The 2nd amendment was created to keep gov't in check. Bet they thought that the existing laws (and enforcement thereof) would deal with the criminals, though.


----------



## WCraig

> PARKLAND, FL—In the hours following a violent rampage in Florida in which a lone attacker killed 17 individuals and seriously injured over a dozen others, citizens living in the only country where this kind of mass killing routinely occurs reportedly concluded Wednesday that there was no way to prevent the massacre from taking place....


https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1823016659


----------



## Macfury

Just to be sure--you know that's the Onion, right?


----------



## FeXL

Tucker Carlson: ‘They Call It Gun Control But It’s Not — It’s People Control’



> “Let’s stop lying about this,” he said. “The calls we are hearing today for gun control have nothing to do with protecting Americans from violence. What you’re witnessing is a kind of class war. The left hates rural America, red America, gun-owning America, the America that elected Donald Trump. They hate them. Progressives are still in charge of most of the major institutions in this country, and they despise the autonomy of an armed population. They want collective punishment for the sins of a few. *They seek to obliterate a core constitutional right rather than trying to mitigate its downsides. They call it gun control, but it’s not. It’s people control. For the left, voters who can’t be controlled, can’t be trusted.*”


Bold mine.

Precisely...


----------



## FeXL

No, There Haven't Been 18 School Shootings This Year — Not Even Close



> The latest mass shooting, which claimed 17 lives at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, was a horrible tragedy. But that's no excuse for the flurry of stories parroting a gun control advocacy group's false claims about school shootings.


More:



> It's not true.
> 
> That number comes from a gun control advocacy group — Everytown for Gun Safety* — which arrived at 18 only by shoving everything it possibly could into the category of "school shooting."
> 
> The simplest check of its list shows how misleading the group is being.
> 
> One of the "school shootings" on the list, for example, involved a Greyson College, Tex., student who accidentally discharged a weapon at the school's Criminal Justice Center during a class supervised by a police officer on how to use handguns.
> 
> Another on the list involved a third grader who accidentally pulled the trigger of a police officer's holstered weapon.
> 
> Two were suicides that happened to take place on school grounds. One of them was a 31-year-old man who shot himself while parked in his car, which happened to be on a school lot— at a school that had been closed for seven months. Another was a student who shot himself in the head in the school's bathroom.


*Spearheaded by Michael Bloomberg.

In sum?



> In fact, of the 18 "school shootings," only five occurred during school hours, and *only four* — including the latest — are what most people would consider a school shooting; in which someone brings a gun to school with the intent of shooting students.


Bold mine.

Interesting what a little perspective will do to a Prog narrative...

Further on statistical manipulation:

Lying About Gun Violence With Statistics

First:



> Every time a Muslim terrorist shoots, stabs, bombs or runs over Americans, the default response is, “Let’s not jump to any conclusions”. That’s swiftly followed by media spin pieces claiming that the majority of terrorist attacks are really committed by white male Republicans and the Amish based on math so bad that even the world’s crookedest bookie wouldn’t go near it. And anyone who argues that the pattern of Islamic terror attacks is a call for common sense migration reform is regarded as a racist and a coward who wants to destroy the Constitution by blowing a handful of attacks out of proportion.
> 
> (And do you know how many people are hit by lightning or stung by killer bees every year.)
> 
> And whenever a suburban shooting happens, especially in a school, it becomes a clarion call to dismantle the 2nd Amendment. And that’s also backed by some of the world’s worst statistics.


Yep.

More:



> Mass shootings haven’t actually increased. But the perception of them has. Criminologist James Alan Fox has repeatedly demonstrated that the hard numbers aren’t going anywhere. But real statistics are boring. And so fake statistics, whether from Everytown, Vox or Mother Jones, have proliferated instead.
> 
> Fake statistics like Everytown’s 18 school shootings create a sense of urgency. Nothing manufactures a crisis like statistics showing that the problem is getting worse when what is actually getting worse is the media coverage. The media’s obsession with mass shootings not only creates the perception that they are getting worse, but it also inspires a special class of mass shooters to aim for a new high score.
> 
> Guns don’t cause mass shootings, but media coverage does.


Even more:



> *The suburban kid who goes to a school and opens fire will be on the news for weeks while the kid in the ghetto who shoots up a housing project in Chicago or St. Louis will never be more than a local crime story.* But those local crime stories are what make Chicago, Baltimore and St. Louis uniquely dangerous.
> 
> The firearm crime rate has been steadily falling. Even as the population has grown, the number of incidents and victims have dropped sharply. Gun control conspiracy theorists obsess over the 2004 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. But the number of firearms incidents has been higher before it expired and has often been lower since it expired. *Gun bans have very little to do with violent crime.*
> 
> *Violent crime is carried out by criminals. Banning guns doesn’t stop people who already operate outside the law.* The French authorities seize some 1,200 “assault rifles” every year. Meanwhile in the capital of the European Union, you can get a “military weapon” for $500 in half an hour.


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Curious, that...

Media Finds School Shooter's Politics Highly Relevant, So, Unfortunately, You Know What That Means



> Steve Scalise's assassin's politics? Not important. In fact, Steve Scalise's assassin wasn't even important himself -- the media stopped most reporting on it after a mere 4 days, and stopped all reporting on it after 12.
> 
> Rand Paul's assailant's politics? Not important. The media pushed the attacker's lawyer's claim that this was a personal dispute over grass clippings and then, when that was proven a lie, neatly forgot to report on the rabid left-wing attacker's motives.
> 
> But now motives in otherwise inexplicable violence are important again -- so that must mean the shooter was right-wing (or could be claimed to be right-wing).


More:



> Meanwhile, the FBI was warned about this guy, who left a comment on a YouTube video stating flat-out he intended to be a mass school shooter, but the FBI says it failed to "fully identify" the commenter.
> 
> *I can see why the FBI couldn't "fully identify" the commenter -- all he did was leave the comment under his actual legal name, along with the uncommon spelling of his first name.
> 
> It's hard to "fully identify" someone based on their full legal name and their YouTube login and their IP and all that, I guess.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Leftists Blame Trump for Mass Shooting at Florida School



> Web entrepreneur Brian Krassenstein took the opportunity to suggest the real culprits behind this shooting: "Congress, Gun Store Owners, Gun Manufacturers, The President of this nation." Does this mean that former president Barack Obama is guilty for the mass shootings that took place under his watch?


<snort> Yeah, I wanna see Barry stand up & take credit for that...



> In any case, blaming Trump, the NRA, and Republicans for this massacre is wrongheaded. As Mike Zollo tweeted, "Liberals are blaming everyone except the shooter. The NRA is not to blame. Donald Trump is not to blame. Law abiding gun owners are not to blame. *Nikolas Cruz, the psychopath who did this, is the only one to blame.*"


Bold mine.

Yeppers.



> As PJ Media's J. Christian Adams pointed out, guns were in schools 30 years ago, but mass shootings did not take place — partly because students were taught how to use guns rightly, and how not to use them. Something about modern American culture is exacerbating this problem — it may be the attention given to mass shooters after Columbine, it may be unformed male teenage anger, or it may be something else.
> 
> Blaming Trump and the NRA is a distraction from the real issue.


Again, yeppers.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## FeXL

So? What's your solution? You come to this thread time after time after time with links to another mass shooting but never propose an actual _solution_.

How's the view from the cheap seats?



CubaMark said:


> _some BS Prog meme_


----------



## FeXL

(article from 2013, still relevant today)

Common theme emerges in school shootings



> Last month’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. was shocking. Everyone feels that viscerally. But the rush to blame guns and the gun culture in the U.S. is, at the very least, only a part of the issue and likely more than a little disingenuous.
> 
> In the first place, none of the guns used in that incident were illegal and nothing that U.S. President Barack Obama has done with his nearly two-dozen executive orders would have changed that.
> 
> Secondly, there has been precious little discussion about the impact that mental health had in this case. Relatives of the shooter, Adam Lanza, said he was on a form of medication for “depression,” so we can assume some sort of psychotropic prescription pills.
> 
> The more we look at other similar events it would seem a pattern emerges. A law enforcement friend sent me a chart looking at 47 school shootings and stabbings between 1992 and 2011. A common denominator exists that bears discussion. In every event the attacker was being treated for some form of diagnosed mental issue or personality disorder with psychotropic medication.


----------



## FeXL

The compassionate, intellectual, left...

Gun Control Advocates Bully Shooting Victim's Father Because He's a Trump Supporter



> How depraved is the left? Gun control advocates on Twitter are now trolling a father who just lost his daughter in a school shooting.
> 
> _Actual responses to a man whose daughter was murdered in the Florida school massacre. Why? Because he voted for Trump. Some people are sick pic.twitter.com/9jUmHH1wFJ
> — Chet Cannon (@Chet_Cannon) February 15, 2018_​


There is no lower form of life...


----------



## FeXL

Memes? We gots sum o' them, too...


----------



## WCraig

You can post your tripe a thousand times and still isn't any less sickening or any closer to right.

How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before even trying to change?


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I suspect that enforcing existing regulations would go a lot further than promising to upend the Second Amendment.


Sadly, "existing regulations" were recently watered-down, making it entirely legal for an unstable teenager with known (and reported) mental health concerns to own an AR-15.

Curious, the silence from the usual suspects in here on that front...

*White House refuses to release photo of Trump gun law repeal*









The White House released a photo of a different bill signing from the same day relating to environmental regulations​

The White House has refused to release a photo of President Donald Trump signing a law making it easier for some people with mental illness to buy guns.

Despite repeated requests from CBS News, the White House press office has issued only a one-line response.

Mr Trump last year repealed an Obama-era rule allowing the names of certain people on mental health benefits to be entered into a criminal database.

The controversy follows a shooting by a suspect who had mental health issues.

Nikolas Cruz is accused of using a legally-purchased rifle to kill 17 people at his former high school in Parkland, Florida, on Wednesday.

In a tweet, Mr Trump called the gunman "mentally disturbed" and vowed to "tackle the difficult issue of mental health" during a speech to the nation.

But the Republican president's critics noted his own annual budget proposed this week would cuts hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for mental health programmes.

*Why won't White House release photo?*

CBS News says it requested a copy of the image - which White House photographers confirm exists - 12 separate times by phone or email.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders has only said in a note dated 19 April 2017: "We don't plan to release the picture at this time."

CBS News asked the White House again on Thursday to release the photo, but has not received a response.

Legislation is often signed into law with much fanfare at the White House, including photo-ops, press conferences and even gifts to selected participants.

Mr Trump has boasted of having signed into law "more legislation than anybody" - a claim fact checkers say they have debunked.

(BBC)​


----------



## Rps

WCraig said:


> You can post your trip a thousand times and still isn't any less sickening or any closer to right.
> 
> How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before even trying to change?


WCraig, you do realise we live in Canada right? We can do little and we can rant all we want about our neighbours to the south.....bottom line.....only they can affect change. Much of the gun issues are cultural.....in Canada people buy guns ( and we probably have as many per capita as the U.S., if not we are probably one of the countries that has more than their fair share ) the difference is philosophical...we buy for hunting or sport....the U.S. buys for personal protection.....that is a huge gulf to cross. The cowboy image of the gun loving society is a tough nut to crack. The issue is that all posts on this thread contain a large amount of truth to them. Whether it’s FeXl, Sinc, MacFury, CubaMark, or myself ( regular posters to this thread ) all touch the truth even though our comments are at odds with each other.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Sadly, "existing regulations" were recently watered-down, making it entirely legal for an unstable teenager with known (and reported) mental health concerns to own an AR-15.


Yep. The ACLU weighed in on that one as well. 



> This month, Congress repealed a rule that would have registered thousands of Social Security recipients with mental disabilities, who have others manage their benefits, into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to prevent them from owning firearms.
> 
> The American Civil Liberties Union does not oppose gun control laws. As an organization dedicated to defending all constitutional rights, we believe the Second Amendment allows reasonable restrictions to promote public safety.
> 
> But gun control laws, like any law, should be fair, effective and not based on prejudice or stereotype. This rule met none of those criteria.


https://www.aclu.org/blog/disability-rights/gun-control-laws-should-be-fair


CM, your nose for research is seriously out of joint. Are you getting your news from Jimmy Kimmel?


----------



## FeXL

Trip as in bad acid from the 60's or trip—>tripe?

Either way, what's sickening is the left's propensity to turn a tragedy into political hay. As I pointed out, over 250 people shot in one city in 6 weeks and what do we get? Crickets. A school shooting? Now there's a headline grabber!!!

The problem is not existing gun laws and those law abiding citizens who largely follow them. The problem is those who already skirt the law & won't care what gun laws are introduced 'cause they ain't gonna follow 'em anyways. Yet you castigate the lawful along with the lawless.

Your suggestion of increasing the cost of firearms & ammunition is at best naive at at worst completely ignorant of economics.

What happens when you falsely inflate the cost of a desirable product? You drive it underground. Increase the cost of firearms & ammunition to prohibitive levels & suddenly every domestic entrepreneur with a home machine shop will start making black market weapons. Not only that, but suddenly international arms makers will be supplying the US black market, knowingly or not.

Look at what's happening with drugs. Look at what's happening with alcohol. Look at what's happening with cigarettes.

Enforce the existing laws. Listen to tipsters. Eliminate gun free zones which do nothing save paint a target on the backs of those therein, especially schools. Quit prescribing meds for kids that do more damage than good. Get inner city kids the help they need, instead of extending mere platitudes. Quit using shootings for political hay, all it does is divide.

Do those things, measure the results & then see what change has occurred. Disarming law abiding American citizens is not an option in the second place & will never be allowed to happen in the first place.



WCraig said:


> You can post your trip a thousand times and still isn't any less sickening or any closer to right.
> 
> How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before even trying to change?


----------



## eMacMan

Wanna bet the gun seizure groupies attempt to slip this one onto their list of school shootings?

https://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/Seattle-Highline-School-Shooting-Lockdown-12619600.php



> A shooting scare at Highline College in Des Moines prompted a campus-wide lockdown Friday, fueling fears of a campus attack in a nation rattled by yet another mass shooting earlier in the week.
> 
> Hours after gunshots were reported at the suburban Seattle campus, police had not yet located any evidence that a shooting occurred. Fire officials noted that there is "no indication" of an active shooter at Highline.
> 
> At 11:50 p.m., a Kent Police Department spokesperson said investigators had completed their sweep of the campus without uncovering any evidence of a shooting. The lockdown was lifted, though Friday's classes have been canceled.
> 
> "We have completed our search and have not located any injuries or indications of a shooting," the spokesperson said on Twitter. "The investigation into the initial call will continue."


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Increase the cost of firearms & ammunition to prohibitive levels & suddenly every domestic entrepreneur with a home machine shop will start making black market weapons.


What? Yes it's definetly very easy to spin out AR-15s with your $79 Ryobi Lathe. Come on!



> Not only that, but suddenly international arms makers will be supplying the US black market, knowingly or not.


I guess in this scenario the borders are really loose now? Containers full of AKs for everyone.



> Look at what's happening with drugs. Look at what's happening with alcohol. Look at what's happening with cigarettes.


Not the same thing at all and you know it. Mike, who failed grade 7 can grow Marijuana but he sure as sh** can't get his life together to become an arms manufacturer.



> Listen to tipsters.


I love this argument. It's now Trumps position. The fault lies in people that think their neighbor is crazy. Report everything. Like it's the red scare. The FBI only gets like 5 tips so they can follow up on every one of your call ins. As an added bonus if you dislike your neighbor send in a false tip. Problem solved. No more worries about who pays for the fence!



> Quit prescribing meds for kids that do more damage than good. Get inner city kids the help they need, instead of extending mere platitudes. Quit using shootings for political hay, all it does is divide.


This is in itself a platitude. Looking forward to your 10-point plan that get this rolling in every State and jurisdiction. Maybe Jenny McCarthy can assist get the prescriptions changed.


----------



## smashedbanana

WCraig said:


> As I said, "Severe criminal penalties for possessing a mag with greater than X capacity." Allow a grace period (1 year?) for people to dispose of soon-to-be illegal mags or have them permanently pinned to the permitted capacity. After implementation, severe fines or jail time for possessing now-illegal mags. There is no political will in the US to control the guns themselves but perhaps controlling such mags could find its way into law. After all, what law-abiding use requires a high-capacity mag?
> 
> 
> The BS about criminal guns is just that. Where do they come from? From easily-available, cheap new models and stolen from the existing enormous base of guns in circulation. So we make it much more expensive to buy new guns. And expensive to pass them on to a new generation. But zero cost to turn them in for scrap. The US arrived at the present situation over a long time. Proposals like these would work to reduce the per capita number of weapons, especially handguns and high-capacity, quick-firing long guns. It will take years but isn't that better than doing absolutely nothing?
> 
> And Second Amendment nuts can't complain. The Constitution didn't guarantee that their guns would be cheap. In fact, I'll bet that 1776 weapons were incredibly expensive compared to a current rifle. And, of course, the firing rate with a 1776 weapon was about one shot per minute. I doubt the founding fathers had any idea that they were enabling all the school shooters...let alone something like Las Vegas.
> 
> Craig


I've mentioned it in the thread, I agree strongly that changing the prices of some of the firearms and accessories will be the only achievable response.

For certain firearms or firearm classes the prices should be much higher. Why is an AR-15 less than $800? Does it need to be? Especially in light of what it's been used for.

Not sure about the 1-year grace period or fines. Anything that requires enforcement will end up dying on the floor.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> For certain firearms or firearm classes the prices should be much higher. Why is an AR-15 less than $800? Does it need to be? Especially in light of what it's been used for.


I'm not trying to trap you here, but how much tax would you place on an AR-15 to deter a mass murderer who plans for one or two years?


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Yep. The ACLU weighed in on that one as well.


And while I understand the ACLU's position, I disagree with it. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Though a casual observer of the state of the USA these days might wonder as to the extent of mental illness in the general population... 



> CM, your nose for research is seriously out of joint. Are you getting your news from Jimmy Kimmel?


Did I present erroneous information? Why would you say that?


----------



## Macfury

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. But good to know your actual position: that you believe the government erred by overturning a law branding disabled people on social assistance as mentally ill because it _might_ prevent them from owning guns. 



CubaMark said:


> And while I understand the ACLU's position, I disagree with it. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Though a casual observer of the state of the USA these days might wonder as to the extent of mental illness in the general population...
> 
> 
> 
> Did I present erroneous information? Why would you say that?


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> I'm not trying to trap you here, but how much tax would you place on an AR-15 to deter a mass murderer who plans for one or two years?


Hard to not be a trap 

I believe weapons of a certain type should have a tax. A victims repatriation fund or similar. Like what the tax on Cigarettes is supposed to do for Health Care, except more direct to victim.

A increase in price will slow manufacture and decrease the numbers sold, and in turn reduce access to these weapons. In Sandy Hook the shooter's mom was the one who bought the AR15, "just because". I am pretty sure if she hadn't bought an AR15 there still would have been a shooting, but likely less casualties.

Over time I believe it could have a measurable impact. How it can be measured, not easily. 

Not at all solution. But could be part of one. And more than likely achievable.

And to put a number on it, I think an AR-15 or clone should be $3499 retail. It shouldn't be the same cost as an iphone as it is now..


----------



## Macfury

It's not a trap. Your premise is that you want to A15s to be so expensive that the company eventually goes out of business from lack of sales.

So once we set that precedent, would you be OK with tripling the price of anything else the government down't want you to have-- cars, because they cause death and pollution, butter because it contains fat, dogs and dog food, because dogs cause global warming?



smashedbanana said:


> Hard to not be a trap
> 
> I believe weapons of a certain type should have a tax. A victims repatriation fund or similar. Like what the tax on Cigarettes is supposed to do for Health Care, except more direct to victim.
> 
> A increase in price will slow manufacture and decrease the numbers sold, and in turn reduce access to these weapons. In Sandy Hook the shooter's mom was the one who bought the AR15, "just because". I am pretty sure if she hadn't bought an AR15 there still would have been a shooting, but likely less casualties.
> 
> Over time I believe it could have a measurable impact. How it can be measured, not easily.
> 
> Not at all solution. But could be part of one. And more than likely achievable.
> 
> And to put a number on it, I think an AR-15 or clone should be $3499 retail. It shouldn't be the same cost as an iphone as it is now..


----------



## smashedbanana

Fexl? Are you using MF's account?



Macfury said:


> It's not a trap. Your premise is that you want to A15s to be so expensive that the company eventually goes out of business from lack of sales.


No no no. I have not said anything along these lines at all. I have pointed out the costs of a specific class of weapons favored by mass shooters that are being used because they are too accessible by way of cost. Those costs for those weapons can be increased to reduce access to them.

I have not said that every weapon Colt makes needs to be increased to a level unattainable by all consumers. 

I gave you a specific price as well and it was not by accident. That is the cost of the AR-15 in many countries outside of the U.S.A.



> So once we set that precedent, would you be OK with tripling the price of anything else the government down't want you to have-- cars, because they cause death and pollution, butter because it contains fat, dogs and dog food, because dogs cause global warming?


Really?

Of course I do not favour anything as arbitrary as this example.


----------



## Macfury

Just narrowing things down. So only otherwise legal items that cause death.



smashedbanana said:


> Fexl? Are you using MF's account?
> 
> 
> 
> No no no. I have not said anything along these lines at all. I have pointed out the costs of a specific class of weapons favored by mass shooters that are being used because they are too accessible by way of cost. Those costs for those weapons can be increased to reduce access to them.
> 
> I have not said that every weapon Colt makes needs to be increased to a level unattainable by all consumers.
> 
> I gave you a specific price as well and it was not by accident. That is the cost of the AR-15 in many countries outside of the U.S.A.
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Of course I do not favour anything as arbitrary as this example.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. But good to know your actual position: that you believe the government erred by overturning a law branding disabled people on social assistance as mentally ill because it _might_ prevent them from owning guns.


If you read the report, you'll see that one of the ACLU's complaints was that persons with mental health issues under the old law might not seek the benefits to which they are entitled because that might raise a red flag in a background check when buying a gun.

Surely there is a way to protect folks' access to their entitlements without incurring an unreasonable sanction. Although not an issue of numbers, I can't imagine this affects a great many people, and that a workaround should be possible.


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> If you read the report, you'll see that one of the ACLU's complaints was that persons with mental health issues under the old law might not seek the benefits to which they are entitled because that might raise a red flag in a background check when buying a gun.
> 
> Surely there is a way to protect folks' access to their entitlements without incurring an unreasonable sanction. Although not an issue of numbers, I can't imagine this affects a great many people, and that a workaround should be possible.


Let's see Big Pharma is raking in billion$ selling SSRIs which may well have been the trigger in the latest attack, and it won't impact large numbers????

I think one could make a legitimate argument that SSRIs and/or SSRI withdrawal can cause both suicides and violent outbursts. Should SSRIs be banned?


----------



## CubaMark

If there has ever been a more perfect expression of the phrase "money can't buy you class".... These folks seem awfully happy following the massacre of 17 children and teachers....










(@realDonaldTrump)


----------



## Macfury

You really must be one bitter person to keep nit picking like this.



CubaMark said:


> If there has ever been a more perfect expression of the phrase "money can't buy you class".... These folks seem awfully happy following the massacre of 17 children and teachers....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (@realDonaldTrump)


----------



## eMacMan

Not quite worthy of the Police state thread, but maybe we should be seizing the guns from the police? 

https://www.blacklistednews.com/art...a-church-cops-show-up-and-shoot-himmedia.html


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> You really must be one bitter person to keep nit picking like this.


It is not a nit. Trump has no empathy for others and even less class.

Craig


----------



## Macfury

Because you know what he's feeling? Congratulations, Mr. Psychic.



WCraig said:


> It is not a nit. Trump has no empathy for others and even less class.
> 
> Craig


----------



## SINC

Food for thought as a start?

A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/gun-control-republicans-consider-grvo/


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Food for thought as a start?
> 
> A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider
> 
> https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/gun-control-republicans-consider-grvo/


Some interesting thoughts as long as there is a mechanism in place to prevent and/or punish abuse.

Meanwhile insanity continues after the fact.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawmakers-demolish-horrific-florida-shooting-233626071.html

Instead of demolishing the school imagine the character building exercise if the students got together and reclaimed their school from this tragedy. A helluva a lot cheaper, plus it would in a way allow the students to demolish the s#!thead and conquer their own fears.


----------



## smashedbanana

SINC said:


> Food for thought as a start?
> 
> A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider
> 
> https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/gun-control-republicans-consider-grvo/


The GVRO is retarded.

All it does is give the pro-gun side the belief that the have applied some soft of legislative "solution".


----------



## Rps

From our friends at CNN.... yes a true politician understands the importance of timing....

Washington (CNN)A Kansas congressional hopeful said Monday that he's sticking by his campaign giveaway of an AR-15 rifle despite criticism in light of last Wednesday's mass school shooting in Florida.

"We aren't using this to raise money," Tyler Tannahill told HLN's Carol Costello. "We had this planned over a month ago to kind of coincide with the Kansas Republican Convention."
The Republican candidate launched the giveaway along with his candidacy on February 13, a day before an AR-15-style rifle was used in the Parkland, Florida, massacre that left 17 people dead.
Tannahill said his campaign discussed if they should end the contest and decided to keep it going.
"We have to sit down and have these tough discussions," he said. "I'm a staunch believer in the Second Amendment, and I don't think those rights should be infringed, but how do we keep our children and teachers safe in schools?"
Costello interrupted: "You're saying these things, but you're giving away an AR-15 to bring attention to your campaign, at the very least."
John Fredericks, a conservative talk radio host in Virginia who was participating in the segment, also criticized Tannahill's giveaway, saying he felt it was "in really bad taste."
"Come on, man, it doesn't make any sense," Fredericks said. "You're not having a legitimate conversation when you're giving away an AR-15 for free."
Tannahill's campaign isn't the only assault rifle giveaway carrying on despite the Parkland shooting. The Kansas City Star reported on Saturday that third-graders will continue selling tickets for an AR-15 raffle in a baseball team fundraiser.


----------



## FeXL

In Ottawa a "$79 Ryobi Lathe" may make you a machinist. I don't know. Out here it makes you a Progressive City Slicker.

However, I personally know at least a dozen, maybe more, farmers from the area I grew up (in southern Alberta) who have sizeable lathes, vertical mills & a veritable assortment of tools & equipment more than adequate to machine AR-15 lowers if they wanted to. At least two of them have done some basic gunsmithing.

Come on, indeed...



smashedbanana said:


> What? Yes it's definetly very easy to spin out AR-15s with your $79 Ryobi Lathe. Come on!


Lessee...thousands of tons of illegal drugs smuggled into the US any given year, millions of illegal aliens in the country, & you think sea cans full of weapons is a stretch?



smashedbanana said:


> I guess in this scenario the borders are really loose now? Containers full of AKs for everyone.


'Cause Mike is exactly the type of person we're talking about here... XX)



smashedbanana said:


> Not the same thing at all and you know it. Mike, who failed grade 7 can grow Marijuana but he sure as sh** can't get his life together to become an arms manufacturer.


You should love it. It's precisely what the left has been advocating in Europe: "Run, Tell, Hide".



smashedbanana said:


> I love this argument. It's now Trumps position.


Yes, I know. The average Prog's head would be exploding to see his conservative neighbour & son loading up their firearms for a nice Sunday afternoon at the range.



smashedbanana said:


> The fault lies in people that think their neighbor is crazy. Report everything. Like it's the red scare.


<sniff...>

Deputies called to suspected shooter’s home 39 times over seven years

The FBI Was Warned About A School Shooting Threat From A YouTube User Named Nikolas Cruz In September

Teachers say Florida suspect’s problems started in middle school, and the system tried to help him



> The real problems started at least as early as middle school and quickly intensified. There were the vocal outbursts, disturbing drawings of stick figures with guns, constant disciplinary issues. There were threatening statements written on his homework and scrap paper, including a reference to killing President Barack Obama, saying he should be “burned alive and eaten.”


Nope. No legitimate warnings at all. Model citizen, right up to the minute when he went nuts & brought a weapon to a school.



smashedbanana said:


> The FBI only gets like 5 tips so they can follow up on every one of your call ins. As an added bonus if you dislike your neighbor send in a false tip. Problem solved. No more worries about who pays for the fence!


Looking forward to your ten point plan on precisely what you'd implement that would actually deal with illegal weapons and illegal owners, _*without impacting legal gun owners*_.



smashedbanana said:


> Looking forward to your 10-point plan that get this rolling in every State and jurisdiction.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> In Ottawa a "$79 Ryobi Lathe" may make you a machinist. I don't know. Out here it makes you a Progressive City Slicker.
> 
> However, I personally know at least a dozen, maybe more, farmers from the area I grew up (in southern Alberta) who have sizeable lathes, vertical mills & a veritable assortment of tools & equipment more than adequate to machine AR-15 lowers if they wanted to. At least two of them have done some basic gunsmithing.
> 
> Come on, indeed...


Seriously? This is your followup to your previous comment that somehow every Tom, Dick and Harry machinist is going to start producing underground firearms? You know a guy who knows a guy who probably could make part of a gun. Very weak.



> Lessee...thousands of tons of illegal drugs smuggled into the US any given year, millions of illegal aliens in the country, & you think sea cans full of weapons is a stretch?


Absolutely. Guns are made of metal. They show up on xrays as guns. Drugs packed in other foodstuffs look like nothing out of the ordinary.



> Cause Mike is exactly the type of person we're talking about here... XX)


My point is that illegal drugs and cigarettes require nothing more than a heartbeat to produce.



> You should love it. It's precisely what the left has been advocating in Europe: "Run, Tell, Hide".


In Europe it may work. It's a very different place. They have funded healthcare and a whole different outlook on things.



> Yes, I know. The average Prog's head would be exploding to see his conservative neighbour & son loading up their firearms for a nice Sunday afternoon at the range.


Not sure what your point is here. It's very hillbilly.



> <sniff...>
> 
> Deputies called to suspected shooter’s home 39 times over seven years
> 
> The FBI Was Warned About A School Shooting Threat From A YouTube User Named Nikolas Cruz In September
> 
> Teachers say Florida suspect’s problems started in middle school, and the system tried to help him
> 
> Nope. No legitimate warnings at all. Model citizen, right up to the minute when he went nuts & brought a weapon to a school.


I think you are trying to make my point for me. Obviously reporting out of the ordinary behavior doesn't really work.

What the real question is why was he able to have a gun like an AR15? And why are there no real facilities to remove a gun from someone in the U.S.? Especially someone like this...



> Looking forward to your ten point plan on precisely what you'd implement that would actually deal with illegal weapons and illegal owners, _*without impacting legal gun owners*_.


I guess the real question is what would you do? I mean this discussion is purely academic anyways. Is your answer do nothing? It seems like it.


----------



## SINC

Irony . . .

*Florida Teachers’ Pension Fund Invested in Maker of School Massacre Gun*

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark


----------



## FeXL

My point is, there is more than enough knowledge & capability to produce firearms underground if they become cost prohibitive. Or prohibited. That is all.

As far as your observation about producing _part_ of a gun, it's the most difficult piece to manufacture. Nearly everything else can come off a shelf &/or be modified to fit.



smashedbanana said:


> Seriously? This is your followup to your previous comment that somehow every Tom, Dick and Harry machinist is going to start producing underground firearms? You know a guy who knows a guy who probably could make part of a gun. Very weak.


Not everything that is smuggled into the US passes through customs. Surely you can't be that naive...



smashedbanana said:


> Absolutely. Guns are made of metal. They show up on xrays as guns. Drugs packed in other foodstuffs look like nothing out of the ordinary.


Right. Which is why I specifically mentioned machine shop capability (at whatever scale).



smashedbanana said:


> My point is that illegal drugs and cigarettes require nothing more than a heartbeat to produce.


Presicely what Progs think of gun owners.



smashedbanana said:


> Not sure what your point is here. It's very hillbilly.


Not if law enforcement agencies don't bother following up on them. The flaw in the system in this case wasn't the lack of reporting, it was the FIB (among others) completely dropping the ball.



smashedbanana said:


> I think you are trying to make my point for me. Obviously reporting out of the ordinary behavior doesn't really work.


I think there were two failures here. One, how does a NICS reveal mental issues that have not created a criminal record? The answer is, it can't.

The second (and more importantly in this instance) is after _significant_ evidence and a long history of mental issues, why weren't the complaints even addressed, let alone dealt with by LEO's? This was hardly a single phone call from a nutty neighbour who doesn't like firearms.



smashedbanana said:


> What the real question is why was he able to have a gun like an AR15?


Who said there isn't?



smashedbanana said:


> And why are there no real facilities to remove a gun from someone in the U.S.? Especially someone like this...


No, the real question is what gun law would have prevented this tragedy? The answer is obvious: despite all the screeching from the left, no gun law on the planet would have stopped this. 

What would I do? Asked & answered. As always with me, what part of this equation is cause & what is effect? Again, despite the screeching from the left, the AR-15 is not the cause. There is much that led up to that point.

Enforce current laws. Get father figures into single mother's kid's lives. Quit feeding our kids drug cocktails. When a kid is screaming for help, help him! Eliminate gun free zones, all they do is make people targets. Armed security at all schools. Arm & train teachers.

That's a good start.



smashedbanana said:


> I guess the real question is what would you do? I mean this discussion is purely academic anyways. Is your answer do nothing? It seems like it.


----------



## FeXL

Well, I don't know if more Progs are involved in mass shootings than Republicans, but there certainly is their share...

Republican lawmaker: 'So many' people who commit 'mass murders end up being Democrats'



> Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., said Wednesday that Democrats were more likely to be mass murderers in comparison to Republicans in an interview discussing the high school shooting in Parkland, Fla.
> 
> "It's interesting that so many of these people that commit the mass murders end up being Democrats," Tenney told host Fred Dicker on Albany's Talk 1300 Radio. "But the media doesn't talk about that either."


Related (curious on the second one, no?):


----------



## FeXL

Where's the hue & cry for a knife ban?

According To The FBI, Knives Kill Far More People Than Rifles In America – It’s Not Even Close



> Knives kill far more people in the United States than rifles do every year.
> 
> In the wake of the horrific school shooting in Florida last week, the debate over guns in America has surged again to the forefront oft the political conversation. Seventeen students were killed when a deranged gunman rampaged through the Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida. Many are calling now for stricter gun laws in the wake of the shooting, specifically targeting the AR-15 rifle and promoting the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban.
> 
> However, recent statistics from 2016 show that knives actually kill nearly five times as many people as rifles that year.


Register the knives! Ban scary knives! Restrict sales on knives to those 21 years & older! Require a knife license with a 72 hour background check!


----------



## FeXL

Further on arming schools.

Reading, Writing, and Return Fire



> As much as Americans are reluctant to turn their schools into what critics might call armed camps, it would be a better situation than the free fire zones that exist today. Would allowing guns in school be dangerous? We allow guns in schools right now by not having secure entrances; by not heeding warnings from those who did see something and did say something; and by not having adequate armed security on campus, including armed teachers.


More:



> At Parkland, there were warning signs, enough red flags to have a parade in Moscow. Many did see things and say things, as the mantra goes, *but the FBI, which was notified of the killer's intention posted on social media, was busy chasing Russians and fighting Trump.* The kids in the high school expected that the killer who was expelled would one day return. Yet the doors were not secured. In a society awash with cameras and surveillance, no one saw him waking in with a gas mask, smoke grenades, and a weapon.
> 
> Your local convenience store has better security.


Bold mine.

Yup.

Further:



> _Limbaugh noted how bewildering it is that "we have armed security at virtually every public entity in this country, except schools. For some reason, they are a gun-free zone and everybody that wants to shoot up a school knows that they are going to be the only one armed." ..._​


----------



## FeXL

Further on Democrat controlled, highly gun controlled counties & subsequent gun killings.

Gun Control? You're Killing Me, Lefties



> TWO COUNTIES in the US account for 51% of the murders in the US. That is out of 3,050 counties.
> - If you "guessed" LA and Chicago, you'd be right. Both heavily gun-controlled...and Democrat controlled.
> - And, while 54% of ALL counties in the US had NO murders, it seems to be the 'Democrats way' aka the 'Chicago way' to punish the other 3,048 counties for the failures of two counties.
> - The 2016 Clinton Archipeligo from 2016 almost matches the US murder map. Mucho murders in Blue areas, no murders in Red areas. Gee, who knew? More legal guns = fewer murders. What a novel concept.


----------



## FeXL

Only one small reason why I can't stand blood-sucking lawyers...

Celebrity Lawyer Says You Can Buy a Gun Without ID, But You Need ID to Vote — It Backfires Big Time



> On Sunday, Areva Martin, who describes herself as a media personality, talk show host and commentator, author, and award-winning civil rights attorney, posted an image on Twitter showing states where you can buy a gun and vote with no proof of ID.


More:



> _This is damnably untrue, and an attorney should know better. https://t.co/ESc6BIZylr
> 
> — Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) February 19, 2018
> 
> Sick false meme.
> 
> How in the actual hell are you an attorney. https://t.co/LChSKCGlNU
> 
> — Amanda Prestigiacomo (@AmandaPresto) February 19, 2018
> 
> Wow, a so-called “legal expert” is spreading a big-time lie.
> 
> Don't worry @ArevaMartin, your tweet has been archived and screenshots are forever. https://t.co/X46wnACyS6
> 
> — Ryan Saavedra 🇺🇸 (@RealSaavedra) February 19, 2018_​


See, Freddie? That's the difference between a meme that's truthful & one that tells a complete lie.


----------



## FeXL

Apparently there was an armed resource officer at Parkland. Out in the parking lot. Doing nothing...

F'ing coward.

‘UNBELIEVABLE’! Broward County Sheriff’s latest confession sets blood BOILING



> _JUST IN: Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel says Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School resource officer "never went in" to freshman building amid deadly Parkland shooting; "He should have went in. Addressed the killer. Killed the killer."
> 
> — CBS News (@CBSNews) February 22, 2018_​


More:



> _Not only did Sheriff Israel's department ignore repeated warnings about Cruz, but its on-scene officer failed to respond to the active murder of children.
> 
> *And Israel wants to talk about how your right to own a rifle is the problem.* It's like he's trying to change the subject. https://t.co/UTNGRRSM5b
> 
> — I'm a M'Fin Pickle in a Top Hat (@sunnyright) February 22, 2018_​


Bold mine.

Yeah.


----------



## FeXL

Dana Loesch Rips Into CNN: 'The Legacy Media Love Mass Shootings'



> NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch ripped into the liberal media during an appearance at CPAC Thursday, blasting the networks for repeatedly exploiting mass shootings to push an anti-gun narrative for ratings.
> 
> "Now I’m going to say something that some people are going to say is controversial…Many in legacy media love mass shootings. You guys love it," Dana Loesch said, aiming her words directly to the media standing at the back of the room.
> 
> "Now I'm not saying that you love the tragedy. But I am saying that you love the ratings. Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you and many in the legacy media in the back (of the room)."
> 
> *"And notice I said 'crying white mothers' because there are thousands of grieving black mothers in Chicago every weekend, and you don't see town halls for them, do you?" Loesch asked. "Where's the CNN town hall for Chicago? Where's the CNN town hall for sanctuary cities?"*


My bold.

Nails it.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Apparently there was an armed resource officer at Parkland. Out in the parking lot. Doing nothing...
> 
> F'ing coward.
> 
> ‘UNBELIEVABLE’! Broward County Sheriff’s latest confession sets blood BOILING


*Thank-you for making my case for me. *

A trained law-enforcement officer did not engage the shooter. And you guys think _teachers_ are going to have the wherewithal to step up? You're all living in a gun-filled fantasyland.

As for the link to Twitchy or whatever ridiculous right-wing wacko website you sourced, for those wanting something with a little more balanced perspective and less tinfoil hat ranting:

*Trump: Florida school officer 'didn't have the courage' *- BBC News


----------



## FeXL

For what? Illustrating that many lefties are cowards? You're welcome.



CubaMark said:


> Thank-you for making my case for me.


No, he didn't. But a _veteran_ would have.



CubaMark said:


> A trained law-enforcement officer did not engage the shooter.


And you thought some vague story about a hijab being cut off with a pair of f'ing scissors was legit. Just who has the poorer optics here?



CubaMark said:


> You're all living in a gun-filled fantasyland.


You can catcall my sources anytime you want. Just remember, it was _your_ sources that fell for Clock Girl.

And, curiously, your source says precisely the same thing mine did: The guy was an f'ing coward.



CubaMark said:


> As for the link to Twitchy or whatever ridiculous right-wing wacko website-blah, blah, blah


----------



## FeXL

And further on real Fake News. You know, CM, the ones that outright lie? The kind of BS you'll find on the Clinton News Network?

#VeryFakeNewsCNN: Chris Cuomo Again Spreads a False Twitter Story About Guns



> _CNN anchor Chris Cuomo retweeted a fake story about a student who claimed to be able to buy an AR-15 in "5 minutes," and then doubled down when he was called out.
> 
> Cuomo retweeted the article, "I Was Able To Buy An AR-15 In 5 Minutes," which shows a 20-year-old student holding an AR-15 and claiming to have purchased it without going through a background check.
> 
> However, the student admitted in the article that he never actually finished filing out the paperwork -- which would initiate the background check -- to buy the AR-15. Instead, he shopped around for a bit, took photos with some guns, and asked for the advice of the shop owners.
> 
> "After he walked me through the paperwork, all five pages of it, I told him I changed my mind and wanted to think more before I bought an AR-15," the student wrote. "He told me it wasn’t a problem and listed the store hours if I wanted to come back. I then said thank you and walked back to my car."
> 
> People started pointing out that the kid never actually bought the AR-15, but Cuomo doubled down, stating, "Isn't the point that the kid's age and lack of ID wasn"t a deterrent?"_​


----------



## FeXL

And further to this bull$h!t...

Schools become targets because they're designated as gun free zones. If potential shooters know that there is a chance they'll find lead flying back at them, _that mere knowledge_ will cut down attacks on schools.

If it saves one life...



CubaMark said:


> And you guys think _teachers_ are going to have the wherewithal to step up?


Related:

Colorado School District To Allow Armed Teachers



> However, a small school district in Colorado is addressing the situation differently. They’re expanding gun rights in an effort to combat school shootings. And not just any expansion, but one that will directly impact these kinds of shootings.
> 
> _A rural Colorado school district decided Wednesday night to allow its teachers and other school staff to carry guns on campus to protect students.
> 
> The Hanover School District 28 board voted 3-2 to allow school employees to volunteer to be armed on the job after undergoing training.
> 
> The district’s two schools serve about 270 students about 30 miles southeast of Colorado Springs, and it takes law enforcement an average of 20 minutes to get there. The district currently shares an armed school resource officer with four other school districts._​


More:



> It should be noted that some states have allowed armed staff for years without incident. *In other words, the problem isn’t in law-abiding teachers and staff and it has never been.*


Bold mine.

Further:



> While the Hanover School District isn’t likely to be the target of a mass shooting, they’ve taken a proactive step. In fact, they’ve taken the kind of step that might very well have prevented the district from ever being the target of such a horrific event. *After all, armed staff throws in a variable that a mass shooter is unlikely to want to deal with. A given school could have no guns or dozens. They just wouldn’t know, and that might push them to choose a different target.*


Huh. Just like I said.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> For what? Illustrating that many lefties are cowards? You're welcome.


That makes no sense.



FeXL said:


> No, he didn't. But a _veteran_ would have.


I haven't seen any talk about putting armed veterans in the schools - all the coverage to date has been about putting guns in the hands of teachers. Regardless, guns in schools is a bad, bad idea. Thinking back to my childhood, if someone had put a gun in the hands of our shop teacher, there very likely would have been a tragedy...  



FeXL said:


> And you thought some vague story about a hijab being cut off with a pair of f'ing scissors was legit. Just who has the poorer optics here?


I'm so pleased that you have an issue upon which you can hang your hat and think you've got it all figured out, FeXL.  That child's lie, whatever it was based on, was nonetheless believed by the police, her teachers and others around her. This was communicated to the public. I'm not alone in believing that an incident like that could have happened to her, given that incidents of violence against Muslims continue to occur, second-only to crimes against Jewish Canadians. 

But you, and your ilk, will lift up the banner of this one false report and proclaim that life for Muslim immigrants to Canada is all roses and kebobs, a gravy train that sidelines our seniors, veterans, or whatever other cause strikes your fancy this week. The girl's story was within the realms of believability, and absent any reason to doubt her, we awaiting developments. That's the approach I'll take every single time, and one that is far preferable to the hatred-reinforcing first assumptions bigots and racists embrace. 



FeXL said:


> You can catcall my sources anytime you want. Just remember, it was _your_ sources that fell for Clock Girl.


Not my "sources" - pretty much everyone, as mentioned above. It was an unfortunate case of a child getting caught in a lie. No need for you to make it representative of all reports of hate crimes against Muslims. But you will, of course.



FeXL said:


> And, curiously, your source says precisely the same thing mine did: The guy was an f'ing coward.


No. The BBC report cites the Doofus-in-Chief as saying that. When we have more info after the police investigate the case, maybe we'll have more insight. Maybe the guy was a veteran with PTSD assigned to the a job where he could be useful, instead of on the street engaging bad guys in far more dangerous situations. Straight-up calling the guy a coward is irresponsible and prejudicial. How many soldiers with PTSD ("Shell shock") were called cowards, were executed, jailed, for not being able to engage in a violent situation?

The defining characteristic of modern humans should be compassion. Sadly, that's rarely on display in cases like these...


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Schools become targets because they're designated as gun free zones. If potential shooters know that there is a chance they'll find lead flying back at them, _that mere knowledge_ will cut down attacks on schools.


No. Just... no. The basic presumption is incorrect. Mentally-ill individuals who attack their peers and teachers in schools are not looking at this logically; many have indicated (and have) that they intended to commit suicide after carrying out their attack.

Armed teachers in that context are going to be zero deterrent.

:-(


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> *Thank-you for making my case for me. *
> 
> A trained law-enforcement officer did not engage the shooter. And you guys think _teachers_ are going to have the wherewithal to step up? You're all living in a gun-filled fantasyland.
> 
> As for the link to Twitchy or whatever ridiculous right-wing wacko website you sourced, for those wanting something with a little more balanced perspective and less tinfoil hat ranting:
> 
> *Trump: Florida school officer 'didn't have the courage' *- BBC News


I think there is a very different thing between a guy outside with a gun and people trapped inside with a gunman. Someone trapped in a building with a lunatic shooter is probably going to use their gun if not simply for self survival. I think just about anyone would be having second thoughts about running solo into a building where shootings are taking place.

Not sure any lone officer would enter a building with an armed shooter without backup. Not saying it is right or wrong but seems like police work in teams which gives them their strength and advantage.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> And further on real Fake News. You know, CM, the ones that outright lie? The kind of BS you'll find on the Clinton News Network?
> 
> #VeryFakeNewsCNN: Chris Cuomo Again Spreads a False Twitter Story About Guns


Obviously I set the bar a good deal higher than the typical Lamestream outlet, but it seems to me any competent reporter would have wanted to see the gun. Otherwise there is no way to know if the gun was a Hollywood prop, photoshopped into the image, or just borrowed for the photo.


----------



## FeXL

No, it sums this particular instance up rather nicely.



CubaMark said:


> That makes no sense.


Why am I not surprised? 'Cause MJ, the Clinton News Network, _et al._ don't talk about stuff like that. As a matter of fact, they oppress such discussion. You may wish to check out recent stories about the Clinton News Network scripting an interview with students from the school and what one of them actually wanted to talk about: armed veterans in schools.



CubaMark said:


> I haven't seen any talk about putting armed veterans in the schools...


Worse than killers walking into schools uncontested? Not likely.



CubaMark said:


> Regardless, guns in schools is a bad, bad idea.


Oh, I had it figgered out long before you fell for Clock Girl...



CubaMark said:


> I'm so pleased that you have an issue upon which you can hang your hat and think you've got it all figured out, FeXL.


Nope, there were a whole bunch of suckers from the left who fell for her lie, simply because it fits the Prog narrative & they wanted it to be true so bad...



CubaMark said:


> I'm not alone in believing that an incident like that could have happened to her...


Your welcome....



CubaMark said:


> ...second-only to crimes against Jewish Canadians.


This girl's story was an outright lie, believable only by the most gullible on the planet: a Prog with a narrative.

And, you waited for nothing.



CubaMark said:


> The girl's story was within the realms of believability, and absent any reason to doubt her, we awaiting developments.


Well, if I run across one, I'll let them know that you're more than willing to be jury, judge & executioner before the ink is even dry on the paper.



CubaMark said:


> That's the approach I'll take every single time, and one that is far preferable to the hatred-reinforcing first assumptions bigots and racists embrace.


Yeah, only you _would_ think it was unfortunate she was caught.

And, no. Unlike you, I will continue to wait for details to come out first, especially, _especially_, if it stinks like this great steaming load did.



CubaMark said:


> It was an unfortunate case of a child getting caught in a lie. No need for you to make it representative of all reports of hate crimes against Muslims. But you will, of course.


Coward. Period.



CubaMark said:


> blah, blah, blah


The defining characteristic of humans should be intelligence. _**** sapiens_, remember? The sapient branch of ****? Like my good friend Sid the Sloth notes, "Any of this ringing a bell?"



CubaMark said:


> The defining characteristic of modern humans should be compassion. Sadly, that's rarely on display in cases like these...


----------



## FeXL

Yes. Oh, yes. Not everybody who strolls into a school intent on killing innocents has a death wish. Some want to get off on the media coverage. Can't do that if you're in a coffin.



CubaMark said:


> No. Just... no.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

Man, what a load of whining.


----------



## smashedbanana

CubaMark said:


> A trained law-enforcement officer did not engage the shooter. And you guys think _teachers_ are going to have the wherewithal to step up? You're all living in a gun-filled fantasyland.


I think part of the plan is also to show Diehard to all those teachers. 

Foolproof!

Yipikayay Mac Fury!!


----------



## Macfury

I think it's a deliberate attempt to muddy the waters. Simply allowing _the possibility _that _some_ teachers _might_ have a weapon will convince _some_ shooters that there's no point in showing up.

Wha are you suddenly demanding a system that would be foolproof?



smashedbanana said:


> I think part of the plan is also to show Diehard to all those teachers.
> 
> Foolproof!
> 
> Yipikayay Mac Fury!!


----------



## FeXL

Four cowards with guns hiding outside the school!!! And you wonder why people want their own weapons? Or why they want to arm teachers? Or bring in armed guards who can be depended upon?

Jeezuz...

Also, further to your BS, CM... That's some twisted moral compass you got there, CM. More worried about some nonexistent PTSD in a LEO than defenceless, innocent children getting mowed down by a killer. 

Precisely what circumstances would it take for you to fire a weapon to defend your family? Or would you be more concerned about the mindset of the shooter just prior to him pulling the trigger on your wife and children...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Precisely what circumstances would it take for you to fire a weapon to defend your family? Or would you be more concerned about the mindset of the shooter just prior to him pulling the trigger on your wife and children...


Maybe that they be convicted by a military kangaroo court of being enemies of the Cuban Revolution... unless they had PTSD?


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Four cowards with guns hiding outside the school!!! And you wonder why people want their own weapons? Or why they want to arm teachers? Or bring in armed guards who can be depended upon?
> 
> Jeezuz...
> 
> Also, further to your BS, CM... That's some twisted moral compass you got there, CM. More worried about some nonexistent PTSD in a LEO than defenceless, innocent children getting mowed down by a killer.
> 
> Precisely what circumstances would it take for you to fire a weapon to defend your family? Or would you be more concerned about the mindset of the shooter just prior to him pulling the trigger on your wife and children...



Disgusting post


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> I think it's a deliberate attempt to muddy the waters. Simply allowing _the possibility _that _some_ teachers _might_ have a weapon will convince _some_ shooters that there's no point in showing up.
> 
> Wha are you suddenly demanding a system that would be foolproof?


That was sarcasm.

I used your name because it substitutes well for the original line.

He's my serious answer, 

Maybe arming teachers will dissuade a would be shooter. Maybe even a teacher will kill someone who actually comes to his/her school to kill. Maybe. Or maybe it will make no difference at all then even younger kids will get enrolled in the pervasive US gun culture. 

And then you will have the NRA. Good luck taking guns back out of the schools once you put them there.


----------



## Macfury

I know why you used my screen name--it didn't bother me!

Schools are still welcome to call themselves "gun-free zones"--the NRA has no control over that. But if I were living in the U.S. I would not want to advertise that fact. I would want some doubt in everyone's mind. I remember the old story about a farmer putting a sign on his property to deter theft: "One of these watermelons is poisoned..."

No one solution is going to deter all American mass shooters, but a combination of solutions will have some affect. Even Trump's suggestion of raising the age at which you can buy some weapons is a good one that may deter someone who doesn't have endless resolve.



smashedbanana said:


> That was sarcasm.
> 
> I used your name because it substitutes well for the original line.
> 
> He's my serious answer,
> 
> Maybe arming teachers will dissuade a would be shooter. Maybe even a teacher will kill someone who actually comes to his/her school to kill. Maybe. Or maybe it will make no difference at all then even younger kids will get enrolled in the pervasive US gun culture.
> 
> And then you will have the NRA. Good luck taking guns back out of the schools once you put them there.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## CubaMark




----------



## Macfury

If teachers were simply allowed the option of concealed carry, then no black teacher would be asked to carry a handgun. Is that simple enough for you?


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> If teachers were simply allowed the option of concealed carry, then no black teacher would be asked to carry a handgun. Is that simple enough for you?


Oh, it's that simple, is it MacFury?

It's really quite amazing how you can be a decades-long observer of the relationship between Black Americans and police, and not see the potential for further tragedy.

Where's the rose-coloured glasses emoticon....


----------



## SINC

Bottom line is that any person, black, brown or white, waving a gun at a US police officer is going to be shot. Period. End of story. End of racism accusations.


----------



## Macfury

Your context isn't even relevant. If you're a black person who feels they would be targeted in such a situation, then don't carry a gun.



CubaMark said:


> Oh, it's that simple, is it MacFury?
> 
> It's really quite amazing how you can be a decades-long observer of the relationship between Black Americans and police, and not see the potential for further tragedy.
> 
> Where's the rose-coloured glasses emoticon....


----------



## FeXL

Hey, CM, how would you like to be a student at a school, screaming your lungs out for help because of a shooter in the building, knowing full well there are 4 armed LEO's outside listening to your cries for help & yet doing nothing?


----------



## macintosh doctor

i am somewhat confused :
NRA kills 0 per year receives $0 per year from government. Planned parenthood kills 880 per day and received $500 million per year. Just saying
Parkland Shooting - FBI and law enforcement received 39 calls and did nothing same with officers on campus .. but wait lets be liberals about it and blame the NRA lol
not to mention a police officer shots an unarm person liberals blame the police, a person shots a mass of people they blame guns..


----------



## FeXL

What's really amazing is that you buy into that whole BLM narrative. 



CubaMark said:


> It's really quite amazing how you can be a decades-long observer of the relationship between Black Americans and police, and not see the potential for further tragedy.


----------



## eMacMan

The official narratives of Sandy Hook, San Bernadino and Las Vegas are so obviously flawed that it takes a lot of naivety to even attempt to include them in the gun seizure debate. Doing so certainly weakens the gun seizure argument.

For a while this one seemed to be holding up a little better. The alleged gunman was not killed outright, nor was his pre-handcuffed corpse pulled out the back door of an SUV he had supposedly been driving when the FBI gunned him down. For that matter as of this moment he has not been suicided or murdered in his cell.

However, we do have the four deputies who made no attempt to intervene. Were they just badly trained, were they cowards, or were they ordered not to interfere?

We have the expectation of a live drill, unintentionally brought to light in this article. Live shooter drills and psy-ops tend to go hand in hand. https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-shooting-librarian-saved-55-123526114.html


> Ms Haneski said some teachers at her school believed the shooting was a drill as they had recently undergone training and had been informed a simulated incident would take place.


We also have a witness claiming there was a second shooter. An incredibly incompetent interviewer and would not be worth including except that the controllers at Google chose to scrub it from Youtube. When the propagandists attempt to hide flaws in the narrative, then the narrative is probably a lie. 
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...-student-who-claimed-there-was-second-shooter. 

So was this somehow staged by the gun seizure types to further their cause, or is the version being presented by the Lamestream miraculously far more accurate than say the San Bernadino or Vegas narratives?

Also suspicious that either tox screening on the shooter was not done or the results have not been made public. The presence of Scopalamine, SSRIs or methamphetamines could significantly alter the story.


----------



## smashedbanana

eMacMan said:


> The official narratives of Sandy Hook, San Bernadino and Las Vegas are so obviously flawed that it takes a lot of naivety to even attempt to include them in the gun seizure debate. Doing so certainly weakens the gun seizure argument.
> 
> For a while this one seemed to be holding up a little better. The alleged gunman was not killed outright, nor was his pre-handcuffed corpse pulled out the back door of an SUV he had supposedly been driving when the FBI gunned him down. For that matter as of this moment he has not been suicided or murdered in his cell.


Ok




> However, we do have the four deputies who made no attempt to intervene. Were they just badly trained, were they cowards, or were they ordered not to interfere?


Ordered not to intervene?



> We have the expectation of a live drill, unintentionally brought to light in this article. Live shooter drills and psy-ops tend to go hand in hand. https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-shooting-librarian-saved-55-123526114.html
> We also have a witness claiming there was a second shooter. An incredibly incompetent interviewer and would not be worth including except that the controllers at Google chose to scrub it from Youtube. When the propagandists attempt to hide flaws in the narrative, then the narrative is probably a lie.
> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...-student-who-claimed-there-was-second-shooter.


It seems pretty clear why youtube removed the clip. 



> So was this somehow staged by the gun seizure types to further their cause, or is the version being presented by the Lamestream miraculously far more accurate than say the San Bernadino or Vegas narratives?


Are you saying that opponents of the second amendment intentionally killed children to help make an argument to further control control?

Really?



> Also suspicious that either tox screening on the shooter was not done or the results have not been made public. The presence of Scopalamine, SSRIs or methamphetamines could significantly alter the story.


Getting a tox screen from a minor who's alive is more than a challenge.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Are you saying that opponents of the second amendment intentionally killed children to help make an argument to further control control?


I believe the argument is that government did so to create opportunities for greater control of citizens.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> I believe the argument is that government did so to create opportunities for greater control of citizens.


Well they should go back to faking 911 type things then, because they certainly have more luck after those events. They can't seem to get any more control by just killing kids.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> However, we do have the four deputies who made no attempt to intervene. Were they just badly trained, were they cowards, or were they ordered not to interfere?


I found the following an interesting read. If half of it is true...

Unrolled thread from @TheLastRefuge2

FWIW, this still does not let the bastards off the hook. Anybody (armed or not) who would stand to the side & let defenceless men, women or children come under attack is an f'ing coward.

Related:


----------



## FeXL

Nails it.

Cold, Dead Hands

Comments _very_ pertinent.


----------



## CubaMark

_Neil MacDonald, as usual, provides good insight - this time on America's gun problem:_

*It is too late for gun control in America*










As America's attention span wanes, and the clock ticks down to the next school shooting massacre, it's almost poignant to watch the abruptly politicized teenagers, burning as righteously as young people do when they coalesce around a noble cause, hectoring important politicians, making them squirm on television, clearly believing that they shall overcome.

But they shall not overcome. These lambs may not be silent, but they are battering an insuperable wall of legal and political iron.

Yes, yes, their president has convened a few televised group encounters with survivors, clutching a sheet of talking points that included the numbingly banal "I hear you," but there's a chasm between hearing someone and actually listening, and the men and women who run America are actually just pacifying, knowing the uproar will end.

** * **​
In fact, though, the bedrock law of their country guarantees both things: the right to offensive speech and the right to own and carry battlefield weapons in public.

These youth have also been misled, especially since the 9/11 attacks, into believing that the most sacred duty of their president is to protect American lives, when in fact their president has no intention of protecting theirs. He will do nothing to prevent the next murderer from picking up an AR-15 and setting out for some school to see if he can break the previous shooter's record.

This is not opinion. It is the only possible conclusion.

Americans have created facts on the ground that have become immovable objects, and it is on them that the efforts of the teen activists will crash and break.
(CBC)​


----------



## FeXL

There are so many holes in those 7 paragraphs I don't even know where to begin. However, I'll try.

There are estimated to be 400,000,000 guns in the US and over a trillion rounds of ammo. If guns were a problem in the US, the planet would know it.

Hectoring politicians is a noble cause? Hey, I verbally abuse politicians as much as I can but who knew I was being "noble"? Kewl...

Lambs, huh? What about the young people in Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, LA, Baltimore, who have shot & killed dozens since this tragedy in Florida, yet remain anonymous. Are they lambs, too?

What about the 4 armed, cowardly LEO's who hid out in the parking lot and ignored the screams for help? They must be lambs, too, no? Victims of left-think. The poor...lambs.

Talking points? All the left has is talking points, yet he points his finger at Trump? The iron...

So, this idiot has a problem with free speech now? Curious how he manages to tie that in with gun control. Take away free speech, take away all firearms (and don't think for a minute that isn't precisely what the gun-controllers want), you suddenly have a nice, complacent populace whom you can control at will.

And, hyperbole, much? It's been a while since I've read the Second Amendment but I don't recall anything about everybody getting a "battlefield weapon".

In addition, any idiot who honestly believes, "I'm from the gov't & I'm here to protect you" is an idiot. Oh, wait...

So now, somehow, it's the POTUS' fault every time somebody gets killed by a firearm? Is this fresh blame game retroactive? 'Cause I can't think of any President who hasn't had people killed during their terms.

How about any other COD? Knives? Baseball bats? Slipping in the bathtub? Jes' wonderin' where the line is drawn so's I know who to pass the blame to, 'cause every Prog knows it's not the shooter or everything that led up to the incident, IT'S THE GUN!!! BIG, SCARY, BATTLEFIELD WEAPONS!!!*

I also luvs me his made up facts observation. Ya see, Neil, facts are facts. That is the nature of a fact. They are irrefutable and immovable. Unlike Prog narratives...

In sum, as usual, the typical Prog poster & the typical Prog <cough>"journalist"<cough> come nowhere near the actual cause of the issue, but focus only on the effect.



CubaMark said:


> blah, blah, blah, MotherCorpse agitprop, blah, blah, blah


*


----------



## FeXL

Billboard Says ‘Kill The NRA’ – Dana Loesch Has The Perfect Response



> NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch had a brutal response, asking, “Kill us with what?”


<snort>


----------



## FeXL

Florida lawmakers reject assault weapons ban, approve bill allowing teachers to carry guns



> Florida lawmakers shot down an amendment on Monday that would have banned semi-automatic “assault” weapons like the AR-15 used in the Parkland school massacre.
> 
> They did, however, agree to raise the legal age for purchasing a firearm to 21 — and approved legislation that would give teachers the right to carry guns in school, NBC-2 reports.


On not banning semi-autos, good. On approving CC for teachers, good.

On raising the age of purchase to 21, no. 

Why? 'Cause the age of consent in the US is 18. If 18 year olds are not responsible enough to purchase a firearm, then they're not responsible enough to vote, either. Nor defend their country. _With_ semi-automatic weapons, I might add...


----------



## FeXL

There goes another Prog narrative...

Schools safer today than in 1990s, study on shootings says



> Despite the horror of the high school massacre in Florida, U.S. schools overall are safer today than they were in the early 1990s, and there is not an epidemic of such shootings, a new academic study is reporting.
> 
> Researchers at Northeastern University say mass school shootings are extremely rare, that shootings involving students have been declining since the 1990s, and four times as many children were killed in schools in the early 1990s than today.
> 
> “There is not an epidemic of school shootings,” said James Alan Fox, the Lipman Family Professor of Criminology, Law and Public Policy at Northeastern. He said more children die each year from pool drownings or bicycle accidents.


I find it interesting two of the resources they used: Mother Jones & Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety. The first, known for its extreme leftist bias and the second, already exposed on these boards for the bull$h!t baseline statistic, "defining a shooting as anytime a firearm discharges a live round inside or into a school building, or on a school campus."


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> There are so many holes in those 7 paragraphs I don't even know where to begin. However, I'll try.


Well, you are _trying_, fer sher....



FeXL said:


> There are estimated to be 400,000,000 guns in the US and over a trillion rounds of ammo. If guns were a problem in the US, the planet would know it.


Dude. The world has known about the USA's gun problem for a very long time. It ain't no surprise....



FeXL said:


> What about the 4 armed, cowardly LEO's who hid out in the parking lot and ignored the screams for help? They must be lambs, too, no? Victims of left-think. The poor...lambs.


You posted in the American Political Thread that those 4 LEOs were ordered not to enter the school. Contradict yourself much?



FeXL said:


> So, this idiot has a problem with free speech now? Curious how he manages to tie that in with gun control. Take away free speech, take away all firearms (and don't think for a minute that isn't precisely what the gun-controllers want), you suddenly have a nice, complacent populace whom you can control at will.














FeXL said:


> How about any other COD? Knives? Baseball bats? Slipping in the bathtub? Jes' wonderin' where the line is drawn so's I know who to pass the blame to, 'cause every Prog knows it's not the shooter or everything that led up to the incident, IT'S THE GUN!!! BIG, SCARY, BATTLEFIELD WEAPONS!!!*


When was the last time someone entered a school in the USA and killed 17 people, wounded 15 more, with a knife or a baseball bat? There was an incident in Philadelphia back in 2014 where a kid managed to wound 21 people (I'm seriously surprised), but that's exceedingly rare. The issue here, which you gun nuts cannot seem to get through your heads, is the capability to inflict massive harm that a firearm like the AR-15 and other firearms represents. 

You know what?_ I'll make an admission here that you'll just love:_ *I agree with you that it's not a gun problem, it's a people problem*. But my answer is the same - guns must be harder to obtain, especially by people who shouldn't be anywhere near them. The people problem is a mass cultural problem that the USA exhibits, and you can't change culture overnight. Nor can you address the other major flaw in the USA: for-profit healthcare. Folks who need mental health services obviously are not being treated. So if you can't change the problem - the people who have the guns - your only recourse is to restrict their availability to lessen the potential for harm. Those of you who run around with this cowboy fantasy in your heads, of armed teachers (or janitors, or school nurses, or Willie the Groundskeeper) taking on school shooters need to grow up: real life ain't like it is in the movies, regardless of how whacked-out your testosterone (and thereby fantasy) levels may be.


----------



## eMacMan

Delicious and then some. Scratch the surface of a gun seizure type and you will find a corrupt hypocrite underneath.

Went with Russia Today's version as it seemed more coherently written than most of the lamestream accounts.

https://www.rt.com/usa/leland-yee-senator-charged-california-661/


----------



## FeXL

Still not a clew...



CubaMark said:


> Dude. The world has known about the USA's gun problem for a very long time. It ain't no surprise....


And, once again, not a clew. You stand in front of me & tell me I can't go into a school where children are being shot at because I don't have an f'ing body camera on (or any other reason, for that matter), my advice is to get the hell out of the way 'cause I'm going right through you if you don't. And, if I'm still alive post-event, that hole you're hiding in better be damn well concealed 'cause I'm coming for you next.



CubaMark said:


> You posted in the American Political Thread that those 4 LEOs were ordered not to enter the school. Contradict yourself much?


When was the last time LEO's ignored 39 reports of issues with a single person, including but not limited to, his real name and IP address and yet they did nothing? And now they're reaping the harvest?

Oh, yeah, two weeks ago...

The issue with you gun control fruit loops & whackos is that more kids have died by guns, knives and auto accidents in the last two weeks in the US than the 17 killed at the school. Yet, crickets. You glom onto these sensationalist stories 'cause they make great headlines & narrative material, yet in the real world all the ones & twos & threes added up eclipse every mass shooting total in any given year.

I ask again: Where is the hue & cry about black males with no father figure in their lives shooting other black males with no father figure in their lives in Democratic controlled inner cities (with extensive gun control, I might add) using illegal handguns? Doesn't quite fit the narrative of white guys with automatic weapons, does it?



CubaMark said:


> When was the last time someone entered a school in the USA and killed 17 people, wounded 15 more, with a knife or a baseball bat? There was an incident in Philadelphia back in 2014 where a kid managed to wound 21 people (I'm seriously surprised), but that's exceedingly rare. The issue here, which you gun nuts cannot seem to get through your heads, is the capability to inflict massive harm that a firearm like the AR-15 and other firearms represents.


It's safe to say that there is _nothing_ on this planet you could ever say that I would actually love.

That said, "a people problem" is pretty vague...



CubaMark said:


> You know what?_ I'll make an admission here that you'll just love:_ *I agree with you that it's not a gun problem, it's a people problem*.


So what are you suggesting? Everybody gets a psych evaluation prior to being issued a firearms permit? Fine. As long as every voter gets one prior to getting their ballot...



CubaMark said:


> But my answer is the same - guns must be harder to obtain, especially by people who shouldn't be anywhere near them.


Nope. You _still_ don't get it. There are tens of millions of legal, responsible gun owners in the US with hundreds of millions of weapons and trillions of rounds of ammunition who are among the most law abiding citizens in the country. They are not the problem. American gun "culture" (for want of a better word) is very healthy. Yet every solution proposed by gun control fruit loops & whackos like yourself will negatively affect them & do little to nothing to fix the problem of those who already openly flout the law.

Once again, how's about we enforce _existing_ laws? How's about we get responsible male figures into young black males lives? How's about we quit treating every perceived behaviour problem with another f'ing pill?



CubaMark said:


> The people problem is a mass cultural problem that the USA exhibits, and you can't change culture overnight.


Especially if they're ignored by gov't workers at all levels. QED...



CubaMark said:


> Folks who need mental health services obviously are not being treated.


If you can't change the problem then you haven't actually identified the problem.



CubaMark said:


> So if you can't change the problem...


Again, your ignorance is showing. "[T]he people who have the guns" are not the f'ing problem. Therefore, your proposed solution is $h!te.



CubaMark said:


> ...- the people who have the guns - your only recourse is to restrict their availability to lessen the potential for harm.


Cowards who would do nothing while defenceless human beings, _especially_ children, are being threatened or killed deserve the deepest, darkest, dankest depths of hell...



CubaMark said:


> Those of you who run around with this cowboy fantasy...


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> _Blah Blah Blah...._


You keep painting this as a "prog" issue, when more than a few conservatives have come out in support of greater gun control measures, e.g.,:

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRG98aTP0Wc[/ame]


----------



## FeXL

Not all Progs are lefties.

I know. Shocka...

And some Progs voted for Trump.

Shocka, too.

So what?



CubaMark said:


> You keep painting this as a "prog" issue, when more than a few conservatives have come out in support of greater gun control measures, e.g.,:


----------



## CubaMark

Man, you are all over the map. The only consistency lies with your unpleasantness.

_So - about arming those teachers..._

*Teacher in custody after "shots fired" report at Dalton High School; no students in danger*










DALTON, Ga. - Police say a teacher is in custody after he fired a shot inside a classroom at Dalton High School.

Dalton police said a teacher, identified as 53-year-old Randal Davidson, then became barricaded inside of a classroom.

No children were injured.

** * *​*
Randal Davidson is accused of firing a shot inside Dalton High School Wednesday morning. 

Dalton police said Davidson barricaded himself in a classroom during third period and blocked the school's principal from entering. 

Police spokesperson Bruce Frazier said Davidson had been with the school since 2004. He was known to many in the areas as the play-by-play voice for the school's football team.

According to the school's website, Davidson wast the voice of the Catamounts for 18 years.

He grew up around Atlanta.

In 2012, Davidson was working on a book about Dalton High School's football history. 

(WSBTV)​


----------



## FeXL

Do you ever read what you post before you hit send?

Seriously.

I post something, you come at me from a dozen different compass points. I respond to your crap, refuting each & every point and you find a dozen new directions to come from in your next post. I address those & all you can summon for an argument is some claptrap about, "Well, it not just a Prog thing to be ignorant & ill-informed". And, you are 100% correct.

However, it has zero to do with the topic of gun control & is nothing more than just another Prog whine 'cause yer gettin' yer ass handed to you in a discussion on even footing.

And then you accuse me of being all over the map? Projecting, much?



CubaMark said:


> Man, you are all over the map.


Yeah? And?

Was this teacher protecting kids from a shooter or was he just another Prog gone nuts?

Had he been trained in the proper use & handling of firearms?

Notice one other thing: 



> "Everybody with a badge that was in this area came running when the call went out," Frazier said.


Completely unlike the Broward Cowards. 

D'ya s'pose that mebbe all those badges on the scene had something to do with the fact that no kids were injured?



CubaMark said:


> Teacher in custody after "shots fired" report at Dalton High School; no students in danger


----------



## FeXL

Well, it's something short of evidence of a real spine but Paul Ryan may have actually sprouted a notochord...

Ryan: Gun Violence Prevention Should Look at 'Kind of Culture That's Creating These People'



> Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who met privately with Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School students who are in Washington to lobby for tougher gun regulations, said today on the issues of expanding background checks or banning bump stocks that he's "waiting to see what the Senate can do, and we'll find out what the Senate can do and then we'll address that then."
> 
> "We do know that there are gaps in the background check system that need to be plugged. We passed a bill to do that. And we think that should get done, clearly," he said.
> 
> *Ryan was quick to add that "we shouldn't be banning guns for law-abiding citizens."*


My bold.


----------



## FeXL

Survey: Americans Blame School Shooting on Government, Not Guns



> According to Rasmussen, 54% of Americans believe government failure is to “blame for the mass shooting.” Only 33% of Americans blame guns. Eleven percent of Americans say they are unsure what contributed to the occurrence of the mass shooting.
> 
> When the sample group was adjusted so as to focus only on Americans “who have children of elementary or secondary school age,” the percentage of Americans who cite government failure as causal jumped to 61 and the percentage who blamed guns dropped to 23.


It's a start...


----------



## CubaMark

*Jeebus - the circus just gets more surreal and insane by the day....*

*Trump Saying He Wants to Take People's Guns Wasn't Even the Wildest Part of This Meeting*










Donald Trump suggested actively confiscating some people’s guns with no due process and made a host of other random pronouncements during a wild, freewheeling meeting with members of Congress on Wednesday in which the president’s eagerness to appear “tough” in the wake of the Parkland shooting—as well as his complete lack of policy knowledge—appeared to overwhelm his usual instincts to back the National Rifle Association to the hilt.

“I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida. He had a lot of files—[law enforcement officials] saw everything. To go to court would have taken a long time,” Trump insisted, interrupting Vice President Mike Pence to deliver a line that, had President Obama said it, would have been splashed across NRA fundraising literature for decades.

“Take the guns first. Go through due process second,” Trump reiterated.

** * **​
it was nice to watch Mike Pence, Steve Scalise, and Marco Rubio squirm while the president seemingly embraced almost every Democratic idea pitched to him.

(SplinterNews)​


----------



## Beej

Does anyone have policy ideas with supporting evidence on how to reduce the occurrence of mass shootings in the U.S.? Going over those ideas could be interesting. The evidence never quite lines up and is always open for debate, but it would be a start.

Or maybe, just maybe, this is a red vs blue proxy battle. No one is either red or blue of course, it just looks that way.


----------



## Macfury

You progs still don't get Trump and what he's doing. It's mostly triangulation and theatre, but you're buying it straight up. Good for you!



CubaMark said:


> “Take the guns first. Go through due process second,” Trump reiterated.
> 
> ** * **​
> it was nice to watch Mike Pence, Steve Scalise, and Marco Rubio squirm while the president seemingly embraced almost every Democratic idea pitched to him.
> 
> (SplinterNews)​[/INDENT]


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> You progs still don't get Trump and what he's doing. It's mostly triangulation and theatre, but you're buying it straight up. Good for you!


Right, Trump is playing 5 dimensional chess:



> At the end of the meeting, Trump appeared to not understand that AR-15 assault rifles are widely available for purchase in retail stores. Feinstein closed by asking what the nation could do with “weapons of war.” Trump said it was a black-market issue.
> 
> “The problem, Dianne,” said Trump, “is that these aren’t where you walk into a store and buy them.”
> 
> “Oh no,” replied Feinstein. “You can go into a store and you can buy an AR-15.”
> 
> “You can,” repeated Trump.
> 
> “You can buy a TEC-9, you can buy all these weapons,” said Feinstein.
> 
> Trump then said it was an issue to be solved by Manchin, Toomey and the rest of the group when they wrote the bill.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-trump-keeps-lawmakers-guessing-gun-meeting-234223042.html

Trump is a moron.

Craig


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> You progs still don't get Trump and what he's doing. It's mostly triangulation and theatre, but you're buying it straight up. Good for you!


:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Wait.... :yikes: you're being serious?  

OMG. 

Dude, the only thing Trump has ever triangulated is Boob #1 to Boob #1 to "that thing he likes to grab without asking permission".

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: 

*WCraig is right*._ Trump is a moron._

That says an awful lot about the folks who follow him....


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, question for ya...

If Trump is a moron, what word would you use to describe Juthdin?

Yes, this is a skill testing question.



CubaMark said:


> Trump is a moron.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> If Trump is a moron, what word would you use to describe Juthdin?


Still employing your homophobic lisp tactic incorrectly, I see....

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is little more than a "pretty face" slapped on top of the same old Liberal power brokers who, with the Conservatives and Progressive Conservatives before them, have driven this country into the hands of neoconservatives, destructive "free" trade deals, aligned us with the empire to our south that conducts endless wars for oil and influence, and has the most banal of all public personas I've seen in a politician (with the exception of the Great Orange Doofus-in-Chief).

Trudeau embodies much of the characteristics of the mid-18th-Century "macaroni" class of upperclass young men who travelled throughout Europe to seek new adventures and cultures to appropriate; they were flamboyant in dress and action, and contributed absolutely nothing of worth to society.

And if you still think Trudeau is a "prog", in your words, then your analysis (such as it is) will always be based on deeply flawed premises.


----------



## FeXL

Juthdin has a lithp?

And heeth's gay? Kewl...

Not thure what lithping & homophobia have to do with each other but I bet Thophie is gonna be thurprithed.

Anybody who thinks that our national embarrassment rises above Trump is seriously fukced up. And, yes, The Thpawn is a Prog.

As to the rest of your post it will be treated for the sewage it is... <flush>



CubaMark said:


> Still employing your homophobic lisp tactic incorrectly, I see....


----------



## FeXL

The Morning Rant: J.V. Edition



> Why the Left Opposes Arming Teachers
> 
> _Why does the Left oppose allowing a small number of highly trained teachers and other adults who work at schools to arm themselves?
> 
> When asked, their response is consistent: “It’s a crazy idea.” And “we need fewer guns, not more guns.”
> 
> A New York Times editorial offered the following argument against having any armed teachers: “Nationwide statistics on police shooting accuracy are not to be found. But if New York is typical, analyses show that its officers hit their targets only one-third of the time. And during gunfights, when the adrenaline is really pumping, that accuracy can drop to as low as 13 percent.”
> 
> *But if that is an argument against armed teachers, why isn’t it an argument against armed police?*_​


M'bold.

Questions, questions, questions...

I like Voltaire's quote, too. Man, does it fit...


----------



## FeXL

No argument.

GOP Senator: We Need ‘Idiot Control,’ Not ‘Gun Control’



> Sen. John N. Kennedy (R., La.) said on Tuesday during an appearance on CNN that America needs greater "idiot control" instead of more "gun control."


More:



> When pressed about who he classified as "idiots," the senator explained he was referring to those who commit crimes like the mass shooting in Parkland but not to those who are mentally ill.


I'm thinking his definition can be broadened some...


----------



## FeXL

Hey, if AR-15's save one life...

Neighbor with AR-15 Stops Knife Attack, Assailant Captured



> Dave Thomas said he saw a guy with a knife going after somebody else on the street near him. So he reached for what he thought was his most intimidating weapon and halted the assault, according to Chicago’s WGN-9 television news.
> 
> “I ran back into the home, into my house, and grabbed my AR-15. Grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun. It’s just a bigger gun. I think a little bit more than an intimidation factor definitely played a part in [the man’s] actually stopping,” Thomas said, as quoted by WGN-9.


More:



> *Thomas reportedly holds both a concealed-carry permit and the state’s mandatory firearms ownership certificate.*


M'bold.

Whaddya know. A licensed owner of a semi-automatic weapon who's not a schoolyard mass-murderer.



> Good guys with guns stopping bad guys with all kinds of lethal weapons are far from rare in the U.S. A Jan. 5, 2016, analysis by the Daily Caller News Foundation of crime data found at least 283 victims saved by gun-wielding good guys in the period between July 2014 and July 2015.


More than one? :yikes: There goes another Prog narrative.

Son of a...gun.

Related:

Killers.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Pelosi's teeth must sound like a drum kit... :lmao:


----------



## WCraig

The USA is the highest in the world in:

1) Per capita gun deaths and in particular mass shootings.
2) Per capital guns and in particular assault-style weapons.

Please resume your regular schedule of hand-waving and distractions now while living humans are injured, maimed and killed.

Craig


----------



## SINC

Interesting and likely little known data on guns.

Just 3% of Americans own more than half the country's guns | Big Think


----------



## FeXL

Speaking of hand waving...

Two Progressively controlled counties (with aggressive gun control laws I might add), are responsible for 51% of gun deaths in the US. I posted a link on this thread recently (last week?) about that.

I've also posted a link on this thread to an article that compares gun deaths by country. Now, these numbers are from memory so pardon me if I don't have them exact but they give you the general idea. In that article the US is ranked as third worst for gun deaths per capita in the world (I believe the list was the top 10 countries). If you remove the statistics from the top 4 or 5 Democratically controlled cities where the majority of gun deaths are committed (and all of which have extensive gun control laws) off the list (I believe the list named Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, LA, New Orleans) the US drops to the bottom 3.

Plus, the lion's share of gun deaths in the US is by suicide (~2/3), a final solution that the left usually has no issues with. Why, then, are those numbers used in a gun control argument?

The common threads in these statistics is gangs, young black males, single mothers, illegal firearms (by & large, hand guns), Democratically controlled for decades, and restrictive gun control laws already on the books.

Now, tell me exactly which of these issues a ban on semi-automatic weapons is going to correct? Be specific.



WCraig said:


> The USA is the highest in the world in:
> 
> 1) Per capita gun deaths and in particular mass shootings.
> 2) Per capital guns and in particular assault-style weapons.
> 
> Please resume your regular schedule of hand-waving and distractions now while living humans are injured, maimed and killed.
> 
> Craig


----------



## CubaMark

*2 killed in shooting at Central Michigan University dorm; suspect at-large*

Related: Mass Shootings | Gun Violence Archive


----------



## Beej

FeXL said:


> Two Progressively controlled counties (with aggressive gun control laws I might add), are responsible for 51% of gun deaths in the US.


That doesn't sound right. First, do you mean homicides? Suicides are probably more evenly spread. Second, 2 counties, or 2% of counties? The U.S. has about 10,000 gun homicides per year, so that would be 2,500 per county if the former. I'm not sure any single city has close to 2,500 gun homicides, much less one county within a city.


----------



## Macfury

The correct figure is 2% of counties have 51% of gun deaths.



Beej said:


> That doesn't sound right. First, do you mean homicides? Suicides are probably more evenly spread. Second, 2 counties, or 2% of counties? The U.S. has about 10,000 gun homicides per year, so that would be 2,500 per county if the former. I'm not sure any single city has close to 2,500 gun homicides, much less one county within a city.


----------



## WCraig

FeXL said:


> Speaking of hand waving...
> 
> Two Progressively controlled counties (with aggressive gun control laws I might add), are responsible for 51% of gun deaths in the US. I posted a link on this thread recently (last week?) about that.
> 
> I've also posted a link on this thread to an article that compares gun deaths by country. Now, these numbers are from memory so pardon me if I don't have them exact but they give you the general idea. In that article the US is ranked as third worst for gun deaths per capita in the world (I believe the list was the top 10 countries). If you remove the statistics from the top 4 or 5 Democratically controlled cities where the majority of gun deaths are committed (and all of which have extensive gun control laws) off the list (I believe the list named Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, LA, New Orleans) the US drops to the bottom 3.
> 
> Plus, the lion's share of gun deaths in the US is by suicide (~2/3), a final solution that the left usually has no issues with. Why, then, are those numbers used in a gun control argument?
> 
> The common threads in these statistics is gangs, young black males, single mothers, illegal firearms (by & large, hand guns), Democratically controlled for decades, and restrictive gun control laws already on the books.
> 
> Now, tell me exactly which of these issues a ban on semi-automatic weapons is going to correct? Be specific.


So your thesis is that guns in one county have nothing to do with violence in another? That is utter bullsh|t and you know it. And your strawman about suicide is just that. And I suggested aggressive handgun controls, too.

Your handwaving is pretty feeble.

Craig


----------



## Macfury

The question is why don't extreme gun bans in those counties have even a casual effect on gun deaths? There is something about those places that inspire people to kill each other. 

Why would separating out suicide statistics--and for that matter, shootings of criminals by police--not be a significant part of any discussion on gun controls? The same groups that most favour gun control are also the same groups that advocate for suicide rights.



WCraig said:


> So your thesis is that guns in one county have nothing to do with violence in another? That is utter bullsh|t and you know it. And your strawman about suicide is just that. And I suggested aggressive handgun controls, too.
> 
> Your handwaving is pretty feeble.
> 
> Craig


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> The correct figure is 2% of counties have 51% of gun deaths.


That sounds plausible, although I suspect it's homicides not all deaths. Too lazy to google today.


----------



## Macfury

Beej said:


> That sounds plausible, although I suspect it's homicides not all deaths. Too lazy to google today.


They're homicides, but the stats are pretty fascinating. Even in those counties, the murders are hyper-concentrated in urban areas controlled by Democrats. The suburban areas of the counties experience few or no murders.


----------



## Beej

Macfury said:


> They're homicides, but the stats are pretty fascinating. Even in those counties, the murders are hyper-concentrated in urban areas controlled by Democrats. The suburban areas of the counties experience few or no murders.


If it is linked to organized crime, that wouldn't be a surprise. Wealth and power tend to concentrate, and criminal business probably does the same. It would surprise me if suicide by gun were remotely as concentrated.


----------



## WCraig

Macfury said:


> The question is why don't extreme gun bans in those counties have even a casual effect on gun deaths? There is something about those places that inspire people to kill each other.
> 
> Why would separating out suicide statistics--and for that matter, shootings of criminals by police--not be a significant part of any discussion on gun controls? The same groups that most favour gun control are also the same groups that advocate for suicide rights.


If one can drive 30 minutes to circumvent gun controls, then those controls are doomed, aren't they. It is not like there is a rigorous border between them.

Again, your hand-waving about suicides is just that. You're trying to suggest that if gun controls don't eliminate suicides, then the present situation is 'just fine and dandy'. Hardly.

Major change is possible. Just look at the situation with public smoking. Only a few decades ago, smoking was everywhere: restaurants, offices, theatres, airplanes (!), public transit, in vehicles carrying infants, etc. Smokers said it was their right. Well, they still have the right to smoke...just in highly regulated circumstances, now. 

Craig


----------



## CubaMark

*Some news of note - particularly, I think, for eMacMan. This is from February 10th, but I think we were all preoccupied with another shooting around that time...*

*The Las Vegas shooter’s autopsy report is in, and everyone is noticing one thing*

For months, we’ve known almost nothing about the Las Vegas shooting in October 2017 that left 58 people dead, but the autopsy of the murderer, Stephen Paddock, is now out and offers few clues–though everybody is noticing one thing.

The autopsy, which included an examination of Paddock’s brain and a toxicology report, found that* the shooter had anti-anxiety medications in his system* at the time of the killing. The report also supported police reports that Paddock died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

(Las Vegas Review-Journal via Rare. Also The Independent)​


----------



## Macfury

WCraig said:


> If one can drive 30 minutes to circumvent gun controls, then those controls are doomed, aren't they. It is not like there is a rigorous border between them.


Then you misunderstand my argument. There is no rigorous border between any criminal and a gun. The point I am making about these two percent of counties (and small areas inside them at that) is that since they are responsible for more than half of homicides It would be more efficient to deal with whatever inspires those Democrat-dominated citizens to turn into killers than to take guns from law abiding citizens.



WCraig said:


> Again, your hand-waving about suicides is just that. You're trying to suggest that if gun controls don't eliminate suicides, then the present situation is 'just fine and dandy'. Hardly.


No. I'm arguing that you need to separate suicide by gunshot from the total number of gun deaths, so they're not presented as homicides.



WCraig said:


> Major change is possible. Just look at the situation with public smoking. Only a few decades ago, smoking was everywhere: restaurants, offices, theatres, airplanes (!), public transit, in vehicles carrying infants, etc. Smokers said it was their right. Well, they still have the right to smoke...just in highly regulated circumstances, now.


I was never a fan of smoking regulations... and I don't smoke.


----------



## eMacMan

Despite some serious censorship efforts on the part of Youtube and Facebook, The official Florida narrative has begun to unravel. One video that keeps being disappeared features a teacher describing a shooter in full body and head armor, a clear departure from the official narrative. Another clip has another student saying that she was talking to Cruz at the same time she heard gunshots. IOW there were at least two shooters.

Featured prominently on CNN were clips with a certain teacher who was described as a hero, now a different narrative emerges.


> Gallagher says he was in Gard’s math class when the fire alarm went off. When Gard and other students filed out of the room for the drill, they realized that the shooting was taking place.
> 
> "I walk to the top of the staircase and we heard shots go off," Gallagher wrote. "At this point, we all ducked and shock kicked in for half a second of what is happening."
> 
> When the students ran back to Gard’s classroom, Gallagher said they were not let in.
> “In an almost instant rush, me and my fellow classmates, as well as others, rushed back to our classroom," he wrote. "As we made it to the door we found out the door was locked. Which then left me and 15 other students in the hallways ducking as the screams of classmates and gunshots took over the noise around me."
> 
> The junior said he and the other students were terrified and were out in the hallway for four minutes. Gallagher said he called his father, a first responder, to tell him that he loved him while he and the students looked for a place to hide. After a few minutes, a teacher opened the door.
> 
> "As I was on the phone with him as he tried to calm me down, a teacher I never seen before opened [sic] the door for me and 14 other classmates to flee danger. When I got into the classroom I told my dad I loved him, he then said it back to me and he hung up because he was a first responder running into the freshmen building,” Gallagher wrote.


Parkland Shooting Survivor Calls Teacher 'Coward' For Locking Students Out Of Classroom During Attack

Couple of other questions have popped up. Because a fake fire alarm can be used as a diversion, the schools emergency protocol calls for confirming a fire before issuing an evacuation order. That was not followed supposedly because the hallway cameras were on a 20 minute delay. WTF. This was followed by a "Code Red" which would have had the escaping students reverse their course, possibly back towards the shooter. Again a violation of the protocol. And of course teachers and students were expecting a live shooter drill, the trademark of false flag operations.

That from the gentleman who set-up the emergency protocols for the district after Sandy Hook. He is convinced the official narrative is a crock of $#!t.

Probably the biggest strike against the official narrative is that CNN had the official version out there within minutes. Long before anyone truly had a chance to properly investigate. Also the FBI were the among the first responders, again WTF. Do they have a dozen agents stationed minutes away from all of the 20,000+ high schools in America????


----------



## FeXL

There goes another Prog narrative...

Elementary School Shooter Admits He Picked Target With No Armed Security



> President Trump has been criticized for daring to suggest school teachers arm themselves to protect students in the event of a shooting. Since the killing of 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, the counter debate to Trump’s proposal is keeping schools gun-free.
> 
> However, according to a school shooter who was in a South Carolina courtroom the day of the Florida massacre said he picked his target because there was no armed security.
> 
> ...
> 
> _He decided on Townville Elementary because it was closer and had no armed security. _​


----------



## FeXL

Unhinged...

Former special branch police officer's tiny gun necklace that was a gift from her late husband is confiscated by airport security at Stansted because it's a replica weapon



> A former police officer had her tiny gun necklace confiscated at airport security because it was 'too dangerous' and passengers might think it was real.
> 
> Claire Sharp, who used to work for special branch, had the piece of jewellery taken off her as she was travelling to Perugia in Italy from Stansted on Friday.
> 
> The charm had sentimental value as it was a present from her husband Nigel Greenwood, who died suddenly in 2001, aged just 32 from a heart attack, because of their shared love of shooting and membership of a gundog club.


----------



## FeXL

The Anti-Gun Left's Viciousness and Ignorance Hinder Chances for Compromise



> It's time to reiterate a point I made shortly after CNN's counter-productive town hall meeting post-Parkland: When Second Amendment opponents telegraph how they really feel and what they really believe, the other side tends to dig in. The example I gave at that time was the audience's response to Marco Rubio objecting to a proposed "assault weapons" ban on the grounds that it could likely apply to virtually all semi-automatic rifles. The arena burst into cheers. Message received: _Our leaders may talk about poll-tested "common sense" or "sane" gun regulations, with an emphasis on certain "weapons of war," high-capacity magazines, bump stocks, background checks, and age limits. *But what we're really after is sweeping bans.*_


Bold mine.


----------



## CubaMark

_One wonders how many accidental shootings will take lives on campus if plans to put guns in the hands of teachers, janitors, school nurses, librarians, etc., go ahead.... 
_
*Huffman High School shooting kills 17-year-old Birmingham girl, injures boy*

A Huffman High School senior was killed and another injured when gunfire erupted inside a classroom at the east Birmingham school Wednesday afternoon. 

Killed was a 17-year-old girl who was going to graduate in May, had already been accepted into college and had dreams to become a nurse. "We're not just talking about some person, we're talking about losing a part of our future,'' said Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin. "Our hearts are heavy."

Also wounded in the shooting was a 17-year-old boy, a junior and member of the football team. Both were rushed to UAB Hospital in separate Birmingham Fire and Rescue Service trucks.

The girl, whose name is being withheld because some of her family has not yet been notified, was given CPR at the scene and en route to the hospital, but the efforts to revive her failed.

The boy was initially said to be critically injured, but hospital officials by 7:30 p.m. said he was seen in the emergency department and was no longer at the hospital. He was shot in the leg, and was later questioned at police headquarters.

* * *​
Police said at least two shots were fired but are still trying to sort out a timeline of events and what led to the gunfire. The gun used in the shooting was recovered from inside the school and Acting Birmingham Police Chief Orlando Wilson said they still believe the shooting may have been accidental.

* * *​
Sources said a male student was "showing off" his gun when it discharged, striking the female student. He then accidentally shot himself as he was putting the gun away, according to sources. Police officials did not confirm that account, or any of the other stories making the rounds.

"We're not saying he shot her, we're not saying he didn't shoot her,'' the chief said. "We're asking those questions ourselves so we can determine exactly what happened."

(Al.com)​


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> _One wonders how many accidental shootings will take lives on campus if plans to put guns in the hands of teachers, janitors, school nurses, librarians, etc., go ahead.... _


_

Sensationalize much? Not one "teacher, janitor, school nurse, librarian, etc" were involved in the shooting, nor had a weapon._


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> _One wonders how many accidental shootings will take lives on campus if plans to put guns in the hands of teachers, janitors, school nurses, librarians, etc., go ahead....
> _
> *Huffman High School shooting kills 17-year-old Birmingham girl, injures boy*
> 
> A Huffman High School senior was killed and another injured when gunfire erupted inside a classroom at the east Birmingham school Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> Killed was a 17-year-old girl who was going to graduate in May, had already been accepted into college and had dreams to become a nurse. "We're not just talking about some person, we're talking about losing a part of our future,'' said Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin. "Our hearts are heavy."
> 
> Also wounded in the shooting was a 17-year-old boy, a junior and member of the football team. Both were rushed to UAB Hospital in separate Birmingham Fire and Rescue Service trucks.
> 
> The girl, whose name is being withheld because some of her family has not yet been notified, was given CPR at the scene and en route to the hospital, but the efforts to revive her failed.
> 
> The boy was initially said to be critically injured, but hospital officials by 7:30 p.m. said he was seen in the emergency department and was no longer at the hospital. He was shot in the leg, and was later questioned at police headquarters.
> 
> * * *​
> Police said at least two shots were fired but are still trying to sort out a timeline of events and what led to the gunfire. The gun used in the shooting was recovered from inside the school and Acting Birmingham Police Chief Orlando Wilson said they still believe the shooting may have been accidental.
> 
> * * *​
> Sources said a male student was "showing off" his gun when it discharged, striking the female student. He then accidentally shot himself as he was putting the gun away, according to sources. Police officials did not confirm that account, or any of the other stories making the rounds.
> 
> "We're not saying he shot her, we're not saying he didn't shoot her,'' the chief said. "We're asking those questions ourselves so we can determine exactly what happened."
> 
> (Al.com)​


Not sure what your point is here. The story, as I read it, is about a STUDENT who brought a hand gun to school. No one is talking about arming students. Had this been one of the staff you listed out then that would be a different story. This really has nothing to do with arming teachers and is just a sad story about a young woman losing her life. 

Hopefully the boy is charged and I would like to see it go even further. If the gun is found to be registered to either of his parents I think charges on them should be filed as well for negligence allowing a teen to get access to a deadly weapon.


----------



## CubaMark

wonderings said:


> Not sure what your point is here. The story, as I read it, is about a STUDENT who brought a hand gun to school. No one is talking about arming students. Had this been one of the staff you listed out then that would be a different story.


*Why? *

Would armed teachers be unlikely to have accidents? 

It's not like there are no precedents for supposedly skilled / trained firearm owners making stupid mistakes...

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am-Qdx6vky0[/ame]

and then there was, as just another example:

*3 Kids Injured in Police Gun Accident at School * - ABC News

It is the mere presence of a firearm on school property that creates an additional risk — not a safeguard, not a measure of protections — to students and staff.


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> *Why? *
> 
> Would armed teachers be unlikely to have accidents?
> 
> It's not like there are no precedents for supposedly skilled / trained firearm owners making stupid mistakes...
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am-Qdx6vky0
> 
> and then there was, as just another example:
> 
> *3 Kids Injured in Police Gun Accident at School * - ABC News
> 
> It is the mere presence of a firearm on school property that creates an additional risk — not a safeguard, not a measure of protections — to students and staff.


Do you really think that no one is capable of handling firearms properly? Do you think teachers are buffoons and even with proper training would not be able to handle as well as operate a gun safely? Sure there will always be dumb people who do something stupid, lets ban cars if we are going to go down that route. Race car drivers get in accidents on the road and they are trained professionals, so do police officers with advanced driver training. It is generally the exception though and not the majority of those properly trained having these accidents.

There will always be someone who makes a dumb choice and causes serious harm. Might as well just ban police officers because some have shot and killed people without cause.


----------



## CubaMark

wonderings, I think you're missing my point.

In a classroom where there are no guns, there is zero chance of someone being shot, intentionally or accidentally.

Put a gun in the hands of a teacher, even one with training, and you immediately raise the risk of a potential shooting.

I find it odd that folks are so damn eager to put a Glock into Mrs. Gillespie's hands, so that she can go all cowboy on some whackadoodle, when nobody has entered into a discussion of ensuring the physical environment is secure instead.

Why isn't the debate about deficiencies in the security of school building entrances? Why is it so damn important that the geography teacher be armed?


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> wonderings, I think you're missing my point.
> 
> In a classroom where there are no guns, there is zero chance of someone being shot, intentionally or accidentally.
> 
> Put a gun in the hands of a teacher, even one with training, and you immediately raise the risk of a potential shooting.
> 
> I find it odd that folks are so damn eager to put a Glock into Mrs. Gillespie's hands, so that she can go all cowboy on some whackadoodle, when nobody has entered into a discussion of ensuring the physical environment is secure instead.
> 
> Why isn't the debate about deficiencies in the security of school building entrances? Why is it so damn important that the geography teacher be armed?


I personally do not know if arming the teachers it the best idea, but I am not apposed to it. Simply saying school rules say no guns does not mean no one is going to bring a gun. Back when I was in high school int he 90's I was shocked to go to my locker one day to find the police there taking a hand gun out of the locker beside mine. Pretty sure rules are already in place for no guns in any Ontario schools (obviously) so that obviously did not deter him. 

There are so many school shootings lately it would be unwise to think about increasing protection at a school. The most vulnerable and dependent of our species go there in mass numbers almost every day. The options are either have trained personnel who are already there trained on how to best deal with a situation like this to protect their students or it is to bring in more security and really make schools like airports security wise.

The guns are already out there, over 100 per person in the US, so any ban on guns will not have much of an impact on a culture that loves these lethal weapons. 
Dealing with the mental aspect of these killers is obviously something that should looked at, but easier said then done. There are so few real ideas being put out on how to deal with this. The mere mention of arming people to protect children sends people into an uproar about the dangers of guns, and vice versa, saying pull all the guns does the opposite. I may be limited in my sight, but I only see two real options, arm and training teachers or increase school budgets for armed security with airport like security going in and out of the buildings.


----------



## SINC

And meanwhile far too many movie stars and other celebrities stand up at awards shows and shout out to the world how they are in favour of gun control and how we should get guns out of American society. All this being done as they walk the red carpet surrounded by their bodyguards. Did I mention those bodyguards are armed with guns? Yep, you better believe it they are packing heat. Everywhere that celeb goes. Every. Single. Day.


----------



## Macfury

Likewise, the point of allowing teachers/staff to be armed is not to ensure they are armed--but to sow doubt in the minds of assailants who currently assume they will be able to carry out an assault unchallenged.


----------



## FeXL

Because you fukcers are calling for gun control, that's why.

It's always, "BAN MILITARY STYLE WEAPONS!!!", "AUTOMATIC WEAPONS NEED TO BE RESTRICTED!!!", "AR-15'S ARE EEEEEEVIL!!!", "BAN ALL GUNS!!!".

Not once in my memory have you ever even remotely hinted at building security being a topic for discussion. 



CubaMark said:


> Why isn't the debate about deficiencies in the security of school building entrances?


----------



## eMacMan

First of all it's not gun control it's gun seizure.

The reason they want to go after AR-15s is they put the average Joe on a somewhat even footing with the STASI that the US is building. 

So why are they afraid of a bunch of average Joes being able to stand up to their militarized police forces? Good question, but I suspect the puppeteers have something really evil planned for the nation and they don't want an armed populace capable of standing up to them. Certainly we know they have no concern for human life. Otherwise they would never have staged the Vegas and Florida shootings and several others.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> [....]Not once in my memory have you ever even remotely hinted at building security being a topic for discussion.


Jeez, I didn't realize you were so dependent upon others to come up with things for you to think about... :yikes:


:lmao:


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Not once in my memory have you ever even remotely hinted at building security being a topic for discussion.


If it doesn't involve the primary objective of confiscating guns, it's no longer interesting to them.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> If it doesn't involve the primary objective of confiscating guns, it's no longer interesting to them.


Nor to those of you who see guns as the only answer. I raised the issue of a defensible structure; all you guys could come up with was GUN! KILL! SHOOT! BRAVE! BULLET! 'MURICAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!


----------



## FeXL

I think on my own just fine, thankyouverymuch.

So, CM, question: All these school buildings that yer gonna make "secure"...ya gonna put up "Gun Free Zone" signs? Is this gonna be by the honour system as people walk in the "secure" doors & past the signs? Are there gonna be metal detectors? Ya gonna have armed guards there?

Jes' wonderin' what the Prog definition of a "secure" building is...



CubaMark said:


> Jeez, I didn't realize you were so dependent upon others to come up with things for you to think about...


----------



## Macfury

You did and I missed it. Apologies.



CubaMark said:


> Nor to those of you who see guns as the only answer. I raised the issue of a defensible structure; all you guys could come up with was GUN! KILL! SHOOT! BRAVE! BULLET! 'MURICAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> You did and I missed it. Apologies.


Accepted and appreciated.


----------



## FeXL

"Active Shooter" and Hostage Taker at California Veterans' Care Center



> Someone I know snarked "Well at least we know for certain he doesn't have a high-cap magazine because there's a _law_ against those in California."


----------



## eMacMan

Thus may explain why the former State Trooper/Deputy Sheriff did not go in.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/two-swat-officers-suspended-responding-220353055.html



> Two SWAT members from a Florida police department who raced inside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School while a gunman killed 17 people are now being suspended from duty because they responded to the shooting without permission.
> 
> 
> Detectives Jeffrey Gilbert and Carl Schlosser, both SWAT officers from the Miramar Police Department, were on duty when they headed to the Parkland, Florida school where 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz started shooting, the _Sun-Sentinel _reported. The two were not instructed to respond to the shooting, which created a security issue and resulted in their suspension, according to police.
> ...


----------



## CubaMark

XX) _No words._

*After Boy Shot His Sister, Mother Went to Work: Prosecutor*

(HAYESVILLE, Ohio) — A prosecutor says an 8-year-old Ohio boy loaded a rifle, repeatedly shot his 4-year-old sister at home and then informed their mother, who left work to check the girl’s injuries, cleaned up a bloody bed cover and then returned to work, leaving the children alone again.

The woman, 27-year-old Alyssa Edwards, is jailed on child endangerment charges related to the Saturday shooting in Hayesville, about 70 miles (113 kilometers) southwest of Cleveland.

The Ashland Times-Gazette reports Edwards tearfully appeared in court Monday and said there was no information the judge needed to consider before he set her bond at $30,000. An attorney is being appointed for Edwards for her Wednesday arraignment.

The girl remained hospitalized Monday in stable condition. Ashland County sheriff’s Chief Deputy Carl Richert says the girl’s injuries were not considered life-threatening. No other details about the girl’s injuries have been released. Her brother was in the custody of children’s services.
(Time)​


----------



## SINC

^

Lemme guess. It's the gun's fault??


----------



## CubaMark

SINC said:


> ^
> 
> Lemme guess. It's the gun's fault??


Nope. In this case it appears to be faulty storage of a firearm and neglect of a child.

Which translates into: some people just should never be able to own a gun.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Nope. In this case it appears to be faulty storage of a firearm and neglect of a child.
> 
> Which translates into: some people just should never be able to own a gun.


Yup. Minimum they should have is certified safety training with a certain number of hours at a gun facility.


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, still waiting for your suggestions re: "defensible structures". Are you going to have armed guards there?

If so, then what's the difference between that & armed teachers?

If not, then how are you going to keep Democrats with guns out of the schools?


----------



## FeXL

Of course it is...

You Knew This Was Coming: Arming Teachers Is Racist



> The basic gist is that white people shouldn’t have guns because they will use them to kill minorities and minorities can’t have guns because white people will kill them too. Also that guns are so freakin’ evil that if that if white people have them they won’t be able to resist their racist urges to shoot innocent black children.
> 
> There is one silver lining in this story: I finally found something that isn’t racist in a world where everything is racist. Apparently keeping schools as “gun-free” zones and mass shooter magnets is not racist. Ensuring that students are not safe from mass slaughter is the one thing that doesn’t qualify as racism.


Yep...


----------



## FeXL

Of, course, I fully expect there to be a long train of young black males threading in from inner city districts to their local constabulary, heads down, shoulders hunched, assault weapons in hand...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

Gun Confiscation Begins in Illinois



> It is no longer a conspiracy theory spawned by deplorable bitter clingers, but a creeping reality spawned by shootings law enforcement could have prevented but didn't. The Illinois House has passed legislation requiring 18- to 20-year-olds to give up certain legally purchased and legally owned firearms:


----------



## FeXL

Another Prog narrative (wait for it...) shot to hell. 

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I kill me... 

No, Government Isn’t ‘Banned’ From Studying Gun Violence



> A popular fiction circulating around the gun debate these days contends that “the government” has been “banned” from studying “gun violence.” This prohibition, I’m regularly assured, has led to a dearth of reliable science on firearms, and only when it’s lifted can America start alleviating the “epidemic” of mass shootings.
> 
> “Why Can’t the U.S. Treat Gun Violence as a Public-Health Problem?” asks one major publication. “Gun violence research by the government hasn’t been funded in two decades. But that may soon change,” says another. “The CDC can’t fund gun research. What if that changed?” ponders a third.
> 
> ...
> 
> The most obvious problem with this assertion is that it’s untrue.


The gun control fruit loops & whackos have never let actual facts get in the way of a good narrative...


----------



## FeXL

Gun-Owners Are Being Blamed for the Failures of Liberalism



> Liberalism is largely a process of adopting illogical and factually invalid positions and then artificially placing blame on its opponents when policies based on those positions inevitably fail. For the blame to bear fruit, it is necessary for people of good conscience to be fooled into believing that their actions and beliefs are bad for society and have brought about shameful consequences. At the same time, it is necessary for people whose consciences have already been deformed and co-opted by the faux morality of liberalism to be conditioned to think fellow citizens, who have caused no actual harm but hold contrary views, are evil.
> 
> We see this pattern repeated in the context of illegal immigration, global warming, environmentalism, opposition to Islamic subversion of Western culture, feminism, and social justice generally. Nowhere has it been more acutely on display than in the left's hatred of private gun ownership as the ultimate barrier against political overthrow. In order to disarm the country, the left's adherents must be tricked into believing that guns and gun ownership are irrevocably evil, and simultaneously that they and the policies they endorse have nothing to do with the "gun violence" they selectively decry.


More:



> As true Americans, law-abiding gun-owners reject the illogic, dishonesty, and corruption that animate every aspect of liberal politics and social structure. They loathe the culture that celebrates intolerance and bullying of opposing views, indeed which goes so far as to turn a blind eye to physical violence when it is carried out by leftist assailants against Americans to coerce conformity and acceptance of poisonous ideologies. They reject the culture that both creates victimhood and then encourages the rage it causes, so that those who see themselves as victims feel personally and socially justified in doing harm to people who have done them no harm whatsoever. Truth is irrelevant; liberals look outward. Their enemy is always to blame.


----------



## FeXL

Yes. Yes, you should.

'You should have the right to defend yourself:' Rally for rancher charged in shooting



> OKOTOKS — More than 150 people gathered outside the courthouse on Friday morning to support a man charged with shooting at trespassers on his property.
> 
> Residents of rural communities across southern Alberta attended the rally, some holding signs and shouting slogans such as “broken system” and “charge the criminals.”
> 
> “It doesn’t matter if you’re a rural person, a city person — it’s property rights,” said Rod Hertz, who attended the rally. “You have to defend yourself, you should have the right to defend yourself.”


----------



## FeXL

‘Survivor Of Sexual Assault’ Says She Was Fired For Having A Concealed Carry Permit



> A woman identifying as a Virginia social worker took to social media Friday evening to vent about being fired from her job for being a concealed carry permit holder.
> 
> Storm Durham, a former Department of Virginia Social Services employee who describes herself as a “22 year old blonde who is 5’2 and about 140 pounds who loves everything Disney, pink, and basic,” asserts that she was escorted out of her office by three Roanoke, Va., police officers after she was canned. She was, according to a post on Facebook, not even allowed to use the bathroom due to “serious safety concerns to the building.”
> 
> “I was fired today due to having a concealed carry permit,” Durham wrote on Facebook. “Was my gun on me? No. Has it ever been on me during my job, or visits, or anything related to work? No. When I told them that it has never been on me during work, what did they say? ‘How do we know that.'”


Related:


----------



## FeXL

CAUTION: Link to MotherCorpse inside...

Things You're Going To See On The CBC



> _ At 9am @CBCSask walks back one of the two errors in its divisive "Stanley/Boushie" narrative because "one of our sources is no longer certain" of accuracy. Of course not. It was made up.
> 
> I'll also explain why the second fake assertion is inaccurate. @CBCWatch
> — John Gormley Live (@JohnGormleyShow) March 12, 2018_​


Could just as easily go into the Fake News thread...


----------



## FeXL

Upcoming gun bill ‘scaring the hell out of the Liberal caucus,’ and Trudeau’s response to Harvey’s concerns puts a chill on backbenchers, say Liberals



> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s angry response to a rural MP’s concerns raised at a recent national caucus meeting on the Hill over the government’s upcoming gun legislation did not go over well with some Liberal MPs who say it will have a “chilling” effect on their ability to speak candidly at the closed-door meetings.
> 
> According to Liberal MPs and insiders, Mr. Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) verbally “attacked” rookie Liberal MP T.J. Harvey (Tobique-Mactaquac, N.B.), chair of the Liberal rural caucus, during the Feb. 28 national caucus meeting on Parliament Hill. Mr. Harvey stood up to say that there was a “lack” of meaningful consultation with the caucus over the government’s upcoming gun control legislation.
> 
> “Justin was much too vitriolic and attacked him,” one Liberal MP, referring to Mr. Harvey, told _The Hill Times_, who spoke on condition of anonymity since the closed-door caucus meetings are confidential. *“We’re also supposed to have the right to voice our opinion.”*


Bold mine.

Apparently said anonymous Liberal MP didn't read the chapter in the Liberal Marxist Handbook about Petite P'tat dictatorships...

I jes' luvs me that little chart at the article's end illustrating two things:

1) Liberal rural ridings won by 5% or less (which will be most affected by further gun control);
2) None of the bastards was elected in Alberta.


----------



## FeXL

Sonuvagun. Just like I've been posing about...

Not 'Toxic Masculinity,' but None: Most Mass Shooters Are Fatherless



> The Conservative Millennial brings up excellent points about why fathers matter: "26 out of the last 27 deadliest mass shooters were fatherless. ... That’s why boys who grow up in single-mother homes are twice as likely to commit crimes than those who grow up with a present dad. That’s why both sons and daughters are more likely to become depressed without a strong relationship with their father. That’s why 71% of high school dropouts are fatherless."


Effect, meet cause.

Screeching, "BUT IT'S THE GUNS!!! THE GUNS!!! THE MILITARY STYLE RIFLES!!! AR-15'S!!! GUN CONTROL LAWS!!! LISTEN TO MEEEEEE!!!"

F'ing idiots, all of them.

More:



> These boys are growing up without worthy role models, people whom they can model their behavior on. Instead, they fill the void with entertainers and athletes, people who may or may not be decent people. They find people in their neighborhoods they think are worthy of emulation, never realizing that these supposedly "worthy" people are the scum of the Earth.


The exact same problem with inner city black kids with single moms killing each other off with handguns in centres & states with some of the toughest gun laws in the country.

This ain't rocket surgery, people.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Effect, meet cause.
> 
> Screeching, "BUT IT'S THE GUNS!!! THE GUNS!!! THE MILITARY STYLE RIFLES!!! AR-15'S!!! GUN CONTROL LAWS!!! LISTEN TO MEEEEEE!!!"
> 
> F'ing idiots, all of them..


Okay a big eureka moment. People are at the root of this. Guns aren't dragging helpless people to schools and making them shoot people. We know.

What kind of solution resolves this? A free father figure with the purchase of an AR-15?


----------



## FeXL

It's not a eureka moment. It's common knowledge among those actually _informed_ on the topic. People have known about this for years.



smashedbanana said:


> Okay a big eureka moment.


You are among the very few in the gun control camp that actually admit this. Thank you.

Then why attack legal gun owners? And don't give me the old, "'Cause we're unable to do anything else so this makes it look like we're actually doing something" schtick.



smashedbanana said:


> People are at the root of this. Guns aren't dragging helpless people to schools and making them shoot people. We know.


<sniff> You're better than that...

Attacking legal gun owners certainly is not. Every time the gun control nuts attack legal gun owners they further alienate them. Thing is, legal firearm owners don't want people murdered by guns, either. Wouldn't it be nice to have some of them onside to help solve some of these problems instead of creating an opponent? Furnish some ideas? Man-hours? Money? 

Just spitballing here but can you imagine the power of the NRA behind you? Not for gun control but for legal firearms safety & ownership? Maybe saving a few young black inner city male lives? Wouldn't that just be a kick?

You tell me. What is it about Democratically controlled inner cities with extant gun control laws and large black single mom populations that makes young black males want to kill each other with illegal hand guns?

Quite frankly, while each & every "mass" killing is a tragedy, what goes on nearly unreported every day in inner cities far outnumbers mass killings any given year. But again, that uncomfortable fact doesn't garner near the headlines (people have become inured to that reality) nor does it match most gun control nuts' narrative (****** with an AR).



smashedbanana said:


> What kind of solution resolves this? A free father figure with the purchase of an AR-15?


----------



## CubaMark

*(emphasis mine)*

*Teacher accidentally fires gun in classroom, students injured*

A teacher accidentally fired a pistol inside a California classroom while lecturing about public safety and injured three students, according to police.

Dennis Alexander was pointing the gun at the ceiling when he inadvertently fired it Tuesday at Seaside High School, said Abdul Pridgen, the city's police chief.

*Bullet fragments ricocheted off the ceiling and hit a 17-year-old student in the neck, Pridgen said. Shortly after the incident, class resumed as usual.

The teen’s father, Fermin Gonzales, said he rushed his son to the hospital after the 17-year-old returned from school with blood on his shirt and a neck injury. *

“He’s shaken up, but he’s going to be OK,” Gonzales told KSBW. “I’m just pretty upset that *no one told us anything and we had to call the police ourselves to report it.”*

Two other students were also injured by debris, but police said all of their injuries are minor.

Alexander also serves as a reserve officer for Sand City police and is a Seaside city councilman.

The police department and school district placed Alexander on administrative leave while investigating whether he was legally allowed to have a gun on campus.

"I think a lot of questions on parents' minds are, why a teacher would be pointing a loaded firearm at the ceiling in front of students," Superintendent PK Diffenbaugh told KSBW. "Clearly in this incident protocols were not followed."

Guns and other weapons are prohibited on school grounds, though there are exceptions involving law enforcement.

(WesternMassNews)​


----------



## FeXL

Yeah. And?

Do you want me to pick this shining example of stupidity apart first or are you going to try to support your argument with it?

Wanna bet he's a Democrat?



CubaMark said:


> Teacher accidentally fires gun in classroom, students injured


----------



## FeXL

And, CM, while I'm waiting for a response on that one, how's your "defensible structures" argument fleshing out?

You wanted to talk solutions other than guns so let's hear precisely how yer gonna manage that without firearms.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. Hand making AR-15's. Who knew?

After Parkland, a surge in make-your-own AR-15 rifles



> *Wilson said he believes a “very conservative” estimate would be that 25,000 to 30,000 AR-15s are in circulation because of his machine, the first generation of which was introduced in 2014.* Sometimes, he’s contacted by authorities, he said, after the machines have changed hands.


Nope. No way in hell home machinists can make significant numbers of firearms. Not a chance...

More:



> “There’s always this as an escape valve. *The more Massachusetts and the Fourth Circuit and California and Washington — the more they implement these kind of restrictions [on guns], the more people turn to manufacturing*,” Wilson said, referring to state laws and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s 2017 ruling that the Second Amendment does not cover AR-15s, upholding Maryland’s ban on various assault weapons.


All bold mine.


----------



## SINC

Finally some sanity from the RCMP?

No charges for homeowner who fired gun during alleged rural Sask. break-in - Saskatchewan - CBC News


----------



## FeXL

Let's talk the Broward Cowards s'more:

Broward County Sheriff’s Office Violated Own Policy By Not Entering School



> _Judicial Watch today released Broward County Sheriff’s Office training and operation materials that specifically dictate that the first one or two officers on the scene of an active shooter incident “will immediately go to confront the shooter.”
> 
> The Broward County Sheriff’s Office’s Standard Operating Procedure and lesson plans for an active shooter incident were obtained by Judicial Watch via a Florida Sunshine Act records request.
> 
> The Broward County Sheriff’s Office confirmed that armed school resource officer Deputy Scot Peterson was first on the scene of the February 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, but he did not enter the school to confront shooter Nikolas Cruz.
> 
> Three other deputies also arrived on the scene but did not enter, the sheriff’s office said. The Broward County materials direct that if four officers are on the scene of an active shooter incident they are to form a “Quad” formation and enter the building.
> 
> The lesson plan instructs officers to immediately confront a shooter..._​


Broward sheriff's captain who gave initial order to 'stage' not enter Stoneman Douglas is ID'd



> The Broward County Sheriff’s Office has identified to Fox News the captain who, according to sources, directed responding deputies and units to “stage” or form a “perimeter” outside Stoneman Douglas High School, instead of rushing immediately into the building, as the mass shooting unfolded there.
> 
> Multiple law enforcement and official sources said the commands in the initial moments after Nikolas Cruz allegedly opened fire would go against all training which instructs first responders to “go, go, go” until the shooter is neutralized. As law enforcement arrived, the shooter’s identity and exact location were still unknown.
> 
> Multiple sources told Fox News that Captain Jan Jordan was the commanding officer on scene. In an email responding to Fox News’ request for information, a BSO spokesperson wrote, “Capt. Jordan’s radio call sign is 17S1.”


----------



## FeXL

Student Assaulted for Pro-Second Amendment Views, Then Suspended for Defending Himself



> PJ Media previously reported on the story of a 17-year-old high school student from Farmington, Conn., who was originally blocked from participating in a school assembly on March 14 where she had planned to present her conservative and pro-Second Amendment views. Thanks to the attention her story received, the student, Ashley Dummit, was eventually able to participate, and gave a speech at the assembly in defense of Second Amendment rights. In fact, she ended up being the only speaker at the assembly.
> 
> Unfortunately, not all incidents involving pro-Second Amendment students have ended so well.
> 
> Another high school student, 17-year-old Christian Breault, a senior at Middleburgh Junior/Senior High School, in Middleburgh, N.Y., found himself physically attacked for standing up for the Second Amendment when his school participated in the nationwide walkout on March 14. After the school participated in the walkout, an assembly was held in the school, featuring local law enforcement and community leaders to talk to the students about school safety. Instead of safety, the assembly turned political, tensions rose, and Christian found himself targeted for defending the Second Amendment. His father, Brian Breault, spoke out about the incident on Facebook


----------



## eMacMan

SINC said:


> Finally some sanity from the RCMP?
> 
> No charges for homeowner who fired gun during alleged rural Sask. break-in - Saskatchewan - CBC News


Now if we just saw similar sanity preavail down in the Okotoks area.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Huh. Hand making AR-15's. Who knew?


Nobody hand making anything in your link. They are using a specialized CNC machine that this guy has been selling to make 80% of the lower. Then people are purchasing the remaining 60% of the rifle from parts from the manufacturer. Which as it turns our requires no background check.

2 dumb loopholes. 

-Making customized machinery and selling it to make gun parts. 
-Being able to purchase as much as 60% of a gun in parts with no checks and balances.


At least California is closing the loophole..


----------



## FeXL

Jeezuz... If I happen to use a drill press to drill a hole or a circular saw to cut a piece of wood or a router to run a bead along an edge to make a piece of hand made furniture, it's still considered hand made, is it not?

What is it with you guys? This is the biggest argument you can muster? And you tell me my argument is weak? Take a look in the frickin' mirror every so often.

Remember this?:



smashedbanana said:


> Seriously? This is your followup to your previous comment that somehow every Tom, Dick and Harry machinist is going to start producing underground firearms? You know a guy who knows a guy who probably could make part of a gun. Very weak.


You doubted that there was capability to make significant quantities of firearms in home machine shops.

I merely provided information illustrating precisely that capability. I've also noted somewhere on these boards that the balance of the parts can be purchased off shelf. None of this is a mystery. 

None of what I noted has been refuted by your post. Everything I said regarding the home machinist's ability to machine, purchase additional parts for & subsequently assemble AR-15's in mass quantity has been confirmed.

Go ahead. Tax them out of existence. Make them illegal. In the mean time, they will be manufactured underground by the tens of thousands in home machine shops and sold on the black market everywhere.



smashedbanana said:


> Nobody hand making anything in your link. They are using a specialized CNC machine that this guy has been selling to make 80% of the lower. Then people are purchasing the remaining 60% of the rifle from parts from the manufacturer.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Jeezuz... If I happen to use a drill press to drill a hole or a circular saw to cut a piece of wood or a router to run a bead along an edge to make a piece of hand made furniture, it's still considered hand made, is it not?


Not even close to the same thing. In your scenario you are making something with your hands. Your hands are needed to drive the machines. In the AR15 assembly article a block of aluminum is put in a box and 2 hours later a computer has milled an AR15 lower. It's mini automation or production.

Further to that again, it's a specialized machine being sold for a specific purpose. And I think he's not making them anymore.

You previously said that raising the price of an AR15 would lead to production of AR15s in large quantities with existing machine shops.

If you can provide me an article where someone has made an AR15 100% from scratch and can do it reasonably quick and in quantity I will agree with you 100%.

I will not even argue about the problems with the availability of things like high carbon steel (government monitored) or other challenges with sourcing the raw materials in quantity.


----------



## eMacMan

Let's come at gun seizure from a different direction. Factor out suicides and in 2017 there were about 15,000 firearm deaths in the Untied States of Paranoia. How can I factor out suicide? Easy, the US does not even crack the top 25 in suicides. Anyone that commits suicide with a gun is clearly determined to take their own life, take away the gun and almost all of them will still succeed in taking their own lives.

That same year there were over 40,000 auto deaths. Now if 15,000 deaths constitutes sufficient grounds to betray the Bill of Rights and seize all firearms, would not 40,000 deaths call 2.67 time as urgently for the seizure of all automobiles? Note the right to own an automobile is not Constitutionally protected, except perhaps under the 4th Amendment. FWIW The 4th has been shredded beyond all recognition post 9/11.

So those of you who advocate Gun Control aka Gun Seizure, are you willing to give your vehicles to the government???


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> So those of you who advocate Gun Control aka Gun Seizure, are you willing to give up your vehicles???


Only public transit weenies and eco-nuts--who are happy to give government full control of their transportation.


----------



## FeXL

Nobody ever said anything about 100% from scratch. I certainly did not. As a matter of fact I've specifically noted that the lowers would be the most difficult piece to deal with. Everything else is off the shelf. 

I merely said that AR-15's would be manufactured by other than commercial businesses (home machine shops) & backed it up with an article clearly showing they already have been, on the order of 10's of thousands.

That is all.

Wiggle your terminology freak all you want. Cry foul as loud as you want. The numbers will only increase with more restrictions & higher firearm taxes.



smashedbanana said:


> If you can provide me an article where someone has made an AR15 100% from scratch and can do it reasonably quick and in quantity I will agree with you 100%.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Wiggle your terminology freak all you want. Cry foul as loud as you want. The numbers will only increase with more restrictions & higher firearm taxes.


You are correct I am being too nit picky. People have found a way around the system and if it gets even more difficult they will only try harder.

It is stupid that this workaround is even available, but that doesn't change the fact that you have proved your point!


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> You are correct I am being too nit picky. People have found a way around the system and if it gets even more difficult they will only try harder.
> 
> It is stupid that this workaround is even available, but that doesn't change the fact that you have proved your point!


Good on you! I am always reluctant to cede a point, but I swallow hard and do so on occasion.


----------



## FeXL

Well, whaddya know. Sheriff's deputy engaged the school shooter, shooter killed, no stray black or gay or trans students (or anybody else, for that matter) shot in the process by the crazed gun-waving ******* sheriff's deputy in the hallways. Who knew?

Sheriff’s deputy lauded for confronting Md. high school gunman, averting worse attack



> A 17-year-old student opened fire Tuesday morning at a high school in southern Maryland, wounding two classmates before exchanging gunfire with a school resource officer, said authorities, who credited the sheriff’s deputy for averting a worse attack.
> 
> The shooter, identified as Austin Wyatt Rollins, was killed in the exchange, but not before two other students — a 16-year-old girl and a 14-year-old boy — were wounded at Great Mills High School. The girl was in critical condition Tuesday afternoon, and the boy was in good condition, authorities said.


Hey, CM, you got any further details on that gun free "defensible structures" argument? Waiting with bated breath...


----------



## FeXL

Hey, nit picking can be a good way to get into the details of a complex problem such as this. No worries.

Thx for the discussion.



smashedbanana said:


> You are correct I am being too nit picky.


----------



## FeXL

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey, CM, this must be part of that "gun free" defensible structures plan you wuz talkin' about.

Superintendent Says Students Are Armed with Rocks In Case of a School Shooting



> The superintendent of the Blue Mountain School District is in the spotlight after telling lawmakers in Harrisburg his students protect themselves against potential school shooters with rocks.
> 
> “Every classroom has been equipped with a five-gallon bucket of river stone. If an armed intruder attempts to gain entrance into any of our classrooms, they will face a classroom full students armed with rocks and they will be stoned,” said Dr. David Helsel.


Speaking of stoned...

Problem Solved: School Arms Students With Rocks To Repel Mass Shooters



> “At this point, we have to get creative, we have to protect our kids first and foremost, throwing rocks, it’s an option,” said parent Dori Bornstein.


BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## macintosh doctor

liberals lol


----------



## CubaMark

*Remember when it was a teacher's job to, y'know, teach?*

*'It's my job to protect them': U.S. teachers train to carry guns in class*










"According to the department of public safety, you've passed the proficiency," he says. "But how do you all feel?"

Norman Rangel, a principal at a nearby private school, looks at his target. He's shot the child hostage several times. 

"I hit the kid a few times," Rangel says. "I know it is just paper, but it still impacted me. This is very serious. There's no way to overstate that." 

Proctor nods. "If you are not satisfied," he says. "I'm a happy person. Because what would I be satisfied with? 100 per cent, that's what I would be satisfied with."

* * *​
An obviously shaken Jace Daily stares at her own target. Six of her shots hit the child in the head. 

"It's not very good," she admits. "When I first came up [to the target], of course I looked at my misses. I looked at that precious little baby and all the holes in his head. I obviously did some damage to the bad guy too." 

She pauses and takes a deep breath.








"I need some practice," she concludes. 

Asked if seeing the little kid makes the idea of a school shooting more real, Daily says, "For sure. I have 7-year-old boys and they are about that size," she says — her voice unsteady.

"It's a big responsibility."

(CBC)​


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> *Remember when it was a teacher's job to, y'know, teach?*


That was decades ago, before Progressives took hold of the curriculum.


----------



## CubaMark

_This is simply inexcusable. Outright negligence. Wouldn't have happened if that baby had been armed, I tell you what.... And the reaction of the neighbour... unbelievable._

*Texas 4-Year-Old Shoots 7-Month-Old Baby in Apparent Accident*










A 7-month-old baby is in the hospital after being accidentally shot by a 4-year-old at a house in Temple, Texas.

The condition of the infant is unknown following the shooting at a house in the 300 block of South 25th Street at around 2:31 p.m. local time. KWKT-TV reported that the baby was conscious and breathing when it was taken to McLane Children's Hospital.

* * *​
KWTX-TV reported that there was a sign outside the home in Temple that warned people of weapons inside. The sign reads: “The average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes. The response time of a .357 is 14 hundred feet per second.”

* * *​
Neighbor Adrian Martinez said he did not blame the family for what occurred.

"I'm not there to judge them, but in my family, it happened once with my cousin," Martinez told KXXV. "My cousin killed accidentally my other cousin. It happens. Accidents happen."

(Newsweek)​


----------



## FeXL

It's always been a teacher's job to protect their students, from when I started school in the 60's and for a helluva lot further back than that.

As far as the first time shooters hitting the student target, no surprise. That's what gun ranges & practice does: it makes you a more accurate shooter.

All this article is, is more hype from the gun-hating, control-mongering left. "Teacher hit little Johnny's target right between the eyes! AHHHHHHHH!!!"

You ever fire a weapon, CM? On that expansive tract of land you grew up on? With the horses an' everything? Tell me, how accurate were _your_ first shots?



CubaMark said:


> Remember when it was a teacher's job to, y'know, teach?


----------



## FeXL

Well, for once you've got it right. Don't let it go to your head. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every so often...

_Not_ the gun's fault.

_Not_ the babies fault.

_Absolutely_ the parent's fault for leaving loaded firearms lying around.

What I can't figger is why this belongs in the gun control thread. Ya know, CM, what started out as a perfectly good thread on gun control has morphed, in part, to your Prog ignorance blah, blah, blah...

Sound familiar, CM?



CubaMark said:


> This is simply inexcusable. Outright negligence.


----------



## FeXL

'No new gun registry': Liberals introduce new gun control legislation — RCMP to reclassify firearms



> The federal government tabled a proposed new bill Tuesday to tighten the sale and tracking of firearms, only to find itself under attack from both sides: gun owners wary of burdensome regulation and shooting victims who say the bill doesn’t go far enough.
> 
> *Gun retailers would be required to keep records of firearms inventory and sales for at least 20 years under the legislation introduced in the House of Commons.* The proposed measure is intended to assist police in investigating gun trafficking and other crimes.


So, is a gun registry under any other name merely another shot at a gun registry? Hell, yes.

The only difference is, in this case, they've now unloaded the cost and man-hours of doing so on to the businesses owners who will now be required to manage this thing.

Related:

Trudeau Government Tightens Screws On Gun Ownership



> The Trudeau government is making it even more difficult for Canadian citizens to buy guns.
> 
> In legislation introduced Tuesday, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale is mandating more extensive background checks that will attempt to discern any evidence of mental illness in a potential gun owner’s personal history. When asked what kinds of mental illness are associated with gun violence, Goodale explained that he would “have that conversation with a variety of groups and organizations.”
> 
> The minister said he hopes to address the theft of guns in future legislation with his provincial and territorial counterparts.
> 
> *Goodale called it “sensible, practical package.”*


Bold mine.

For whom? It does nothing to address existing (or future, for that matter) lawbreakers and makes it more difficult for law abiding gun owners.

Lose/lose. It's merely more Prog political posturing.


----------



## eMacMan

Still haven't from any of our our gun seizure wingnuts announcing that they are renouncing their autos. If they truly believed would they not renounce???


> Let's come at gun seizure from a different direction. Factor out suicides and in 2017 there were about 15,000 firearm deaths in the Untied States of Paranoia. How can I factor out suicide? Easy, the US does not even crack the top 25 in suicides. Anyone that commits suicide with a gun is clearly determined to take their own life, take away the gun and almost all of them will still succeed in taking their own lives.
> 
> That same year there were over 40,000 auto deaths. Now if 15,000 deaths constitutes sufficient grounds to betray the Bill of Rights and seize all firearms, would not 40,000 deaths call 2.67 time as urgently for the seizure of all automobiles? Note the right to own an automobile is not Constitutionally protected, except perhaps under the 4th Amendment. FWIW The 4th has been shredded beyond all recognition post 9/11.
> 
> So those of you who advocate Gun Control aka Gun Seizure, are you willing to give your vehicles to the government???


While we wait they can chew on this:


----------



## FeXL

I guess I really don't understand the point of this. People who are never going to purchase firearms attaching their names to a list noting that they're never going to be able to purchase firearms?

Who gives a fat rodent's arse?

As far as the suicide angle, if you really want to kill yourself, there's a ton of ways to do that without using a firearm. 'Sides, you can repeal your name from the list after 7 days. From the little bit I know about suicides, it's usually not an instantaneous thought, a simple matter of stimulus/response. There is significant planning ahead. Planning that could easily eat up 7 days.

Schtupid...

Washington Governor Jay Inslee Signs Voluntary Gun Ban Into Law



> It is unknown how many suckers people will agree to voluntarily have themselves stripped of their Second Amendment rights with the exception of loopy liberals looking to make a political statement but this is one more step down the road toward gun confiscation.


----------



## macintosh doctor

the shooting was a tragedy, but the youth had the best intentions to voice their opinions but they are to young to vote, nor even old enough to express their Second Amendment right to own a firearm.. There’s a common sense reason for that.
Yet, they’re going to dictate to the rest of America how the Second Amendment should apply to them? I wouldn’t count it. Of course a few politicians will cave in to the dictates of political correctness, indeed a few probably already have.
Not to mention the second tragedy and probably is the greatest of tragedy is our youth being manipulated by attention seeking celebrities and media ..


----------



## FeXL

There goes another Prog narrative...

Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say



> The deadly school shooting this month in Parkland, Florida, has ignited national outrage and calls for action on gun reform. But while certain policies may help decrease gun violence in general, it’s unlikely that any of them will prevent mass school shootings, according to James Alan Fox, the Lipman Family Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy at Northeastern.
> 
> Since 1996, there have been 16 multiple victim shootings in schools, or incidents involving 4 or more victims and at least 2 deaths by firearms, excluding the assailant.
> 
> Of these, 8 are mass shootings, or incidents involving 4 or more deaths, excluding the assailant.
> 
> Mass school shootings are incredibly rare events. In research publishing later this year, Fox and doctoral student Emma Fridel found that on average, mass murders occur between 20 and 30 times per year, and about one of those incidents on average takes place at a school.


So, excellent read if you just pay attention to the data. Be aware that there is some personal opinion interjected into the article later on that can be largely ignored.


----------



## FeXL

I've been watching & reading this ignorant excuse for a human being performing his Prog-prepared script for a week or so now. He does need to grow TFU...

You Say You Want a Revolution



> The runaway ego of the most punchable face gracing every mainstream media broadcast right now is claiming he and his ilk are starting a “revolution.” In a very scripted appearance on ABC’s Good Morning America broadcast this morning, David Hogg (thankfully leaving the obscenity-laced rants at home this time) metaphorically pounded his puny chest in a bout of self-aggrandizement, claiming he and his Parkland pals are all heroic and such.
> 
> Uh. OK.


More:



> Every definition and example of a political and social revolution I have seen involves radical change, especially the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler by the governed. But what I haven’t seen in readings about revolutions and revolutionary movements is government-funded, organized, high-end, media promoted events steeped in ignorance of the law, natural rights, and political philosophy.
> 
> *Does this look like a revolution? Or does this look like a rock concert?
> 
> Does this look like the overthrow of a political system, or does it look like a bunch of ignorant kids, funded and encouraged by extremist billionaires, government institutions, and teachers unions?*


Bold mine.

Nails it.

Further:



> “The NRA are pathetic ****ers,” claimed Hogg, denigrating millions of law-abiding citizens who choose to associate with one another, exercising their First Amendment rights.
> 
> *Do these sound like revolutionaries, or bratty kids?*


Bold mine.

I'll leave it to the reader to decide.

I've quoted too much already but this throws into sharp relief the mindset we're dealing with here:



> David Hogg recently stated:
> 
> _When your old-ass parent is like, “I don’t know how to send an iMessage,” and you’re just like, “Give me the ****ing phone and let me handle it.” Sadly, that’s what we have to do with our government; our parents don’t know how to use a ****ing democracy, so we have to._​
> You say you want a revolution?
> 
> Grow up first.


Yep.


----------



## eMacMan

A quick Herald quote from a report on crime in Calgary last year.



> Gun crime was also up in Calgary, reaching the highest numbers in five years, according to the data. In total, there were with 94 shootings in 2017, with 64 of them being targeted incidents and 60 of those being linked to organized crime.


IOW nearly 2/3rds of Calgary shootings involved organized crime. Still waiting to hear how the Gun Seizure wingnuts think additional firearm controls will have the slightest impact on organized crime related shootings.

Entire article here:
Calgary police report says gun and auto crime on the rise | Calgary Herald


----------



## smashedbanana

eMacMan said:


> Still haven't from any of our our gun seizure wingnuts announcing that they are renouncing their autos. If they truly believed would they not renounce???


Who exactly are you talking to? People in this forum?


----------



## FeXL

Interesting read.

20-Plus Questions Mass Schooling Survivors Need To Answer Before Hyping Gun Control



> In the past few weeks, media and Hollywood mega-personalities including Bill Maher, George Clooney, and Oprah Winfrey have anointed select teenagers with the smelly oil of celebrity credibility. They’ve determined these kids are uniquely qualified to teach the world which public policies to adopt (i.e., Maher’s, Clooney’s, and Winfrey’s.)
> 
> At the moment, the issue is gun control advocacy in the wake of the tragic Parkland shooting. The media is giving loads of airtime to these kids to lead school walk-outs as well as this Saturday’s “March for our Lives” in Washington DC. The march is an extremely well-organized and deeply funded mass mobilization project. It’s probably the biggest mass agitation attempt to abolish the Second Amendment we’ve ever seen.
> 
> But the real story is far deeper and broader than a call for gun control advocacy. The real story is how mass public schooling serves mass conformity. It is about how mass schooling deprives countless children of their individuality and the right to think their own thoughts.


Related:

Who Runs March for Our Lives? 



> March for Our Lives is on every cable channel, but who runs it? The photogenic teen fronts are out front. But it’s obvious to everyone that a bunch of teens don’t have the resources and skills to coordinate a nationwide movement. Instead it’s the experienced activists who are actually running things.
> 
> The March for Our Lives Fund is incorporated as a 501(c)(4). Donations to 501(c)(4) groups are not tax- deductible. And they don’t have to disclose donors. That’s why they’re a great dark money conduit.
> 
> But the March for Our Lives website suggests that donors who want to make a tax-deductible donation should write a check to the “March For Our Lives—Everytown Support Fund”. How will Bloomberg’s organization provide support for the supposed student group?
> 
> Why have two March for Our Lives Fund, one dark and one light? And why is one being routed through the godfather of the gun control lobby?


Related, too:

David Hogg's Next Crusade: Opposing Voter Identification Laws



> The March for Our Lives may have been the Parkland activist students' magnum opus, but they are by no means done agitating for leftist policies. The only relevant legislation on the horizon, the STOP School Violence Act, passed without their support, and there are few gun regulations likely to pass.
> 
> So, at least one Parkland student is seeking to expand his policy agenda; David Hogg is battling voter ID laws.
> 
> *That's right: he may believe you should have photo identification in order to exercise your Second Amendment rights, but is iffy on whether you should have similar paperwork to cast a ballot.*


Curious, that. Precisely the same position his Prog puppet masters hold. Voter ID is far too onerous a task for ordinary Americans but anybody who wants a gun better bring his hat, arse, overshoes & first born male along...


----------



## FeXL

March For Our Lives Signage Out-Stupids Previous Anti-Gun Protest



> Today there were March for Our Lives rallies all over the country because teenagers don’t like the idea that our Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms for everyone including them. 10 days ago young people descend upon our nation’s Capitol to demand an end to civil rights with signs about vaginas and slave reparations and yet somehow today’s protest signs managed to out-stupid those.


Some of these are priceless... :lmao:


----------



## FeXL

The Phony ‘Gun Violence Epidemic’



> Promising a “revolution” to “change America” by disarming citizens is rather a radical ambition, but ABC News and other liberal media organizations promote this propaganda without offering any critical analysis or providing access to facts that contradict Hogg’s claims.
> 
> The liberal media did not produce _news coverage_ of Saturday’s protests. Instead, they produced one-sided _publicity_ for gun-control activists. The media have uncritically amplified the claim that events like last month’s Parkland massacre represent an “epidemic” of “gun violence.”
> 
> Facts contradicting this rhetoric are not difficult to find, and any journalist who ignores these facts has failed his professional duty.


More:



> If there is not actually an “epidemic” of school shootings, there is no need for new gun laws to prevent such shootings. And, as Ann Coulter has suggested, maybe guns aren’t the real problem:
> 
> _*There have been about 34 mass shootings since 2000. Forty-seven percent — 16 — were committed by first- and second-generation immigrants*, i.e. people who never would have been here but for Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act.
> And the immigrant mass shootings have been some of the most spectacular ones, such as Fort Hood and San Bernardino. Two of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history, at Virginia Tech in 2007 and at the Pulse Nightclub in 2016, were committed by first- and second-generation immigrants. . . .
> On account of the Rule of Journalism that permits the word “immigrant” to be used only in sentences with the word “valedictorian,” you may not have heard of some of these mass shootings at all._​


Bold mine.

Interesting little statistic, that...


----------



## FeXL

Indeed!

You Want To Have A Serious Talk About Gun Violence? Let’s Talk About Chicago And Handguns



> It seems fairly evident that nobody on the gun control side of the aisle wants to have a serious talk about guns and gun violence. What they want is an easy win. They want to cast the National Rifle Association as the epitome of evil. An army of children is marching on Washington this weekend, and they want to take semi-automatic rifles away, specifically, the spooky AR-15 rifle.
> 
> Indeed, the weapon and its notional ban have objectively dominated debate on the national stage since the Parkland shooting.
> 
> Meanwhile, if gun control advocates were actually serious about gun violence, they’d be talking about places like Chicago and they’d lobby for further regulation of or outright ban on the sale of handguns. Yes, the real numbers actually show rifles are among the safest firearms for an American to own. According to the FBI, Americans are roughly 20 times more likely to die at the end of a handgun.


More:



> Their proposed regulations also fit the typical script in that they will have almost no effect on the problem. Raise the age of sales to 21? Average age of a mass shooter is 32. Ban the sale of AR-15s? There are dozens of magazine-fed carbines on the market. Ban the sale of semi-automatic rifles? Most mass shootings occur with handguns.


I jes' luvs me those tiny, insignificant, niggling details that render gun control nuts arguments completely & totally irrelevant...


----------



## FeXL

It Begins: Florida Police Now Confiscating Guns From People With No Due Process



> In what’s being called the first gun confiscation of its kind in Florida, police have taken four guns and a couple hundred rounds of ammunition from a 56-year-old Lighthouse Point man. The man was not tried, had not committed a crime, and the guns were solely removed because “experts” deemed him a threat.





> To be clear, no one here is advocating for people determined to be mentally unfit to be able to possess firearms. However, they need to be determined to be mentally unfit *before they lose their rights.*


For those of you who would disagree, would it be acceptable to you to be tossed in jail for something _you_ had never done?


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> It Begins: Florida Police Now Confiscating Guns From People With No Due Process
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In what’s being called the first gun confiscation of its kind in Florida, police have taken four guns and a couple hundred rounds of ammunition from a 56-year-old Lighthouse Point man. The man was not tried, had not committed a crime, and the guns were solely removed because “experts” deemed him a threat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To be clear, no one here is advocating for people determined to be mentally unfit to be able to possess firearms. However, they need to be determined to be mentally unfit *before they lose their rights.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For those of you who would disagree, would it be acceptable to you to be tossed in jail for something _you_ had never done?
Click to expand...

This is the reason I now refer to it as gun seizure. Clearly the intent extends beyond dismantling the second amendment. The fourth is certainly in the sites of the Gun Seizure lobby as well. 

Strange that none of the gun seizure crowd has proven willing to stand behind their beliefs and give up their autos. They not only could make a grand stand against the needless slaughter caused by the automobile (2.67 times greater than firearm deaths) but could also greatly reduce their carbon footprint. See this post:
http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else...ed-recent-mass-shootings-223.html#post2620641


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs it when they actually say something worth listening to.

‘Pretty’s Amy Schumer Drops Truth Bomb Between Her Hate



> In the middle of Schumer’s hateful speech she let loose with something most media outlets refuse to acknowledge. Progressive actors spouting progressive talking points are hurting their own bottom lines.
> 
> _Speaking up about this puts literal targets on our backs, and for sick bullying and lies about us, and it narrows the people who will support our work. *We sell half as many tickets* because we’re standing up for what is right._​
> She’s … right.


Bold mine.

Now you know what it's like to be on the receiving end, Amy. Now you know that there are consequences to actions. Now you know that not everybody appreciates your drivel.

'Bout time you grew up...


----------



## FeXL

I question some of his statistics but his main point hits home.

When Will We Have the Guts to Link Fatherlessness to School Shootings?



> Now that the gun control advocates have had their fifteen minutes of fame, let’s start focusing on the real issues impacting the rise in school shootings since that infamous day in Columbine in 1999. Issue number one that no one in the mainstream media or government wants to acknowledge: fatherlessness. Specifically, the impact of fatherlessness on the boys who grew up to become school shooters.
> 
> Dr. Warren Farrell, author of the new book The Boy Crisis, explains:
> 
> _Minimal or no father involvement, whether due to divorce, death, or imprisonment, is common to Adam Lanza, Elliott Rodgers, Dylan Roof and Stephen Paddock.
> 
> In the case of 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, he was adopted at birth. His adoptive dad died when Nikolas was much younger, and doubtless the challenges of this fatherlessness was compounded by the death of his adoptive mom three and a half months ago.
> 
> The rate of mass shootings has tripled since 2011. We blame guns, violence in the media, violence in video games, and poor family values. Each is a plausible player. *But our daughters live in the same homes, with the same access to the same guns, video games, and media, and are raised with the same family values. Our daughters are not killing. Our sons are.
> 
> But boys with significant father involvement are not doing these shootings. Without dads as role models, boys’ testosterone is not well channeled.* The boy experiences a sense of purposelessness, a lack of boundary enforcement, rudderlessness, and often withdraws into video games and video porn. At worst, when boys’ testosterone is not well-channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most destructive forces. When boys’ testosterone is well channeled by an involved dad, boys become among the world’s most constructive forces._​


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

HA!!! The iron...

Parkland students who begged for gov't to take away their rights now experiencing buyer's remorse



> After the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida last month, a group of anti-gun high school children became the darlings of the anti-gun movement. They were given widespread coverage and platforms on all mainstream media networks to call for the disarming of Americans. They were sanctioned by the government to do so-and now they are getting what they asked for-less rights.


More:



> Now, all students will have to allow anyone at anytime to view the contents of their backpacks as well as wear IDs so they can be properly identified by school authorities.
> 
> These new measures now have the darling activists on the defensive.
> 
> "I'm not happy with it. Why are you punishing me for one person's actions?" Tyra Hemans, 19, a Stoneman senior, told CNN on Friday. But this is exactly what they wanted. These students wanted to punish the tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners by demanding the government take away their right to defend themselves-all for the actions of one person. Now, they are getting a taste of their own medicine, and it stinks.


Further:



> _*I get what you mean.
> 
> It’s REALLY frustrating when the law abiding are punished because of the actions of a criminal.*_​
> — Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) March 23, 2018


Yeah, bold mine.

I jes' luvs me a little sauce for the gander...


----------



## eMacMan

As some of us have tried to point out, it ain't about gun control at all, it's about total control. Give up one civil right and you put all civil rights at risk. The benefactors would be tyrants.



> Now, all students will have to allow anyone at anytime to view the contents of their backpacks as well as wear IDs so they can be properly identified by school authorities.
> 
> These new measures now have the darling activists on the defensive.
> 
> "I'm not happy with it. Why are you punishing me for one person's actions?" Tyra Hemans, 19, a Stoneman senior, told CNN on Friday. But this is exactly what they wanted. These students wanted to punish the tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners by demanding the government take away their right to defend themselves-all for the actions of one person. Now, they are getting a taste of their own medicine, and it stinks.


----------



## CubaMark

WTF is wrong with people?

*Fan Mail Pours In for Parkland Suspect Nikolas Cruz*



> Nikolas Cruz's brother wanted to start a fan club for the Parkland shooting suspect, but it looks like someone beat him to it. Stacks of fan mail, including love letters and suggestive photographs, have been arriving for Cruz at the Broward County Jail, reports the South Florida Sun Sentinel, which obtained copies of some of the notes. In one sent from Texas, the writer identifies herself as an 18-year-old high school senior before sharing her breast size. "Your eyes are beautiful and the freckles on your face make you so handsome," she writes. A letter sent by a woman in Chicago was accompanied by nine photos. One showed cleavage, another showed a bikini-clad woman eating a Popsicle. Other letters provide words of encouragement, offers of friendship, or money to be added to Cruz's commissary account, hovering around $800.
> 
> "I've never seen this many letters to a defendant," says Howard Finkelstein, Broward County's public defender. As Cruz remains on suicide watch, he has yet to receive any mail, which is screened by jail officials. "We read a few religious ones to him that extended wishes for his soul and to come to God," Finkelstein says. But "we have not and will not read him the fan letters or share the photos of scantily clad teenage girls." It's that "perverted" mail that "scares" Finkelstein, and a case out of central Florida might explain why: According to the Polk County Sheriff's Office, a 13-year-old boy who idolized and collected photos of Cruz admitted Saturday that he wanted to be "the next school shooter" and "kill a lot of kids," per the New York Post. The teen was arrested on suspicion of felony aggravated stalking.


(Newser)


----------



## SINC

The better question to ask is WTF is wrong with government?

It is they who have created today's society and all its woes.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me these little snippets of candor that leak past the curtains of the narrative...

Democrat Candidate Jokes About Killing People Who Oppose Gun Confiscation



> A candidate for sheriff in Buncombe County, North Carolina recently joked about killing people who wish to retain their constitutional right to bear arms. R. Daryl Fisher, who is running as a Democrat, quipped at a campaign event: “You’ve heard people say: ‘You’ll have to pry my gun from my cold, dead hands.’ Okay!”


Related:

Knew This Was Coming: Buoyed By “Boss Hogg,” Leftists Now Demanding FULL REPEAL Of The Second Amendment



> First they demanded background checks be required for all gun transactions, including private ones. Then they began calling for a ban on bump stocks and semiautomatic weapons. Last month they started pleading for the minimum age for gun buyers to be raised to 21. And now, at long last, they’re pushing for a full repeal of the Second Amendment.
> 
> Writing in *The New York Times* about Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School mass shooting survivor David Hogg and his mindless band of demagogues, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens argued Tuesday that the kids should stop aiming for the low-hanging fruit and direct their energy toward the left’s true goal:
> 
> “*(T)he demonstrators should seek more effective and more lasting reform. They should demand a repeal of the Second Amendment*,” he wrote.


Links' bold.


----------



## Macfury

SmashedBanana, this call for the repeal of the Second Amendment is exactly what I was talking about earlier. There is no appeasing the left except total disarmament of anyone but the government. Any concession simply leads to a demand for more concessions.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> SmashedBanana, this call for the repeal of the Second Amendment is exactly what I was talking about earlier. There is no appeasing the left except total disarmament of anyone but the government. Any concession simply leads to a demand for more concessions.


Not with you on this one MF.

For sure there are radicals on both sides of the argument. Some want an outright removal of the second on the other side unfettered access to all weapons. But there is a lot in between.

Appeasing means that some concessions have been made. I don't see any concessions from the right lately. 

If you can point me to some significant legislation that has been passed bipartisan and then after some cry for an end to the second then I'm with you.

But what I see here is just some frustration. If I lived and voted there I would feel the same.


----------



## FeXL

smashedbanana said:


> If you can point me to some significant legislation that has been passed bipartisan and then after some cry for an end to the second then I'm with you.


Why does it have to be bipartisan? Why would legal gun owners willingly curtail their constitutional right to own firearms on legislation that will do nothing to address illegal gun owners?


----------



## FeXL

Further on firearm murder statistics in the US.

(article from last year)
Chicago: 75% of Murdered Are Black, 71% of Murderers Are Black



> After hearing about a woman attempting to start a sex-strike in Chicago, ultimately based on the Ancient Greek play Lysistrata, to end the gun violence, we thought it would be good to dig into the numbers a little bit. We wish we hadn't.
> 
> Simply put, Chicago has a massive Black-on-Black murder problem. All of the data below comes from the Chicago Police Department. You can access it here.


Not news to anyone paying attention.

More:



> What stands out the most looking at both charts and knowing that 90% of the victims are male is that a lot of young, Black men are being killed in Chicago. No race comes even close to overall deaths by homicide. Keep in mind that based on 2010 Census numbers, only 33% of Chicago's population was classified as Black.


Further:



> Looking at the troubling statistics, is it reasonable to be reminded of Don Lemon's (a Black, CNN anchor) somewhat famous and controversial comments during the George Zimmerman acquittal in 2013:
> 
> _"'Black people,' Lemon said, 'if you really want to fix the problem, here's just five things that you should think about doing.'
> 
> The No. 1 item on that list -- 'and probably the most important,' he said -- had to do with out-of-wedlock births.
> 
> 'Just because you can have a baby, it doesn't mean you should,' Lemon said. 'Especially without planning for one or getting married first. More than 72 percent of children in the African-American community are born out of wedlock. That means absent fathers. And the studies show that lack of a male role model is an express train right to prison and the cycle continues.'"_​


Related:

Do White People Commit a Disproportionate Number of Mass Shootings?



> For one, school shootings account for a slim percentage of mass shootings. As a recent _New York_ magazine article detailed, there is no “epidemic” of mass school shootings. The perception that there is likely stems from media coverage and gun control advocacy groups, both of which tend to exaggerate the number of school shootings in various ways.
> 
> An example: Following the Parkland shooting, media and politicians ran with a figure from the non-profit Everytown for Gun Safety that said it was the eighteenth school shooting of 2018. That number was false, the _Washington Post_ admitted, unless one chooses to count as “school shootings” instances in which a man parked in a car commits suicide outside a closed school at 3 a.m.
> 
> In fact, there have been a grand total of eight mass school shootings since 1996, _New York_ magazine reports, and school crime has been declining since 1992.


----------



## FeXL

And another.

DNC Vice Chair Publicly Demands Repeal of the 2nd Amendment



> The Vice Chair of Civic Engagement and Voter Participation of the Democratic National Committee has called for the repeal of the Second Amendment.
> 
> Louisiana Democratic Party Chairwoman Karen Carter Peterson on Tuesday issued a four-word tweet as she shared a link to a New York Times op-ed written by former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens that advocated for the Second Amendment’s repeal.
> 
> “Repeal the Second Amendment,” she tweeted.


More:



> The Louisiana Democrat’s tweet caused Louisiana Democratic Party Executive Director Stephen Handwerk to run for cover.
> 
> Handwerk said the party is “a strong supporter of the Second Amendment that protects Americans’ rights to bear arms,” according to the USA TODAY Network.
> 
> Handwerk was asked whether the tweet reflected the Democratic Party’s position.
> 
> “Of course not,” he replied.


Pants on fire...


----------



## FeXL

Interesting.

Why The Left Will Finally Admit They Want To Repeal The Second Amendment



> In the aftermath of Parkland, the anger of student protesters and their intolerance for the views of the National Rifle Association and those linked to it is growing. Under these circumstances, the Left’s coyness about the Second Amendment may change.
> 
> More to the point, as we head toward the 2020 presidential election in which the Democratic nomination will be largely decided by which potential candidate is able to secure the affections of the party’s left wing, the time may soon be approaching when liberals will be able to own up to their desire to drastically restrict gun rights in a way that was unimaginable only a few years ago.
> 
> Although that sort of debate sounds horrific to conservatives, they should actually welcome it since it would at least provide an opportunity to talk about something real rather than the disingenuous discussion about proposals that do nothing but make the lives of law-abiding citizens more difficult.
> 
> So should the rest of the country. If gun control remains an issue that most Americans care about one way or another— and that will continue to be the case if mass shootings continue to happen every few months — then they should be debating core questions about rights and the government’s responsibility to ensure the safety of its citizens rather than diversions politicians create to convince the public they are doing something when they’re not.
> 
> It is a debate conservatives should continue to win. But whether they do or not, it is high time we stopped wasting our time fighting about things that don’t matter rather than those that do.


While I agree in principal, gun ownership is already guaranteed in the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution and many from the left already discount that fact, for various baseless reasons. This could go to court and if the gun control advocates lose (which they likely will) that's no guarantee that they'll shut up even for a minute. Having had their 15 minutes of fame, I'd bet all this would accomplish is to renew afresh the calls for gun control and their arguments would be even more vociferous than before.


----------



## FeXL

So, about those "student" gun control protesters...

The Morning Rant: J.V. Edition



> _ Per research published in the Washington Post, just twelve percent of the first-time protestors at the gun control march were there to protest gun control, and only ten percent of attendees were under 18. https://t.co/SlaHGYnqVv
> — Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) March 29, 2018_​


----------



## FeXL

Hogg's almost as good a firearms salesman as Barry!

Gun Sales Soar, Set Record in March Amid Push for New Gun-Control Measures



> Last month saw the most gun-related background checks run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of any March on record, documents released by the agency on Tuesday show.
> 
> With 2,767,699 checks conducted by the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) in March 2018, the month beats the previous record of 2,523,265 set in March 2016 by 244,434 checks. That represents a 9.68 percent increase.
> 
> The March results put 2018 on pace to see more gun-related background checks than 2017, the second-best year on record, but still behind 2016, the best year on record.


I heard they were all for AR-15's...


----------



## FeXL

Does Gun Control Reduce Murder? Let’s Run The Numbers Across The World



> Reducing gun violence is a desirable goal, particularly when one sees shooters mowing down children. After I thought about it, I realized the question of whether reducing guns in a society will lead to fewer murders is a testable hypothesis. You can measure gun ownership and murder rates. No two countries have the same gun laws or the same murder rates.


More, and the money quote:



> It really doesn’t matter how you slice this data. The conclusion is inescapable: High concentrations of private, legal gun ownership do not correlate positively to increased murders. *Indeed, you can look at almost any slice of data and conclude the opposite: Higher private ownership of guns can be strongly correlated to lower murder rates.*


Yeah, my bold.

Huh. Just like I've been saying for years: An armed society is a polite society. Prog heads exploding everywhere.

Not a surprise to anybody paying attention...


----------



## eMacMan

I noticed that MacDiscussion bit the dust sometime in the past little while. Wonder why the Gun Seizure types over there have failed to jump in and help Freddie and CM shore up their badly battered and tattered narratives?


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> I noticed that MacDiscussion bit the dust sometime in the past little while. Wonder why the Gun Seizure types over there have failed to jump in and help Freddie and CM shore up their badly battered and tattered narratives?


Reeeeaaaallly... Wondered why we'd suddenly seen more Freddie recently. Most interesting. And, funny as hell.

Guess the world can't exist purely on the presence of the Progressive head-nodders & back-slappers busily congratulating each other. Without numbers from the right to support it, it died. A most fitting and auspicious death...


----------



## 18m2

I saw a news item that claimed London England had a higher murder rate than the infamous New York City.

OK.

Then I saw this article on the BBC news feed The names and faces of those killed in London - BBC News

I found it interesting that many of the faces are brown and I suspect are immigrants and involved in illegal activities that brings with those activities some associated violence and murders.

The other thing that I took away is the predominance of stabbings as opposed to fire arms used in the killings. If you don't have access to fire arms and you have a knife then that becomes the weapon of choice. 

The final thing I'd like to mention is that stabbing someone is very personal, up close with direct contact whereas shooting someone is more likely to be at a distance and impersonal. It takes an especially "bad person" to stab another human being.


----------



## FeXL

The iron...

After Nearly 100 Years of Gun Control, London Adding Knife Control



> London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan used a tweet to go after knives with verbiage similar to gun control rhetoric. He said, “No excuses; there is never a reason to carry a knife.”
> 
> _No excuses: there is never a reason to carry a knife. Anyone who does will be caught, and they will feel the full force of the law. https://t.co/XILUvIFLOW
> 
> — Mayor of London (@MayorofLondon) April 8, 2018_​
> On April 2, 2018, Breitbart News reported that Britain began an incremental adoption of stringent gun controls in 1920. The controls were ratcheted up during the decades that followed, until the hoops one had to jump through for legal handgun ownership reached a point were doing so became impractical. (The handgun prohibitions were contained in the Firearms Act of 1997.)
> 
> In 2009, just 12 years after the passage of the Firearms Act, the Daily Mail declared Britain was “the most violent country in Europe.” It reported that Britain had “a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S.”


More:



> *London’s homicides are largely being committed with knives* so the Mayor is increasingly focused on controlling knives and is granting police “extra stop and search powers for areas worst-affected by knife crime.” The Daily Wire reports that “Parliament is also set to take up heavy ‘knife control’ legislation when it resumes this week.”


My bold.

Take away guns, they use knives. Take away knives, they'll find something else. The issue is not the weapon of choice, people. The issue is the killers themselves.

Once again, clueless politicians go after the effect, not the cause.

Related:

London's Mayor Declares Intense New 'Knife Control' Policies To Stop Epidemic Of Stabbings



> An epidemic of stabbings and acid attacks in London has gotten so bad that London mayor Sadiq Khan is announcing broad new "knife control" policies designed to keep these weapons of war out of the hands of Londoners looking to cause others harm.
> 
> The "tough, immediate" measures involve an incredible police crackdown, a ban on home deliveries of knives and acid, and expanding law enforcement stop-and-search powers so that police may stop anyone they believe to be a threat, or planning a knife or acid attack.
> 
> Khan announced Friday that the city has created a "violent crime taskforce of 120 officers" tasked with rooting out knife-wielding individuals in public spaces, and is pumping nearly $50 million dollars into the Metropolitan Police department so that they can better arm themselves against knife attacks. He's also empowering the Met Police to introduce "targeted patrols with extra stop and search powers for areas worst-affected," according to a statement.


On deck? Baseball bats...


----------



## Macfury

Next there will be no excuse for simply strolling around London after sunset.


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> The iron...
> 
> After Nearly 100 Years of Gun Control, London Adding Knife Control
> 
> 
> 
> More:
> 
> 
> 
> My bold.
> 
> Take away guns, they use knives. Take away knives, they'll find something else. The issue is not the weapon of choice, people. The issue is the killers themselves.
> 
> Once again, clueless politicians go after the effect, not the cause.
> 
> Related:
> 
> London's Mayor Declares Intense New 'Knife Control' Policies To Stop Epidemic Of Stabbings
> 
> 
> 
> On deck? Baseball bats...



Unless I missed it the article does not go into what will classify as an illegal knife. I am assuming it will not be all knives, but will have some sort of blade length limitation. I do love the quote from the article "It's also not clear what local Londoners will now use to cut their food."

I do agree that violence is a people problem and there is no fix or cure in sight. All the anti-bullying campaigns and the rest seem to do nothing to stop people in furled by greed and anger among other things.

I carried a knife when I was backpacking Europe in 2001. Was about a 5" blade that folded into the handle. Wore it on my belt and never had an issue with it be it on the train or walking about. Of course flying with it was not an option, though I do remember having my swiss army knife in my pocket for the flight there. Going back was a different story as 9/11 had just happened and I was left mid November of that year.


----------



## eMacMan

wonderings said:


> Unless I missed it the article does not go into what will classify as an illegal knife. I am assuming it will not be all knives, but will have some sort of blade length limitation. I do love the quote from the article "It's also not clear what local Londoners will now use to cut their food."
> 
> I do agree that violence is a people problem and there is no fix or cure in sight. All the anti-bullying campaigns and the rest seem to do nothing to stop people in furled by greed and anger among other things.
> 
> I carried a knife when I was backpacking Europe in 2001. Was about a 5" blade that folded into the handle. Wore it on my belt and never had an issue with it be it on the train or walking about. Of course flying with it was not an option, though I do remember having my swiss army knife in my pocket for the flight there. Going back was a different story as 9/11 had just happened and I was left mid November of that year.


I keep a Swiss army knife either in my pocket or in the car. I have found no better weapon for an all out assault on the various blister packs manufacturers continue to to foist on us.


----------



## eMacMan

Yep!


----------



## FeXL

Further on weapon bans.

7 Deadly Objects London Must Ban Next If It Wants To Survive



> I heartily support Mayor Khan's initiative. My only concern is that it doesn't quite go far enough. Even after we have gotten rid of the guns and the knives, we have still left many lethal objects that, by their very existence, may compel otherwise peaceable people to become serial killers. Let's highlight just a few:


----------



## FeXL

Fortunately, double standards & hypocrisy have always been seen by Progs as a feature, not a bug...

Top aide of gun-control advocate Bill de Blasio is arrested on weapon charges after she's found in a car with a loaded pistol near the scene of a shooting in Queens



> An aide of New York City mayor Bill de Blasio has been arrested after she was found in a car with a loaded gun near the scene of a shooting.
> 
> Police found Reagan Stevens, 42, sitting in the back of a double-parked car in Jamaica, Queens, near where an NYPD 'ShotSpotter' device had just detected five gunshots on Saturday night.
> 
> The deputy director at the mayor's Office of Criminal Justice was charged with two counts of criminal possession of a weapon after a nine-mm gun with the serial number scratched off and a shell casing were found in the 2002 Infiniti's glove compartment, officials said.


----------



## FeXL

Good. Easy to single out for no further business.

BofA Will Stop Lending to Makers of Assault-Style Guns



> Bank of America Corp. plans to stop lending to companies that make assault-style guns used for non-military purposes.
> 
> “It’s our intention not to finance these military-style firearms for civilian use,” Anne Finucane, a vice chairman at Bank of America, said Tuesday in a Bloomberg Television interview. The firm has had “intense conversations over the last few months” with those kinds of gun manufacturers to tell them it won’t finance their operations in the future, she said.


----------



## FeXL

London Mayor Sadiq Khan Isn't the Sharpest Knife in the Drawer



> Recently, London's murder rate caught up with New York City's. Which is weird, because there shouldn't be any murders in either city. After all, both NYC and the UK have very strict gun laws. As we've learned from our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters on the left, banning guns leads to fewer gun crimes. (That's why the Secret Service doesn't carry them!) So how is this happening? How can such a gun-free utopia be so dangerous? The answer will terrify you: scary, evil _KNIVES_.


That carries about the appropriate amount of snark.

More:



> *Banning weapons has never made people safer, and it never will. Criminals don't follow laws in the first place — that's why they're called criminals! — and law-abiding people are just rendered defenseless against attackers.* If you ban guns, people will use knives. Or clubs. Or jars of acid. Or whatever else they can get their hands on. Hell, now we know that terrorists and white supremacists will even drive cars and trucks into crowds of people, if that's what it takes. Bad people are always going to find ways to hurt and kill others. And they're always going to prey on those they believe to be defenseless.
> 
> When banning guns and knives doesn't work, what will they ban next? Pens? Potato peelers? Knitting needles? Scissors? Safety razors? Screwdrivers? Toothbrushes? (Well, nobody in England has those anyway.)


Emphasis mine...


----------



## FeXL

Britain’s Knife Control Campaign Just Got Way Funnier



> Over the weekend London mayor Sadiq Khan announced a strict crackdown, banning all knife possession. Yesterday the London police bragged about confiscating tools like pliers and scissors in their knife control efforts to keep the streets safe. If you’re like me, you find this all to completely hilarious, but it’s nothing compared to what came next. A British police agency has released a series of anti-knife public service announcements that make those “this is you brain on drugs” commercials seem semi-serious.
> 
> The following are real tweets from the Office of the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner and not something from a parody account or a satire site:
> 
> _ *Find positive activities to channel your energy and help you avoid dangerous situations. This will also help you meet others living knife free.* #knifefree pic.twitter.com/0QHUjVlRqD
> 
> — Office of SYPCC (@SYPCC) April 4, 2018_​


Bold mine.

Wait...what?!

ROTFLMFAO... :lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Hey, CM, this must be part of that gun-free protective school zone thing you were talking about!

School shooting: Teachers in Pennsylvania get 16in bats after Florida



> A Pennsylvanian school district has given its teachers baseball bats in the fight against school shooters.
> 
> All 500 teachers of Millcreek School District near Erie got a 16in (41cm) bat in the wake of the Parkland, Florida high school attack in February.
> 
> Though the bats are largely symbolic, Superintendent William Hall said, they are there as a "last resort".
> 
> "Unfortunately, we're in a day and age where one might need to use them to protect ourselves and our kids."
> 
> The superintendent said the aim was to have a "consistent tool" for every teacher in every classroom.


Well, first off, I congratulate them for not entirely knuckling under. It appears that they at least want to fight back. Good.

However, second, 16 inch bats? :yikes: At least with the pail of rocks you don't have to be standing next to the shooter...

I found this little statistic interesting:



> An online survey also asked whether teachers in the district should be armed if the state passed laws allowing it.
> 
> "It was about 70% to 30% that people would favour that," Mr Hall said, "but we're not really actively planning that right now."


Hmmm. Wonder what it would take to actually put that plan into motion...


----------



## FeXL

Gun-Rights Groups File Suit on Behalf of Illinois Day-Care Operators



> Three gun-rights organizations filed suit against the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services over its requirement that bans home day-care operators from keeping guns in their home.
> 
> The Second Amendment Foundation, Illinois State Rifle Association, and Illinois Carry filed suit against the state in support of Jennifer and Darin Miller. The couple has a home day-care license and would like to keep guns in their home for self-defense. The state, however, won't allow them to do so despite the fact that both of them have Illinois firearms owner identification cards and concealed-carry permits.
> 
> The complaint said the couple fears losing their home day care license if they were to keep a gun in their home.


----------



## CubaMark

*Today, on the anniversary of the Columbine school shooting massacre...*

*Florida shooting: Suspected gunman in custody as SWAT team sweep school*
_Shooting comes as students prepare to rally across US against gun violence_

*Columbine shooting: ‘Tens of thousands’ of students to walk out of school on 19th anniversary to protest gun violence*
_The anniversary has an added urgency this year following the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February_

*And not school-related, just another one of those murderous toddlers run amuck.....*

*Toddler shoots pregnant mother after finding father's loaded gun*


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> ....
> *And not school-related, just another one of those murderous toddlers run amuck.....*
> 
> *Toddler shoots pregnant mother after finding father's loaded gun*


And all this supports the Gun seizure fanatics how???

Let's face it. Would a responsible parent leave a live grenade within reach of a 3 year old? Would they leave the kid alone in the car with the engine running? Either scenario could be just as deadly as leaving a gun within easy reach.

The answers are a resounding no, but the fact that there are irresponsible gun owners does not justify attempting to seize guns from the 99.98% who are responsible.

Cars are clearly more deadly than guns, and some parents are dumb enough to leave young children alone in their vehicles with the engines running or the windows rolled up. Do you therefore advocate seizing everybody's automobile? If not why not?


----------



## Macfury

I'll bet CM thinks that his links will cause you to hang your head in shame and ensure that only governments are armed.



eMacMan said:


> And all this supports the Gun seizure fanatics how???
> 
> Let's face it. Would a responsible parent leave a live grenade within reach of a 3 year old? Would they leave the kid alone in the car with the engine running? Either scenario could be just as deadly as leaving a gun within easy reach.
> 
> The answers are a resounding no, but the fact that there are irresponsible gun owners does not justify attempting to seize guns from the 99.98% who are responsible.


----------



## FeXL

Hey, CM, question for ya:

How many young, black, inner city males with single moms shot or were shot with illegal handguns in the US on the Columbine anniversary yesterday?

Jes' askin'...



CubaMark said:


> Today, on the anniversary of the Columbine school shooting massacre...


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs it when the tables get turned on the bastards...

‘Sanctuary county’ declared for Illinois gun owners; citizens ‘tired of being pushed around’



> An overwhelming majority of board members in Effingham County, Illinois, decided to “flip the script” this week and declare itself a “sanctuary” for gun owners.
> 
> Effingham County State’s Attorney Bryan Kibler and board member David Campbell called a barrage of gun-control bills working their way through the Illinois House and Senate a clear signal that it’s time to “take a stand.”
> 
> The men joined “Fox & Friends First” on Thursday to discuss a new Second Amendment resolution that passed along an 8-1 vote.
> 
> We “decided it’s time for someone to take a hard stand,” Mr. Campbell told the network.
> 
> The resolution reads: *“If the Government of the State of Illinois shall infringe upon the inalienable rights granted by the Second Amendment, Effingham County shall become a ‘sanctuary county’ for all firearms.”*


M'bold.

Nice!!!

Related:


----------



## FeXL

White Gun Owners, the Left Hates You



> If you are a white, law-abiding gun owner, _never forget_: the left hates you.
> 
> *If you are a gun-wielding jihadist, leftists will find every excuse to turn a blind eye to your evil and direct their outrage toward white, law-abiding defenders of the Second Amendment. If you are a gun-wielding, non-white illegal alien like the multiple-felony murderer of San Francisco’s Kate Steinle, the left will shield you in a sanctuary city and blame Steinle for being white, pretty, and causing trouble for you by getting in the way of your bullet. If you are part of a gun-wielding black mob torturing and massacring white farm-owning families in South Africa, the left will wag its finger at the families themselves and blame your savagery on their colonialist oppression.* The left hates you.
> 
> What about white leftists? Do white leftists hate themselves? Yes, although they do love themselves during their ecstatic spasms of virtue-signaling. Hence their self-flagellating claims of their own purported white privilege, cultural appropriation, and colonialist past. But mostly they hate _you_, law-abiding white patriots – make no mistake about it.


Yeah, my bold.

Nails it.


----------



## FeXL

What's this? An AR-15 used for self-defense? :yikes:

There goes another gun control narrative...

Home Invasion Victims Use AR–15 To Defend Themselves Against Five Armed Intruders



> Three men were asleep inside their Glen St. Mary, Fla., mobile home when five young intruders claiming to be police broke down the front door at 4:00 a.m. on Tuesday, News 4 Jax reports.
> 
> The first intruder wore a mask and shouted, “Sheriff’s office!” from outside the trailer before breaking the front door down and shooting a single round.
> 
> Upon hearing the break-in, two of the three men staying in the mobile home — one armed with an AR–15 and another with a handgun — confronted the criminals with open fire in self-defense.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> What's this? An AR-15 used for self-defense? :yikes:
> 
> There goes another gun control narrative...
> 
> Home Invasion Victims Use AR–15 To Defend Themselves Against Five Armed Intruders


Ok your radar goes up for the leftist stuff but not this?

This is not some poor meat and potatoes family defending themselves against some wayward burglar. 

There is more to this story. Drugs, weapons, something nefarious. You don't see 5+ home invaders with ski masks pretending to be police to enter a clearly armed home to steal a TV..


----------



## eMacMan

eMacMan said:


> And all this supports the Gun seizure fanatics how???
> 
> Let's face it. Would a responsible parent leave a live grenade within reach of a 3 year old? Would they leave the kid alone in the car with the engine running? Either scenario could be just as deadly as leaving a gun within easy reach.
> 
> The answers are a resounding no, but the fact that there are irresponsible gun owners does not justify attempting to seize guns from the 99.98% who are responsible.
> 
> *Cars are clearly more deadly than guns,* and some parents are dumb enough to leave young children alone in their vehicles with the engines running or the windows rolled up. Do you therefore advocate seizing everybody's automobile? If not why not?


With the recent event in TO, I wonder if the Gun Seizure crowd will wake up and begin demanding auto seizure. Of course they could be really radical and lead by example. Show us they are serious about stopping auto violence by giving up their own autos. I'm sure it will make the world a safer place if they do.


----------



## Beej

eMacMan said:


> With the recent event in TO, I wonder if the Gun Seizure crowd will wake up and begin demanding auto seizure. Of course they could be really radical and lead by example. Show us they are serious about stopping auto violence by giving up their own autos. I'm sure it will make the world a safer place if they do.


Mandatory autonomous vehicles...coming soon.


----------



## smashedbanana

eMacMan said:


> With the recent event in TO, I wonder if the Gun Seizure crowd will wake up and begin demanding auto seizure. Of course they could be really radical and lead by example. Show us they are serious about stopping auto violence by giving up their own autos. I'm sure it will make the world a safer place if they do.


Dumb post


----------



## macintosh doctor

eMacMan said:


> With the recent event in TO, I wonder if the Gun Seizure crowd will wake up and begin demanding auto seizure. Of course they could be really radical and lead by example. Show us they are serious about stopping auto violence by giving up their own autos. I'm sure it will make the world a safer place if they do.


it has begun.. liberal media is questing the rental agency .. smh..


----------



## CubaMark

macintosh doctor said:


> it has begun.. liberal media is questing the rental agency .. smh..


Re: http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/152418-white-van-control-thread-bound-happen.html

(a) CityNews Toronto is "liberal media"? I mean, they're not _The Rebel_, but.... 
(b) That report got you all hot and bothered? Seriously? I just watched the video - there's nothing in there that should set you off, unless your triggers are incredibly low. As the Public Safety Association guy they interviewed noted, Ryder is cooperating with police and any video footage, documents, etc., will be turned over as part of the investigation. What exactly is the axe you're grinding here?
(c) there is no "c". This topic is already far past any relevance (real or imagined) it might have.


----------



## FeXL

There goes another Prog narrative...

CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns



> CDC surveys in the 1990s, never publicly reported, indicate nearly 2.5 million defensive uses of guns a year. That matches the results of Gary Kleck's controversial surveys, and it indicates more defensive than offensive uses of guns.


Related:

CDC Survey On Defensive Gun Use Was Never Publicized



> Many gun control advocates have complained about the fact that the CDC is limited with regard to research on gun violence. A 1996 amendment to a spending bill bars the organization from using congressionally allocated funds to “advocate or promote gun control.”
> 
> *What those fighting for stronger gun-control generally leave out is the fact that the CDC is not barred from doing any research on gun violence — and the research it has done in the last two decades has largely corroborated Kleck’s findings.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Handful of links.

Anti-Gun Control Parkland Survivor Kyle Kashuv Questioned By School Security For Visiting Gun Range With His Father

Kyle Kashuv questioned by BCSO

Ken Bone claims son was suspended over gun range photo

The NRA just broke a 15-year fundraising record

Tennessee Shooting Suspect Had His Guns Confiscated After Secret Service Arrest At White House

(Related to the top two links in this post):

Broward Sheriff's Department Releases Incident Report on Kashuv Grilling. Kashuv Responds In Brutal Fashion.



> _This police report shows how incompetent the Cowards of Broward are and how unjustified this interrogation was. They can't spell "rifle" properly, calling it a "riffle" TWICE, they used my dad's name for my mom, they practically admit they hadn't bothered to read the Tweet, yet they had no problem using vicious interrogation tactics on a minor. This is why I went to the range because I need to learn how to protect myself because my area's law enforcement is systematically incompetent. Honestly, their attempt to silence me in this incident was an epic fail and actually did the polar opposite, so I wanted to thank the Cowards of Broward for strengthening my love for 2A._​


Related:


----------



## FeXL

Huh. If they aren't even going to bother enforcing existing gun laws...

Rocco Zito granted gun permit after being convicted for manslaughter in 1986, court told



> Convicted underworld killer Rocco Zito was granted a legal gun permit after he served prison time for shooting a man to death in a debt collection, court heard Thursday.
> 
> Zito’s gun permit was introduced as evidence in the murder trial of Zito’s former son-in-law, Domenic Scopelliti, 54.
> 
> Scopelliti is charged with murder in the shooting death of Zito on Jan. 29, 2016, in the Playfair Ave. bungalow shared by nine members of the Zito and Scopelliti families near Caledonia Rd. and Lawrence Ave. W.
> 
> Zito pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 1986 after shooting a man to death in a debt collection. Zito was sentenced to four and a half years in prison in 1986 for the killing.


----------



## FeXL

Good.

Now Mossberg Discontinues Sales to Dick's Sporting Goods, Too



> First, Springfield Armory decided to sellcot the 2nd-Amendment hostile Dick's.
> 
> Then MKS Supply severed ties.
> 
> And now Mossberg.
> 
> Virtual signalling and alienating customers to get nice articles written about you for the non-customer's of Buzzfeed's audience will cost you real cash money.


That's what you get for being a Dick.

I jes' luvs it when SJW virtue signalling comes back to bite them in the backside. I'd love it even more if MEC got similar treatment.


----------



## FeXL

David "Camera" Hogg To Put Off College While Pursuing a Career in Television Demagoguery



> I guess he's getting an early jump on his chosen career.
> 
> Makes sense -- he already knows everything college would teach him anyway: Republicans suck, Tweeting is the same as writing analyses and arguments, and being outraged by everything is easy money.
> 
> _The #NeverAgain leader and high school senior says he's postponing college for a year to engage in gun-reform activism, focusing mostly on getting students and others registered to vote for the elections and raising awareness about gun lobbies.
> 
> Hogg also told The Associated Press on Monday that he's not sure what to choose for a career. He says he’d like to spend time figuring that out, potentially doing several internships. He says he's interested in politics, journalism and environmental science -- and could run for office someday._​
> Oh, he's got a Messiah complex, you say? I didn't see that coming. You never see that in angry, self-loving young men.


----------



## FeXL

Big Liberal Talking Point Takes Hit After Mass Shooting In Australia



> Australia’s gun laws have been promoted as the model for gun confiscation right here in the USA because hey, there haven’t been any mass shootings there since 1996.
> 
> So much for that, because the gun ban didn’t work as we can now see.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. An armed resource officer who didn't hide in the parking lot stops a potential school shooter. In illinois, of all places.

Shocka.

Report: Potential school shooting stopped by armed resource officer



> An armed Illinois school resource officer stopped a potential atrocity Wednesday morning when he shot a 19-year-old who brought a gun to the school.
> 
> The former student came to Dixon High School Wednesday and opened fire at the school resource officer, Sauk Valley Media reports. The officer returned fire around 8 a.m., hitting the suspect, City Administrator Danny Langloss said. The young man is now in custody and is receiving medical treatment for a non-life-threatening gunshot wound. No one else was injured. Dixon Public Schools are on lockdown. Police believe the suspect acted alone.


Curious the gun-control nuts haven't noted this... 

Speaking of which, hey, CM, how's that strategy for gun-free protection of schools coming along? Anything beyond the BS stage yet? Got a rough plan drawn out on a napkin, at least? Some funding maybe? How about a paper? Written a paper yet? You know I'm willing to let you take the lead on this but I want second author. That's non-negotiable.

Something? Anything?

Nothing from MotherJones to report? No?

Patiently waiting...


----------



## CubaMark

*Related:* 

The latest on the Texas school shooting
At Santa Fe High School, police had an active-shooter plan. Then the fog of chaos descended.


----------



## eMacMan

CM Perhaps you could post a link to the 50 shootings in one week in that Gun controlled paradise known as Chicago. 

Surely that should qualify as a mass shooting in almost anybodies vocabulary.


----------



## eMacMan

Since CM does not want to go there, here it is direct from the Chicago Tribune. It was actually 52 shootings over just a long weekend, Memorial Day 2017! If you look at the chart at the bottom of the article you will find that 3 of the 5 previous Memorial Day weekends were even more productive.

52 shot in Chicago over Memorial Day weekend, nearly half on final day - Chicago Tribune



> Shootings over the Memorial Day weekend left seven people dead and another 45 wounded in Chicago, a drop from last year, though almost half of this year's victims were shot the last night of the weekend.
> 
> The violence this weekend was similar to three of the last five Memorial Day weekends: 53 gunshot victims in 2012, and 58 in 2015. A total of 34 people were shot in 2014, and 21 were shot in 2013.
> 
> Last year's total was 71 and was the worst since at least 2012. It came during a year that saw almost 800 homicides and more than 4,000 people shot.
> 
> A police district that bore the brunt of the violence last year, Harrison on the West Side, reported no one shot this year.
> 
> The most violent day of the weekend this year was Memorial Day, with 24 people shot, five of them fatally, including a 20-year-old disabled man at a park he visited every day.


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> Since CM does not want to go there, here it is direct from the Chicago Tribune. It was actually 52 shootings over just a long weekend, Memorial Day 2017! If you look at the chart at the bottom of the article you will find that 3 of the 5 previous Memorial Day weekends were even more productive.
> 
> 52 shot in Chicago over Memorial Day weekend, nearly half on final day - Chicago Tribune


Okay - there were 52 shootings in Chicago. So what? Trying to make my case for me that current gun control measures are insufficient?


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Okay - there were 52 shootings in Chicago. So what? Trying to make my case for me that current gun control measures are insufficient?


No. Only communist gun control measures are sufficient--but then you'd have to live under a brutal dictator.


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, two questions for ya:

1) What gun law(s) not on the books would have stopped this?
2) How's that gun-free school protection gig coming along? With all of these school shootings, you should hurry up & register the business. Money to be made, if it works...



CubaMark said:


> Related:


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> Okay - there were 52 shootings in Chicago. So what? Trying to make my case for me that current gun control measures are insufficient?


The so what is that Chicago has pretty much the most restrictive gun control legislation in the nation. If shootings are in any way inversely proportional to gun control, why were there any shootings?

If you followed the links the one precinct with no shootings accomplished that by putting a cop on just about every corner. Given the current tactics/antics of American cops, that is hardly likely to make one feel safe and secure.


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## FeXL

Good, ol' Camera Hogg.

ROTFLMAO... :lmao::lmao::lmao:

A "die in"? :lmao::lmao::lmao:

David Hogg puts Publix in crosshairs, demands $1 million donation and anti-NRA pledge



> David Hogg is trying to shake down Publix.
> 
> The public face of the gun control movement demanded $1 million Thursday from the Florida-based grocery chain in a tweet, just one day after calling for a “die-in” protest at its stores.
> 
> Publix is being targeted by Mr. Hogg for its support of Adam Putnam, a Republican gubernatorial candidate who is now the state’s agricultural commissioner. The Tampa Bay Times reported earlier this week that Publix had given $670,000 during the last three years to Putnam campaigns.


This guy is working himself up to be a perfect Democratic candidate... :lmao:


----------



## eMacMan

Bet your a$$ if this had happened in Alberta, Rachael's Red Riders would have the men who stopped the gunman in irons.

Civilians kill gunman who shot 3 at Oklahoma restaurant | Colorado Springs Gazette, News



> OKLAHOMA CITY — Three people were shot and wounded at an Oklahoma City restaurant and one person was injured while fleeing before the gunman was shot dead by two armed citizens, police said Friday.
> 
> Police released a statement alleging that 28-year-old Alexander Tilghman opened fire inside Louie's On The Lake around 6:30 p.m. Thursday, wounding a 39-year-old woman and two juvenile girls. An unnamed man fell and broke his arm while fleeing.
> 
> Tilghman was then shot dead outside the restaurant by two citizens identified by police as Carlos Nazario and Bryan Wittle. A suspected motive for the shooting hasn't been released.


----------



## FeXL

With the usual _Grunion_ innuendo & Prog bias...

‘We have good kids to protect’: the Texan schools where staff carry guns



> For the past 18 months, the British photojournalist Spike Johnson has been touring Texan high schools, talking to the armed superintendents who work there and who believe passionately that civilians have a greater role to play in protecting American children. At least 10 states across the US now allow school staff access to firearms, kept in lock boxes or inside vehicles, in a scheme known as the school marshal programme. In Texas, though, more than 170 schools go a step further, allowing employees to carry weapons under a shirt or in an ankle holster.


----------



## FeXL

How can this be?! :-( All those gun laws!!!

Toronto on pace for another ‘Year of the Gun’



> If the pace is maintained, it will be the fourth straight year in which Toronto has seen the number of shooting victims increase. In 2015 there were 429 victims; there were 581 in 2016, 594 in 2017 and, so far, there have been 215 this year. The numbers surpass even 2005, Toronto’s notorious “year of the gun,” when 52 people were killed by guns and there were 359 shooting victims.


Damn those farmers & skeet shooters!!!


----------



## CubaMark

*So It Looks Like Florida Wasn't Doing Required Background Checks*

For more than a year, the state of Florida failed to conduct national background checks on tens of thousands of applications for concealed weapons permits, potentially allowing all kinds of ineligible people to be approved.

Oopsy!

Just as Florida was flooded with concealed carry applications after the Pulse nightclub massacre, the department that approves them stopped using a FBI crime database called the National Instant Criminal Background Check System -- something that flags any disqualifying history in other states.
(Crooks & Liars)​


----------



## Macfury

Exactly. This is why it makes no sense to create new gun regs. Apply the old ones first.


----------



## FeXL

Ftfy...



cubamark said:


> for years, the country of united states failed to conduct national background checks on millions of illegal aliens, potentially allowing all kinds of felons into the country.


----------



## Macfury

Oopsy!


----------



## FeXL

In, of all places, Delaware.

Assault weapons ban dies in Delaware Senate after months of fighting



> An effort to revive a proposed ban on the sale of assault weapons failed in the Delaware Senate on Tuesday, effectively defeating the most controversial gun control measure pending before the Legislature.
> 
> Two Democrats sided with Republicans in opposing the maneuver, including Sen. Brian Bushweller of Dover and Sen. Bruce Ennis of Smyrna. That left Democrats two votes short of the 11 needed to bring the measure to the floor.


----------



## FeXL

The Czechs get it.

Czechs Hit Back Against EU Crackdown on Legal Gun-Owners: ‘Free Countries Don’t Disarm Their Citizens’



> Czech president Miloš Zeman has put his name to a petition opposing an EU diktat which would clamp down on legal gun-owners and backed a constitutional amendment which would guarantee citizens’ right to keep arms for self-defence and protection of the homeland.


----------



## CubaMark

Sigh. Another white guy with a gun. Somebody really should do something about that....

*5 killed after shooting at Annapolis newspaper office, suspect in custody*


----------



## eMacMan

CubaMark said:


> Sigh. Another white guy with a gun. Somebody really should do something about that....
> 
> *5 killed after shooting at Annapolis newspaper office, suspect in custody*


Hmmm Maybe some really tough gunlaws identical to the ones that tamed the South Side of Chicago.


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, once again: Exactly what gun law would you implement that would stop this? Be specific.

In addition, you fleshed out the concept of protecting schools from shooters & not using guns yet? _Very_ interested in that one.



CubaMark said:


> Sigh. Another white guy with a gun. Somebody really should do something about that....


----------



## FeXL

Legally Armed Teachers Explain Why They Carry Guns in Their Schools



> *'Why do teachers have to die protecting their students? Why can't we live protecting our students?'*


Brilliant! I haven't heard anyone put it more succinctly or more accurate than that.

More:



> "Getting teachers who are highly trained, willing, capable to carry is an ultimate end goal," MacFarlane told the Free Beacon. "I understand the complexity, I understand the hesitancy of school boards to just say we're going to arm teachers because unfortunately a lot of people aren't educated on what that means. *They think you're going to hand a box of guns out at a staff meeting and be like alright we're going to train you how to shoot the bad guy.* That's the last thing that I want to see. I want to see those of us who are willing, able and highly capable, and have the right mindset for that."


All bold mine.

Well, the Progs think that.


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> Sigh. Another white guy with a gun. Somebody really should do something about that....
> 
> *5 killed after shooting at Annapolis newspaper office, suspect in custody*


Constantly making everything about race does nothing to help and only does harm. How about "another guy with a gun"... or maybe these days you have leave gender out of it completely "another person with a gun". If you were to say "another black guy with a gun" you know what they would call you. 

It is a sad story and you only make it sadder by making this some sort of race thing.


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> It is a sad story and you only make it sadder by making this some sort of race thing.


It's the Prog narrative. The only disappointing thing is that the weapon used wasn't an AR. However, they are more than willing to overlook this _small_ inconvenience.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> It's the Prog narrative. The only disappointing thing is that the weapon used wasn't an AR. However, they are more than willing to overlook this _small_ inconvenience.


Yes because anyone pro-gun control is delighted when a shooting happens!


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Yes because anyone pro-gun control is delighted when a shooting happens!


They're delighted to report the identity of the shooter if they believe that shooter to be white, male, Republican, Christian.


----------



## FeXL

Many are, simply because they sport this twisted logic that any gun death reinforces their case for further gun control. Look at the person on these boards who posts most of the shooting death articles. Do you honestly believe he does this as a simple public service message, a benevolent FYI? 

It's done precisely to push his narrative of "****** with an AR" in order to justify his gun-control stance. Notice he _never_ reports on inner Democrat-controlled city, black, fatherless, young male, gang-banger deaths with handguns in some of the most difficult regions in the US to legally own firearms, despite the fact that they are the lion's share of deaths by firearms in the US, not including suicide? This omission is not by chance; it's by design.

Yet, when queried as to what he would do differently, crickets. Why? 'Cause he wants to present this measured front despite the fact that, if he was king of the world, he'd confiscate every firearm on the planet, save those belonging to the armed forces & security details. And, both of those he'd take a long, hard, second look at.



smashedbanana said:


> Yes because anyone pro-gun control is delighted when a shooting happens!


----------



## eMacMan

.


----------



## eMacMan

Wow those gun control measures in Tranna sure do have gun violence under control.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-gun-violence-reduction-plan-1.4743677



> Toronto will add more front-line officers during peak hours for gun violence for the remainder of the summer, the police chief and mayor announced Wednesday.
> 
> About 200 additional officers will be deployed on patrols during the hours of 7 p.m. and 3 a.m., the window during which most shootings occur in the city.
> 
> The move is part of a new, $15-million "gun violence reduction plan" that comes in the wake of a spate of high-profile and brazen shootings.


----------



## CubaMark

_What's truly shocking is how veteran politicians don't know enough to not say really stupid things while looking into a camera... _ 

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkXeMoBPSDk[/ame]


----------



## Macfury

How about Elon Musk calling that Thai cave rescuer a "pedo"? Unbelievable.



CubaMark said:


> _What's truly shocking is how veteran politicians don't know enough to not say really stupid things while looking into a camera... _
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkXeMoBPSDk


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> How about Elon Musk calling that Thai cave rescuer a "pedo"? Unbelievable.


Unbelievable? No - Unsworth told him to stick the mini-sub up his ass, so no surprise that Musk lashed out at him. A very stupid lashing-out, mind you. His own followers took him to task immediately. 

It's starting to look like Musk needs someone between himself and the Twitter account as much as the Doofus-in-Chief. Unsworth has a defamation case, I'd say.


----------



## Macfury

A big surprise that Musk lashed out at him! The guy had already taken enough abuse from Musk who had already started attacking him--his only crime seemed to be rescuing the kids without Musk's unwanted assistance.



CubaMark said:


> Unbelievable? No - Unsworth told him to stick the mini-sub up his ass, so no surprise that Musk lashed out at him.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> A big surprise that Musk lashed out at him! The guy had already taken enough abuse from Musk who had already started attacking him--his only crime seemed to be rescuing the kids without Musk's unwanted assistance.


The whole build a submarine quick and ship was weird. Like Howard Hughes weird when he built that rig to recover the soviet nuclear submarine. Or when Elvis visited he white house and wanted to lead an anti drug task force.

I think Elon is that type of genius that skates the precipice of crazy.


----------



## Macfury

Agreed. Wish he would concentrate on Space X which is really valuable work. Tesla is just another electric car company that is spending too much time reinventing processes and technology that have already been developed elsewhere. Might have worked better for him to pair with an existing manufacturer to produce the Tesla.



smashedbanana said:


> The whole build a submarine quick and ship was weird. Like Howard Hughes weird when he built that rig to recover the soviet nuclear submarine. Or when Elvis visited he white house and wanted to lead an anti drug task force.
> 
> I think Elon is that type of genius that skates the precipice of crazy.


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Agreed. Wish he would concentrate on Space X which is really valuable work. Tesla is just another electric car company that is spending too much time reinventing processes and technology that have already been developed elsewhere. Might have worked better for him to pair with an existing manufacturer to produce the Tesla.


Electric vehicle technology will be essential if Musk manages to actually get folks to Mars. No fossil fuel industry up there.... you'd need dinosaurs for that!


----------



## FeXL

So, what's the thrust here? 

All this subsidy farming is nothing more than developing technology to be used on Mars, Real Soon Now?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

Pull the other one...



CubaMark said:


> Electric vehicle technology will be essential if Musk manages to actually get folks to Mars.


----------



## FeXL

A young man whose political movement makes sense & is one I can support.

Alberta teen's gun law petition nears 83,000 signatures as it reaches final stretch



> A southern Alberta teenager’s desire to quash proposed changes to federal firearms legislation has become the second-most-signed e-petition to the government in Canadian history.


----------



## FeXL

All the gun laws! They do nothing!!!

Chicago’s gun violence is so bad that parents resort to “hiding” their children



> Gang violence and crime in the Windy City have not gone away under Rahm Emanuel’s leadership, though some progress has been made in specific categories of crime. Still, the endemic problems are enough to have altered the lives of many of Chicago’s residents, seemingly in a permanent fashion. The local CBS outlet looked at the effect this has had on some families and discovered some truly heartbreaking stories. In Lawndale, on the City’s west side, some parents report that they’ve become so desperate that they’ve taken to “hiding their children” rather than risking their being injured or killed in the act of simply playing or enjoying a normal childhood.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

No, it won't. But the gun-control nuts will still lap it up like a cat on a bowl of fresh cream & then vote for the idiots who proposed it.

You simply _cannot_ fix stupid.

Gun ban won't address gun crime



> Writing in this space the other day, Tom Parkin tried to make the claim that gun violence was up in Canada because we went from 5,000 handguns imported into Canada in 1999 to 70,000 in 2015.
> 
> According to Parkin, this and “loosened gun control laws” from the Conservatives have led to a spike in gun violence. It is an easy and emotional argument but not one backed up by facts.
> 
> Here is one problem, the Conservatives never made it easier to get a gun legally, they just reduced some paperwork for people that had gun licences. It is still as tough to get a licence now as it was in 1999.
> 
> Secondly, if we are to believe Parkin that more guns equals more deaths then surely we have seen a spike between 1999 and 2015 in the number of handgun murders.
> 
> But we didn’t.
> 
> *Despite what Parkin describes as a 1,300% increase in the number of handguns, Statistics Canada says that we went from a handgun murder rate of .30 per 100,000 in 1999 to .28 per 100,000 people in 2015.*
> 
> How can that be?


Yeah, bold mine.

Curious, that.


----------



## FeXL

And, when this doesn't work, the ban will be extended to rural areas. And, when that doesn't work, they'll come after long guns.

Stomp this crap out _now._

Jagmeet Singh urges Ottawa to immediately allow cities to ban handguns



> Federal NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is formally asking the prime minister to immediately give cities the leeway to ban handguns.
> 
> *In a lengthy letter to Justin Trudeau outlining a long-term approach to tackling crime, Singh says more policing is not a solution to gun violence in cities because it amplifies distrust between communities.*
> 
> Instead, he says allowing cities to ban handguns would help municipal authorities deal with the fact that many gun crimes are committed with legal guns.


'Course not. Can't actually address the problem. Somebody might, just maybe, become _offended_...


----------



## FeXL

Why does the gun-controlling left always resort to...guns?

Former Gun Control Candidate Charged With Shooting Her Campaign Treasurer



> Kellie Collins, a former congressional candidate in Georgia’s 10th District, was charged with the murder of her former campaign treasurer, Curtis Cain. The allegations of murder follow Collins’ advocacy for “responsible” gun control laws during her campaign. WSB-TV reports that she argued for stricter legislation “to protect the community.”
> 
> Police found Cain’s body in Collins’s apartment with a gunshot wound. Cain did not come in to work last Tuesday, prompting deputies to check in on him. Police estimated that he was dead for roughly a week.
> 
> Collins turned herself in to police on Saturday, shortly after the body was found. The two were reportedly living together and may have been married.


----------



## FeXL

Smell the professional journalism 



> _••• Cochrane, Alberta ••• “This was a *very intentional act*. This was somebody who pulled up beside them, lowered the passenger-side window, pointed a firearm and *discharged a shot into his head*,” said Cochrane RCMP Sgt. Tom Kalis. Driving the vehicle was *a Caucasian male with long, dark hair*._​
> Wait a minute... do I smell a "*minority report?*"
> 
> _"None of the occupants of the Durango were the intended targets of the shooting.”_​
> Say what?
> 
> Of course, the devil is actually in the details... *the details you won't hear on the CBC*...
> 
> _"The tourist was driving a truck near the rodeo grounds of Stoney Nakoda First Nation when he was shot, causing his vehicle to hit the ditch and strike a pole."_​


Bold from the link.

Questions, questions, questions...


----------



## FeXL

<snort> Sometimes Kate's headlines just slay me. :lmao:

Because Gangsters Buy Their Ammo at Cabela’s



> We now have Montreal joining Toronto and the Ontario Liberal Party in calling for ammo sales to be banned in cities on top of the hand gun ban idea.


As noted in the comments, 'cause this worked so well in Chicago...

Tangentially related:

Demand For Concealed Carry Permits Is Skyrocketing



> The most notable demographic increase was found to be among women and minorities. During the aforementioned time period, CCW issuance jumped 111 percent faster for women than for men. Moreover, compared to white individuals, permits for Asian and black individuals spiked 29 percent and 20 percent quicker, respectively. (RELATED: Federal Court Rejects Campus Carry Challenge)
> 
> “That increase in women and minorities mirrors their changing views on guns,” John Lott, the founder of the CPRC, told Fox News. “A poll by [the] Pew [Research Center] helps to explain why there has been such a large increase in concealed handgun permits among blacks and women. The poll shows a 25 percentage point increase in the proportion of blacks with a favorable view of gun ownership. This is the largest increase of any group.”


More:



> The study also found that CCW permit holders are “extremely” law-abiding citizens. For example, in Florida and Texas, two states with the largest number of permits issued, *permit holders are convicted of misdemeanor and felony crimes and one-sixth of the rate that law enforcement officers are convicted.*


M'bold.

Wait...wha...?!

But...the Progs told me that all gun owners are rootin', tootin', shootin', lawless bastards!!!

How can this be?


----------



## FeXL

*Becauth ith's 2015!*

The bastards can't fix the gang shooting problems in Vancouver, Tranna, Ottawa & Montreal but they can't be seen as doing nothing. Instead, they go after law-abiding firearms owners to make it look like they're doing _something_ for the party faithful.

Trudeau pushes a handgun ban



> It is now official. Beyond the world of speculation.
> 
> Justin Trudeau wants a handgun ban in Canada.


More:



> Now it is in the mandate of one of Trudeau’s newest cabinet ministers, Bill Blair.
> 
> Blair is officially the Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction. It is a ministry without a department and no one reports to him.
> 
> Still, Trudeau wants him to come up with a plan to ban handguns.
> 
> “*You should lead an examination of a full ban on handguns and assault weapons in Canada, while not impeding the lawful use of firearms by Canadians*,” the letter reads.


Yeah, bold mine.

Would any gun controlling Prog care to step up to the plate here & explain to me precisely _how one manages to ban something, anything, without impeding access to it_?

By definition, if it's banned, access is impeded!

Do these idiots ever read what they've written down? Do they listen to the words coming out of their mouths?

<just shaking my head...>

And, _and_:



> So in order to deal with the problem of criminals shooting up Canada’s streets Trudeau will look for the only solution he can think of. He will take away your handguns because he knows where they are.
> 
> He can’t get at the criminal guns.


And those of you on the gun control side of things wonder where this well known mantra comes from: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

QED.

And, _and_, when this doesn't work (and it won't), they'll come after long guns. It doesn't matter that these big-city criminals rarely use long guns. After all, the politicians need to appear to be doing _something_...

It's long past due for Canada's milque cow to separate.


----------



## SINC

Yeah I can hardly wait to see Justin tell gang members they can't have handguns. The laughter will be so loud they'll hear it on parliament hill. Idiots.


----------



## FeXL

Further on being a Dick.

Dick's Sporting Goods Isn't Doing Well. You'll Never Guess Why.



> Dick's banned sales of so-called "assault rifles" at its stores and at its sister retailer, Field & Stream. It also banned the sale of "high capacity" magazines and barred the sale of any gun to any customer under 21 years of age. At the time, the company admitted they believed the move could hurt sales, but said that they hoped the change would attract a new breed of Dick's customer.
> 
> *The anti-gun crowd must not buy a lot of sporting goods.*


D'uh. Couched in their parent's basement, they never leave the house!


----------



## FeXL

_Not_ surprised.

As Land Confiscations Loom, South Africa Rules 300,000 Gun-Owners Turn Over Their Weapons



> The Constitutional Court of South Africa recently ruled that 300,000 gun owners must turn in their firearms.
> 
> This judgement came in response to the North Gauteng High Court’s ruling in 2017 which said Section 24 and Section 28 of the Firearm’s Control Act were unconstitutional.
> 
> A report from The Citizen explains what Section 24 and Section 28 entail:
> 
> _“Section 24 of the Act requires that any person who seeks to renew a licence must do so 90 days before its expiry date Section 28 stipulates that if a firearm licence has been cancelled‚ the firearm must be disposed of or forfeited to the state. A 60-day time frame was placed on its disposal, which was to be done through a dealer.”_​
> Now that the High Court’s initial ruling has been overturned, *gun owners who failed to renew their firearms licenses must hand in their firearms to the nearest police station*, where authorities will then proceed to destroy them.
> 
> Many naïve political observers will paint this event as a casual gun control scheme, but any astute student of politics will recognize that the floodgates are now open for further encroachments – not only on the gun rights of South Africans, but also on others facets of theirs lives.


Links' bold.


----------



## FeXL

Even _more_ on being a Dick.

Dick's Sporting Goods Has a Fever, and the Only Cure is Getting Woker and Going Broker



> The Wall Street Journal notes that Dick's is "bucking" a national trend of retailers making gains in this booming, enyugening Trump-fueled economy, by losing 4% year-to-year among comparable stores.


----------



## FeXL

Add one more to the boycott list.

Levi Strauss Forms Gun-Control Group with Bloomberg, Pushes Employees to Donate



> Levi Strauss announced on Tuesday it would be creating a new gun-control group with billionaire Michael Bloomberg and donating millions of dollars to a collection of established gun-control groups.
> 
> The clothing company said it would be partnering with Everytown for Gun Safety and Michael Bloomberg to form Everytown Business Leaders for Gun Safety in a blogpost on their website. It also said it would set up the Safer Tomorrow Fund, which Levi Strauss said would direct more than $1 million over the next four years to "fuel the work of nonprofits and youth activists who are working to end gun violence in America." The company went on to say it would begin doubling the amount it matches for employee donations to gun-control groups aligned with the fund and pushed employees to use their five hours a month in paid volunteer time at the gun-control groups.


The fact that they recognize a problem is a good first step.

The fact that their first step is completely out of sync with the _real_ issue is typical.


----------



## FeXL

Not a surprise to anyone paying attention.

Fake School Shootings



> SPOTLIGHT: A US government report about school shootings is riddled with errors.
> 
> BIG PICTURE: This past April, the US Department of Education released a report that included a startling claim:
> 
> Nearly 240 schools (0.2 percent of all schools) reported at least 1 incident involving a school-related shooting…during the 2015-2016 school year.
> 
> Two weeks ago, _National Public Radio (NPR)_ declared that number nonsense. In a lengthy article titled The School Shootings That Weren’t, _NPR_ explains that a team of interns spent the summer calling every one of the 235 schools that had supposedly experienced a shooting. (All 95,360 schools nationwide were required, by law, to answer the government survey.)
> 
> _NPR_ received no reply from roughly one quarter of these 235 schools. Nevertheless, it learned something critically important about the majority of them: no shooting had actually occurred:


More:



> In Georgia, a “toy cap gun fired on a school bus” was reported as a school shooting. In Florida, a student who “took a picture of himself at home holding a gun and posted it to social media” got counted.


----------



## Macfury

Good thing I read this. Had to buy a bunch of jeans this week and Levi Strauss is off the list.



FeXL said:


> Add one more to the boycott list.
> 
> Levi Strauss Forms Gun-Control Group with Bloomberg, Pushes Employees to Donate
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that they recognize a problem is a good first step.
> 
> The fact that their first step is completely out of sync with the _real_ issue is typical.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Good thing I read this. Had to buy a bunch of jeans this week and Levi Strauss is off the list.


Nice! :clap:


----------



## FeXL

Wonder how many illegal firearm owners attended the meeting...

Toronto town hall on potential handgun ban marked by vocal opponents



> A Toronto town hall that saw repeated angry outbursts and interruptions from an unruly audience offered the Liberal government its first glimpse of the road ahead in its work on a possible ban on handguns.
> 
> In advance of formal public consultations, Toronto-area Liberal MPs Julie Dabrusin and Nathaniel Erskine-Smith hosted a public event Sunday to discuss gun violence, an issue the government has vowed to crack down on ahead of next year’s election. But despite support for a ban from some of Canada’s largest cities, the meeting, which saw repeated interjections from a small but determined number of pro-gun audience members, highlighted just how divisive the issue may still prove to be.


More:



> “*I know there is a great diversity of opinion.* There are some people with very strong feelings on this issue,” Bill Blair said afterward.


Bold mine.

Yeah, there's also lies, half-truths, mis-represented statistic and pap narrative. On the other side, you have facts: it's not legal firearms owners who are committing the lion's share of these shootings. Why are we the ones suffering additional restrictions & laws?


----------



## FeXL

This guy's an idiot.

Require gun owners to buy liability insurance



> Law-abiding gun owners often complain that they are disproportionately targeted by new gun-control measures. They are unlikely, however, to draw attention to regulatory blind spots from which they benefit.
> 
> But when such an oversight offers an opportunity to mitigate inherent risks associated with gun ownership, it behoves all of us to shine some light on the subject. Firearm liability insurance is one such oversight and I believe that should be mandatory – not optional – for gun owners and sellers.


Awrite. Let's follow this down it's logical path.

Bill, from Bill's Gun Shop down the street, is suddenly compelled to purchase Firearm's Sellers Insurance to the tune of a couple thousand bucks/year. Bob Jones decides to purchase a new firearm from Bill but Bob must not only produce all his FAC documentation, he needs to produce proof of Firearm's Owners Insurance, which likely is going to cost him a couple hunnert dollars/year.

Across the alley from Bob lives Mohamed. Bob shows Mohamed his new firearm acquisition before Bob safely locks it away in his gun safe. However, unbeknownst to Bob, Mohamed is a terrorist. One weekend when Bob & his family are away, Mohamed decides it time to meet the 72 virgins, breaks into Bob's house, beats the gun safe door open with a hammer & crowbar taken from Bob's workshop downstairs, steals the firearm & goes on a killing spree, ending by turning the gun on himself.

What happens to the insurance money?

As to the author's comparison with Germany, there could be dozen's of reasons why Germany's death rate is lower than Canada's. Curiously, those details are never discussed.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> ....Across the alley from Bob lives Mohamed. Bob shows Mohamed his new firearm acquisition before Bob safely locks it away in his gun safe. However, unbeknownst to Bob, Mohamed is a terrorist. One weekend when Bob & his family are away, Mohamed decides it time to meet the 72 virgins, breaks into Bob's house, beats the gun safe door open with a hammer & crowbar taken from Bob's workshop downstairs, steals the firearm & goes on a killing spree, ending by turning the gun on himself.....


The bigotry on display in this paragraph alone is simply astounding.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Bill, from Bill's Gun Shop down the street, is suddenly compelled to purchase Firearm's Sellers Insurance to the tune of a couple thousand bucks/year. Bob Jones decides to purchase a new firearm from Bill but Bob must not only produce all his FAC documentation, he needs to produce proof of Firearm's Owners Insurance, which likely is going to cost him a couple hunnert dollars/year.


> Okay great they both have the right paperwork. Sounds like some responsible gun ownership.



> Across the alley from Bob lives Mohamed.


> An alley? Getting suspicious here. Bob should stay out of the alley.



> Bob shows Mohamed his new firearm acquisition before Bob safely locks it away in his gun safe.


> Damit Bob why are you showing everyone your gun? You understand it's not a new iphone right? Okay proceed you genius.



> However, unbeknownst to Bob, Mohamed is a terrorist.


> And all the signs were there too. Lives accross an alley, curious about new purchases. Friendly enough to talk to. And his name is Mohamed. A dead giveaway.



> One weekend when Bob & his family are away, Mohamed decides it time to meet the 72 virgins, breaks into Bob's house, beats the gun safe door open with a hammer & crowbar taken from Bob's workshop downstairs, steals the firearm & goes on a killing spree, ending by turning the gun on himself.


> WTF Bob? I thought you securely locked up your gun. You know this was the shortest path from normal alley-living , friendly enough to show your purchases to neighbor to go from zero to lets meet Allah. You should have know terrorism is like the red scare. Everyone is a potential terrorist. Well most especially your neighbors with arabic names. Lets get those guys before they mission impossible into your house and get your not well secured firearms.



> What happens to the insurance money?


> Exactly! That's for sure the question everyone should ask reading this narrative.


----------



## FeXL

Yes. However, despite the fact that both seller & buyer are being responsible firearms owners, all the gun control in existence & all that coming down the pipe will restrict their law-abiding asses & affect illegal firearms owners not a whit.



smashedbanana said:


> > Okay great they both have the right paperwork. Sounds like some responsible gun ownership.


Agreed. Probably not for the same reasons, though.



smashedbanana said:


> > An alley? Getting suspicious here. Bob should stay out of the alley.


It's better.



smashedbanana said:


> > Damit Bob why are you showing everyone your gun? You understand it's not a new iphone right? Okay proceed you genius.


Yeppers.



smashedbanana said:


> > And all the signs were there too. Lives accross an alley, curious about new purchases. Friendly enough to talk to. And his name is Mohamed. A dead giveaway.


It was securely locked up. In an approved gun safe.



smashedbanana said:


> > WTF Bob? I thought you securely locked up your gun. You know this was the shortest path from normal alley-living , friendly enough to show your purchases to neighbor to go from zero to lets meet Allah. You should have know terrorism is like the red scare.


Hey, if every swinging dick is a potential rapist, then why not?



smashedbanana said:


> Everyone is a potential terrorist. Well most especially your neighbors with arabic names. Lets get those guys before they mission impossible into your house and get your not well secured firearms.




> Exactly! That's for sure the question everyone should ask reading this narrative.[/QUOTE]


----------



## FeXL

California slammed with slew of new gun control laws

In sum:



> Ineffective new rules punishing law-abiding citizens are the perfect addition to Governor Jerry Brown’s legacy.


Yeppers.

More:



> Perhaps the most outrageous of the new rules is that Californians under the age of 21 will no longer be able to legally buy firearms starting next year.
> 
> _The Firearms Policy Coalition, a gun rights advocacy group, slammed the bill.
> 
> “Governor Brown just told millions of people under 21 that they can fight and die for our state and country with machine guns, but they can’t buy a gun for self-defense in their homes,” said group spokesman Craig DeLuz. *“That’s nuts.”*_​


Bold mine.

No argument.


----------



## FeXL

Shhh...

Hear that dripping sound?

It's CM drooling...

Democrats' new anti-gun laws are also an attack on due process



> *Another California law allows police to verbally ask to confiscate a gun rather than make their case in a written request. Under “red flag laws,” guns can be confiscated from citizens who’ve never been charged with, much less convicted of, breaking any law.* And it’s getting easier and easier to do it.
> 
> All it takes in many states is for a family member, neighbor or co-worker to accuse you of a pre-crime. One of Maryland’s many new laws (signed by Republican Gov. Larry Hogan) allows the police to confiscate weapons for up to a year—or until the next person accuses you of a crime you are only yet to commit.
> 
> There is risible evidence that these new regulations will stop mass shootings or lower gun crime. But as William Rosen, deputy legal director for Everytown for Gun Safety, explains, “red flag laws” are needed to “step into that gap.” What gap? You know, the pesky space between protecting the ideal of presuming innocence and completely ignoring it when you feel like it.


Bold mine.

Hey, CM, how's that gun free school protection plan coming along? You've been working on that for months now. Any progress?


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me these little nuggets of truth that sneak past the narrative...

Project Veritas Catches Democrat Senator McCaskill On Camera: She’ll Vote To Ban High-Capacity Mags



> Project Veritas released another bombshell video on Monday night, this time showing Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill and her staff saying that she supports strict gun control measures, *but that she couldn’t express that outwardly or she wouldn’t get reelected.*


M'bold.

D'oh!


----------



## FeXL

The handgun ban is coming, the consultations are a farce



> There is an online consultation that you can take on Justin Trudeau’s idea of a handgun ban and it is a complete farce.
> 
> You can find the consultation form here, fill it out as often as you want until November 10.
> 
> I wrote about it for the Toronto Sun here.
> 
> Suffice to say, this consultation is a joke.
> 
> I’ve filled out the form several times myself. Every time that I filled it out I used the same computer, the same browser and never once cleared my cache. Stopping people from spamming forms is something that has been possible with online surveys for a very long time.


More:



> The Trudeau Liberals didn’t use basic web security technology.
> 
> It’s the same thing with letting people from outside Canada fill in the form. People not in Canada could easily have been blocked, stop that Russian bot, but Trudeau’s Liberals chose not to.


Further:



> As for why you can fill it out as often as you want from anywhere in the world, he offered this answer.
> 
> _It is designed to be an open, anonymous and barrier-free tool that will provide meaningful feedback to the Government of Canada, including from Canadians living and working abroad._​
> Or Russian or Chinese bots.
> 
> Or American gun control advocates working with their Canadian colleagues.


FWIW, I filled out the form last week. Once.


----------



## SINC

Yeah, I too filled it out once, not that it will do any good.


----------



## FeXL

The True Cause Of Hate Crimes In America: Guns!



> The link is to a USA Today opinion piece that infuriated me. The site itself is really obnoxious...it's barely tolerable even for a three minute read. I survived an anti-Semitic shooting. I know how hate armed with a gun turns deadly.
> 
> Here is a Jew writing about gun violence as it relates to hate crimes! They can link gun violence to anything, but this bitch is particularly offensive, because she claims the mantle of moral superiority because she was shot by a fvcking Muzzie in Seattle in 2006. She carefully does not mention Muslim terrorism or Arab anti-Semitism!


----------



## FeXL

Headline nails it.

I can't wait for the CBC to...

...start calling them "irregular firearms owners"...



> Three men suffered serious gunshot wounds after gunfire erupted in East York and downtown Toronto early Thursday. A fourth man is fighting for his life after being run down by a car in North York following a gunbattle barely 12 hours earlier.
> 
> As of Oct. 28, prior to these latest incidents, police statistics show there have been 342 shooting occurrences so this year in the city — nearly eight per week. There have also been 453 victims of shootings this year — just over 10 per week.


----------



## FeXL

I think it's a fabulous idea.

But, don't stop there. Driver's licenses, voting, purchasing alcohol, buying groceries, pet ownership, marriage licenses, doctor & dentist visits. These are just a few things that need to be examined under the same microscope & with precisely the same consequences.

Coming to an Anti-Gun State Near You – NY Pols Want Social Media Checks Before Buying Guns



> What’s lurking in your social media accounts? Judging by some of the occasionally…shall we say…intemperate remarks we’ve seen in the comments here at times, a few of you have no compunction about spouting off on line. It’s one thing to do that under an anonymous screen ID and another when it’s done under your own name. Nothing ever disappears. The internet is forever.
> 
> If you’re someone who occasionally pops off on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit or some other forum, this may give you pause . . .
> 
> _Two New York lawmakers are working to draft a bill that would propose a social media check before a gun purchase._​


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

Wait... I thought the narrative was that all these gang-bangers were getting their weapons from the gun safes of legal firearms owners across the country?

Justin Trudeau to crack down on...

...farmers, hunters... wait a minute... that's the big bust at the border where they wouldn't give a name...



> _The Oct. 31 arrest of 50-year-old Rima Mansour of Toronto, who is facing 27 gun trafficking charges, led officers to carry out 13 search warrants in Toronto and neighbouring Peel and Durham regions."_​
> Just another "irregular firearms owner."


----------



## FeXL

Progs will _never_ admit that. It ain't in their DNA...

At what point do we admit...

...this isn't about inanimate chunks of steel...



> This is Shakeil Wheatle’s *second murder of an innocent stranger* in the Lawrence Heights community. Both victims were *unarmed, law-abiding men* with no criminal records.
> 
> Wheatle’s lawyer, Gabriel Gross-Stein, offered an apology to the Engelbrecht family on behalf of his client. The judge suggested it *might have more meaning if it came from Wheatle himself — but he declined the opportunity.*


Bold from the link.

More:



> RELATED: Making guns "super, double illegal"...
> 
> ...isn't the answer...
> 
> _California, where a gunman killed 12 people in a bar in Thousand Oaks on Wednesday night, has some of *the strictest gun laws* in the country._​


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, outline precisely what gun control measures would have stopped this from happening?

Cops shocked by disturbing shooting video



> It might be the grossest, most disturbing crime video ever captured in Toronto history.
> 
> It has angered Toronto Police and shocked a community.
> 
> As you see on torontosun.com, all three gunman stood over a man they had already shot and each unloaded their hand guns into him again.
> 
> “He was hit with eight bullets and is still recovering in hospital,” said 23 Division Supt. Ron Taverner. “He was an innocent man who had never before had dealings with police.”


No word from the Toronto City Police what gun club they belonged to...


----------



## FeXL

Progs applauding...

Maryland Cops Descend on Man's Homes to Confiscate His Guns Under New "Red Flag" Law; When Man Scuffles to Keep Possession of Guns, He's Shot Dead



> Wonderful.
> 
> It seems like a member of his family filed the "red flag" complaint, so it's possible this guy was behaving strangely or threateningly enough to justify some kind of an intervention.
> 
> He also seems to have opened the door with a gun in hand, which is legal, but also seems provocative.
> 
> This doesn't bode well for "red flag" laws going forward.
> 
> _Two police officers ordered to remove firearms from a house on a "red flag" protective order fatally shot an armed man Monday morning in Ferndale, Maryland, police said. Anne Arundel County Police arrived at the house at 5:17 a.m. to remove guns from the home under a new law that temporarily allows for the seizure of firearms if a person shows "red flags" that they are a danger to themselves or others, CBS Baltimore reports._​


----------



## FeXL

Question for the Progs: Has there been a commensurate increase in DC firearm-related crime?

DC Carry Permits Jump Over 1440 Percent Since District Went ‘Shall Issue’



> The number of Washington D.C. concealed carry permit holders skyrocketed a little over 1440 percent since the District lost a key legal battle related to its previous restrictive gun permitting process at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia last year.
> 
> The Metropolitan Police Department confirmed to The Daily Caller Tuesday that 1,896 concealed carry permits were issued by MPD for the calendar year to date 2018.


----------



## FeXL

It Begins: House Democrats Introduce Bill To Ban Certain Guns



> The new Democrat majority in the House of Representatives won’t be sworn into office until January, but that hasn’t stopped them from getting a jump start on their anti-freedom agenda –namely, legislation that attacks gun owners and the firearms industry and places undue and unconstitutional restrictions on the Second Amendment.
> 
> _Breitbart_ reported that while most everyone was focused on the midterm elections, a handful of House Democrats were putting together a piece of gun-control legislation that has far-reaching implications for the gun-owning community at large, as well as for firearm parts manufacturers and the subset of gun owners who manufacture their own firearms at home.


M'bold.

More:



> *However, critics will note that this legislation is but one of several being put forward by anti-gun Democrats and, if passed, would provide a jump-off point for additional restrictions on the firearms industry, the parts they produce and the means by which they advertise such products to the public.*
> 
> The vastly widened definition of “assault weapon” as encompassing virtually all modern semi-automatic rifles and shotguns is also incredibly concerning, and don’t think Democrats won’t fully exploit that wide definition in their efforts to pass sweeping gun bans in the future.


Yep. Once the bastards have their foot in the door...


----------



## FeXL

Great Christmas present!

First, they got all 16 employees to take a gun safety course. Then, they gave them all gift certificates for firearms!

(Prog heads exploding eveywhere...)

‘We have an entire armed staff.’ Wisconsin boss gives employees guns for Christmas



> A family-ran business in rural Wisconsin now has employees armed with firearms after they each received an early Christmas present from the company, reports the Appleton Post-Crescent.
> 
> BenShot, a father-and-son shop in Hortonville, gifted handguns “as part of an effort to promote personal safety and team building,” according to the Post-Crescent.
> 
> “For us, now, we have an entire armed staff,” co-owner Ben Wolfgram said, according to the newspaper. “I think that’s pretty good.”
> 
> To obey all state laws, the owners actually gave the employees a gift card to buy their own guns for Christmas, WISN reported.
> Be the first to know.
> 
> No one covers what is happening in our community better than we do. And with a digital subscription, you'll never miss a local story.
> SIGN ME UP!
> 
> “That way the background check was done by the store,” Wolfgram said, according to WISN.
> 
> Sixteen full-time employees received a gift card, totaling about $8,000, according to WISN.


As an aside, the company sells some tres cool product: Benshot.


----------



## Dr.G.

FeXL said:


> Great Christmas present!
> 
> First, they got all 16 employees to take a gun safety course. Then, they gave them all gift certificates for firearms!
> 
> (Prog heads exploding eveywhere...)
> 
> ‘We have an entire armed staff.’ Wisconsin boss gives employees guns for Christmas
> 
> 
> 
> As an aside, the company sells some tres cool product: Benshot.




[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lDb0Dn8OXE[/ame]

:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## CubaMark

Dr.G. said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lDb0Dn8OXE


:clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## Macfury

Man, that was weak stuff. That program has aged really badly.


----------



## FeXL

Yuck it up, me boyoz.

What happened immediately after 9-11? The number of armed air marshalls jumped from about 3 dozen to 600, later to around 4000.

How many Muslims have hijacked aircraft in the US since then? A big, fat, zero. Guess guns on planes works, huh?



Dr.G. said:


> :lmao::lmao::lmao:





CubaMark said:


> :clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> Yuck it up, me boyoz.
> 
> What happened immediately after 9-11? The number of armed air marshalls jumped from about 3 dozen to 600, later to around 4000.
> 
> How many Muslims have hijacked aircraft in the US since then? A big, fat, zero. Guess guns on planes works, huh?


It would be hard to say how much the air marshals presence stops terrorists from thinking of doing the same thing again, or is it the more secure cockpit now that will not open if something like the hijacking from 9/11 happened again. There have been multiple changes to security since that tragic event. I was in Europe backpacking when 9/11 happened and flew home in November I remember the extreme difference in airport security before and after.


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> It would be hard to say how much the air marshals presence stops terrorists from thinking of doing the same thing again, or is it the more secure cockpit now that will not open if something like the hijacking from 9/11 happened again.


Well, it sure as hell ain't the TSA... :lmao:


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> Well, it sure as hell ain't the TSA... :lmao:


I am glad I do not travel by plane regularly in the US. I have watched some youtube videos of the TSA and I am shocked that any of that is deemed acceptable.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Guess guns on planes works, huh?


Why should they think about that when they have a sitcom from 1971 to make them feel superior.


----------



## FeXL

NRA, Second Amendment Foundation File Suit Against Washington State Gun Control



> The NRA and Second Amendment Foundation filed suit against the gun controls in Washington state’s Initiative 1639.
> 
> I-1639 is a 30-page gun control conglomeration that bars 18- to 20-year-olds from exercising their Second Amendment right to purchase commonly-owned semiautomatic firearms. It also puts an enhanced background check in place for those commonly owned firearms, adds a 10-day waiting period on purchases of said guns, and enacts new gun storage laws, among other things.


Related;

Dem Rep Left Speechless After Dana Loesch Asks the One Gun Control Question He Couldn’t Answer



> So, if you’ve been on Twitter these past 24 hours, you’ve probably noticed that California Rep. Eric Swalwell has been making an idiot of himself. Of course, he had a little help from his enemies — namely, NRA spokeswoman and conservative commentator Dana Loesch.
> 
> Swalwell, a Democrat, first came to the attention of gun owners nationwide with a May Op-Ed in USA Today that seemed to advocate taking a very, ahem, active role in confiscating “assault weapons” from Americans.


More:



> Of course, all of the points Loesch made are accurate, but the most salient one is this: *The loudest voices in our gun control debate are often the ones who understand the issue the least but have the most power to influence it.* Apparently, just one “60 Minutes” piece isn’t enough to educate Swalwell on the issue he’s most well-known for, but he’s willing to nuke people who don’t follow his dictums. Sarcastically, obviously.


Yeah, my bold.

Surprise! Prominent Democrat Eric Swalwell Is Already Proposing a Mandatory Semi-Automatic Rifle "Buyback" Program -- Sell the Government Your Gun or Face Prosecution -- and Reminds Gun Owners That the All-Powerful Godstate Has _Nukes_



> They're not even in control of the House yet.
> 
> Remember, Democrats posed as moderates for this election.
> 
> And here we are.
> 
> _ A Democratic congressman has proposed outlawing "military-style semiautomatic assault weapons" and forcing existing owners to sell their weapons or face prosecution, a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically exempt existing firearms.
> 
> In a USA Today op-ed entitled "Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters," Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., argued Thursday that prior proposals to ban assault weapons "would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come."_​


----------



## FeXL

Guess that tells us what circle of friends she hangs with...

Newsweek Writer: Only AR-15 Owners I Know Are Mass Murderers



> Newsweek writer Nina Burleigh claimed Saturday that almost every person she has heard of who owns an AR-15 rifle “has been a mass murderer.”
> 
> And “based on Twitter sample the rest of them are scarily paranoid,” Burleigh tweeted.


Oh, & she's a shrink, too?

Well, then...

The only truly frightful thing here is the breadth & depth of her wilful ignorance.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Well, it sure as hell ain't the TSA... :lmao:


Only 200 incidents of Gun mishaps! Not sure the Air Marshals are the real deterrent...

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/19/us/air-marshal-guns-invs/index.html


----------



## Macfury

Most of the "mishaps" were not related to air flight.



smashedbanana said:


> Only 200 incidents of Gun mishaps! Not sure the Air Marshals are the real deterrent...
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/19/us/air-marshal-guns-invs/index.html


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> Most of the "mishaps" were not related to air flight.


Ok, but they are charged with the protection of airflights and fly all day.

19 Weapons discharges!


----------



## Macfury

Put the feds in charge of anything...



smashedbanana said:


> Ok, but they are charged with the protection of airflights and fly all day.
> 
> 19 Weapons discharges!


----------



## SINC

Yeah, Goodale doesn't get it at all, nor do most Anti gun types.


----------



## FeXL

SINC said:


> Yeah, Goodale doesn't get it at all, nor do most Anti gun types.


Related:

How gun-free zones invite mass shootings



> People have been acting for a long time like the United States is the world’s hotbed of mass public shootings. Following a 2015 mass shooting during his administration, President Barack Obama declared: “The one thing we do know is that we have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world.”
> 
> This belief is constantly used to push for more gun control. If we can only get rid of guns in the United States, we will get rid of these mass public shootings and be more like the rest of the world, gun-control supporters preach.
> 
> But America doesn’t lead the world in mass public shootings. We’re not even close. Just last month, a school shooting in Crimea, Russia, claimed 20 lives and wounded 65 others. But Americans usually don’t hear about such events.


----------



## FeXL

What happens when you're a Dick.

Dick's Sporting Goods: Guys, You're Not Going to Believe This, But Our Sales Keep Falling and We Think Maybe It's Due to Our Anti-Shooting Sports Stance



> The Woke/Broke Cycle gets faster.
> 
> _ Sales at Dick's Sporting Goods dropped in the past three months amid backlash against tighter gun-sale restrictions following a mass killing early this year at a Florida high school.
> 
> Revenue dipped 4.5 percent to $1.86 billion amid challenges in the company's hunting business during the quarter through Nov. 3. Sales at stores open at least 12 months -- a key metric for the retail industry -- fell 6.1 percent compared to the prior year.
> 
> ..
> 
> While Chief Executive Officer Edward Stack previously said the firearms policy brought in new customers and sales were reported as flat in August, *Dick's has now warned that "negative reaction" could affect future results.*_​


M'bold.

Ya think?! :yikes:

Guess that's why he's CEO: post hoc ergo propter hoc. Too little, too late.

Shoulda hired me. I coulda told him that long before the decision was made. Woulda cost a helliva lot less than the $87 million or so in lost sales, too.


----------



## FeXL

Another one?! :yikes:

Leftist Narrative Gutted as Handgun Murders Drop Once States Allow Constitutional Carry



> By now you’ve heard the narrative so often, you probably have it memorized: Guns cause crime. More regulation and layers of laws are the go-to “solutions” after every tragedy. But does it work?
> 
> The data says no. In fact, the violent crime rate in America has dropped dramatically since 1990 even while gun ownership and concealed carry permits surged. Now, yet another key data point suggests that “common sense gun laws” may not make so much “sense” after all.
> 
> As Breitbart News journalist AWR Hawkins recently pointed out, a dozen states now allowed “permitless carry,” which means that any law-abiding citizen can carry a concealed handgun without an additional license.
> 
> Letting Americans exercise the Second Amendment without state permission? The horrors! If you bought into liberal anti-gun narratives, the only possible result is Wild West lawlessness and people shooting their grandmothers.
> 
> *No. Actually, violent crime is taking a nosedive.*


Bold mine.

Shocka...


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Another one?! :yikes:
> 
> Leftist Narrative Gutted as Handgun Murders Drop Once States Allow Constitutional Carry
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Shocka...


Amazing article. A heavy biased OP Ed based on a 2012 article using stats from 2000-2002. Stats that are defended by saying the CDC was involved. A body that has been blocked from doing gun violence research by the NRA.


----------



## Macfury

It uses many statistics from many sources, most newer than 2002.

The CDC was never prevented from doing research into gun violence. It was prevented from using its funds to lobby for legislation undermining the Second Amendment. The Dickey Amendment of 1996 predates the 2002 CDC study.



smashedbanana said:


> Amazing article. A heavy biased OP Ed based on a 2012 article using stats from 2000-2002. Stats that are defended by saying the CDC was involved. A body that has been blocked from doing gun violence research by the NRA.


----------



## FeXL

You use the data you have access to. If you have any newer evidence to the contrary (or even in support of!), I'd be more than happy to read it. 



smashedbanana said:


> A heavy biased OP Ed based on a 2012 article using stats from 2000-2002.


This has long been debunked, as MF has pointed out. It's a fallback position for many who are uninformed on the topic.



smashedbanana said:


> Stats that are defended by saying the CDC was involved. A body that has been blocked from doing gun violence research by the NRA.


----------



## FeXL

Even more on being a Dick.

Get Woke, Go Broke? DICK'S Sporting Goods Warns Investors That Decision To Get Rid Of Guns Cost Company Dearly



> Dick's Sporting Goods is warning investors that its decision to remove certain "assault-style" weapons from its Field & Stream stores cost it dearly and may limit its future gains.
> 
> The sporting goods retailer was forced to confront angry shareholders late last week after its stocks tanked more than 4.5% and financial conglomerate J.P. Morgan Chase downgraded Dick's shares, saying the company was "overweight."
> 
> "Gross margin-driven upside appears less probable given 3Q's performance, changing comparisons, and rising inventory levels," an analyst for J.P. Morgan told CNBC. The same analyst noted that same-store sales for Dick's outlets are expected to grow less than 1% even as the company's inventory rises.


More:



> But while Bolitsky didn't come out and say it directly, it seems that Dick's' decision to cut down on its gun sales had an impact in other areas of its business. Gun owners and pro-gun consumers may not be ale to buy their guns from Dick's any longer, but they also seem to have made the conscious decision not to trust Dick's as an outfitter for any of their other needs — particularly their hunting needs.
> 
> Dick's has seen a decline in sales of its hunting gear overall — such a decline that they're considering removing hunting and outdoors equipment from all of their stores in order to boost their bottom line and cull some of their excess inventory.


Good.

Again, no surprise to anybody with more than two brain cells to rub together. PO'd consumers will boycott the whole store, not just the firearms dept. This ain't rocket surgery, people...


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> The CDC was never prevented from doing research into gun violence. It was prevented from using its funds to lobby for legislation undermining the Second Amendment. The Dickey Amendment of 1996 predates the 2002 CDC study.



Lobby for legislation? Please explain how the CDC lobbies for legislation.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> You use the data you have access to. If you have any newer evidence to the contrary (or even in support of!), I'd be more than happy to read it.


I'm not the one making an argument.




> This has long been debunked, as MF has pointed out. It's a fallback position for many who are uninformed on the topic.


If you say so. Maybe this was covered at one of those meetings where everyone stands around and shares the same opinions about everything and they never change.


----------



## Macfury

You're asking because you don't know how the CDC operates to begin with, or because you want a specific example?



smashedbanana said:


> Lobby for legislation? Please explain how the CDC lobbies for legislation.


----------



## FeXL

No, you're the one criticizing the argument for using "old" data, despite the fact that it is likely the most current data available.

Again, if you know of any newer data, bring it. Otherwise, your criticism is invalid.



smashedbanana said:


> I'm not the one making an argument.


It's common knowledge to those of us who do not believe in gun control because it's bandied about in many gun control arguments as a pointless last retort.



smashedbanana said:


> If you say so. Maybe this was covered at one of those meetings where everyone stands around and shares the same opinions about everything and they never change.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> No, you're the one criticizing the argument for using "old" data, despite the fact that it is likely the most current data available.
> 
> Again, if you know of any newer data, bring it. Otherwise, your criticism is invalid.
> 
> 
> 
> It's common knowledge to those of us who do not believe in gun control because it's bandied about in many gun control arguments as a pointless last retort.



Oh no no no non!

I am not falling for this trap of putting together a well reasoned sourced argument only to have you shoot it down. You want me to jump in and be held to a higher degree of scrutiny that these dumpster fires of "articles" you are posting. 

No thanks! That OP Ed is junk and that's all I say. You put it on the table and left it there saying it's dinner. It's not dinner it's a bag of broken sticks. Go out and try harder!


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> You're asking because you don't know how the CDC operates to begin with, or because you want a specific example?


I think I understand how the CDC operates.

To your point, I don't follow you on how they are lobbying the government.


----------



## FeXL

It's not a trap, that's how a discussion or debate or argument works. I post something with facts, you post something with facts to counter it. Or vice versa. Discussion ensues.

Thus far all we have from you is an official BS with nothing to support it. And, the only way I can shoot down your argument is if yours is presented full of holes. Which, BTW, it already is. 

"BS" isn't an argument. It's a way to preface an argument & one I use myself. Left on its own, however, it's merely a fallback position for someone who either can't or won't defend their point. Which is it?

You can't just call an unsubstantiated BS on something without saying why it's BS & expect people to scurry off in search of further support for their position. If, indeed, the argument is as weak as you claim you should be able to dismantle it in a matter of a couple sentences.

Here's a start: you claim the article is a "dumpster fire", "junk", "a bag of broken sticks". Fine. Do you disagree with the entire article or just with certain points? Where? How? Why? We both agree that some of the data is dated. Is the data incorrect? Something else?



smashedbanana said:


> I am not falling for this trap of putting together a well reasoned sourced argument only to have you shoot it down. You want me to jump in and be held to a higher degree of scrutiny that these dumpster fires of "articles" you are posting.


Well, that's your _opinion_ & you're certainly entitled to it!



smashedbanana said:


> No thanks! That OP Ed is junk and that's all I say.


You may not like what's being served but until you go out & forage for your own, it's whats on the table...



smashedbanana said:


> You put it on the table and left it there saying it's dinner. It's not dinner it's a bag of broken sticks. Go out and try harder!


----------



## Macfury

Suppose I decide that I want to ban vapes. As a politician I would direct funds to the CDC to study "the negative health consequences of using vapes." The CDC would then hire arms length research organizations to complete part of the research and use the rest of the money to lobby the government to ban vapes. Essentially, a politician would be using government money to lobby the government to change its own laws.

Better that the CDC simply studies vapes and presents its conclusions to the public. 



smashedbanana said:


> To your point, I don't follow you on how they are lobbying the government.


----------



## FeXL

Students Search Their Roommates' Room Without Permission, Then Demand The Landlord Evict Her. Her Crime? Being from Alabama and Owning Guns.



> Legal guns.
> 
> Oh -- and she also wore a MAGA hat once.
> 
> Her ratty thot roommates thought nothing of invading her privacy and knew that society as a whole would not only excuse their behavior, but defend it. And of course they were right.
> 
> But she's Privileged you guys.
> 
> She lost all rights to privacy and decency because she was white, from Alabama, and once wore a MAGA hat -- but that just shows how privileged she is.
> 
> _ "*We discussed with Leyla that all of us are uncomfortable with having firearms in the house, and that their presence causes anxiety and deprives us of the quiet enjoyment of the premise to which we are entitled*," the roommate wrote to [the landlord]._​


Bold mine.

Then leave. And take every one of your snowflake roommates with you...


----------



## FeXL

Caution: Article is >11 years old. :lmao:

Gun control heads exploding...

why the gun is civilization. 



> Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.
> 
> ...
> 
> When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Caution: Article is >11 years old. :lmao:
> 
> Gun control heads exploding...
> 
> why the gun is civilization.


This is why progs are so intent on eliminating gun ownership. They can't convince people to do what they demand through reason.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> This is why progs are so intent on eliminating gun ownership. They can't convince people to do what they demand through reason.


Not only re: gun control, but everything else.

Behold "peaceful" Antifa...


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> Suppose I decide that I want to ban vapes. As a politician I would direct funds to the CDC to study "the negative health consequences of using vapes." The CDC would then hire arms length research organizations to complete part of the research and use the rest of the money to lobby the government to ban vapes. Essentially, a politician would be using government money to lobby the government to change its own laws.
> 
> Better that the CDC simply studies vapes and presents its conclusions to the public.


Again though the CDC does not lobby. People lobby using their research or grants.

At the end of the day they are government funded body. Is their choices on what to research really the issue? Are they putting forward false research? In your example you are suggesting a conclusion and saying justify it through research. Implying bias or outright falsehood. 

Is it not the politicians that control their budgets not the issue here? That's how the NRA influenced research to start with..


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Caution: Article is >11 years old. :lmao:
> 
> Gun control heads exploding...
> 
> why the gun is civilization.


If this opinion holds water then the most armed populace in the world must have the most responsive, most accountable government in the world. They must also must have the safest, most civil, balanced confrontations in everyday life.

Oh wait the don't have either. Wonder why.

Maybe the idea of having a gun to change power dynamics is just television.


----------



## Macfury

Politicians control their overall budgets, but not always how the money is used. So the Dickey amendment was designed to ensure that the CDC would not use government funds to attempt to lobby to overturn the Second Amendment.

In the 1990s, the problem was that people at the CDC were beginning with a publicly stated premise of reducing gun ownership, and then promising to find the research to support such a policy. So yes, their research was biased.



smashedbanana said:


> Again though the CDC does not lobby. People lobby using their research or grants.
> 
> At the end of the day they are government funded body. Is their choices on what to research really the issue? Are they putting forward false research? In your example you are suggesting a conclusion and saying justify it through research. Implying bias or outright falsehood.
> 
> Is it not the politicians that control their budgets not the issue here? That's how the NRA influenced research to start with..


----------



## FeXL

This isn't about arming gov'ts. It's about arming the populace and precisely how the 2A came about.

One of the first things dictators do is disarm the people.



smashedbanana said:


> If this opinion holds water then the most armed state in the world must have the most responsive, most accountable government in the world.


----------



## smashedbanana

smashedbanana said:


> If this opinion holds water then the most armed populace in the world must have the most responsive, most accountable government in the world. They must also must have the safest, most civil, balanced confrontations in everyday life.
> 
> Oh wait the don't have either. Wonder why.
> 
> Maybe the idea of having a gun to change power dynamics is just television.


I said state but I meant populace, corrected.


----------



## FeXL

Are you talking the US here? I can't tell.



smashedbanana said:


> Oh wait the don't have either. Wonder why.


----------



## FeXL

Even more on being a Dick.

Dick’s Sporting Goods May Close Field & Stream After Gun Control Policy Hurt Business


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Even more on being a Dick.
> 
> Dick’s Sporting Goods May Close Field & Stream After Gun Control Policy Hurt Business


Fun comment following the article:



> It just shows that you don’t need a gun to shoot yourself in the foot...


----------



## SINC

What an arsehole!

*Trudeau rejects evidence and pushes for handgun ban*



> Justin Trudeau used the 29th anniversary of a tragedy to push for greater restrictions on handguns despite a lack of evidence it would accomplish his stated goal: Improved public safety.
> 
> So much for fact-based, evidenced-based policy.
> 
> Throughout the 2015 election campaign and countless times since in the House of Commons, Trudeau and his ministers have said that unlike the Conservatives, they base their policies on fact. They even put it in their 2015 election platform.
> 
> “Government should base its policies on facts, not makeup facts to suit a preferred policy,” the platform reads.
> 
> “Responsible governments rely on sound data to make their decisions. We will release to the public key information that informs the decisions we make.”
> 
> Yet despite releasing any evidence to back up their call for stricter handgun laws, Trudeau used the 29th anniversary of the Ecole Polytechnique massacre to say he will move ahead with stricter gun laws.
> 
> Appearing on Montreal radio station 98.5 with Paul Arcand, Trudeau said restricting handguns further is not out of the question.
> 
> “We are thinking about how we will do better to counter violence from handguns and assault weapons. It is unacceptable what happens … We want to limit the easy access that unfortunately remains for criminals with handguns and assault weapons,” Trudeau said.
> 
> So he’s talking about handguns and criminals, but he is doing it on the anniversary of a massacre that took the lives of 14 women.
> 
> Trudeau’s intention, his desire, to take handguns and “assault weapons” off the streets is evident. He had talked about it openly many times.


More stupidity at the link.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/trudeau-rejects-evidence-and-pushes-for-handgun-ban/


----------



## FeXL

Further on arseholes & their stupidity.

Who Needs Evidence When You Can Attack Gun Owners!



> Forget evidence based policy when you can scare people that it is law abiding gun owners instead of gangsters that are the real problem.


More:



> _Justin Trudeau used the 29th anniversary of a tragedy to push for greater restrictions on handguns despite a lack of evidence it would accomplish his stated goal.
> 
> Improved public safety.
> 
> *So much for fact-based, evidenced-based policy.*_​


My bold.

Since when have facts ever mattered in a Liberal discussion?


----------



## FeXL

Deconstructing the Anti-Gun Cult



> Before she blocked me last week on Twitter, I frequently read the posts of Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, as well as tweets from former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and his Everytown for Gun Safety, which is her organization's chief financial backer. Combined, the two gun control groups are front and center in the U.S.'s anti-gun cult, with 4 million members, which is about the same number of members as the National Rifle Association.
> 
> It's alarming how frequently Watts manipulates data to craft a narrative that America is held hostage to pervasive gun violence and how often she and her organization regurgitate the usual debunked Democrat and DMIC (Democrat Media Industrial Complex) myths, lies, half-truths, and conspiracy theories.


Scroll down the article to see a couple lists of the cities in the US with the highest homicide rates.

More:



> In the 2010-2015 graph, every city, except Tulsa has been run by Democrat mayors and super-majority city councils or boards of aldermen ranging from 15,000 consecutive days (St. Louis) to 53,000 consecutive days (New Orleans).


'Magine that. And, _and_, on that list are cities/states where some of the toughest gun control laws in the country exist.

So, CM (or any of you other gun control freaks), once again: Precisely what gun law, any gun law, would stop young black male single parent inner Dem controlled city kids with illegal firearms from killing the public & themselves?


----------



## FeXL

So, CM, is this the solution you've been working on for that gun-free school protection racket you've been planning for years now?

What can her husband 'say'


----------



## FeXL

What some of us have been saying for years.

The evidence simply doesn't support calls for gun bans in Canada



> *Here is a simple question for Canada to answer: has a single place, anywhere in the world, ever seen its murder rate decline after banning all handguns or all guns?*


CM? C'mon, here's your opportunity to slay the dragon! There must be some gun control website out there on the intertoobs somewhere that can furnish some ammunition (pun intended) here.

No? Nothing? Ya know why?



> *We can’t find such a place. Every single time that guns have been banned, murder rates have gone up — often several-fold.*


More:



> *Handgun homicides continued to rise after Canada’s 1995 ban on more than half of all legally registered handguns. Americans tried to completely ban handguns in Chicago and Washington D.C., and saw murder and violent crime soar.* Gun control advocates argued that these aren’t fair test cases because criminals could bring in guns purchased outside of city limits. But that argument can’t account for why rates of violence exploded in both places.
> 
> Murder rates have increased even when all guns or all handguns are banned in entire countries, even entire island nations. *Murder rates more than tripled after Ireland’s 1972 ban. In Jamaica, they went up six-fold after a 1975 ban.*


Why is that, CM?

Could it be because criminals don't abide by the laws _in the first place_? Is that it?

Nah. Couldn't be...



> The reason is simple. When guns are banned, it is law-abiding citizens rather than criminals who turn in their firearms. And criminals can continue buying arms from drug gangs.


Further:



> Australia is a favourite example of gun control advocates...
> 
> ...
> 
> According to gun control advocates’ logic, Australia’s buyback should have been followed by a sudden drop in firearm homicides and suicides. After all, access to legal guns ought to have been greatly diminished. *Gun control advocates would then have predicted a slow increase in firearm deaths as the ownership rate increased again. No such thing occurred.* Firearm homicides and suicides were falling for 15 years prior to the buyback, and fell more slowly after the buyback. So there is no evidence that the buyback actually caused the fall, but it may look that way in the absence of historical context. *Armed robbery rates rose after the buyback, and then slowly fell back down to pre-buyback levels as gun ownership increased. This is the exact opposite of what gun control advocates predicted.*


Finally:



> Whether we look at all countries or only at developed ones, we find that *nations where gun ownership is more common tend to have lower homicide rates and lower rates of death from mass public shootings*. That’s because armed citizens are able to defend themselves and stop attacks in crowded, public places. *Every single mass public shooting on record in Canada has occurred in areas with gun prohibitions. In the United States, that’s true of 98 per cent of attacks.* It’s no wonder, since many mass killers intentionally pick targets where people can’t defend themselves.


All bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the Broward Cowards...

Devastating Parkland shooting report fuels support for arming willing teachers



> The same Florida school shooting that ignited a national gun control movement has since fueled a rallying cry for arming teachers, thanks to a devastating state report detailing the bungled response of Broward County law enforcement.
> 
> The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission’s recently released draft report detailed a series of mistakes, missteps and profiles in cowardice that contributed to the carnage, prompting the panel to vote 16-1 last week to recommend arming willing teachers.
> 
> Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, who served on the commission, said the early reaction by the Broward County Sheriff’s Department should “shock the conscience of every professional law enforcement officer, as well as the community.”


More:



> Sheriff Judd said the shooting showed that relying on law enforcement to protect schools and other soft targets such as churches will inevitably fall short, given that officers take at least five minutes to respond, while the average shooting lasts two to five minutes.
> 
> “By the time the first phone call came into 911, he had already been shooting 35 seconds, and people had been killed,” said Sheriff Judd, adding, “This is not something we want to do. This is something we have to do.”


Hey, CM, whaddya think? Maybe some teachers should just hit their knees, no?


----------



## FeXL

Kick Ass: Judge Invalidates New York's Nunchuck Ban on 2nd Amendment Right-to-Self-Defense Grounds



> _The judge invalidated the whole of the law because she found one part of it unconstitutional and ruled that part could not be severed from the rest of the law. So it all had to fall together.
> 
> The part she objected to was New York's declaration that even having nunchucks in your own home was illegal. You couldn't even have them in a locker at a martial arts studio, I guess.
> 
> That doesn't seem to invalidate less absurd nunchuck laws in other states, which may only ban people from carrying them.
> 
> But -- shouldn't it? If you have a right to self-defense, why can't you carry nunchucks?_​


----------



## FeXL

Brilliant...

Baltimore Woman Says She Will Use Gun Buyback Cash To Purchase Bigger Gun



> One woman is planning to take advantage of Baltimore’s new gun buyback program by using the cash from the city to purchase a brand new weapon.
> 
> The Baltimore City Police Department started its gun buyback program Monday and said they were able to purchase more than 500 firearms from residents. The Police Department offered anywhere from $25 to $500 depending on the type of firearm. (RELATED: Baltimore’s Police Department Embroiled In Corruption Scandal)
> 
> One woman told FOX45 that she was planning to surrender her 9mm handgun to the buyback program, but had a unique idea of what she would do with her newly obtained cash.
> 
> “She says she is using the cash to get a bigger weapon!” Kathleen Cairns reported.


Good for her!


----------



## FeXL

The plan was to steal tools. Then customers drew their guns



> The plan was simple: Steal tools and pawn them for money.
> 
> That’s what two men, 22 and 23, reportedly had in mind when they showed up to the Coastal Farm & Ranch store in Marysville on Saturday afternoon, according to a police report. They allegedly took four nail guns, each worth over $400, walked out of the store and got into a Honda Civic.
> 
> They didn’t expect to be surrounded by about six customers with guns raised.


----------



## FeXL

The Slaughter by the Water



> Toronto appears to have hit another record in a year of increased violence. According to police data, the city has *recorded 424 shootings in 2018*, as of Monday, surpassing the previous high, set in 2016, of 407.


No comment on what gun club all those duck hunters & skeet shooters belonged to.

More:



> Baltimore addresses "rocket launcher" problem
> 
> ...
> 
> "You paid $500 for an inert rocket launcher? *Those are $35 at any army surplus store*. I’ll load up my truck and head to BLT. Have cash ready!"


Related:


----------



## FeXL

The iron...

Golden Globes: Anti-Gun Hollywood Surrounded By Security Walls and Armed Guards



> Anti-gun Hollywood celebrities enjoyed presidential-level protection by barricades, bomb-sniffing dogs, armed guards, LAPD officers, and numerous security checkpoints as they arrived for the 2019 Golden Globes.


More:



> After the good guys with guns keep Hollywood’s upper crust safe at the Beverly Hilton, the celebrities can go back home, and wake up Monday to start pushing more gun control for commoners.


Just remember, folks. The laws are for all the little people...


----------



## smashedbanana

> Just remember, folks. The laws are for all the little people...


Ah Breitbart such a great publication. I mean Really , really Great Folks. 

No gun advocate has said law enforcement and security should not have guns.

This is more of that new conservative logic. Got a 4ft fence to keep your dog in? Then you must support all walls everywhere no matter what kind, size, or cost!


----------



## Macfury

The Hollywood elite says it needs guns to protect itself from the rabble. That's the message. Source is irrelevant, unless it is inaccurate.



smashedbanana said:


> No gun advocate has said law enforcement and security should not have guns.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> The Hollywood elite says it needs guns to protect itself from the rabble. That's the message. Source is irrelevant, unless it is inaccurate.


Show me where it says they carried weapons themselves and I am with you. Otherwise, no.


----------



## wonderings

smashedbanana said:


> Show me where it says they carried weapons themselves and I am with you. Otherwise, no.


They are saying it by having armed security. 

They are against personal ownership (assuming that the majority is) but ok with armed guards.

If this is the model that is ok why do people get all upset when the talk of armed security at schools to protect children?


----------



## Macfury

wonderings said:


> They are saying it by having armed security.
> 
> They are against personal ownership (assuming that the majority is) but ok with armed guards.


The message then becomes that if your are rich or famous (or a politician) armed protection is a necessity and a right. If you can't afford a professional protective detail, but might be able to afford a single gun, you deserve nothing.


----------



## FeXL

Man buys new gun after selling ‘pieces of scrap metal and garbage’ for $300 in gun buyback



> _YouTuber Royal Nonesuch made a quick $300 by taking 3 firearms that he’d built out of scrap and selling them back to the state of Missouri. He described two of the pipe guns as the ‘crappiest guns I’ve ever made’ but was still able to successfully sell them off to the program.
> 
> …
> 
> Nonesuch was literally able to sell pieces of scrap metal and garbage back to the ‘no questions asked’ program with an intention to purchase a rifle or pistol from a pawn shop after the sale. He stated to his followers that he would post again when he settled on a new gun to purchase.
> 
> The ‘guns’ that he sold included a .22 zip-gun style rifle as well as a 12-gauge grappling hook gun. They were functional but by no means a practical weapon or method of defense. _​


:clap::lmao:


----------



## Macfury

The 333 Grappler is great for hunting Longhorn!


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> If this is the model that is ok why do people get all upset when the talk of armed security at schools to protect children?


You don't actually expect a Prog argument to make sense, do you? :lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> The 333 Grappler is great for hunting Longhorn!


Probably elk & moose, too.


----------



## smashedbanana

wonderings said:


> They are saying it by having armed security.
> 
> They are against personal ownership (assuming that the majority is) but ok with armed guards.
> 
> If this is the model that is ok why do people get all upset when the talk of armed security at schools to protect children?


I think you might be confusing armed security vs arming teachers. A large portion of US schools have armed guards and the numbers continue to climb. You may recall that at Columbine there was an armed guard. 

The recent debate has been in relation to arming teachers..


----------



## Macfury

The suggestion is simply that allowing teachers, but not requiring them, to carry a permiitted gun would place enough doubt in the mind of a potential assailant to ward off an attack. It wouldn't be as much about response as potential response.



smashedbanana said:


> I think you might be confusing armed security vs arming teachers. A large portion of US schools have armed guards and the numbers continue to climb. You may recall that at Columbine there was an armed guard.
> 
> The recent debate has been in relation to arming teachers..


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> The suggestion is simply that allowing teachers, but not requiring them, to carry a permiitted gun would place enough doubt in the mind of a potential assailant to ward off an attack. It wouldn't be as much about response as potential response.


Yes I understand the argument for arming teachers. 

My post was a response to Wonderings in response to me in response to you , etc. etc. about armed security.


----------



## Macfury

I worked for security companies years ago as a guard. I never sensed any commitment on the part of hired security to do much of anything that would introduce the possibility of personal risk. Not saying this is universal, but at least some teachers have skin in the game in their relationships with their kids.



smashedbanana said:


> Yes I understand the argument for arming teachers.
> 
> My post was a response to Wonderings in response to me in response to you , etc. etc. about armed security.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> I worked for security companies years ago as a guard. I never sensed any commitment on the part of hired security to do much of anything that would introduce the possibility of personal risk. Not saying this is universal, but at least some teachers have skin in the game in their relationships with their kids.


Without opening this all up again, if one or more people come to a school with an AR15 it's not going to matter if the person with a gun is a teacher or a paid security officer. 

You will not know how you react until you are in that situation.

Which is why I support removing the guns themselves rather then adding more people with them.


----------



## Macfury

At a certain level of protective service, you would know how you would react.

Teachers certainly would not be using AR15s, but I would be happier that potential perps don't have the confidence to believe they are entering an advertised "gun-free zone."



smashedbanana said:


> Without opening this all up again, if one or more people come to a school with an AR15 it's not going to matter if the person with a gun is a teacher or a paid security officer.
> 
> You will not know how you react until you are in that situation.
> 
> Which is why I support removing the guns themselves rather then adding more people with them.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> At a certain level of protective service, you would know how you would react.


Are teachers now a level of protective service?

Not with you on this one. If you are saying paid security guards can't be expected react well in light of motivations then it's a hard sell to say teachers will become Rambo.



> Teachers certainly would not be using AR15s, but I would be happier that potential perps don't have the confidence to believe they are entering an advertised "gun-free zone."


I would be happier not having anyone approach a school with a gun.


----------



## Macfury

I believe security guards can be good at discouraging entry, but not firefights. 

Regarding teachers, it is not how thy will react, but how a perp feels they _might_ react. Given a school where teachers might carry a gun and an advertised "gun free zone", the choice would be pretty easy for a perp to make.



smashedbanana said:


> Are teachers now a level of protective service?
> 
> Not with you on this one. If you are saying paid security guards can't be expected react well in light of motivations then it's a hard sell to say teachers will become Rambo.
> 
> 
> 
> I would be happier not having anyone approach a school with a gun.


----------



## wonderings

smashedbanana said:


> Without opening this all up again, if one or more people come to a school with an AR15 it's not going to matter if the person with a gun is a teacher or a paid security officer.
> 
> You will not know how you react until you are in that situation.
> 
> Which is why I support removing the guns themselves rather then adding more people with them.


In a perfect world sure no one has guns. That is not reality, the guns are there. Even if you were to ban AR15's and the like it will not remove the MILLIONS of guns from millions of owners across the US. I would rather deal with reality. Have increased security at school, keep trained security in the school just like they do at airports and other public places. 

I would rather hedge my bet on someone having a gun to make a wood be school shooter think twice than to just not have them because we think people are incapable of something.


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> In a perfect world sure no one has guns.


Nope.


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> Nope.


that perfect world is also a utopian world where guns have no need because there is no violence, no war. This is wishful thinking.


----------



## FeXL

Dems Introduce Gun-Ban Bill as GOP Seeks to Expand Gun-Carry Protections



> Democrats and Republicans introduced dueling gun proposals this week in the Senate with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) pushing a new gun-ban proposal and Sen. John Cornyn (R., Tex.) attempting to expand gun-carry protections across the country.


More:



> ...Feinstein's office said it would ban any firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine and either a "pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock."


So, in other words, most of these scary looking BB guns...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Trump’s Bump Stock Ban Adds New Chapter To BATFE’s Sordid History



> In December, at President Trump’s direction, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) issued a ruling that bump stocks “are ‘machineguns’ as defined by the National Firearms Act of 1934” (NFA). Furthermore, it declared that owners of the contraptions must destroy them or turn them over to the federal government without compensation, or be guilty of a federal felony. For now, I leave it to others to address the BATFE’s plan to deprive law-abiding Americans of lawfully acquired private property without compensation.
> 
> As Sean Davis noted, a bump stock is not a “machinegun.” The NFA defines “machinegun” to include several things, including a firearm that fires “automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger,” “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun,” and “any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled.”
> 
> The BATFE claims that the second and, by extension, all three of these definitions apply in this instance. It says, “these devices [bump stocks] convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun.”


However:



> *The BATFE Knows It Is Lying*
> 
> As Davis noted, in 2010 the agency said bump stocks weren’t “machineguns,” that a bump stock “performs no automatic function when installed. In order to use the installed device [the bump stock], the shooter must apply constant forward pressure with the non-shooting hand and constant rearward pressure with the shooting hand.”


FWIW, bumpstocks _do not_ turn firearms into “machineguns”...


----------



## FeXL

With Progs, it's always "Do as I say, not as I do."

The Democrat Who Banned Guns in Chicago Had 23 Guns



> Burke, an Obama and Blagojevich ally, and the godfather of Chicago politics (dubbed its real mayor), hated and loved guns at the same time. He had nearly as many guns as he had gun control bills. When the FBI raided the offices of the powerful Chicago Democrat, they found 23 guns. That’s a lot of guns for one man. Especially for a man who had worked hard to ban handguns in Chicago.
> 
> "What it does do hopefully is put a freeze on the number of handguns that are presently owned by the people in the city of Chicago,” he had said of Chicago’s 1982 handgun ban.
> 
> The freeze however didn’t apply to all the guns in his office.


More:



> But while Alderman Burke banned ordinary Chicago residents from owning guns, he had a legal loophole for owning as many guns as he wanted and even being able to legally carry semi-automatic weapons.
> 
> The same pol who had fought to ban handguns, expand the gun registry and pressured banks to use their monopolistic power to impose gun control, was doing exactly what he banned others from doing.


Further:



> Chicago’s aldermen had banned guns for everyone, except themselves. And even during the heyday of the gun ban, they benefited from a special law giving aldermen and other officials the power to carry.
> 
> Democrat pols believe that they can be trusted with guns when no one else can. But the track records of Ed Burke, Senator Trotter or Alderman Dorothy Tillman, who during a ward redistricting meeting, settled the debate by pulling out her “38-caliber,snub-nosed, nickel-plated pistol”, say otherwise.


They all seem nice.


----------



## FeXL

NOYFB...

Boston Officials Pushing Law Requiring Doctors To Ask Patients About Their Firearms



> Boston city officials plan on pushing legislation requiring doctors to ask patients whether or not they possess firearms in their homes.
> 
> Mayor Martin J. Walsh’s administration said Wednesday that the step would be taken to help health care providers statewide “play a larger role in addressing gun violence” by identifying red flags or patients at risk of suicide or domestic violence.
> 
> “*We’re just asking them to help identify ways to save lives*,” Boston Police Commissioner William Gross told the Boston Business Journal, adding that the legislation won’t suggest that doctors should solve crimes and that owning guns won’t be included in patients’ medical records.


Bold mine.

More legal, law-abiding firearms owners will save more lives, you idiot.

h/t Misanthropic Humanitarian at AoS, who noted:



> Why not ask about knives, rope, cars, baseball bats, booze and pills while you're at it.


Precisely.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> NOYFB...
> 
> Boston Officials Pushing Law Requiring Doctors To Ask Patients About Their Firearms


This seems prudent.

People can tell doctors in confidence. And then doctors can notify authorities in extreme cases when someone presents as a risk his self/her self or others.


----------



## Macfury

I would not tell a doctor any more than he needs to know to solve my health problem. I have suffered enough from doctors breaking my confidence.


----------



## eMacMan

smashedbanana said:


> This seems prudent.
> 
> People can tell doctors in confidence. And then doctors can notify authorities in extreme cases when someone presents as a risk his self/her self or others.





Macfury said:


> I would not tell a doctor any more than he needs to know to solve my health problem. I have suffered enough from doctors breaking my confidence.


First of all in this age of digitized health records, there is no such thing as doctor-patient confidentiality. 

Second, drug dealers love to get their hooks into someone at a medical clinic, with this arrangement that someone could then pass along addresses of homes to burglarize for firearms. 

Third, not only would MF not divulge that sort of information but that also applies to anyone who is likely to be a serious threat. 

Fourth, the age group with the greatest tendency to mishandle firearms is also the least likely to visit a doctor.

Clearly the idiots who proposed this did not bother to think it through. Or maybe they did, and the true intent is to make it easier to seize firearms from the general population.


----------



## smashedbanana

eMacMan said:


> First of all in this age of digitized health records, there is no such thing as doctor-patient confidentiality.


Sure there is. Who can view those records? And what specifically do you know as it related to the medical record keeping in Boston?



> Second, drug dealers love to get their hooks into someone at a medical clinic, with this arrangement that someone could then pass along addresses of homes to burglarize for firearms.


This sounds like holywood to me. Substantiate it with some links and I will read them. We are talking about the U.S. What is it like 1 in 3 homes probably has a firearm? You need confirmation before you try those odds?



> Third, not only would MF not divulge that sort of information but that also applies to anyone who is likely to be a serious threat.


When you need healthcare you cooperate. In MF's example he did at one point trust doctors and provide info.



> Fourth, the age group with the greatest tendency to mishandle firearms is also the least likely to visit a doctor.


Nonsense. You cannot make that generalization. Anyone can become suicidal. Anyone.



> Clearly the idiots who proposed this did not bother to think it through. Or maybe they did, and the true intent is to make it easier to seize firearms from the general population.


I think they did think about it.

Every time there is a shooting it's not about the gun. At least the pro-gun side says. So here is a idea that's new and applies to mental health. It's not a solution but it's something. But surprise it's treated as instantly dumb by the pro-gun side.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> When you need healthcare you cooperate. In MF's example he did at one point trust doctors and provide info.


I provided health related information which was shared with other patients by the doctor.


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> I provided health related information which was shared with other patients by the doctor.


I'm certainly not here to defend your provider.

For sure if things you told a doctor in confidence were shared then of course you should be wary of sharing again. 

On the same vein I am sure with the Boston thing after a doctor shares with authorities the fact that an at risk patient has a firearm that patient isn't going to be trusting doctors either..


----------



## Macfury

No (or very few) patients with a firearm will share this information with a doctor. How could answering honestly benefit the patient?



smashedbanana said:


> I'm certainly not here to defend your provider.
> 
> For sure if things you told a doctor in confidence were shared then of course you should be wary of sharing again.
> 
> On the same vein I am sure with the Boston thing after a doctor shares with authorities the fact that an at risk patient has a firearm that patient isn't going to be trusting doctors either..


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> No (or very few) patients with a firearm will share this information with a doctor. How could answering honestly benefit the patient?


Well that is supposition.

If the legislation is passed it will be a requirement for doctors to ask. So it's answer honestly or lie. Not sharing will not be an option.


----------



## FeXL

Somebody wants to go blow their head off, go. Hurry up & get it done so the rest of us can get on with our lives. If it can't happen because somebody confiscated their weapons and they're serious about it, they'll find another way.

This isn't about suicide. It's about control.

All someone needs to do to get Uncle Buck's guns taken away is to go to the doctor and say, "I'm afraid of Uncle Buck & what he might do with his guns". And, <poof>, they're gone.

My father's best friend lost his firearms years ago during a divorce process. The bitch contrived some BS story about her being afraid for her & her children's lives and one night after she left the Queen's Horsemen show up at his door & confiscate guns, bullets, magazines, everything.

I've personally known the guy since the 60's & he's as easy-going as anybody I know. Not a chance he'd ever go after her or the kids. It's just not in his make-up. She was just striking out at him & she was the one who cheated. It was all trumped up BS.

Took him the better part of a year and hundreds of dollars in court costs to get his firearms back, all because she had a vendetta. And this was back in the 80's.

I've known 2 other women who have tried the same thing to friends of mine. One, the guy told the cops to get stuffed unless they had a warrant. They didn't & never returned. The second, the guy was asked if he'd surrender his weapons voluntarily. He did and, after some sort of background check (he already had all his legal documentation), a week later he was allowed to pick up his firearms from the Calgary Police station.

It's bull$h!t, pure & simple. Until there is zero chance for abuse, no way in hell this crap should get passed.



smashedbanana said:


> Anyone can become suicidal.


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Well that is supposition.
> 
> If the legislation is passed it will be a requirement for doctors to ask. So it's answer honestly or lie. Not sharing will not be an option.


How do you know that "not sharing" won't be an option?


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> It's bull$h!t, pure & simple. Until there is zero chance for abuse, no way in hell this crap should get passed.


Same old same old. Rail against the progressives. 

But zero change until absolute 100% chance of success. That kind of logic can claim no advancement of anything in our lifetime!


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> How do you know that "not sharing" won't be an option?


I guess maybe it could. Since the requirement is only for doctors to ask.

Knowing the U.S. maybe abstaining will be a checkbox?


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Same old same old. Rail against the progressives.
> 
> But zero change until absolute 100% chance of success. That kind of logic can claim no advancement of anything in our lifetime!


Why is this an "advancement"? Making doctors into deputies sounds like a bad precedent.


----------



## FeXL

Railing against _stupidity_. And even more _gov't control & interference_ in my life.

The fact that Progs are largely responsible for all this _stupidity, gov't control & interference_ is purely tangential.

BTW, anytime a conservative stands up & says or proposes something stupid, he/she/it gets it from me as well.



smashedbanana said:


> Same old same old. Rail against the progressives.


How many legal, law-abiding citizens getting their lives upheaved & rights eroded or taken away entirely does it take before the situation becomes an issue for you?

1? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000? A million? More?

That's one of the differences between the left & the right.

I see a single solitary individual having their lawful rights abrogated & I see a problem. The left sees millions of people whose rights are being infringed upon and they say, "Meh..."



smashedbanana said:


> But zero change until absolute 100% chance of success. That kind of logic can claim no advancement of anything in our lifetime!


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Railing against _stupidity_. And even more _gov't control & interference_ in my life. The fact that Progs are largely responsible for all this _stupidity, gov't control & interference_ is purely tangential.


Without knowing all your beefs I will just say "ok".



> BTW, anytime a conservative stands up & says or proposes something stupid, he/she/it gets it from me as well.


Haven't really seen that. But I am going to guess they get labelled the ambiguous "Progressive". 



> How many legal, law-abiding citizens getting their lives upheaved & rights eroded or taken away entirely does it take before the situation becomes an issue for you?


Oh come on. You get asked one question and it's all a massive erosion of your life and liberty.



> 1? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000? A million? More?


My world does not work that way. I'm very much a best idea wins kind of person.



> That's one of the differences between the left & the right.


Is it though?



> I see a single solitary individual having their lawful rights abrogated & I see a problem. The left sees millions of people whose rights are being infringed upon and they say, "Meh..."


Really??? So I assume your railing against the payouts to Kadr and Maher Arar is now retracted. Those single individuals had their rights violated. I guess in that vein you also really like Trudeau. He's been all Charter of Rights is top priority this whole term. Peas in a pod you guys.

I'd like to hear your ideas for addressing mass shootings. I don't think I've read 1 suggestive thing put forward from you.

Go ahead expand your horizons. This forum isn't binding in the real world.


----------



## FeXL

Go read the Anti-Prog thread. The basic stupidity & wilful ignorance is on full display.



smashedbanana said:


> Without knowing all your beefs I will just say "ok".


Fairly recently I was critical of Harper for opportunities left undone while he was PM. And no, Harper wasn't a Prog.

As far as ambiguous is concerned, it's actually quite clear: Is the action/statement/whatever based on empirical evidence or faith, ideology? Is there a clear set of double standards, hypocrisy, on display?

If yes for the latter or faith in the former, chances are pretty good you got yerself a Prog. Have a look at the regular posters on these boards. You need look no further. Whose a hypocrite? Whose an ideolog? They're your Progs.



smashedbanana said:


> Haven't really seen that. But I am going to guess they get labelled the ambiguous "Progressive".


Depends on the question & the questioner. But possibly, yes.



smashedbanana said:


> Oh come on. You get asked one question and it's all a massive erosion of your life and liberty.


I'm down with that. Thing is, frequently, Progs simply _do not have_ the best ideas because they're not often based on reality. Far too frequently they rely on pixie dust, unicorn farts & feel good pap and change simply because they appear to be bored with the situation.



smashedbanana said:


> My world does not work that way. I'm very much a best idea wins kind of person.


Yes, I believe it is.



smashedbanana said:


> Is it though?


Khadr is a confessed killer. Whether or not his rights have ever been infringed upon is a matter of opinion. IMO he has the right to three hots & a cot & not a helluva lot more. 

I know little about Arar & don't recall ever posting about him.

My views on the Gropenfuhrer are well known on these boards and I could care less about the C of R. It was a crap document when his old man & the rest of the Prog idiots put it together & remains so to this day.



smashedbanana said:


> Really??? So I assume your railing against the payouts to Kadr and Maher Arar is now retracted. Those single individuals had their rights violated. I guess in that vein you also really like Trudeau. He's been all Charter of Rights is top priority this whole term. Peas in a pod you guys.


Addressing them how? Prevention? Simple: Stop making gun free zones (like schools, churches, malls, etc.). That's where most mass shootings occur, at least in the US. _Most_ killers aren't interested in dying. That's why they seek out destinations & targets that are unarmed.

I've been advocating that on these boards for years.

A legally armed & carrying populace also helps immensely.



smashedbanana said:


> I'd like to hear your ideas for addressing mass shootings. I don't think I've read 1 suggestive thing put forward from you.


Then give me something to sink my teeth into.



smashedbanana said:


> Go ahead expand your horizons. This forum isn't binding in the real world.


----------



## SINC

Yup, pretty much.


----------



## FeXL

Another Prog narrative shot <snort> to hell...

DOJ Report: Guns Carried During Crimes Most Frequently Obtained Off the Street or Underground



> A report published on Jan. 9 by the Department of Justice (DOJ) found that in 2016, criminals who carried firearms while they committed crimes most frequently obtained the guns either off the street or underground, rather than through legal purchases.
> 
> The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reported that an estimated 287,400 prisoners possessed a gun in 2016 while they committed the crimes for which they were imprisoned. Of these, “more than half (56%) had either stolen it (6%), found it at the scene of the crime (7%), or obtained it off the street or from the underground market (43%). Most of the remainder (25%) had obtained it from a family member or friend, or as a gift.”
> 
> *By contrast, according to BJS, only seven percent of guns carried during crimes in 2016 were purchased by the criminal “under their own name from a licensed firearm dealer,” revealing that the vast majority of criminals who possess guns apparently do not obtain them legally.*


M'bold.

Well, duh...


----------



## FeXL

Hopefully, this will fail miserably in the senate, as well.

Gun-Confiscation Plan Backed by Va. Gov Defeated in House, Awaits Vote in Senate



> A plan to ban the sale and possession of certain kinds of firearms and ammunition magazines backed by Virginia governor Ralph Northam (D) failed a vote in a house subcommittee on Thursday but awaits action in the state senate.
> 
> By a vote of 4 to 1, Delegate Kathy Tran's (D) HB 2492 failed to pass out of the committee. That effectively kills the proposal within the House of Delegates. However, an identical Senate bill, Senator Adam Ebbin's SB 1748, is awaiting a vote in the Committee for Courts of Justice.
> 
> The bills would make it illegal to "possess or transport any assault firearm." It would define "assault firearm" as any semiautomatic firearm "equipped at the time of the offense with a magazine that will hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition" or one that is "designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock."


As I noted before, like some of those _scary looking_ BB guns...


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Another Prog narrative shot <snort> to hell...
> 
> DOJ Report: Guns Carried During Crimes Most Frequently Obtained Off the Street or Underground
> 
> M'bold.
> 
> Well, duh...


A missing link here is where these guns started their lives. With no real record keeping legal gun purchases become street guns. When stolen, sold, or falsely reported as stolen and sold.


----------



## FeXL

Obviously they all started their lives in some factory. The lion's share of which were then sold to law-abiding citizens.

Having said that, there are damn few law-abiding citizens who are going to sell their legally purchased & legally owned weapons to some young, black, male gang-banger on the street for at least one reason: ROI. They paid a premium dollar for their new weapons. Why would they discount them for 50 cents (or whatever) on the dollar?

Now, you can speculate as much as you want about how some of these weapons ended up on the street. In the real world it don't matter: Most firearms used in the commission of a crime are illegal in the first place & more gun laws ain't gonna change that one whit in the second place.



smashedbanana said:


> A missing link here is where these guns started their lives. With no real record keeping legal gun purchases become street guns. When stolen, sold, or falsely reported as stolen and sold.


----------



## smashedbanana

FeXL said:


> Obviously they all started their lives in some factory. The lion's share of which were then sold to law-abiding citizens.


Agreed.



> Having said that, there are damn few law-abiding citizens who are going to sell their legally purchased & legally owned weapons to some young, black, male gang-banger on the street for at least one reason: ROI. They paid a premium dollar for their new weapons. Why would they discount them for 50 cents (or whatever) on the dollar?


Where are you getting this from? Street prices are much higher than off the shelf prices. Who would sell their gun for less? Years ago there was a gun amnesty in Alberta? or somewhere and the news was saying how ineffective it would be. The only number I remember was for H&K MP5. The program questioned who would possibly turn one in when the street prices was $35000 cdn at the time..



> Now, you can speculate as much as you want about how some of these weapons ended up on the street. In the real world it don't matter: Most firearms used in the commission of a crime are illegal in the first place & more gun laws ain't gonna change that one whit in the second place.


Sure they will. As you have admitted the guns started somewhere. There is no rogue factory producing these guns.. A reduction in the supply chain will flow through. Overnight? No. Will it takes years, yes.


----------



## FeXL

Prog heads exploding.

Female VA State Senator Open Carries On House Floor — Calls Gun Her ‘ERA’



> A Virginia state senator utilized the state’s open-carry law in a unique way on Tuesday by carrying her .38 caliber revolver with her right into the state’s capitol building.
> 
> Amanda Chase, a first-term conservative state senator who has made news by being a vocal opponent of the Equal Rights Amendment, decided to carry her gun after pro-immigration activists confronted a fellow state senator the day before, forcing Capitol Police to be called, according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.


----------



## FeXL

_Unlike_ the socialist, progressive dictator running Venezuela.

Brazil’s President-Elect to Decree Protections on Citizens’ Right to Own Guns



> On December 2, Breitbart News reported that Brazilian lawmakers were already working to put forward legislation to give Bolsonaro the tools he need to protect the people’s right to own guns and to reinvigorate gun ownership among the law-abiding. The legislative push includes efforts to ease taxes on firearms and lower the legal purchase age from 25 to 21. Bloomberg reports that it also revolves around recognizing, “as a matter of law,” Brazilians’ “right to own and bear firearms for legitimate self-defense and the protection of personal property.”


----------



## FeXL

What's this? Red flags & waiting periods didn't stop a massacre?

Shocka...

Gun Control Fail: Red Flag Law, Waiting Periods Fail to Stop Florida Bank Massacre



> Florida’s red flag law and waiting period for gun purchases failed to stop the horrendous massacre at SunTrust Bank in Sebring, Florida, on Wednesday.


More:



> The minimum age for long gun purchases was raised to 21 in the gun control package as well, but none of the controls prevented 21-year-old Zephen Xaver from attacking the bank. The _New York Times_ reports that he opened fire then called the police and said, “I have shot five people.”


Whereas as a single CCW could have stopped the killer in his tracks.

So much for Prog narratives.


----------



## FeXL

Baltimore School Board Votes to Disarm Police in Schools

So, despite this:



> On March 20, 2018, an armed officer cut short an attack on Great Mills High School, in Great Mills, Maryland. CNN reported that a student opened fire in a hallway around 7:55 a.m. but was quickly killed by Officer Blaine Gaskill.
> 
> Gaskill stopped the gunman before he could wound more than two people.


They've disarmed the school cops.

Face, meet palm...

Yet, on the other side of the coin:

How Dangerous Is Baltimore?



> *Michael Bloomberg* believes that security at his alma mater is insufficient. There is a university police force but its members are not armed. Bloomberg, according to this report in the Baltimore Sun, wants to change that and says so plainly.
> 
> “When you have a city that has the murder rate that Baltimore has, I think it’s ridiculous to think that they shouldn’t be armed.”


Bold mine.

Yes, _that_ Michael Bloomberg

More:



> Unarmed security personal aren’t much of a defense against the killers who make Baltimore a dangerous place. A whistle and a night stick aren’t much up against a Glock or an AK. The police, obviously, aren’t much protection either. Otherwise Baltimore wouldn’t be close on the heels of St. Louis and well ahead of Chicago in the ranking of urban murder rates.


Yeppers.


----------



## FeXL

Sheriffs in Rural Washington Refuse to Enforce Latest Gun Controls



> Rural Washington state appears to have had enough of it. The Guardian reports that numerous sheriffs are refusing to enforce the controls contained in I-1639. After all, the initiative was rejected by 27 of the state’s 32 counties. It passed because of the financial backing and the massive populations of the cities compared to the populations of rural areas.
> 
> Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer is one of those allegedly refusing to enforce the controls. He said the controls are “unconstitutional on several grounds. I’ve taken the position that as an elected official, I am not going to enforce that law.”


Firearm sanctuary state? Hell, yeah! :clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

Well, Sturgis just got a lot more interesting... 

Freedom! South Dakota Becomes Latest State to Pass ‘Constitutional Carry.’



> On Tuesday, the South Dakota state legislature passed a bill allowing for permit-less concealed carrying. The bill now goes to the desk of Gov. Kristi Noem (R-SD), who has already expressed support for the measure.


----------



## FeXL

'Course not.

His story doesn't follow the narrative.

Shooting Survivor Steve Scalise: Democrats Will Not Let Me Testify Against Gun Control



> Steve Scalise says Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) asked Democrats to let Scalise give testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and they told him no.
> 
> Fox News reports that Scalise decided to make public the testimony he would have given, testimony that explains why universal background checks will not reduce gun violence or make Americans safer.
> 
> Scalise referenced the June 14, 2017, Congressional baseball shooting in which he was nearly killed. He noted that the gunman acquired his guns via background checks, just as nearly every mass shooter of the 21st century has done. Because of this means of acquisition, Scalise notes that universal background checks would not have stopped the shooting from taking place.


----------



## Macfury

This Florida school is taking steps to protect students:

https://www.heraldtribune.com/news/20181220/msa-guardian-is-strapped-ready-for-worst-case-scenario

However, listen to this ex cop whining about it:



> You don’t walk around with an assault rifle strapped to your chest in a school. That is not the normal policy of police agencies,” said Walt Zalisko, a retired police chief who now owns a Daytona Beach-based global investigative group and police management consulting business.
> 
> Zalisko said *it is best practice to keep rifles locked up within a police car or in a secure location*, and he said guardians or school resource officers are more effective when they are able to regularly engage with students, rather than viewing their job as solely stopping a mass shooter.


This guy's job IS "solely stopping a mass shooter"!


----------



## smashedbanana

Macfury said:


> This Florida school is taking steps to protect students:
> 
> https://www.heraldtribune.com/news/20181220/msa-guardian-is-strapped-ready-for-worst-case-scenario


Why the Herald Tribune has made their website unreadable. I hope they are getting a lot of money for those over the top adds...


----------



## Macfury

smashedbanana said:


> Why the Herald Tribune has made their website unreadable. I hope they are getting a lot of money for those over the top adds...


I visit with adblock as none of these sites seems to be able to offer a decent balance between commercial content and editorial. If they beg me to disable adblock I generally just leave. I paused adblock for one site a few weeks back and was immediately greeted with a phony request to download malware disguised as Adobe Flash.

Here is more of the article:


> Manatee School for the Arts in Palmetto equips school guardian with military-style rifle.
> 
> PALMETTO — Harold Verdecia, 39, was an infantryman in the U.S. Army, completing tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has been shot at, and he has fired back.
> 
> “That’s just the job,” he said.
> 
> Now he patrols the hallways of Manatee School for the Arts, strapped with a Kel-Tec “Bullpup” rifle and a Glock 19X. Verdecia isn’t there to get to know the kids, break up fights or do the typical community-policing that school resource officers typically do, said MSA Principal Bill Jones.
> 
> Verdecia has one job: Stop an active shooter.
> 
> Jones said if a shooter arrived at the campus, they would most likely be carrying a rifle, wearing body armor and looking to inflict as much carnage as quickly as possible. He said even though the Palmetto Police Department will respond, he needs someone on scene who can return force with force.
> 
> “When seconds count, (Palmetto police) are only a few minutes away,” Jones said ironically, emphasizing the need for an instant response.
> 
> Jones has thought through the nightmare scenario in minute detail. If a shooter was 100 feet away, very few officers could take him down with a handgun, Jones said, while that is a standard shot with a rifle. Verdecia’s gun is loaded with bullets that will explode on impact, rather than exiting their target and possibly hitting someone else. And, in addition to his two guns, Verdecia wears body armor. In all, he is strapped with 45 pounds of firepower.


----------



## FeXL

Progs _hate_ studies like this.

Study: Concealed Carry Permit Holders Break Laws Far Less Than Cops



> Despite massive gun restrictions rolling out across the country, for the past two years, the number of concealed carry permit holders has continued to soar. A study conducted at the end of last year showed that the number of Americans licensed to carry a concealed weapon is now over *17 million*—a whopping *273 percent increase* since 2007.
> 
> If we were to believe the rhetoric that more people carrying guns would lead to more crime, there would be a correlation showing an increase in crime among concealed carry holders. However, a study conducted by the Crime Prevention and Research Center, which examined these numbers, found the opposite.
> 
> *What’s more, not only are concealed carry permits not committing the crimes the anti-gun crowd would like us to believe, but the study found cops are far more likely to commit crimes than permit holders.*


Last bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

David Hogg Claims AR-15 Owners Are ‘Hunting’ Human Beings



> During an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, gun-control activist David Hogg claimed those who own AR-15s and similar rifles are not interested in self-defense but in hunting human beings.
> 
> After telling viewers that Americans need to find unity in addressing gun violence, Hogg was asked about his recent efforts to ban certain kinds of semiautomatic firearms at the state level. He said he and other March for Our Lives activists had introduced a ballot initiative to ban so-called assault weapons in Florida. He said those who own an AR-15, the most popular rifle in the United States, want to hunt other people.
> 
> *"The truth of the matter is weapons like the AR-15 have an effective range of over 1,500 meters," Hogg said. "If you're using a weapon with an effective range of over 1,500 meters, you are not defending yourself. You are hunting a human being."*


Bold mine.

If David Hogg had two brain cells to rub together, it'd be a friggin' miracle.

I want to see a human being on this planet accurately (say, 0.5 – 1.0 MOA) fire a .223 caliber AR-15 _*1500 meters*_. With _any_ barrel length & _any_ ammo, match grade included. For that matter, with a .224, 5.56, 6.5 or 6.8 chamber, either.

With a proper scope, a 20" barrel (or more), match grade ammo and significant training, it _may_ be possible with the .300, .450 & 9mm. Maybe.

But I'd be willing to bet that the lion's share of AR-15's sold are chambered smaller than larger. If you want a firearm with sniper characteristics, there are simply better choices than an AR-15.

The guy is an idiot.

Not even mentioning his BS that AR-15 owners are hunting humans...


----------



## eMacMan

Wow. I know there are some mathematically challenged members here so here is the math on that 1500 meter shot.

Depending on cartridge and barrel length, it would be rare for most AR-15s to achieve a muzzle velocity of 3000 feet/second. That 1500 meter distance converts to 4921 feet.

Time for the bullet to travel to its target is: 4921/3000 = 1.64 seconds
Actually a little longer as something called friction will slow the round during its fight.

Gravity will be acting on that bullet for the entire 1.64 seconds, so in that time the bullet will lose this much elevation: (32*1.64*1.64)/2=43 feet. If the target is 50 meters closer than estimated the bullet will go nearly 3 feet over its head.

If side-ward wind vector is only 6 miles an hour the cartridge will drift 8.8*1.64=14.4 feet to the left or right. If side wind speed vector picks up to say 7 miles an hour at the moment you shoot bullet will miss by 2 feet left or right.

At only 3 miles an hour the target can move as much as 7.2 feet left or right in that 1.64 seconds.

That's all assuming you can even see the target through a scope at that range. It would take a very serious scope to even accomplish that little task.

I am a competent shot and I would not even try that shot with any rifle I've ever shot let alone something as ill suited as an AR-15.

All those factors and we have not even taken into account the drop in bullet velocity over that 1.64 seconds or the effect of projectile spin over that distance. Both would be very significant.

This is all high school level math and physics. To me what's shocking is that some peoples skills are so weak that they are able to swallow that kind of propaganda.


----------



## FeXL

Recall lying Ralph Goodale's claim (_allegedly_ derived from StatsCan data) of 1200 break-ins/year in Canada to steal guns?

Well, it appears his numbers are a _coupla orders of magnitude_ off the mark. For you Progs, gun control nuts, SJW's (BIRM) and other lefty mathematical illiterates, that's 100 times too high...

The Liberals' cynical, ineffective gun policies continue



> However, StatsCan’s database shows five “robberies to steal firearms” in 2013, 16 in 2014, 12 in 2015 and 18 in both 2016 and 2017. There may not have been 1,200 break-ins to steal guns in the 151 years since Confederation.


_Mein Gott_, those robberies could have put, what, dozens of guns on the street? Dozens, I tell you!


----------



## FeXL

Criminals gonna criminal...

Aurora Police Chief: Shooter ‘Was Not Supposed To Be In Possession Of A Firearm’ After Felony Conviction



> "During the finger-printing and background process" for a conceal and carry permit, "it was discovered that [the suspect] had a felony conviction for aggravated assault out of Mississippi," Ziman stated.
> 
> She added:
> 
> 
> The date of that conviction was August 3, 1995. It should be noted that this conviction would not necessarily have shown up on a criminal background check conducted for a FOID card. Once this felony conviction was discovered, the offender's conceal and carry permit was rejected, and his FOID card was revoked by the Illinois State Police.​
> During the press conference, a reporter asked the following question: "Does the series of events relating to the gun license and the revocation of his FOID card mean that he was in illegal possession of that gun?"
> 
> Ziman replied: "That is absolutely correct, yes."
> 
> The reporter followed up by asking if authorities should have confiscated the suspect’s firearm after his FOID card was revoked, to which Ziman replied:
> 
> That's what we are determining right now as part of our investigation ... absolutely he was not supposed to be in possession of a firearm. ... After a FOID card revocation, the subject is provided a letter stating that they need to relinquish their firearms, and we're looking into why that did not happen.​


----------



## FeXL

'Course not...

House Democrats: No ICE Alert if Illegal Fails Gun Background Check

I read the first two words of the headline as, "House Rats".



> Fox News reported that the universal background check bill, H.R. 8, passed the House Judiciary Committee on a 23–15 party-line vote. Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL) had proposed an amendment to H.R. 8, which would have required a notification be sent to law enforcement “when an individual attempting to purchase a firearm fails a federal background check.”
> 
> Steube commented of the Democrats’ refusal to incorporate his amendment, “In rejecting this amendment, the Democrats have shown their true colors.” He continued, *“It is clear they are not interested in preventing gun violence or stopping the illegal purchase of firearms, but rather they are only interested in limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens to advance their own political agenda.”*


Bold mine.

Don't tell me yer actually surprised...


----------



## FeXL

Illinois Shooter Is Latest Law Enforcement Miss to Commit Mass Murder



> The man who allegedly murdered five people and wounded five police officers at an office park in Aurora, Ill., on Friday is the latest mass killer to obtain firearms due to failures in enforcing current gun laws, records show.
> 
> The alleged shooter, who spent several years in prison for a violent domestic assault in the 1990s, was able to obtain an Illinois Firearms Owners Identification (FOID) card in January 2014 and purchase the firearm he used to commit mass murder. Though he was prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms under both federal and state law, the shooter was able to obtain the FOID card and buy his gun because the background checks done during both transactions failed to uncover the disqualifying felony conviction.


Related:

Mass Shooting In Aurora Shows Why Gun Control Doesn’t Work



> Last week, when an Illinois man killed five of his co-workers and injured several police officers, he did so with an illegal firearm. The shooter purchased the gun after lying on his background check about a past felony for aggravated assault. Like many other mass shootings, the criminal was able to carry out an act of violence not because of a lack of gun laws, but because of a bureaucratic failure to enforce the existing ones.
> 
> The Aurora shooter answered “No” to the question, “Have you ever been convicted of a felony?” He was then approved for his Firearm Owner’s Identification Card (FOID), which is required before purchasing a firearm or ammunition in Illinois. He then passed another background check before purchasing the .40-caliber Smith & Wesson he used on his killing rampage last week in Aurora. Both background checks failed to flag his felony conviction and prison sentence from the mid-1990s in Mississippi. Police reports say he hit a former girlfriend with a baseball bat and stabbed her with a knife.
> 
> It wasn’t until Gary Martin later applied for a concealed carry permit that his felony was flagged and his FOID card revoked. He was sent a letter with orders to surrender his firearm but never did so, and it’s unclear if any police agency ever followed up. The Illinois State Police has yet to explain how their database missed his past convictions, or whether any measures were taken to seize his firearm after his FOID card was revoked. The Chicago Tribune reports there is no record of law enforcement asking the court for permission to search for Martin’s gun.


----------



## FeXL

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

No, baby... trust me...

...my way is better...


----------



## FeXL

Good.

Maryland Sheriff on Gun Confiscation Bill: ‘We Will Not Comply’



> Lewis told _Delmarva Now_ that he believes lawmakers are punishing residents throughout the state for the out-of-control crime in Baltimore. He said, “Law-abiding citizens are repeatedly being penalized because of Baltimore City’s inability to control their crime. And I’m sorry — I’m not someone’s puppet. I’m going to stand up for what I think is unjust and unconstitutional to the American people, including those living in the state in Maryland.”


----------



## FeXL

Good, too.

Oklahoma Governor Signs Bill Eliminating Concealed Permit Requirement



> Oklahoma joins Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Vermont as the 15th state to declare the Second Amendment as an individual’s carry permit.


----------



## FeXL

Good, three.

Dems Lose ‘Embarrassing’ Gun Control Amendment Vote After Multiple Defections



> In a rare move, a Republican amendment to gun legislation brought to House floor by Democratic leadership was adopted after multiple defections from moderate Democrats.
> 
> The House voted Wednesday on H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019. The bill would expand background checks to include all gun sales, rather than just sales by licensed gun dealers as under current law.
> 
> Republicans in the minority countered with an amendment to require that federal officials notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement whenever a lawful or unlawful immigrant tried to illegally purchase a firearm. That measure, opposed by most Democrats, was voted down when the bill was still in the House Judiciary Committee.
> 
> When Democratic leadership brought H.R. 8 to the full floor for a vote, Republicans made a motion to recommit the bill with the ICE amendment, usually a last-ditch symbolic action taken by the minority party with little chance of success. But in a surprising development, the motion passed 220-209, with 26 Democrats joining the Republicans.


----------



## FeXL

Questions, questions, questions...


----------



## FeXL

Good.

Defiant U.S. sheriffs push gun sanctuaries, imitating liberals on immigration



> A rapidly growing number of counties in at least four states are declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, refusing to enforce gun-control laws that they consider to be infringements on the U.S. constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
> 
> Organizers of the pro-gun sanctuaries admit they took the idea from liberals who have created immigration sanctuaries across the United States where local officials defy the Trump administration’s efforts to enforce tougher immigration laws.
> 
> Now local conservatives are rebelling against majority Democratic rule in the states. Elected sheriffs and county commissioners say they might allow some people deemed to be threats under “red flag” laws to keep their firearms. In states where the legal age for gun ownership is raised to 21, authorities in some jurisdictions could refuse to confiscate guns from 18- to 20-year-olds.
> 
> Democrats took control of state governments or widened leads in legislative chambers last November, then followed through on promises to enact gun control in response to an epidemic of mass shootings in public spaces, religious sites and schools.
> 
> Resistance to those laws is complicating Democratic efforts to enact gun control in Washington, Oregon, New Mexico and Illinois, even though the party holds the governorship and both chambers of the state legislature in all four states.


----------



## FeXL

Colorado House Passes ‘Red Flag’ Gun Control Bill as Counties OK Second Amendment Sanctuary Measures



> Law enforcement officials are split on the bill, and some counties have passed "Second Amendment Sanctuary County" resolutions, citing due process concerns.
> 
> Custer and Fremont counties have both passed resolutions which would mean sheriffs in those counties wouldn’t have to enforce ERPOs if the bill becomes a law.
> 
> Democratic House Majority Leader Alec Garnett, D-Denver, mocked the counties in a floor speech before the bill’s passage Monday.
> 
> *"Now we have sanctuary counties," he said. "I mean, do we have to talk about the ridiculousness of sanctuary counties? You’re not going to enforce a judicial order?"*


I certainly hope Mr Garnett is equally as aghast at ICE sanctuary counties...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Colorado House Passes ‘Red Flag’ Gun Control Bill as Counties OK Second Amendment Sanctuary Measures
> 
> 
> 
> I certainly hope Mr Garnett is equally as aghast at ICE sanctuary counties...


Freemont county is particularly relevant as it houses the main Cañon City penitentiary as well as the new super max pen in Florence. Pretty sure there would be an open revolt if residents in this county were unable to protect themselves from escaped or inadvertently released violent inmates.


----------



## FeXL

Further on being a Dick.

Amid Dropping Sales, Dick’s Doubles Down On Ditching Guns



> Amid continued financial struggles, *including an 11% drop in shares Tuesday*, Dick's announced that it would stop selling firearms altogether at 125 of its 729 stores, The Wall Street Journal reports.


Bold mine.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of virtue signallers.


----------



## wonderings

In the place you would least expect a mass shooting New Zealand has been hit and it hard. From what I read on CNN 49 have been killed as 2 Mosques were attacked

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/15/world/asia/new-zealand-shooting-updates-christchurch.html


----------



## CubaMark

_Sickening._

A right-wingnut, Donald Trump-loving, believer in the "replacement" myth perpetrated by racists throughout western countries.

Brenton Tarrant, 28-years old. Believes "White Christians" are under threat. 

Livestreamed his attack with a camera attached to his helmet. A 74-page "manifesto" posted to social media.

Evil ****ing bastard.

Ongoing coverage from The Guardian UK.


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> _Sickening._
> 
> A right-wingnut, Donald Trump-loving, believer in the "replacement" myth perpetrated by racists throughout western countries.
> 
> Brenton Tarrant, 28-years old. Believes "White Christians" are under threat.
> 
> Livestreamed his attack with a camera attached to his helmet. A 74-page "manifesto" posted to social media.
> 
> Evil ****ing bastard.
> 
> Ongoing coverage from The Guardian UK.



Where did it say he was a Donald Trump lover? Read your link and did not see it unless I missed it. 

People have had no problems with mass shootings before Donald Trump and will after. Using his name as if it adds something (unless it legitimately was stated by the shooters) serves no purpose but to try and divide people even more.


----------



## SINC

wonderings said:


> Where did it say he was a Donald Trump lover? Read your link and did not see it unless I missed it.
> 
> People have had no problems with mass shootings before Donald Trump and will after. Using his name as if it adds something (unless it legitimately was stated by the shooters) serves no purpose but to try and divide people even more.


Me too. Not only that, but the only mention of Donald Trump in the story is this:



> *The attack prompted condemnation from across the world.* Pope Francis, the Queen, *Donald Trump* and Theresa May have all sent messages of support to New Zealand.


Completely contrary to the false accusation made in the post.


----------



## CubaMark

_The Guardian article may not have mentioned it, but it has come up in various other reports from those who have read the (now removed) "manifesto"...._

*Alleged New Zealand Mosque Mass Shooter’s Manifesto Praises Donald Trump As ‘Symbol Of Renewed White Identity’*

A mass shooting at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, on Friday has left an astonishing total of 49 people dead, according to The Associated Press. The shooting was carried out by at least one gunman who posted on online “manifesto” stating white supremacist viewpoints and naming prominent Donald Trump supporter and right-wing American media personality Candace Owens as the person who most inspired him to commit acts of violence.

He also praised Trump himself “as a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose.” But he disavows Trump as “a policy maker and leader.”

(Inquisitr)​


----------



## Macfury

CM, you are way off base. It almost seems as though you wish your accusations were true.


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> _The Guardian article may not have mentioned it, but it has come up in various other reports from those who have read the (now removed) "manifesto"...._
> 
> *Alleged New Zealand Mosque Mass Shooter’s Manifesto Praises Donald Trump As ‘Symbol Of Renewed White Identity’*
> 
> A mass shooting at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, on Friday has left an astonishing total of 49 people dead, according to The Associated Press. The shooting was carried out by at least one gunman who posted on online “manifesto” stating white supremacist viewpoints and naming prominent Donald Trump supporter and right-wing American media personality Candace Owens as the person who most inspired him to commit acts of violence.
> 
> He also praised Trump himself “as a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose.” But he disavows Trump as “a policy maker and leader.”
> 
> (Inquisitr)​


Seems like the name to mention if any is Candace Owens. Though really not sure why any one should be named as the shooter did this on his own. If the shooter had said he was doing this in the name of the Queen it would mean as much. The blame is on the shooters and the choice they CHOSE to make freely. 

Also from the article you linked I do not think the shooter was super impressed with Trump outside of his loud mouth. Taken from your linked article

"He also praised Trump himself “as a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose.” But he disavows Trump as “a policy maker and leader.”"


----------



## CubaMark

Gosh, I'm so sorry that I reproduced in this thread news accounts that Donald Trump was on of the folks who had qualities (white nationalism, racism) that the New Zealand shooter admired.

Certainly, it's important that the good name of Donald J. Trump not be impinged, that we should focus on protecting him from further derision as a character whose statements and actions, along with others on the right-wing fringe, inspire murderous acts among the deranged who have access to weapons.

[insert your deity of choice here] forbid that today we dare to express sorrow and solidarity with those who died and those who are suffering. 

Get your goddamn priorities straight, people. 

Or continue to prance around, oblivious (intentionally?) that the hatred that you tolerate among white nationalists and racists will grow if it continues to be unchallenged.

An interesting world you're choosing in which to live....


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> Using his name as if it adds something (unless it legitimately was stated by the shooters) serves no purpose but to try and divide people even more.


Mornin', wonderings.

I wondered how long it would take before The Bigot would dance on the graves of these victims. Sadly, they're not even cold yet.

The unfortunate truth is, facts have never mattered to a Prog in the middle of an anti-gun, anti-right, anti-Trump rant & The Bigot is no exception. He's thrown that into sharp relief time & time again on these very boards.

As to The Bigot's snark about threatened "White Christians", why is everything about race to him? 

Why does it go unmentioned that members of a primitive, inbred, misogynistic, murderous culture have shot, knifed, exploded, what have you, nearly 2000 living, breathing people in the Name of Islam the first 10 weeks of this year alone and The Bigot's chiefest concern today is a "white guy" attacked a mosque? 

WTF?

Many of those dead (I would hazard a guess that most of them) were Muslims themselves. Why is Muslim on Muslim violence entirely sanctioned, yet when the killer is <spit> _white_ suddenly The Bigot comes scuttling out from under his rock, fulminating about guns, the right & Trump?

Is this the hallmark of a reasonable individual? Wouldn't a reasonable individual condemn _all_ killings, no matter what the _killer's skin colour_?


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Just like you reproduced "news" accounts of Clock Girl.

And just like you reproduced "news" accounts of the Catlicker Boyz.

And here you are, yet again, reproducing another "news" accounts and blaming them for the "connection".



CubaMark said:


> Gosh, I'm so sorry that I reproduced in this thread news accounts that Donald Trump was on of the folks who had qualities (white nationalism, racism) that the New Zealand shooter admired.


The iron...

You mean more like your priorities? "Muslims killing Muslims good, white man killing Muslims bad"? And then throw in some tenuous (even by your standards) connection to Trump, racism, etc., etc., etc?

That's some twisted $h!t, CM.



CubaMark said:


> Get your goddamn priorities straight, people.


----------



## FeXL

This New Zealand terrorist sounds more & more like some Prog gone off the deep end than anybody from the political right.

The Demented Politics of the New Zealand Terrorist



> He calls himself an “Eco-fascist,” one who combines environmentalism, racism and authoritarianism into one repulsive package. In his mind the world is dying from over-population, but over-population of the “wrong” kind. He hates capitalism, free markets, and free trade but he loves the Communist Chinese government and fascism. He takes the racist rhetoric of Donald Trump and mixes it with Marxist rhetoric about the poor workers of the world.
> 
> In his fevered imagination alleged “over population” is directly tied to “mass immigration” and “sub-replacement fertility” among whites. The culprits who deserve the blame, he says, are the “corporate entities” who “invited” immigrants to “replace the White people.” It’s Paul Ehrlich meets Adolph Hitler, Bernie Sanders in cahoots with Benito Mussolini.


More:



> A secondary goal was to goad individuals on the Left into pushing for gun control. He says he chose to use guns in order to push precisely that agenda in order to “create conflict between the two ideologies within the United States.” He believes if the Left can be pushed into trying to weaken Second Amendment rights this will splinter the country, resulting in “a civil war that will eventually balkanize the US along political, cultural and, most importantly, racial lines.”


----------



## Beej

I read the manifesto. It's a mix of manifesto-type statements of "truth", so sayeth the sicko, internet humour (including trolling), and some general discussion. The language is frequently informal, which is off-putting, considering what he did. 

One item the guy was completely clear on, assuming the document is his, was the intent to create conflict between the sides as he sees them.

The supreme importance of racial identity was, of course, a big deal to him.


----------



## SINC

The really repugnant piece of this whole New Zealand massacre story was that he was allowed to live broadcast the slaughter on Facebook. I watched it in horror before it was removed. Isn't it time to have the government shut down the Facebooks and Twitters, et all of the world and regain some decorum from idiots online?

I could live without social media quite easily and be better off for it. I kind of think so would the entire world.


----------



## FeXL

Beej said:


> One item the guy was completely clear on, assuming the document is his, was the intent to create conflict between the sides as he sees them.


Yes, that's what I got out of it as well.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

Liberals still FOS re: stolen guns statistics.

'Experts' ignore facts when it comes to gun control in Canada



> Still, Liberal ministers persist in the myth that there are 1,200 break-ins every year in Canada to steal firearms, even though StatsCan’s database shows just five “robberies to steal firearms” in 2013, 16 in 2014, 12 in 2015 and 18 each in of 2016 and 2017.
> 
> *Despite repeated claims by leading Liberals and anti-gun activists, the vast majority of crime guns in Canada are almost certainly not bought legally by a licensed owner here, then lost or sold on the black market.*
> 
> Moreover, firearms researcher Dennis Young, himself an ex-Mountie, has filed numerous access-to-info requests with the federal government. Young has managed to pry out the fact that neither the RCMP nor StatsCan have ever compiled statistics on the sources of crime guns.


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. 'Magine that...

Data Review Contradicts Hickenlooper Claim on Colo. Gun-Check Law



> A review of Colorado data on gun background checks contradicts recent claims by former Colorado governor and Democratic presidential hopeful John Hickenlooper.
> 
> Hickenlooper has repeatedly touted his signature on a universal background check measure. He has said the law was important because background checks in Colorado have prevented people from purchasing guns and that the system in place beforehand didn't require checks on half of all gun sales.


----------



## FeXL

FOID (Firearm Owners Identification Card) Ruled Unconstitutional In Illinois



> Well, this should be interesting! Apparently a judge doesn't think that it is appropriate for the state to tax and regulate our rights protected by the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution.
> 
> People v. Brown - FOID ruled unconstitutional in IL District Court


----------



## wonderings

SINC said:


> The really repugnant piece of this whole New Zealand massacre story was that he was allowed to live broadcast the slaughter on Facebook. I watched it in horror before it was removed. Isn't it time to have the government shut down the Facebooks and Twitters, et all of the world and regain some decorum from idiots online?
> 
> I could live without social media quite easily and be better off for it. I kind of think so would the entire world.



I do not use social media, no facebook account, no twitter or anything else. Not a fan and really despise the whole culture. I would not want the government to intervene though and try and stop the ability for people to communicate or share though. The government has enough control over our lives as is with little to no accountability I really do not want them governing how people interact with each other. I also think the government is not capable of correcting these things, nor should they be. They waist enough tax paying dollars as is I do not want more studies and programs funded to try and stop this type of thing when we all know it will end in failure and more burnt up money that we all work hard for.


----------



## FeXL

Washington sheriff tells Glenn Beck why he won’t enforce the state’s new, far-reaching gun control laws



> On Thursday’s Glenn Beck Radio Program, Sheriff Bob Songer of Klickitat County, Washington, joined BlazeTV host Glenn Beck to talk about why he won’t enforce the state’s new, far-reaching anti-gun laws.
> 
> “I’m a constitutional sheriff; the rule of law is the Constitution, U.S. and Washington state constitution,” Songer told Beck. “Based on that, I believe that it violates the citizens that I serve.”
> 
> Songer added that “this was a political move” from the state’s attorney general and governor, who hope that it will translate into electoral promotions for them down the road. “They’re violating good, honest citizens’ rights.”
> 
> “I’ve been in this business 48 years, in law enforcement,” Songer says. He says the state’s new gun laws “will do nothing to make a safer community.”
> 
> *“That’s why crooks are crooks,” Songer added. “They don’t pay any attention to laws.”*


M'bold.


----------



## Macfury

wonderings said:


> I do not use social media, no facebook account, no twitter or anything else. Not a fan and really despise the whole culture. I would not want the government to intervene though and try and stop the ability for people to communicate or share though. The government has enough control over our lives as is with little to no accountability I really do not want them governing how people interact with each other. I also think the government is not capable of correcting these things, nor should they be. They waist enough tax paying dollars as is I do not want more studies and programs funded to try and stop this type of thing when we all know it will end in failure and more burnt up money that we all work hard for.


There's already too much collusion between government and Facebook/Twitter/Google to bury news and commentary and to shape narratives.


----------



## FeXL

Well, it took 4 whole days, but they finally found out the _real_ perpetrators behind Christchurch...

New Zealand Mosque Chairman Claims Mossad Organized Shooting



> The chairman of a New Zealand mosque said he believed Israel’s Mossad organized the Christchurch attacks that killed 50 people, outraging New Zealand’s Jewish community.
> 
> Ahmed Bhamji, chairman of the Mt Roskill Masjid E Umar mosque, asserted that Mossad funded the gunman’s attack against mosques in Christchurch and that it was “Zionist business” at a rally in Auckland for the shooting victims organized by Love Aotearoa Hate Racism. Members of New Zealand’s Jewish community and witnesses of Bhamji’s speech denounced his accusations, calling them “hateful.”
> 
> “I really want to say one thing today. Do you think this guy was alone … I want to ask you – where did he get the funding from?” Bhamji asked the crowd, according to Newshub. “I will not mince words. I stand here and I say I have a very very strong suspicion that there’s some group behind him, and I am not afraid to say I feel Mossad is behind this.”


----------



## FeXL

Ralph Goodale's "War on Neo-Nazis"...

...yielding unexpected non-Nazi results...



> A *35-year-old Brampton man, Salem Talke*, is facing more than 60 charges in connection with what police are calling one “*one of the single biggest firearms seizures*” in Peel Region history.
> 
> 26 firearms were found, along with 1,500 rounds of ammunition and a bullet proof vest. A large quantity of *drugs with a street value of $1.2 million* was also seized.​


Links' bold.

No news on what gun club Talke belonged to.

But, *but*, isn't that a great photo of the suspect, I mean, a Peel PD car?!


----------



## FeXL

Ah. An honest (at least in her intent) Prog...

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Time to Ban ALL Semi-Automatic Guns



> Media and political phenom Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has an answer for everything. Don’t believe it? Just ask her.
> 
> Miss AOC decided to weigh in on gun control while everyone else was focused on the Mueller report over the weekend. In short, the democratic socialist thinks we need to outlaw private gun sales, keep our guns loked up, and ban semi-autos and standard capacity magazines.


----------



## eMacMan

This is a really bad piece of legislation. So bad that 31 Colorado counties have already announced they will not enforce. So incredibly bad that if it was any worse even Freddie and CM could see how bad it is.
https://gazette.com/ap/colorado-leg...cle_6f27e62e-54a1-11e9-8f03-47d6e6318e1b.html



> DENVER — A bill allowing a court to order seizure of guns from a person deemed to be a threat is on its way to the governor's desk.
> 
> The Democrat-sponsored bill would allow family, household members or law enforcement to petition a court to have guns seized from an owner if they believe he or she poses a threat to themselves or others.
> 
> Once that has happened, the person who possessed the firearms would be provided with legal counsel and a hearing within 14 days to determine if a longer-term order should be put in place for for up to 364 days. The court can order a mental health evaluation, as well as mental health treatment.
> 
> *The bill places the burden of proof on the gun owner to prove that he or she no longer poses a risk in order to get the firearms back.*





> As of March 27, 31 counties, all but one outside of the Denver metro area, have adopted resolutions declaring themselves sanctuary counties, meaning they will not enforce the law if signed by the governor. The largest of them: El Paso and Weld counties.


NOTE: Recall petitions have been launched against some of the bill's perpetrators. Hopefully they will pay for this monumental stupidity with their jobs.


----------



## FeXL

There goes another Prog gun control narrative...

Study: ‘Assault Weapons’ and Magazine Bans Do Not Lower Homicide Rates



> The study was headed by Boston University School of Public Health’s Michael Siegel and another listed study author was Harvard gun control advocate David Hemenway.
> 
> The study, _The Impact of State Firearm Laws on Homicide and Suicide Deaths in the USA, 1991–2016: a Panel Study_, isolated four states to study ten different types of gun control to see if certain gun controls were successful in reducing homicide and/or suicide rates. *Via their research, they discovered that “high-capacity” magazine and “assault weapons” bans do not lower homicide rates.*
> 
> In an interview with Futurity.org, lead study author Michael Spiegel elaborated: “Although I completely understand the desire to ban assault weapons, *I just don’t see empirical evidence that such bans have any substantial impact on homicide rates.* These bans are most often based on characteristics of guns that are not directly tied to their lethality.”


Bold mine.

Huh. Who knew?


----------



## FeXL

Following Christchurch Shootings, New Zealanders Have Voluntarily Surrendered a Total of 37 Guns Out of an Estimated 1.2 Million



> After the mosque attacks in Christchurch where 50 people were murdered, New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said the government would move quickly to tighten existing gun laws.
> 
> Ahead of the new laws, Ardern urged gun owners to voluntarily surrender their firearms. As of March 20th, a whole 37 guns had been surrendered out of an estimated 1.2 million.
> 
> ...
> 
> *37.
> 
> I love New Zealand.*


Yeah, my bold.

Me, too.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Following Christchurch Shootings, New Zealanders Have Voluntarily Surrendered a Total of 37 Guns Out of an Estimated 1.2 Million
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, my bold.
> 
> Me, too.


Some progs probably bought guns so they could publicly surrender them.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Some progs probably bought guns so they could publicly surrender them.


<snort>

Wouldn't surprise me a whit.


----------



## FeXL

Sanity prevails in the Land of Fruit Loops & Whackos?

Judge Rules California Ban on High-Capacity Ammo Magazines 'Unconstitutional'



> U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez, for the Southern District of California, ruled on Friday that a California law banning high-capacity gun magazines -- more than 10 bullets per magazine -- was "unconstitutional in its entirety." The ruling prohibits California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and all law enforcement officers in the state from enforcing the rule against owning high-capacity ammo clips.
> 
> *Gun "magazines holding more than 10 rounds are 'arms,'" said the judge, in reference to the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms," and “individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts."*


Bold mine.

:clap::clap::clap:

Related:


----------



## FeXL

Further on beng a Dick.

Dick’s CEO Okay with Company’s $150 Million Loss over Gun Control Stance



> Bloomberg.com reports that Dick’s lost “about $150 million” after coming out for gun control, yet Stack continues to stand his ground. He addressed America’s gun policy, saying, “The system does not work. It’s important that when you know there’s something that’s not working, and it’s to the detriment of the public, you have to stand up.”


Wonder what the shareholders think...


----------



## FeXL

Eric Swalwell's Anti-Gun Agenda Is a Dog That Just Won't Hunt in America



> Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), the 945th Democrat to throw his hat in the ring for the 2020 presidential election, has chosen to be a one-note candidate to distinguish himself from the ever-growing field:
> 
> It’s time we take BIG, BOLD action to #EndGunViolence in America. That’s why I’m the only candidate proposing that we ban and buy back every single assault weapon in this nation. pic.twitter.com/rwhvDVBeDG
> — Eric Swalwell (@ericswalwell) April 9, 2019​
> Swalwell represents one of the most liberal counties in one of the most liberal states in America, so he probably thinks that this is truly a winning strategy.
> 
> It's also the only issue that he's managed to use to distinguish himself as a member of Congress. Sure, it was because he threatened to nuke gun owners who resisted having their legally owned weapons confiscated, but hey, in his lunatic part of the world that's A-OK.


Good luck with that.


----------



## FeXL

Government ‘Consultation’ Backfires On Elites, As Overwhelming Majority Of Respondents Oppose Gun Ban



> The Trudeau government and the corrupt anti-freedom elites didn’t get exactly what they expected from a consultation on the idea of a wide-ranging gun ban.
> 
> The Liberals have been laying the rhetorical groundwork for a ban on handguns and so-called ‘assault-weapons’ (a category always kept purposely vague by the elites), and introduced a ‘consultation’ to see what people think.


More:



> *In fact, out of 135,000 respondents, a full 80% were against a gun ban.*


Links' bold.

Related:

Stevie Wonder Calls for ‘Stronger Gun Laws’ After California Gun Control Fail



> Singer Stevie Wonder stressed his belief that “we must have stronger gun laws” when he spoke at the memorial service for Nipsey Hussle on Thursday.
> 
> He did not mention that the shooting death of Hussle took place in California, a state which arguably has the most stringent gun controls in the U.S.


h/t HoM (caution: Link to MotherCorpse inside), who noted:



> What part of "*criminals don't obey laws*" do these knuckleheads not understand?
> 
> How does taking away my legal registered firearms stop inner city gangbangers from killing people?


----------



## FeXL

No One Had a Problem Watching a Man Get Beaten Up Until He Pulled Out His Gun



> Two black young men were assaulting an older white man in Chicago outside a McDonalds where one of its patrons was filming the whole thing. People from inside watched the struggle happen outside through the window and were more or less quiet until the white man pulled out a firearm, and that’s when people seemed to have the problem.


----------



## eMacMan

A bit of context. The Mountain Jackpot was a Teller County newspaper which came to life in response to legalized gambling in Cripple Creek. For many years it seemed its only purpose in life was to promote the casinos, and I am sure that is where almost all of its financing originated.

In recent years it has branched out a bit and actually reports on real news. This is one of the better articles I have read on the new Colorado red flag law. 
Red Flag Law Sparking Major Opposition In Teller County and Rural Areas | The Mountain Jackpot News


> Regardless of the bill’s probable passage, the legislation, which would take away weapons from those deemed as mentally unstable, has brought about a movement by county sheriffs within the state to fight the potential law. This same sentiment is shared by a growing number of Teller residents and leaders, who see the red flag effort as an attack against constitutional rights.
> 
> The bill caught state-wide attention months ago when several counties within the state passed resolutions declaring themselves “Second Amendment Sanctuary Counties.” Teller County stepped away from using the term “sanctuary,” but has passed a resolution that heavily opposes the red flag legislation.





> Locally, many residents, business owners, government, and law enforcement officials also oppose the new bill. According to Jon DeVaux, owner of Alpine Firearms in Woodland Park, he believes that there should be a way to keep people with mental health problems from owning guns, but contends that the new red flag bill is not the solution. “There’s a way to write the red flag law where the sheriffs in this state will enforce it,” the gun store owner said. He says that the current proposed legislation violates a person’s right to due process.
> 
> “It’s not a Second Amendment issue, the bill violates the 5th and 14th amendments,” DeVaux said. “They have just gone over the top with what they are doing. And it’s not because we have a Democratic Congress, it’s because we have one party controlling the executive and legislative branches no matter what they are. And they are passing things because there is currently no check and balances within the state government.”
> 
> Others believe that the law poses a risk to law enforcement agents. “It is a no-knock warrant,” local real estate agent Dave Martinek said. “Meaning that they can break down your door and somebody can get shot that way. I believe it is a gun confiscation law. If it were a mental health law, why are they taking away their guns? ”





> The owner/operator of the Historic Ute Inn, Elijah Murphy, fears that passing a law that violates due process is dangerous. “The way this bill works is that you are guilty until proven innocent,” Murphy said. “It becomes a thing where I’m allowed to error on the side of caution and deny someone their rights.”
> *
> He says that the law could set a precedent that allows people to get convicted before they have actually committed a crime.*


----------



## FeXL

When you've lost Jake Tapper...

Jake Tapper To Dem Rep. Eric Swalwell: ‘Vast Majority Of Gun-Related Deaths’ Are Not From Semi-Automatic Rifles



> On Sunday, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), who recently declared his candidacy for president, appeared on CNN’s "State of the Union." During the segment, host Jake Tapper asked Swalwell about his signature issue — gun control.
> 
> ...
> 
> *...the vast majority of gun-related deaths in this country are not related to these semiautomatic assault weapons — whatever you want to call them — and the vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens who have purchased these weapons legally and use them safely.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Hypocrite Much? Kamala Harris Admits To Owning A Gun For Personal Safety.



> While campaigning in Iowa last week, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) made a confession that would have been seen as unremarkable in previous decades, but which now strikes us as perhaps unusual for the increasingly far-left modern Democratic Party.
> 
> It turns out that Kamala Harris is...wait for it...drumroll please...a gun owner. Gasp!


Prog hypocrisy.

A feature, not a bug.


----------



## FeXL

Kamala Harris On Gun-Control Network CNN: If Congress Doesn't Restrict Gun Sales, I'll Restrict Them Via Executive Order



> And that's not all she said.
> 
> Sen. Kamala Harris on Monday night pledged that, if elected president, she will sign a series of executive orders on gun control if Congress fails to pass comprehensive legislation in her first 100 days in the Oval Office.
> 
> During a town hall hosted by CNN, Harris said that if a bill from Congress did not make it to her desk, she would unilaterally mandate background checks for customers purchasing a firearm from any dealer who sells more than five guns a year.
> 
> Dealers who violate the law, she said, would have their licenses revoked. The other executive orders would prohibit fugitives from purchasing a firearm or weapon, as well as close the loophole that allows some domestic abusers to purchase a firearm if their victim is an unwedded partner.​


----------



## FeXL

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every so often...

Liberal website stumbles onto harsh truth about gun control in high-crime areas



> Far-left website ThinkProgress has sounded the alarm about new gun control laws that Pittburgh authorities moved to put in place after last October’s shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue. Reporting on a local story from the Public Source (TPS) last month, the ThinkProgress post highlights concerns that new gun control measures, including an “assault weapons” ban, an ammunition ban, and a new “red flag” law, will hurt young black men especially.
> 
> “Any ordinance like this… always lands on the backs of young African Americans,” Pennsylvania Interfaith Impact Network President Rev. De Neice Welch of the, told the Public Source. “Always.”


More:



> *The numbers, however, show that people who commit crimes with guns don’t tend to get their hardware in ways that would be affected by gun control laws: 90 percent of 2016 federal inmates don’t buy from retail sources, and almost half of them got their guns off the black market. Furthermore, another survey found that four out of five gun crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Leave it to the Progs...

With Gun Ban Not Working, Politicians In Britain Now Want To Ban Knives Nationwide



> If ever we needed proof of the expression that "guns don’t kill people, people kill people" look no further than Britain, where families may have to start practicing cutting their steak and bread at dinner with a spoon. This is, of course, because Britain's politicians have now made the absurdly ridiculous move to call for the banning of what Reason magazine called "the most useful tool ever invented" - the knife.


You simply cannot fix stupid.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Leave it to the Progs...
> 
> With Gun Ban Not Working, Politicians In Britain Now Want To Ban Knives Nationwide
> 
> You simply cannot fix stupid.


But you can exile it to Parliament.


----------



## FeXL

Prog heads exploding.

Florida Lawmakers Pass Legislation Allowing Teachers To Be Armed; Governor Expected To Sign



> On Wednesday, the Florida state House of Representatives voted 65-47 to pass legislation that would allow teachers to carry firearms in the classroom. The legislation previously passed the state Senate 22-17 in late-April.
> 
> 
> The bill is now headed to Republican Governor Ron DeSantis’ office, where he is likely to sign it into law.
> 
> The Florida legislation lays out a set of rules by which public school boards, teachers, charter schools, and law enforcement authorities must abide before any such program can take shape.


----------



## FeXL

So, let's talk the San Diego synagogue shooting and the 19 year old killer for a second.

Amazing! Buying Guns Before Birth



> AR-15s have been banned for sale in California since 1989--30 years ago.


----------



## FeXL

Cory Booker Wants Every Gun Owner To Interview With The Federal Government



> Democratic New Jersey Sen. and 2020 presidential candidate Cory Booker proposed sweeping gun control legislation on Monday.
> 
> Booker’s proposal would, among other things, force Americans to have a sit-down interview with a federal government employee in order to purchase a firearm.
> 
> During an appearance on CNN Monday morning, Booker was asked if he supported a gun buy-back proposal like the one offered by Democratic California Rep. Eric Swalwell, a long-shot presidential candidate. Booker did not endorse the proposal but said that America needs to get “weapons of war” off the streets.


Related:

Ocasio-Cortez Attacks Senator’s ‘Critical Thinking,’ Does Not Go As Planned



> Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) embarrassed herself on Monday after she tried to attack Sen. Rick Scott's (R-FL) "critical thinking" abilities over comments Scott made but was unable to understand that Scott was being sarcastic.
> 
> Scott weighed in on Democrat presidential candidate Cory Booker saying that he wanted to create a federal gun licensing system.


More:



> "What's next? Will we have to register sharp knives? *Maybe @AOC will make us register every time we buy meat as part of her #GreenNewDeal*," Scott continued.


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Gun Expert Shoots Down Biggest AR-15 Myths



> 2020 Democratic presidential candidates are talking a lot about AR-15s, which should come as no surprise, as this rifle has been in the crosshairs of the left and part of the national debate for years.
> 
> Variations of the AR-15 have been used in many recent mass shootings, including the 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, Parkland school shooting and Las Vegas concert shooting.
> 
> The Daily Caller caught up with gun expert Chris Mcrae with Magpul Industries at the 2019 National Rifle Association convention in Indianapolis, Indiana, where he debunked some of the biggest AR-15 myths that some of the 2020 candidates are peddling.


----------



## SINC

I came across this comparison chart today that certainly proves a point about increased gun control. Go figure.


----------



## FeXL

Police shut down alleged gun manufacturing operation in gun control-heavy Canada



> *A recent gun bust in Canada ought to serve as a reminder that gun control is really good at placing restrictions on the law-abiding while encouraging criminals to innovate and improvise.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

*Becauth ith's 2015!*

One more reason to get rid of the bastards come October.

Bill C-71 Passes Final Vote in Senate as New Law to Ban Guns



> Bill C-71 passed its third and final vote in the Canadian Senate today as the governing Liberal Party’s new law to criminalize hunters, farmers and sport shooters and take away more of their guns.
> 
> Senators voted 55 in favour and 33 against at 5:34 p.m. in Ottawa with 2 abstentions. Pro-Liberal members supported the bill. The opposition Conservative Party voted against, backed by Michael Duffy, David Richards, Pamela Wallin and three other senators.


----------



## FeXL

Curious, that...

Democrat-Media Complex Ignores Story of Gun Control Lobbyist Arrested for Assault, Domestic Violence, False Imprisonment



> Robert Blaisdell, managing partner for Demers, Blaisdell & Parsol Inc. and a lobbyist for Michael Bloomberg's "Everytown" gun control group, was arrested earlier in May on a whole host of charges in Manchester, New Hampshire. He was charged on domestic violence-related crimes of simple assault, false imprisonment, and criminal mischief. Police say Blaisdell "knowingly" confined a family member, trapping his victim by "holding the laundry room door closed over a period of several minutes." Police claim that Blaisdell also stepped on the person's hand during the incident, and also allegedly destroyed their cellphone.


----------



## 18m2

Comments about US gun violence are not necessary as you can draw your own conclusions.



> from the BBC
> 
> According to US tracking website Gun Violence Archive, the incident is the 150th mass shooting in the US so far in 2019.
> 
> The site defines a mass shooting as a gun attack in which at least four people are either killed or wounded.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48483618


----------



## FeXL

18m2 said:


> Comments about US gun violence are not necessary as you can draw your own conclusions.


When you control the language...

Dem Senator Chris Murphy Claims There Have Been 150 ‘Mass Shootings’ In 150 Days



> Because there isn’t an official set of criteria that can be used across the board to define "mass shooting," many organizations and academics use the FBI definition of "mass murder" as the standard by which "mass shooting" is determined.
> 
> In a report published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in 2015, William J. Krouse and Daniel J. Richardson wrote:
> 
> According to the FBI, the term "mass murder" has been defined generally as a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered, within one event, and in one or more locations in close geographical proximity. Based on this definition, for the purposes of this report, "mass shooting" is defined as a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms, within one event, and in one or more locations in close proximity.
> 
> Similarly, a "mass public shooting" is defined to mean a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms, within one event, in at least one or more public locations, such as, a workplace, school, restaurant, house of worship, neighborhood, or other public setting.​
> *Despite this somewhat standardized definition, other organizations have set different criteria for what constitutes a mass shooting.*


Bold mine...


----------



## FeXL

Those crazy legal gun owning white farmers, duck hunters & skeet shooters...

Chicago Sees Most Violent Weekend Of 2019 With 52 Shot, 10 Killed



> Over the weekend, Chicago saw its most violent days and nights so far this year. *A total of 52 people were shot between Friday night and Sunday night.* Ten of those victims were killed, according to NBC News.
> 
> Chicago police superintendent Eddie Johnson called the incidents part of a "despicable level of violence," and promised targeted patrols in neighborhoods on the south and west side where violence has become a regular part of everyday life, thanks to increases in gang activity.


Bold mine...


----------



## FeXL

In New Zealand, Only 530 Semi-Automatic Guns Turned In Under Ban Law, Out of Hundreds of Thousands



> New figures show gun owners are holding back on handing in their firearms, because they're waiting to hear how much the Government will pay for them
> 
> Figures released to Newstalk ZB by the New Zealand Police showed that, as of Sunday night, only 530 guns had been handed in since the ban on semi-automatic guns was finalised in early April.
> 
> There are around 250,000 licenced firearm holders in New Zealand and it's estimated as many as 300,000 guns could now be illegal.​


Guess they're not quite swallowing the narrative...


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> In New Zealand, Only 530 Semi-Automatic Guns Turned In Under Ban Law, Out of Hundreds of Thousands
> 
> 
> 
> Guess they're not quite swallowing the narrative...



Guns are not cheap, I know I would not be all that anxious to give away something I paid hard earned money for especially if I knew I was not the problem. 

If the government really wants to get them they will need to make the incentive worth it for the gun owners and with that being said personally I would want to make money off my turned in gun, not lose or break even.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

Liberal gun ban likely coming soon but won't improve safety



> The Trudeau Liberals have been brazen lately in talking about moving forward with gun bans that will not use legislation, saying they want to target guns “designed to hunt people.”
> 
> Specifically, the Liberals have singled out the AR-15.
> 
> *It is a rifle that has been legal in Canada for more than 50 years, that has more than 80,000 legal owners and is not used as a crime gun.*
> 
> Still, its use in mass shootings in the United States and elsewhere — but not Canada — has made it an easy scapegoat for a government that wants to be seen as acting on gun problems, even if they aren’t actually acting.


Bold mine...


----------



## FeXL

Dan Rather: America's Refusal to Repeal the 2nd Amendment Proves That the Nation is Unpatriotic and Without Honor



> The super-patriotic Forgery Vendor Dan Rather has some thoughts.
> 
> Following the [Virginia Beach] shootings Friday, Rather on "CNN Tonight" called the inaction "despicable" and charged "*it speaks to our lack of honor and patriotism."*​


Bold mine.

Projection much, Dan?

More:



> That's Don Lemon's show. Good to see that some people don't mind being associated with a show the New York Times deems "too partisan" for people posing as being real journalists.
> 
> Rather said on Friday's "CNN Tonight" show with Don Lemon: "This story is not new. This story happens all too often, and the fact that we haven’t done anything really to come to grips with it is -- despicable is the only word that comes to mind. And it speaks to our lack of honor and patriotism, in this sense: This is a national health epidemic. *And can you imagine, Don, what it would be, of instead of guns, we had an outbreak of an Ebola epidemic?* We the public, we the people, and our political representatives would be behaving in a completely different manner."​


Bold mine.

Click on the link for a reminder of what Jug Ears actually did during the _Ebola_ epidemic.


----------



## FeXL

It's nice these organizations identify themselves so clearly. Makes it easy to know who to boycott.

Corporate Gun Control: Salesforce to cut off customers who sell legal semi-automatic firearms



> Business software provider Salesforce is flexing its anti-Second Amendment muscles as it bans sellers who use its software from legally selling a selection of (legal) guns, (legal) magazines, and an array of (legal) firearm accessories.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Click on the link for a reminder of what Jug Ears actually did during the _Ebola_ epidemic.


I remember 'Bam deciding that banning flights to countries with Ebola epidemics was too risky... to the economies of those countries.


----------



## FeXL

If You Think Gun Registration Is Benign, Think Again



> Elderly Man Who Shot Two Burglars In His Home Charged With Felony Over Inherited Gun
> 
> It's a Gateway Pundit article, but I checked the links, and they are pretty much straight down the middle with this one. It is a vile and disgusting example of government overreach, and an obvious example of the hatred that government has for anyone who has the temerity to ignore their authority.
> 
> Nowhere is it even suggested that this poor man should not have been allowed to possess firearms...his only transgression was against the power of the state, and we cannot have people acting as free men!


Unbelievable...


----------



## FeXL

Further on the EnnZed gun ban.

Kiwis 'Just Say No' To Gun Ban



> *New Zealand politicians who rushed to enact nationwide gun confiscation following the Christchurch mosque massacres are befuddled by the lack of enthusiasm from citizens who have yet to comply with the new law.* The so-called “gun reform” was expected to rid the vast New Zealand countryside of most semi-automatic firearms, magazines over a specified limit, and shotguns.
> 
> Two months ago, Reuters breathlessly reported, “New Zealand police expect tens of thousands of firearms to be surrendered by a guns buy-back scheme.” Law enforcement authorities averred that “it could be more.” Pregnant with the expectation that gun owners would trade their firearms for cash, the political class is nonplussed by the results.


Links' bold.


----------



## FeXL

Major Firearms Company That Banked On Hillary Winning Files For Bankruptcy



> On Monday, a major American firearms dealer which staked its future on the election of Hillary Clinton in 2016 declared bankruptcy and its intention to liquidate.
> 
> United Sporting Companies Chief Executive Officer Bradley Johnson admitted in a court filing that USC, which was founded in 1933 as Ellett Brothers before merging with Jerry’s Sports, Inc. in 2009 and formally changing its name to United Sporting Companies, Inc. in 2010, hiked its inventory before the election of Donald Trump. They figured that once a Democrat was elected, gun sales would soar because of the Democrats’ typical hostility for guns and avowed determination to restrict gun sales.


----------



## FeXL

The Usual, well... you know...



> As they fled a black handgun fell from one of the males' waistband.​
> Meet *Tajean Alexander-Smith*, 18, *Matchushan Kamalakumaran*, 18, *Mohsen Yahya*, 18, *Laxsen Laxmikanthan*, 18, all of Toronto.


Links' bold.

Looks like another one of those Diversity! things.

Comments:



> BDFT said...
> 
> I wonder how he got an ATT to transport his handgun in his waistband. I have to transport mine locked in an opaque case. Also, I didn't think there were any approved restricted ranges in Toronto.
> 8:40 am, June 20, 2019
> 
> Neo Conservative said...
> 
> *
> *perhaps there are special rules
> for members of the Jane Finch
> Hunters & Anglers Association?*
> 
> *


Bold mine.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## FeXL

Cold, Canuck Hands



> If you thought competitive target shooting was safe from the rapacious reach of gun grabbers — think again.
> 
> British Shooting is disappointed that the sport of target shooting has not been included in the programme for the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games.
> 
> It will be the first time since 1970 that shooting has not featured at the Games.
> 
> The initial announcement that shooting wouldn’t be included in the list of sports set to be represented at Birmingham 2022 came out two years ago. But since then, shooting governing bodies across the Commonwealth have worked hard to propose a plan that would be viable for all parties.
> 
> Following a consultation period, the ISSF, British Shooting, and other prominent shooting federations across the Commonwealth had hoped that the Commonwealth Games Federation and the Birmingham Organising Committee would be able to find a successful solution to include shooting sports in the 2022 programme.
> 
> The ISSF offered to contribute to the costs of shooting being included, while Bisley was suggested as the venue for shooting sports. This is same location used for the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth Games with great success.
> 
> However, the Commonwealth Games Federation today reaffirmed their initial announcement of shooting sports not being included.​


----------



## FeXL

6 Gun Lies (And One Truth) Obama Told In Brazil



> On May 30, former president Barack Obama was a keynote speaker at an event in Brazil. The event, VTEX Day, is billed as “the largest digital innovation event in Latin America.”
> 
> During a conversation with a host on stage during the digital innovation event, Obama took the opportunity to speak negatively about U.S. gun laws. He said, “Our gun laws in the United States don’t make much sense. Anybody can buy any weapon, any time, without much, if any, regulation. They can buy [guns] over the internet, they can buy machine guns.”
> 
> His statement to a foreign audience includes six lies about our gun laws and one truth. Let’s start out on a positive note and cover the one true statement first.


----------



## FeXL

After Justin confiscates firearms from...



> ...farmers, hunters & skeet shooters... how much safer will you really be? And that's not a rhetorical question...


----------



## FeXL

Actions—>Consequences. AKA, Get woke, go broke.

(From December.)

Dick’s May Have To Close Stores Due To Anti-Gun Decisions



> I’ve written more about Dick’s Sporting Goods in 2018 than I ever thought I would. When the year started, we thought the company would have gotten the message that taking anti-gun stances wasn’t conducive to profits, but it didn’t.
> 
> So Dick’s doubled down after Parkland and purged the rest of the AR-15s from its stores and then instituted a discriminatory policy against legal adults.
> 
> And it’s biting it right in the kiester, too.


More:



> But Dick’s couldn’t just leave it there. It had to institute a discriminatory age limit for long gun sales – something that is blatantly illegal to do – and then double down by hiring lobbyists to push an assault weapon ban.
> 
> *Dick’s deserves what’s happening to it.*


M'bold.

Why, yes. Yes, it does.

Don't be a Dick!


----------



## FeXL

There's a reason it's known as Chi•Raq



> At least *66 people were shot in Chicago*, five fatally, over the 2019 Fourth of July weekend. Additionally, at least 56 were shot, four fatally, the weekend prior to the Fourth of July.​


Further:



> *If only there was a law.*


Got me an oft asked question for the Progs. One that, curiously enough, has never been answered: Precisely what gun law would you prescribe that would address this tiny, insignificant, niggling issue?

As an aside, we passed through Chicago, going & coming, about that timeframe. Just happy we weren't among the counted...


----------



## FeXL

Another Prog narrative (pardon the pun...) gets shot to hell.

Hundreds of guns go missing from the Mounties, military and other departments



> One of the arguments gun control advocates will make for calling for an outright ban on handguns or certain rifles is that if regular citizens don’t have these firearms in their homes, they can’t be lost or stolen to be used in a crime.
> 
> Newly-released documents from the RCMP and other federal departments and agencies show that if the risk of lost and stolen guns is an issue, then we better think of taking guns from the Mounties, maybe even the military.
> 
> Firearms researcher Dennis Young obtained a list of the number of guns lost or stolen by police or public agencies from 2005 through 2019 and the numbers might shock you.
> 
> *A total of 640 firearms were reported lost in that time frame, another 173 were reported stolen.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Caution: Link to MotherCorpse inside.

GTA leads Canada in organized crime homicides, Statscan reveals in new gangland data



> A clearer picture of the nation’s criminal underworld emerged this week, as Statistics Canada released detailed data on organized crime for the first time in a decade.
> 
> Within the report were figures that show more murders linked to gang activity and traditional organized crime happened in the Greater Toronto Area last year than anywhere else in Canada.


Once again, I pose the question to you gun control idiots: Precisely what legislation would you tailor that would _effectively_ deal with the issue of current lawbreakers ignoring extant gun control laws?

<crickets...>

Ya, thought so...


----------



## CubaMark

_Funny how there's pretty much never a "good guy with a gun" around when you need one, eh? As for the report below, the "multiple shooters" angle is almost always refuted after the fact. In this case (in another report I reviewed) police had to divert resources to intercept and question one of those "good guys" who pulled his weapon and went toward the scene._

*Walmart Shooting In Texas Leaves At Least One Dead, 17 Injured – Multiple Suspects In Custody*









*The alleged shooter*​In El Paso, Texas Walmart shooting has left at least one person dead and 17 injured, according to reports. Multiple suspects are in police custody.

The shooting happened shortly after 11 AM Texas time. A boy told a local Fox News reporter that he saw several people dead on the ground.

“We have multi reports of multiple shooters,” El Paso Police tweeted just after 2 PM. The Walmart is located at the Cielo Vista Mall.









*The alleged shooter*​(Deadline)​
*EL Paso police briefing on the Walmart shooting:*

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3jrU6uEa14[/ame]


----------



## CubaMark

And I'm sure you all remember the *Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting* of a week or so ago, right?

The 2nd amendment fanatics have been going on (and on, and on) about it being a "gun free zone", ergo the shooter could kill unopposed.

Of course, the reality is somewhat different:



> _Armed police were all over the Gilroy Garlic Festival. Everyone knew it. They got to the shooter in 60 seconds.
> 
> 60 seconds. And he shot 16 people.
> 
> There is no better proof that the "more guns could solve mass shooting" garbage is garbage.
> 
> And we seem to have already moved on_.
> Kurt Eichenwald via Twitter​



*And even then, it wasn't the police who took him down:*

Gilroy Garlic Festival shooter killed himself, coroner says, contradicting police version of events

But please, do go on about how we're all safer when everybody's got a Glock in their pocket...


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Yeah. Not limited to but including security or a cop. AKA, "When seconds count, cops are minutes away". In addition, asked & answered. Years ago...

And, _and_, if there had been a few armed customers in the store, perhaps fewer people would have been killed or injured. You may call out my use of "perhaps" as vacillation. Frankly, given a choice between an armed bad guy with an unarmed populace vs an armed bad guy with an armed populace, I'll take my chances with the latter any day. If you were smart <snort...>, so would you...

Plus, once more I ask the same unanswered question: Precisely what gun law would you prescribe that would have stopped this tragedy? Be specific.



CubaMark said:


> Funny how there's pretty much never a "good guy with a gun" around when you need one, eh?


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Sounds like, except for the police & the killer, it _was_ a gun free zone.

I see nothing up for debate.

Unless, that is, one of the guys standing beside the killer would have been armed & shot the bastard a full minute before the cops got there...



CubaMark said:


> The 2nd amendment fanatics have been going on (and on, and on) about it being a "gun free zone", ergo the shooter could kill unopposed.


And, from my previous post:



> Plus, once more I ask the same unanswered question: Precisely what gun law would you prescribe that would have stopped this tragedy? Be specific.


----------



## CubaMark

*Police: Deaths, injuries in Texas shopping complex shooting
Developing story: Agents identify suspect as 21-year-old Patrick Crusius*

Multiple people were killed and injured and at least one person was in custody after a shooting rampage Saturday at a shopping mall, police in the Texas border town of El Paso said.

Police responded in the early afternoon to an active shooter scene at the Cielo Vista Mall, which is near Interstate 10 on east side of the city, and were advising people to stay away from the area.

(Associated Press via Local10.com)​
*Who is Patrick Crusius?*










Witnesses said that alleged shooting suspect Patrick Crusius began in the Walmart parking lot, with the shooter moving closer to the building. Video from the shooting circulated on social media, showing multiple victims in the parking lot and just outside the doors of the retail chain. Witnesses said that the shooter attacked vendors who had set up outside the Walmart store, with the shooter repeatedly shooting some of the victims after they had fallen to the ground.

(Inquisitr)​


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Further to this...

What is it about this particular shooter/shooting that caught your eye? There have been hundreds of deaths & thousands of injuries from gunfire in Prog $h!tholes like Chicago, Detroit, New York, LA, Baltimore & New Orleans this year.

Is your inner bigot rearing it's ugly head again? Are you deriving pleasure from the fact that, for once, the shooter is white and not a single parent young black male from a Prog ghetto? Is it because Texas is pro-gun? Is it because of the rumours that the killer was anti-immigration?

What is it about this one that rises above all the others the last 7 months...



CubaMark said:


> Developing story: Agents identify suspect as 21-year-old Patrick Crusius


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark is the Model T-Ford of gun violence reporting, sputtering and missing a few cylinders whenever the story is inconvenient. Yes, it was very important for him to include a photo of the shooter today.


----------



## CubaMark

Would you like another photo?

Here's another of those dirty, jihadist moooslem evildoers wreaking havoc on pure, innocent American society..... oh, waitaminute.... 










*Dayton shooting: Nine killed, 27 wounded, shooter also dead*

At least nine people have been killed and 27 wounded in a mass shooting in Dayton, in the US state of Ohio, according to police.

The incident in the early hours of Sunday came just hours after a mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, killed at least 20 people and wounded 26 others.

Police in Dayton killed the gunman, who was wearing body armour, less than a minute after he began firing on a busy street in the city's Oregon District, a central neighbourhood known for its nightlife. His motive was not immediately known and his identity has not been released. 

Matt Carper, the assistant chief of the Dayton police department, described the shooter's weapon as "a long gun with multiple rounds". He said the location was "a very safe part of downtown".

"The shooter is deceased from gunshot wounds from the responding officers," Carper said. "We have nine victims deceased."

[...]

Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley said the shooter fired a .223-calibre high capacity magazine and was carrying additional magazines. That calibre is typically used with assault weapons, although the specific type of gun the shooter used was not immediately released. 

(Al Jazeera)​


----------



## CubaMark

*...and for those who are keeping count on gun-crazy USA....*

_As of August 4th, 2019, 251 mass shootings have occurred in 2019 .... resulting in 1,032 people being shot. Of those people, 281 have died. This averages out to 1.2 shootings per day._​
(Wikipedia)​


----------



## Macfury

If you're going out of your way to run photos of white male perps, at least stop quoting your news from the Al Jazeera feed. 



CubaMark said:


> Would you like another photo?
> 
> Here's another of those dirty, jihadist moooslem evildoers wreaking havoc on pure, innocent American society..... oh, waitaminute.... ]


----------



## Macfury

If we could only move hard left and ensure that only the government shoots you!



CubaMark said:


> *...and for those who are keeping count on gun-crazy USA....*
> 
> _As of August 4th, 2019, 251 mass shootings have occurred in 2019 .... resulting in 1,032 people being shot. Of those people, 281 have died. This averages out to 1.2 shootings per day._​
> (Wikipedia)​


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> If you're going out of your way to run photos of white male perps, at least stop quoting your news from the Al Jazeera feed.


Why? Can you point to any factual errors in the Al Jazeera source?

Or is your consternation ideological?


----------



## Macfury

I think you should get all of your news from there. Anything filtered through its owner, the ruling family of Qatar, must be accurate. Unless of course you're attacking Middle Eastern governments again.



CubaMark said:


> Why? Can you point to any factual errors in the Al Jazeera source?
> 
> Or is your consternation ideological?


----------



## FeXL

Pure, unadulterated bull$h!t...

And, Wiki? Pulease...



CubaMark said:


> As of August 4th, 2019, 251 mass shootings have occurred in 2019...


----------



## CubaMark




----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Pure, unadulterated bull$h!t...
> 
> And, Wiki? Pulease...


Do you have any reason to refute the documented shootings? I mean, y'know, a reason with facts, not your it-goes-against-my-core-beliefs-praise-god-pass-the-ammo _intuition_ usual screed?

The Wikipedia article references the Mass Shooting Tracker, which links to public sources (news articles, mostly), and since it refers to "mass killings" as being a minimum of four victims, it drastically under-counts the actual number of shootings with more than one victim during the period.

But please, do continue with your rant.... :yawn:


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

The iron...



CubaMark said:


> ...a reason with facts...


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Well, this one backfired on ya. Quick! Pull the post...

The Dayton Shooter Was a Satanist, Leftist-Socialist, and Bernie/Warren Fan, Supported Antifa



> This is probably something CNN won’t be sharing with its audience, but there’s some pretty striking news on the shooter who perpetrated the Dayton, OH shooting, which followed an equally tragic shooting in El Paso, TX by what appears to be a white supremacist.
> 
> Heavy.com got access to the shooter’s social media. Contrary to the media narrative currently boiling over, this shooter was not a Trump fan. In fact, he hated Trump, hated Republicans, was an avowed leftist, used antifa style language in his posts, and loved Elizabeth Warren.


More:



> Ironically, he was even a rabid supporter of gun control, using it to levy attacks against Republicans.


Further:



> This all leaves very little question about who Betts really was. He was absolutely a far leftist. He was not a white supremacist and hated religious people. He repeated antifa, as well as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez talking points on his social media. He was a global warming enthusiast and an avowed socialist. *Every piece of evidence we have points to his radicalization coming via the left, not the right.*


Yeah, my bold.



CubaMark said:


> Dayton shooting: Nine killed, 27 wounded, shooter also dead


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Hello, Bigot.
> 
> Well, this one backfired on ya. Quick! Pull the post...
> 
> The Dayton Shooter Was a Satanist, Leftist-Socialist, and Bernie/Warren Fan, Supported Antifa


Jumped the gun, there, FeXL old trout. Show me where I mentioned anything about the motives of the Dayton shooter, his political inclinations, etc. Yup - you got nuthin'!

When/if we hear any plausible reasons for his actions, then we can have that discussion. 

Now quiet down, boy, and let the grownups talk.


----------



## macintosh doctor

CubaMark said:


>


you do realize that more people die from medical malpractice , abortions and car accidents.. 
not trying to down play the shootings but put in perspective ... 

what should be brought to attention is mental illness awareness of the shooters, lack of care.


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Hardly.

In case anybody hasn't figgered it out yet, the reason you posted on these two recent shootings and have completely ignored the hundreds of instances perpetrated by young, black, single parent males in Prog inner-city strongholds is to politicize them. :yikes:

Shocka, I know.

You continuously play the "white, far-right, religious, NRA supporting gun nut" narrative in an attempt to curry favour for gun control. Yet, now that this particular nutbar is shown to have been a <spit> Prog, once again yer scrambling around like a cockroach in the light in a transparent attempt to minimize the damage to your narrative with his far-left proclivities: "I didn' say nuffin'".

Try harder, Bigot.



CubaMark said:


> Jumped the gun, there, FeXL...


----------



## FeXL

macintosh doctor said:


> you do realize that more people die from medical malpractice , abortions and car accidents..
> not trying to down play the shootings but put in perspective ...


It doesn't matter to Progs. Guns are _eeeeeevil..._

Except when they are used to protect other Progs: politicians, movie stars, etc., etc., etc.

Then, they _neeeeeed_ protection.


----------



## CubaMark

macintosh doctor said:


> you do realize that more people die from medical malpractice , abortions and car accidents..
> not trying to down play the shootings but put in perspective ...


Yeah, I've seen that angle and various related memes circulating since yesterday.... and it's a meaningless attempt at distraction from the issue at hand.

Medical malpractice, car accidents, drug complications, (no idea why you would include abortions as a separate item there....), etc., are all issues that have established, ongoing processes of review, rectification, improvement.

Guns? Sacred cow. Don't dare do anything that might restrict the (misinterpreted and irrelevant in the 21st Century) 2nd amendment - that's just commie talk! 



macintosh doctor said:


> what should be brought to attention is mental illness awareness of the shooters, lack of care.


Yup. Absolutely. But the GOP gets you from that angle as well, doing their damndest to ensure that the medical services industry gets their profits, and that for-profit (i.e., unaffordable for millions) health care is the only game in town. Are you coming out as a Bernie / Warren supporter for socialized health care?


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> You continuously play the "white, far-right, religious, NRA supporting gun nut" narrative in an attempt to curry favour for gun control. .


yeah... uh-huh... okay... sure, it _could_ be that... or.. .if we take off your rose-coloured-to-the-point-of-being-opaque sunglasses and saw reality for, y'know, _reality_, it just might turn out that right-wing extremist killings are the norm, not the outlier:

*Extremist-related killings in 2018 'overwhelmingly linked to right-wing' movements: ADL*



FeXL said:


> Yet, now that this particular nutbar is shown to have been a <spit> Prog, once again yer scrambling around like a cockroach in the light in a transparent attempt to minimize the damage to your narrative with his far-left proclivities: "I didn' say nuffin'".


As I said - you're jumping the gun (no pun intended). Betts appears to have been a misogynist from 'waay back, obsessed with death, killing and demonstrated hatred towards women, which takes him quite a ways from 'prog'-ville:

*Dayton shooter obsessed with killing, Bellbrook classmates say*

The man who killed nine people Sunday morning in Dayton’s Oregon District was once kicked out of Bellbrook High School for making a list of girls he wanted to kill, the Dayton Daily News learned in interviews with former classmates and school administrators.

Police said they haven’t yet established a motive for Sunday’s massacre. But acquaintances say the warning signs — signs of the shooter’s unusual obsession with killing and death — cropped up long ago.“This isn’t a mystery to me,” said one middle school classmate. “I’m furious.”

...the shooter once said he fantasized about tying her up and slitting her throat. The fetish was so macabre that even the shooter admitted he was scared of his thoughts, the woman recalled him saying.

“He knew it wasn’t normal,” the woman said about the decade-old conversation. “He and I talked at length about him getting help.”

The woman said she and her parents told Bellbrook police about the bizarre admission, but the woman said she felt she wasn’t taken seriously, despite the would-be shooter including her on a hit list.Bellbrook police haven’t released information about any involvement they might have had with him.

[....]

...the shooter was suspended for causing a lockdown by writing a hit list on a bathroom wall.

[....]

One of the shooter’s classmates, Demoy Howell, said he and the killer participated in Bellbrook’s Junior ROTC military program. 

(Dayton Daily News)​


FeXL said:


> Try harder, Bigot.


I don't really have to, given your usual dedication to getting the story completely wrong, Herr Germanwings....


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

What, precisely, is the issue at hand in your twisted mind? It sure as hell ain't gun deaths, 'cause if it were, you'd need to be looking in entirely another direction, if not another country. If it's not deaths, period (as you've just confirmed), then WTF is it?

The fact that Progs have been holding their brefs 'til they turned blue and still haven't repealed 2A?

Suck it up, princesses. It ain't gonna happen, either...



CubaMark said:


> .... and it's a meaningless attempt at distraction from the issue at hand.


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Drugs. Has to be drugs. It's the only explanation.

No sane, rational, thinking person could read the articles I've posted on this thread & believe that "right-wing extremists" are the leading cause of gun deaths in the US.

Nobody.



CubaMark said:


> ...it just might turn out that right-wing extremist killings are the norm, not the outlier:


Rationalize away. Prog. Pure & simple. I s'pose that Justa Turd ain't a Prog either, because he groped a female reporter. Only far right extremists do that, right?

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

And when Bill Clinton used one of his interns as a humidor in the Oval Office, that automatically excludes him from the "'prog'-ville" club, too. Right?

:lmao::lmao::lmao:

Quite frankly, from my personal experience, Progs are far more likely to exhibit behaviour that you, personally, would attribute to "far right extremists" than far right extremists themselves.

Drugs...



CubaMark said:


> ...which takes him quite a ways from 'prog'-ville:


Whatever you say, ClockGirl. And Catlicker Boyz. And Globull Warming. And gun control. And alternative energy. And electric cars. And progressivism. And MSM. And Islam. And unions. And I could go on forever...



CubaMark said:


> ...Herr Germanwings....


----------



## FeXL

Nope. Definitely a Prog. If he had been far-right, Twatter'd have left the account up for observation...

Twitter Suspends Account Allegedly Linked to Ohio Shooter



> Twitter suspended an account Sunday evening allegedly linked to the gunman who killed nine and wounded dozens outside a Dayton, Ohio, bar early Sunday morning, after several reports identified the account and noted its left-wing political orientation.


Related:

Unknown Hero May Have Knocked the Gun Out of Dayton Shooter's Hands



> Early Sunday morning, a lone gunman opened fire outside Ned Peppers in Dayton, Ohio. He killed nine — including his own sister — and wounded 26. Police shot him down, saving hundreds according to the mayor. Yet before police ended the altercation, an unknown hero reportedly grabbed the gun out of the shooter's hands.
> 
> "He tried to go into the bar but did not make it through the door. Someone took the gun from him and he got shot and is dead," a witness told WHIO-TV.


If true, I'm sure The Bigot will have some snide comment about registering, if not outright banning, hands & arms outside bars & interfering with a Prog's right to shoot white people...

More:



> Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley said police officers who responded to the shooting within seconds saved "literally hundreds of lives" by keeping the shooter outside the crowded bar...


Huh. 'Magine that. Guns being there in seconds saved hundreds of lives. 

Who knew?

I mean, the rotten cop bastards! They should have finished their donuts!


----------



## FeXL

Huh. 'Magine that. The El Paso shooter was a Prog, too. Everybody knows that white, far-right, religious, NRA loving freaks don't care about the environment...

Environmental alarmism behind El Paso shootings



> If the left can blame Sarah Palin for the shooting of Gabby Giffords because Palin once used the term "putting a target on their backs" for political opponents, then why can't the entire Democratic party and liberal ideology be blamed for so many years of criticizing industrial America for the El Paso shooters' mass killing? Furthermore, he has exposed a contradiction in left-wing Democratic ideology that is all for open borders and the massive influx of foreigners into the country yet promotes the idea that people are doing irreparable harm to the environment. This is a blatant discrepancy as wide as the Grand Canyon. How can you square this circle? The simple answer is, you can't.


Amen, Brother!!! :love2::clap:


----------



## macintosh doctor

CubaMark said:


> Yeah, I've seen that angle and various related memes circulating since yesterday.... and it's a meaningless attempt at distraction from the issue at hand.
> 
> Medical malpractice, car accidents, drug complications, (no idea why you would include abortions as a separate item there....), etc., are all issues that have established, ongoing processes of review, rectification, improvement.
> 
> Guns? Sacred cow. Don't dare do anything that might restrict the (misinterpreted and irrelevant in the 21st Century) 2nd amendment - that's just commie talk!
> 
> 
> 
> Yup. Absolutely. But the GOP gets you from that angle as well, doing their damndest to ensure that the medical services industry gets their profits, and that for-profit (i.e., unaffordable for millions) health care is the only game in town. Are you coming out as a Bernie / Warren supporter for socialized health care?


if guns were so evil, then why under Obama and the many democrats ignored the mass murders, as well as inner cities mass murders that happen nightly in Chicago and Baltimore, under the democrats and their leadership LMAO... 

also Democrats seem to love their abortions.. they do over 300 000 a year - all the while ignoring the fetus to suit their needs. But when it matters they refer to it as a human only to further their leftest Bull ****.. SMH.. planned parenthood are the real mass murders..


----------



## FeXL

macintosh doctor said:


> ...as well as inner cities mass murders that happen nightly in Chicago and Baltimore, under the democrats and their leadership LMAO...


Because young single parent black males in Prog $h!tholes killing each other with illegal handguns falls something short of the narrative: far-right ****** with an AR...


----------



## FeXL

Further on "It ain't far-right ****** with an AR, despite what Mother Jones and all the other crackpot Prog news organizations say..."

Baltimore's Homicide Rate Is Ten Times The National Average



> The most recent homicide data from the FBI (2017) shows the city of Baltimore with a homicide rate of 55.8 per 100,000 population.That's a homicide rate comparable to El Salvador (60 per 100,000) and Venezuela (56 per 100,000). Baltimore has more homicides per capita than Honduras, Guatemala, South Africa, and Brazil.
> 
> *In other words, Baltimore's homicide problem is worse than those in many of the world's most violent countries.*
> 
> In contrast, the US homicide rate in 2017 was 5.3 per 100,000 making Baltimore homicide rate ten times larger than that in the US overall.


Links' bold.

Now, gentle reader, ponder this: When was the last time you saw The Bigot quote stats on shootings in Baltimore?

If your immediate response is "Never", congrats! You win a cookie...


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Unknown Hero May Have Knocked the Gun Out of Dayton Shooter's Hands


So *a good guy with bare hands* stopped a shooter, no gun required. Bravo! [/quote]



FeXL said:


> If true, I'm sure The Bigot will have some snide comment about registering, if not outright banning, hands & arms outside bars & interfering with a Prog's right to shoot white people...


Your insanity has reached new levels. You should get a trophy or something.

XX)


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Huh. 'Magine that. The El Paso shooter was a Prog, too. Everybody knows that white, far-right, religious, NRA loving freaks don't care about the environment...
> 
> Environmental alarmism behind El Paso shootings
> 
> Amen, Brother!!! :love2::clap:


Just when I thought you'd reached peak inanity.... :yikes:

The very first lines of the "manifesto" (has it been confirmed to have been authored by him?) declare his support for the racist Christchurch killer in New Zealand and his opposition to immigration. He specifically identifies Hispanics as his target, and his opposition to immigration.

But no - of course, you must be right, he's a far-left Prog environmentalist driven to murder because society continues to insist on plastic bags at the checkout.

_Deranged, thy name is FeXL_. :lmao:


----------



## CubaMark

macintosh doctor said:


> if guns were so evil, then why under Obama and the many democrats ignored the mass murders, as well as inner cities mass murders that happen nightly in Chicago and Baltimore, under the democrats and their leadership LMAO...


Dunno. Weren't those the years when the Republicans controlled the House, or the Senate, or something? All parties have blood on their hands, federal, state, municipal. What is the solution that you would like to offer that would see firearm deaths in general, and mass shootings in particular, come to an end?



macintosh doctor said:


> also Democrats seem to love their abortions.. they do over 300 000 a year - all the while ignoring the fetus to suit their needs. But when it matters they refer to it as a human only to further their leftest Bull ****.. SMH.. planned parenthood are the real mass murders..


Just like refugee immigration would be massively reduced if folks stopped dropping bombs on the homes of Syrians, Iraqis, Yemenis, Afghanis, etc., so too would abortions be reduced if the radical right loonies would stop opposing proper sex education and the accessibility of birth control. The USA's business model of government approaches health care within a profit model: curative, where you can charge for services, rather than preventative, where the broad provision of basic health care could curb illness in the future (but there's no money to made there, of course). Prevent pregnancies, reduce abortions. It's a pretty easy equation to wrap one's head around.

The boogeyman that the Right has made out of Planned Parenthood (which does FAR more than just arrange abortions) is unconscionable. The religious wingnuts have taken over the discourse and scared any moderate politician into hardline stances just to avoid having the placard-waving loonies bring down their re-election campaign. 

In the end, it's all a spectacle to distract the masses while the servants of the 1% (those who foolishly think they can join the upper crust if they play their roles effectively) continue to change finance and election law to their benefit. What a waste.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> Just like refugee immigration would be massively reduced if folks stopped dropping bombs on the homes of Syrians, Iraqis, Yemenis, Afghanis, etc...


Or if they cut immigration.



CubaMark said:


> ...so too would abortions be reduced if the radical right loonies would stop opposing proper sex education and the accessibility of birth control.


Maybe if people stop aborting babies, it would cut down on the number of abortions.


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Once again, whooooosh...



CubaMark said:


> So a good guy with bare hands stopped a shooter, no gun required. Bravo!


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

FINALLY! We reach an understanding. :clap::clap::clap:

I compose a couple completely sarcastic posts & you call me nuts. The hilarious (and revealing) thing is, _I'm using the precise, exact same logic you do to support your twisted narrative all the GD time_.





CubaMark said:


> Your insanity has reached new levels. You should get a trophy or something.





CubaMark said:


> Just when I thought you'd reached peak inanity....


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

You first. Be precise.



CubaMark said:


> What is the solution that you would like to offer that would see firearm deaths in general, and mass shootings in particular, come to an end?


That's some seriously twisted $h!t. It's no wonder Progs can't find a solution to any of these issues if they honestly believe these are the causes...



CubaMark said:


> Just like refugee immigration would be massively reduced if folks stopped dropping bombs on the homes of Syrians, Iraqis, Yemenis, Afghanis, etc., so too would abortions be reduced if the radical right loonies would stop opposing proper sex education and the accessibility of birth control.


Then you should try it...



CubaMark said:


> It's a pretty easy equation to wrap one's head around.


Perhaps they do. However, killing hundreds of thousands of fetuses every year kinda overshadows everything else, donit...



CubaMark said:


> The boogeyman that the Right has made out of Planned Parenthood (which does FAR more than just arrange abortions) is unconscionable.


Is that what you call Progs like the 4 female Commies? "Moderate"?



CubaMark said:


> ...and scared any moderate politician into hardline...


----------



## FeXL

Huh. 'Magine that...

Shooting at a packed nightclub in Canada, where gun control is already way stricter than the U.S.



> Shots rang out at a packed Toronto nightclub as an altercation involving a firearm sent five people to the hospital, one with life-threatening injuries, according to local police.
> 
> A Toronto police official told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation said that it was “fortunate there’s five victims only,” because “the club was completely full.”


----------



## FeXL

'Magine that, too...

51% of Mass Shooters in 2019 Were Black: Only 29% Were White



> Around the same time that the media was focused on the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, 60 people were shot in Chicago over the weekend. 24 of those people were shot in four hours.
> 
> Baltimore reached its 200th murder victim of the year during its “Ceasefire Weekend”.
> 
> 4 people were killed in 4 days in Kansas City. 6 men were shot in Philly during the filming of a rap video.
> 
> Even in Toronto, 15 people were wounded in shootings over the weekend. Over 350 people have been shot this year in the Canadian city which has gun control, no NRA, and none of the usual excuses.
> 
> This tide of violence has received less media coverage because it challenges the false claim that, as a CNN op-ed once put it, mass shootings are a “white man’s problem.”
> 
> *"I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country," Rep. Ilhan Omar claimed on Al Jazeera.*
> 
> "We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men," Don Lemon had previously claimed on CNN.
> 
> "White Men Have Committed More Mass Shootings Than Any Other Group," _Newsweek_ had argued.
> 
> The perception that mass shootings are a “white man’s problem” lingers around the country because white mass shooters tend to get more publicity. And, the twisted young male who goes on a public shooting spree fits a certain kind of media narrative. But when we actually study the mass shootings that took place in 2019, it’s clear that Patrick Crusius and Connor Betts are not the norm, but aberrations.


Hey, Bigot, see what happens when you getcher news from Bro-Fo on _Al Jazeera_ and other Prog "news" sites? Not only do you get misinformed but yer brain rots...

And, seeing as you and yer Prog news sites seem to put faith in the much celebrated Mass Shooting Tracker, here's a bit more data from them:



> Looking at the data from the Mass Shooting Tracker, widely utilized by the media, as of this writing, of the 72 mass shooters, perpetrators in shootings that killed or wounded 4 or more people, whose race is known, 21 were white, 37 were black, 8 were Latino, and 6 were members of other groups.
> 
> 51% of mass shooters in 2019 were black, 29% were white, and 11% were Latino.


Yet still, you crow about "******". XX)

Curious you never mentioned _that_ stat in your recent expose...

Related:

No, the United States Doesn’t Lead the World in Mass Shootings

Many El Pasos and Daytons in Chicago Every Weekend: More than 50 Shot, 6 Killed in Windy City

Baltimore Records Its 200th Homicide Of The Year

Chicago: 51 People Shot, 7 Dead -- Where's the Liberal Media Outrage?

Where, indeed...


----------



## Macfury

What it really comes down to is that statists like CM put all their trust in government, and fear the people. They have to rely on and believe in government to make people do what they would never do given free choice. It's never about limiting guns, or making existing gun laws work. It's about disarming the people to make the world safe for governments imposing hard core socialism.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> What it really comes down to is that statists like CM put all their trust in government...


Any idiot who trusts their gov't is not a student of history.



Macfury said:


> It's about disarming the people to make the world safe for governments imposing hard core socialism.


Agreed.

The 2A was not created because the deer were revolting...


----------



## CubaMark

Macfury said:


> Or if they cut immigration.


All those refugees still have to go somewhere... One would think that the meditteranean / European countries which are receiving the vast majority of refugees would sue the USA, France, UK, Canada, etc. for creating the refugee crisis....



Macfury said:


> Maybe if people stop aborting babies, it would cut down on the number of abortions.


Sounds easy, doesn't it? But until U.S. social policy changes to provide for the well-being of those little humans, abortions will still be in high demand. Sadly, particularly the GOP sees enormous value in these "unborn people" to the point of putting women's lives at risk, but once they pop out, well, they damn well better pull up their bootstraps and get a job! Not gonna stand for any of those lazy babies just laying around, not pulling their own weight! :lmao:


----------



## wonderings

CubaMark said:


> Sounds easy, doesn't it? But until U.S. social policy changes to provide for the well-being of those little humans, abortions will still be in high demand. Sadly, particularly the GOP sees enormous value in these "unborn people" to the point of putting women's lives at risk, but once they pop out, well, they damn well better pull up their bootstraps and get a job! Not gonna stand for any of those lazy babies just laying around, not pulling their own weight! :lmao:


How many of the almost 640,000 women who had abortions last year in the US had their lives at risk by the pregnancy? Would be an interesting number to know and to possible give a better understanding of why abortions are happening.


----------



## Macfury

CubaMark said:


> All those refugees still have to go somewhere... One would think that the meditteranean / European countries which are receiving the vast majority of refugees would sue the USA, France, UK, Canada, etc. for creating the refugee crisis....


Most of them are not refugees in the sense that we once knew. And no, there is no moral imperative to resettle all of them.



CubaMark said:


> Sounds easy, doesn't it? But until U.S. social policy changes to provide for the well-being of those little humans, abortions will still be in high demand. Sadly, particularly the GOP sees enormous value in these "unborn people" to the point of putting women's lives at risk, but once they pop out, well, they damn well better pull up their bootstraps and get a job! Not gonna stand for any of those lazy babies just laying around, not pulling their own weight! :lmao:


Unless government supports these babies financially, might as well flush them down the toilet—and then blame government for a personal choice to kill your own unborn?


----------



## Macfury

wonderings said:


> How many of the almost 640,000 women who had abortions last year in the US had their lives at risk by the pregnancy? Would be an interesting number to know and to possible give a better understanding of why abortions are happening.


The Guttmacher Institute is a pro-abortion rights group. Here are their findings:



> The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents' or partners' desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents. Conclusions: The decision to have an abortion is typically motivated by multiple, diverse and interrelated reasons. The themes of responsibility to others and resource limitations, such as financial constraints and lack of partner support, recurred throughout the study.


https://www.jstor.org/stable/3650599?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Health of the mother didn't even make it to the abstract of the study. Progressives wrap abortion in the trappings of the health of the mother, but they know they're not being honest.


----------



## wonderings

Macfury said:


> The Guttmacher Institute is a pro-abortion rights group. Here are their findings:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/3650599?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
> 
> Health of the mother didn't even make it to the abstract of the study. Progressives wrap abortion in the trappings of the health of the mother, but they know they're not being honest.


I will admit I was expecting that answer. I do not think any law will really help or work when it comes to the mothers health and possible death because of child birth. I think it should be done case by case and there should be local medical authorities who deal with it when it comes up. Not really the place to get into it obviously.


----------



## Macfury

wonderings said:


> I will admit I was expecting that answer. I do not think any law will really help or work when it comes to the mothers health and possible death because of child birth. I think it should be done case by case and there should be local medical authorities who deal with it when it comes up. Not really the place to get into it obviously.


I'm certainly not suggesting that abortion is never appropriate. But using it as a form of birth control is uncivilized. Pretending it is primarily about the health of the mother is dishonest.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> I'm certainly not suggesting that abortion is never appropriate. But using it as a form of birth control is uncivilized.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

The Morning Rant: Minimalist Edition



> If this isn't a perfect encapsulation of the idea that "Guns don't kill people; people kill people," I can't imagine a better one. This is the mindset that drives the mayhem in our inner cities, and it is a product of three generations of the careful destruction of family, church, personal responsibility, and self-reliance in Black America, all perpetrated by the Democrat-Industrial-Complex.
> 
> Does anyone really think that if we took away "military-grade weapons" (whatever that means) from inner-city thugs that the murder rate would drop? Only fools and liberals believe that. It isn't the tool, it is the lack of respect for human life that drives the carnage in our Democrat strongholds in our cities, and no amount of gun control will change that.
> 
> As summer violence rages on, a Chicago gang member's jail recordings offer a rare look at the city's entrenched gun culture


----------



## FeXL

CNN Notes Dayton Shooter Was Far Leftwing Antifa Supporter;
Daily Beast "Reporter" Freaks Out In Anger That CNN Broke the Carefully Coordinated Suppression of This Fact



> CNN feels it's safe to report this now, a friend says, because the Narrative around the El Paso shooter has already been set in stone and is already delivering political advantage.
> 
> So they finally report what literally everyone in America already knew. (PS, bet it doesn't make the TV.)


----------



## FeXL

Changing Canadian gun laws after American mass shootings is foolish



> It’s a bizarre turn that happens pretty much every single time there is a mass shooting that makes headlines south of the border. Canadian politicians and activists attempt to use what happens in America as a reason to call for gun bans or increased gun control in this country.
> 
> Let me be clear, what happened in Dayton, Ohio and El Paso, Texas was awful. They are two very different mass shootings carried out by men with two very different ideologies. Neither one of them is acceptable or excusable.
> 
> I’ll let Americans debate what the problems and the solutions are in their own country but when it comes to our country, any attempt to change our laws based on American incidents is simply wrong.
> 
> *Canada’s gun laws already contain most of what American gun control advocates call for.*


Bold mine.

Unfortunately, it's nowhere near enough for the Progs...


----------



## macintosh doctor

FeXL said:


> Hello, Bigot.


would just like to thank you for making me laugh.. after a long day, you provide me with uplifting laughter in a good way. 
i am glad you see it and call it what it is..



Macfury said:


> I'm certainly not suggesting that abortion is never appropriate. But using it as a form of birth control is uncivilized. Pretending it is primarily about the health of the mother is dishonest.


BOOM! nailed it..


----------



## FeXL

macintosh doctor said:


> would just like to thank you for making me laugh.. after a long day, you provide me with uplifting laughter in a good way.
> i am glad you see it and call it what it is..


My pleasure.

And, you're welcome.


----------



## FeXL

Let's talk ignored Prog city killings s'more!

Buried News: Two Mass Shootings in Chicago Over Weekend, More Than 1,500 Shot in 2019 



> Sunday at 11:59 p.m. ended a banner weekend for gun-controlled Chicago.
> 
> As the nation mourned mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso Texas, the City of Big Shoulders posted numbers that broke its previous record for shootings.
> 
> More than four dozen people were shot; seven were killed. Seventeen were shot during just three of the crimes, 15 in two of them.
> 
> Nor was this weekend unusual. In Chicago, the gunfire never stops.
> 
> Chances are, on any given Monday morning, the Cook County Morgue will have a few more bodies on ice.


More:



> Total people shot this year? More than 1,500, with 300 homicides.


And from The Bigot? Crickets. None of these killings conform to his bigoted narrative of ****** with an AR and are therefore politically useless.

Further, and why I called bull$h!t on The Bigot's reference to 255 mass shootings thus far this year:



> How you define the term results in vastly different counts: *The Gun Violence Archive has tallied 255 mass shootings in 2019 so far, while Mother Jones lists the number at seven.*
> 
> Some databases also exclude gang-related or domestic shootings. Most counts also don’t include the shooters when they’re killed or injured.​


Bold mine.

A difference of only 248. That's _some_ discrepancy. It's also the reason why Progs & the MSM (BIRM) use that particular database. It underscores their narrative.

Read. Learn. And then call an official bull$h!t on _anything_ The Bigot has to say relating to guns: gun deaths, gun statistics, gun control, gun anything. He's got an axe to grind and that is all.


----------



## FeXL

Another one The Bigot won't be reporting on.

Four Dead, Two Wounded in Southern California Mass Stabbing



> Quick, think of an angle we can use to blame Trump.
> 
> Aha! The victims were all Hispanic! That'll work! We can use that on the Twitter zombies!
> 
> Wait -- the crazed stabber was also Hispanic.
> 
> Hm.


----------



## FeXL

Wrong thread.


----------



## CubaMark

FeXL said:


> Another one The Bigot won't be reporting on.
> 
> Four Dead, Two Wounded in Southern California Mass Stabbing


_"a two-hour stabbing and robbery rampage"_

Two hours, eh? Seems like a lot of time in which a good guy with a gun should have shown up to stop him... 

Imagine that two-hour rampage with an AR-15 and high capacity magazine.... 

:yikes:


----------



## Macfury

You're talking So-Cal here...



CubaMark said:


> Two hours, eh? Seems like a lot of time in which a good guy with a gun should have shown up to stop him...


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Curious that a California cop couldn't fix this issue in something less than 120 minutes, huh? A good guy with a gun could have taken care of the problem in seconds. When the cops are only two hours away...



CubaMark said:


> Two hours, eh? Seems like a lot of time in which a good guy with a gun should have shown up to stop him...


The magazine would have been empty in seconds, at which point he could have been disarmed & beaten with his own weapon. By a good guy, of course. However, seeing as we're talking the land of Fruit Loops & Whackos here, all the good guys have long since left for Texas while the Progs were all triggered & stroking their comfort animals in hiding...



CubaMark said:


> Imagine that two-hour rampage with an AR-15 and high capacity magazine....


----------



## FeXL

'Magine that. Nobody shot...

Good Guy With Gun Stops Potential Attack At Walmart After Man Shows Up With Rifle, Body Armor



> An off-duty firefighter who had a firearm with him stopped a potential attack from taking place at a Walmart in Missouri after a 20-year-old man showed up to the store with a rifle, body armor, and over 100 rounds of ammunition.
> 
> ...
> 
> KOLR news anchor tweeted "20-year-old man with rifle, handgun & body armor arrested at Walmart on Republic. SFD Police say he had 100+ rounds of ammunition. *Off-duty firefighter with concealed carry gun held him at gunpoint until officers arrived about 3 minutes later*"


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

The Morning Rant



> "As is usual after mass shootings, the progressives are running around with their hair on fire trying to get laws passed that criminals and mentally people will just ignore, just like they ignore all of the other laws progressives succeeded in passing in response to previous mass shootings. They seem to forget that, though.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

Hispanic with an AR? The Bigot won't be reporting on this one. Especially when he reads that a good guy with a gun chased him away...

Bystander gunman scares off killer after 2 shot in Houston



> Texas authorities on Friday were searching for a gunman who shot and killed two men on a Houston freeway on Thursday before being chased off by a witness who opened fire at him.
> 
> Authorities on Friday described the gunman as a Hispanic male in his 20’s armed with what they believe was gun similar to an AR-15 assault-style weapon.


----------



## FeXL

Time to get a knife registry going! Mommy's silver service is a deadly weapon!!!

FBI Stats Show Knives Kill Far More People Than Rifles In America – It’s Not Even Close



> Knives kill far more people in the United States than rifles do every year.
> 
> ...Many are calling now for stricter gun laws in the wake of the shooting, specifically targeting the AR-15 rifle and promoting the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban.
> 
> However, recent statistics from 2016 show that *knives actually kill nearly five times as many people as rifles that year.
> 
> According to the FBI, 1,604 people were killed by “knives and cutting instruments” and 374 were killed by “rifles” in 2016.*


Bold mine.

If all the noise gun control nuts were making was truly about saving lives, the Progs would be all over this. 

It ain't & they aren't...


----------



## FeXL

FeXL said:


> Hispanic with an AR? The Bigot won't be reporting on this one. Especially when he reads that a good guy with a gun chased him away...


Told ya...


----------



## FeXL

Damn ******!

Philly Shootings Update: Six Cops Shot, But All Are In Stable Condition



> The White Supremacy continues attacking cops.
> 
> There's still a gun battle going on, though it seems some perps or suspects have been arrested.
> 
> High-ranking police officials said that two officers with the Narcotics Strike Force were serving a warrant at a multifamily home when a shooter opened fire at the home. The two officers are barricaded in separate rooms with as many as four suspects in what may be a drug-related offense.
> 
> Hostage negotiators and a SWAT team are on the scene.
> 
> "Officers are attempting to communicate with the shooter; imploring him to surrender and avoid further injuries," Philadelphia Police Department Sgt. Eric Gripp said on Twitter.​


----------



## eMacMan

Even the police chiefs say its bogus.
https://calgaryherald.com/news/cana...nada/wcm/65cffb96-8f4e-45f0-9dab-e935005a819d


> CALGARY — The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police won’t be supporting a call for a ban on handguns despite concerns about gun violence in a number of major cities including Toronto.
> 
> Vancouver police chief Adam Palmer, who heads the organization, says Canada already has strong firearms regulations and no other law is required.





> Palmer says in the majority of cases involving gun violence, the handguns being used are already illegal and it makes no sense to ban something that is already prohibited.
> 
> “In every single case there are already offences for that. They’re already breaking the law and the criminal law in Canada addresses all of those circumstances,” Palmer said Wednesday at the conclusion of the association’s annual conference.
> 
> “The firearms laws in Canada are actually very good right now. They’re very strict.”


So the question becomes: If the retards plans to seize guns won't have any impact on gun violence, then why the rush to seize handguns???

Just spit-balling here but maybe the globalist thugs who pull the hairdoo's strings have something so vile in the works that they want the general populace disarmed before they spring it. Surely that possibility is sufficient reason to just say no to more gun control!


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> So the question becomes: If the retards plans to seize guns won't have any impact on gun violence, then why the rush to seize handguns???


Because it's not about gun violence. It's about controlling the masses...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Because it's not about gun violence. It's about controlling the masses...


Can't have a repeat of 1776, you know...


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Can't have a repeat of 1776, you know...


I've always found this quote salient to the discussion:



> “A government that fears arms in the hands of it’s people should also fear rope!” —Nathan Bedford Forrest


----------



## wonderings

Why does no one in government or with social influence talk about the roots of these horrific act? What is causing it and how can we turn the tide so these individuals who are mentally unstable become more and more rare. The idea of simply taking away the guns is reactionary and I do not believe will solve much. The guns are out there, especially in the US and the people I believe would not stand for government seizures of their legal weapons. So what is to be done? They talk and talk about tougher gun control without ever looking at the root cause and start being proactive to make social changes that might reduce the likelihood of these people growing up to be a danger to society.


----------



## CubaMark

wonderings said:


> Why does no one in government or with social influence talk about the roots of these horrific act?


*We do.* And in this thread. But that's touchy-feel "prog crap" that involves, y'know, _feelings_ and stuff that the usual suspects in here disavow as having anything to do with, well, anything. People are "just bad"._ No explanation needed or sought._ Just give everybody a gun so the "bad" guys can be shot down by the 'good' guys with guns.

Mental health services, counselling, an economy that allows for dignified work and a sense of some kind of control over one's own life... very basic concepts that contribute to people's mental well being. All of which are opposed, to one degree or another, by the right-wing who refuse to consider such "socialist" concepts as comprehensive health care.

The only _feel_ that matters is that cold, hard steel in their warm, angry hands....


----------



## Macfury

Guess it's a lot more comforting to have the government tell you what job to take and decide how much you get paid! Takes the guesswork out of freedom!



CubaMark said:


> ...an economy that allows for dignified work and a sense of some kind of control over one's own life...


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Pure, undiluted, horse $h!t. 

Prove me wrong. Quote the last time you posted _anything_ on _any_ thread on these boards _ever_, not only acknowledging that the main gun violence problem in the US is young black Prog inner city males with single moms and illegal weapons but then, _then_, suggested a solution for said problem?

Go ahead. I'll wait...



CubaMark said:


> We do.


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

The iron.

You, wanting freedom & control over your life, yet subscribing to an ideology that, by default, wants to limit as many freedoms as they can possibly legislate and control every aspect of ones life...

Horse $h!t. Again...



CubaMark said:


> ...and a sense of some kind of control over one's own life...


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Further on this "It's all righty ****** with an AR's fault" bull$h!t...

Like, say, all those unbiased Prog "journalists? Or perhaps you're talking about those dignified Prog "politicians"? Or maybe the "peaceful" Prog Antifa protesters? Or, or, or...



CubaMark said:


> ...an economy that allows for dignified work...


Off topic but here's a shining example of your much prized comprehensive "soclialist" health care at work:

Canadian Health Care Refused to Pay for Disabled Father's Care, but Happily Paid for His Assisted Suicide

Nice!!!

Coming soon to a family member near you & brought to you by the compassionate, intellectual, left...



CubaMark said:


> ...by the right-wing who refuse to consider such "socialist" concepts as comprehensive health care.


----------



## FeXL

Well, looky here. An exception to the young black male from a Prog inner city with a single mom & an illegal hand gun rule.

And, no, it's not righty ****** with an AR...

'Monstrous' teen girl gang 'hitta' killed 17 in Chicago



> Someone parked nine bullets into Gakirah Barnes on Chicago’s dystopian south side.
> 
> In a tragic way, it was a sadly fitting departure from this mortal coil.
> 
> During her reign as the Windy City’s most feared female gangland assassin, Barnes allegedly sent as many as 17 people to the morgue.
> 
> And when her number came up in 2014, she was just 17 years old and forged by a lifetime packed with abuse and violence.
> 
> But how does a happy child with straight-A report cards become, as one cop called her, a “devilish, monstrous little girl.”


----------



## FeXL

If it wasn't for double standards...

The same people who pushed early release for gun felons now want to take guns without due process



> For every person who fits the profile of the El Paso shooter, there are likely thousands who fit the profile of Maurice Hill, the man arrested for shooting six cops in north Philadelphia yesterday. Based on a quick look at court documents from Philadelphia and Delaware Counties, Hill has a rap sheet dating back to 2001 that includes charges for illegal gun possession, drugs, driving offenses, assault, burglary, theft, robbery, kidnapping, and attempted murder. However, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer, he was only “convicted six times on charges that involved illegal possession of guns, drug dealing, and aggravated assault.”
> 
> Will there be any soul-searching trying to figure out why so many of these people wind up unconvinced, under-sentenced, and back on the streets? As the Inquirer put it, “his record would indicate, he does not like to go to prison. In 2008, he was convicted of escaping, fleeing from police, and resisting arrest. Along the way, he beat criminal charges on everything from kidnapping to attempted murder.”
> 
> Nope. Instead, they very people who have created the drive in the criminal justice system to let these people out of jail are pushing a war on guns for law-abiding people. Meanwhile, the criminals who illegally get guns every day in places like Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Chicago are never punished!


----------



## SINC

Finally, a journalist who gets it:



> *Matt Gurney: Toronto doesn't have a gun-control problem*
> 
> Gun control is functioning well in Canada. Solutions to shootings in our big cities lie elsewhere


https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-toronto-doesnt-have-a-gun-control-problem


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

I don't believe it. Ain't one of 'em smart enough...

Trudeau’s own government knows a handgun ban won’t work



> Since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is talking about making the banning of handguns an election issue, let’s examine the evidence that shows why it won’t be effective — which comes from Trudeau’s government.
> 
> Here’s what Trudeau’s point man on the issue of banning handguns — former Toronto Police chief Bill Blair, now Trudeau’s Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Minister — told the Globe and Mail in June.
> 
> “It would not, in my opinion, be perhaps the most effective measure in restricting the access that criminals would have to such weapons, because we’d still have a problem with them coming across the border.”


More:



> On that point, Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders said during a news conference Friday that, “*in recent years, we have seen that 80% of the firearms are coming in from the border*,” as opposed to the past where guns purchased legally and sold into the black market were 50% of the problem.


Bold mine.

There goes another Prog narrative.

Related:

Time for legal gun owners to work together



> As the federal election ramps up, expect Justin Trudeau to use gun control as a wedge issue to keep key urban seats in Liberal hands. Legal gun owners have a lot to lose.
> 
> Most Canadians know little about guns beyond what they’ve seen on TV. City dwellers see handguns in the news when they’ve been seized by police from murderers and gangbangers. In their eyes, guns have one use: to kill people.
> 
> It doesn’t help that politicians routinely lie about guns. We are told legal guns owned by licensed gun owners are the problem. Data from Statistics Canada and Canada’s police services prove this false. *But, most Canadians don’t know that.*


Bold mine.

Yeah, well, most Canadians are big city idiots, too. Ya think there's correlation there somewhere? Consider that rhetorical.


----------



## FeXL

Walmart: We'll Stop Selling Handgum Ammo and Also Stop Selling Handguns in the One State, Alaska, We Still Sell Them In



> Just start your own Walmart, a friend snarks.
> 
> JUST IN: Walmart announces it will stop selling handgun ammunition and ammunition for short-barrel rifles, and will stop selling handguns in Alaska, the only state where it still sells handguns. https://t.co/yPIUwm7DNq
> — CNN (@CNN) September 3, 2019​


----------



## FeXL

Joe Biden: We Have to Ban Magazines That Hold "Multiple Bullets"



> A head filled with tata salad.
> 
> "The idea that we don’t have elimination of assault type weapons, magazines that can hold multiple bullets in them, it's absolutely mindless," he added. "It's no violation of the Second Amendment. It's just a bow of special interests of the gun manufactures and the NRA."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Biden wants to ban “magazines that hold multiple bullets”
> 
> That would ban nearly every gun in America - including a majority of pistols
> 
> These are the people coming for your guns:
> 
> Zero understanding of how they work but never in doubt of their views pic.twitter.com/OHZYV0r6NP
> — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) September 3, 2019​


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> I don't believe it. Ain't one of 'em smart enough...
> 
> Trudeau’s own government knows a handgun ban won’t work
> 
> 
> 
> More:
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> There goes another Prog narrative.
> 
> Related:
> 
> Time for legal gun owners to work together
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Yeah, well, most Canadians are big city idiots, too. Ya think there's correlation there somewhere? Consider that rhetorical.



It always feels like we are trying to mimic the US. Our gun problems are nowhere near their gun problems. We have some gang shootings, some nut cases now and then doing something horrible. We do not have mass shootings, crazed gunpeople (to be politically correct) going into schools shooting up anyone that moves (thankfully!). Hand guns are not easy to get as it is right now, at least in Ontario.


----------



## SINC

Ever notice when a cop decides to shoot someone, it is always the cop's fault to be determined by a special investigative branch of the police?

Ever notice when a gang member shoots someone it's always the fault of the gun?

Curious that, innit?


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> Hand guns are not easy to get as it is right now, at least in Ontario.


Yet the compassionate, intellectual, left would have you believe that waving a twenty at the sky would make it rain AR's & handguns stolen from unlocked Canadian gun safes & night tables...


----------



## FeXL

Joe Biden Pushes Ban on Gun Magazines Secret Service Used to Protect Him



> Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden pushed a ban on the very magazines Secret Service agents used to protect him while he was Vice President under former President Barack Obama.
> 
> Biden did this by calling for a ban on gun magazines holding “multiple bullets.”
> 
> Joe wants to ban “magazines that can hold multiple bullets in them,” and said that doing so is “no violation of #2A.”
> 
> He knows NOTHING about firearms or 2A. In June, he claimed to have gotten “the number of clips in a gun banned.”
> 
> Joe is an embarrassment.pic.twitter.com/9XTVqIYqEb
> 
> — NRA (@NRA) September 2, 2019​
> The Secret Service uses an array of firearms to carry out its protection duties. The Military Times reports that Secret Service agents’ current sidearm is a Sig Sauer 229 variant chambered in .357 Sig. The 229 uses magazines that hold “multiple bullets.”


Well, Joe is an embarrassment, but handguns will never be banned for politicians & other high ranking Prog members of society. They're "special", doncha know...


----------



## FeXL

You simply cannot fix stupid.

Dem Congressman Claims It's Easier to Buy an AR-15 Than Sudafed, Hilarity Ensues



> Crazy? No. Stupid and mal-informed? Yes!
> 
> Call me crazy, but I think it should be harder to buy an AR-15 than it is to buy Sudafed.
> — David Cicilline (@davidcicilline) September 2, 2019​
> Please note that David Cicilline is a fully Twitter-credentialed member of the Blue Checkmark Outrage Brigade. That's because he's a congressman representing Rhode Island’s 1st District, chairman of the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, and chairman also of the Antitrust Subcommittee. So you'd think Cicilline would have some familiarity with the law, but you'd be wrong.
> 
> Cicilline did, however, receive quite the education in his Twitter mentions, on the off chance he actually reads them, and on the even more remote chance that he's capable of comprehending them.
> 
> Really?!? Which Federal form do you have to fill out in order to buy Sudafed? And what database does the pharmacist query when doing the required background check?
> — (((WitCoHE))) (@E__Strobel) September 3, 2019​


----------



## FeXL

Curious, that...

Four years after allowing universal ‘concealed carry’ law, Maine rated the safest state in the nation for crime



> Since 2015, residents of the state of Maine have been allowed to carry a concealed firearm without any special permit, and now the results are in: crime has fallen to the point where the state is now rated the safest in the nation from the threat of crime.


More:



> Guns in the hands of honest citizens decrease crime. That is fact that has been statistically demonstrated by John Lott’s pathbreaking book, More Guns, Less Crime, a rick-solid statistical analysis showing that when states pass “shall issue” concealed carry laws, crime goes down.


Another Prog narrative shot <snort> to hell.

And, further support of "An armed society is a polite society".


----------



## FeXL

If it wasn't for double standards...

De Blasio Wants To Seize Semi-Automatic Rifles From Citizens, But His Bodyguards Can Keep Theirs



> New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio revealed on Thursday that if elected president, he would implement a federal gun confiscation program where American citizens would be required to turn over their semi-automatic rifles to the government, but law enforcement officers would be excluded from the ban.


----------



## FeXL

Why Criminals Looking To Victimize Women Love Gun Control



> On September 3, Lachelle Hudgins wounded a robber who had attempted to steal her purse. While the mainstream media pan the attack as an overreaction to an attempted purse-snatching, Hudgins, who was there, saw it differently.
> 
> According to the video recorded by a local ABC reporter, five attackers approached her car in the wee hours of the morning. How was she to know the attack would end with only a stolen purse? “With so many men surrounding her car and trying to get in the car, she did the only thing she could think to do. She reached in her purse for her gun.” *Hudgins said of the incident, “I saved my life.”*


----------



## eMacMan

This has been really obvious to most of us non-believers for many years. Now the deep state shills are coming right out and admitting it.

https://www.seattlepi.com/news/texa...ur-AR-15-O-Rourke-scrambles-Dems-14438752.php



> WASHINGTON (AP) — Beto O'Rourke's "hell yes" moment at the Democrats' presidential debate is scrambling his party's message on guns.
> 
> The Democrats have long contended their support of gun control laws does not mean they want to take away law-abiding citizens' firearms. But on Friday, they struggled to square that message with their presidential contender's full-throated call on national TV for confiscating assault rifles.
> 
> "Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47, and we're not going to allow it to be used against your fellow Americans anymore," the former Texas congressman declared during Thursday night's debate.





> "I frankly think that that clip will be played for years at Second Amendment rallies with organizations that try to scare people by saying Democrats are coming for your guns," Sen. Chris ***** of Delaware told CNN Friday. "I don't think a majority of the Senate or the country is going to embrace mandatory buybacks. We need to focus on what we can get done."
> 
> His fears about new rages against gun control supporters seem sure to be borne out.
> 
> *"This is what their goal is. We've always said it, now they're saying it,"* said Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation, based in Washington state. "Now they've said it and we're going to make them eat it."


----------



## eMacMan

Tinsley hit the nail dead center with this one. No rim shot here.


----------



## FeXL

Liberal policy? Shocka...

Father Of Parkland Victim Says Guns Aren’t The Problem, Liberal Policies Are



> 3Andrew Pollack, the father of Parkland victim Meadow Pollack says guns aren’t the problem in America when it comes to mass shootings, he instead blames liberal policies for enabling the mentally ill and evil to kill.
> 
> Since his daughter’s death, Pollack has focused on finding answers to why his daughter was the victim of a mass shooting, and what we as a country can do to protect our youth. (RELATED: Pollack: Don’t Blame Trump After the Next School Shooting; Learn the Facts.)
> 
> Pollack is the co-author of the new book “Why Meadow Died: The People and Policies That Created The Parkland Shooter and Endanger America’s Students,” in this book he describes the policies that are still in place that he believes are putting students at risk.


Related:

MSNBC Poll About Guns Backfires Fabulously



> A poll hosted by the MSNBC asked respondents a simple question: Do you think people should be allowed to carry guns in public?
> 
> Given that it’s MSNBC, the leftist conspiracy machine, hosting the poll, I doubt they thought the results would be so favorable to our beloved Constitution.
> 
> At the time this post was published, more than 547,000 people voted and 92% of them answered “Yes! The second amendment guarantees it.”


Now, while the 2A guarantees public _ownership_ of firearms, I'm not sure that extends to public _carry_. That said, the results of the poll speak for themselves.

Related 2, 3, 4, 5 taken from the comments of the above link:

Study Shows NO Relationship Between Concealed Carry, Homicide or Violent Crime



> This study confirms what a number of other studies have found: Having more people without criminal records, carrying concealed firearms, does not increase violent crime.


Link to above study.

More People Use a Gun in Self-Defense Each Year Than Die in Car Accidents



> Millions of people protect themselves and their families with guns every day in the United States. They choose guns as a means of self-defense for the same reason the Secret Service uses them to protect the president: guns stop bad people from doing bad things to good people.
> 
> It’s absurd to speak about the right of self-defense in theory but then deny people the tools they need to exercise that right.


Gun Control and Rape Facts



> This simple fact is Australia had a massive gun confiscation and rapes increased by half or more over the next decade. While the US saw a fifty percent drop in rapes while the number of guns owned by American DOUBLED.


Also related:


----------



## Macfury

Nice response!

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-...un-store-offers-beto-specials-ar15s-and-ak47s



> In response to Beto O’Rourke’s “Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47” threat, a Tempe, Arizona gun store owner ran a “Beto Specials” promotion the next morning – selling out of both types of rifles by that afternoon.


----------



## FeXL

I fail to see the problem.

Georgia Man Kills Three Youths With Semiautomatic Assault Weapon
PS, The Three Youths Were Trying to Rob His Home and Were Shooting at Him



> Citizens never stop criminals with guns, and certainly not when using Hate Guns like semi-auto rifles.
> 
> Georgia homeowner shot and killed three teens as they approached his residence with their faces covered, authorities said.
> 
> The masked teens -- a 15-year-old and two 16-year-olds -- approached three residents around 4 a.m. Monday at the front yard of a home just outside Conyers and tried to rob them, the Rockdale County Sheriff's Office said.
> 
> One of the would-be robbers took out a gun and fired shots at them before one of the residents returned fire, authorities said.
> 
> "The victims of the attempted robbery were all uninjured, but the three attempted robbery suspects were all shot during the exchange of gunfire and succumbed to their injuries, one on scene and two at a local hospital after being transported," the sheriff's department said in a news release.​


More:



> lolgf


Indeed.


----------



## FeXL

Door-to-Door Gun Confiscations Begin in New Zealand; One Gun Owner Dead



> Armed police have begun going door-to-door to gun owners’ places of business, their homes, and even gun ranges in New Zealand “in an attempt to gather information and get gun owners to relinquish their firearms,” and the authoritarian tactics have already resulted in one gun owner’s death, according to local reports.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

Tried & true "Labrador Retriever" defense...



> *..."LOOK, LOOK... SQUIRREL!!!"...*
> 
> Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pledged a ban on “*military-grade*” semiautomatic rifles in *an attempt to redirect his campaign* after his blackface controversy.
> 
> City News reports that Trudeau announced the rifle ban on Friday in Greektown, Toronto, the area of the city in which *a gunman shot 15 people, killing two*, last year.
> 
> Of course, *not a single Canadian shooting has been perpetrated with an AR15*. Ever.


Links' bold.

Doesn't matter. They look so scary!!!


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me a good, ol' fashioned, Prog gun expert...

mm-hmmmm



> “I held an AR-15 in my hand, I wish I hadn’t. It is as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving. And the bullet that is utilized, a .50 caliber, these kinds of bullets need to be licensed and do not need to be on the street.” - Rep. @JacksonLeeTX18 pic.twitter.com/U71ir6BHZH
> — Jason Howerton (@jason_howerton) September 23, 2019​


Pro tip: If you don't get the issue, guess what? Yer part of the problem...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> I jes' luvs me a good, ol' fashioned, Prog gun expert...
> 
> mm-hmmmm
> 
> Pro tip: If you don't get the issue, guess what? Yer part of the problem...


I was fairly sure that the AR-15 used .227 caliber amo. More powder than a .22 but the bullet itself is only slightly bigger than a .22 LR.

As to weight I thought the advantage of an AR-15 was that it was relatively light, my quick search came up with 7.5 pounds with a full ammo clip.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> I was fairly sure that the AR-15 used .227 caliber amo. More powder than a .22 but the bullet itself is only slightly bigger than a .22 LR.
> 
> As to weight I thought the advantage of an AR-15 was that it was relatively light, my quick search came up with 7.5 pounds with a full ammo clip.


Oh, no. This guy's a gen-u-wine Twatter "expert". And, _and_, you can mount a chainsaw front & center on the bayonet mount. Really. Trust him...


----------



## FeXL

Trudeau accidentally admits Harper was far better at stopping gun crime



> *“Gun crime in Canada is on the rise. In 2017 there were 2,500 more victims of gun violence than in 2013…”*
> 
> So begins the text of the Liberals all-out attempt to distract from Justin Trudeau’s blackface debacle.
> 
> The Liberals have made a big deal of their “gun control” measures, with all their MPs, social media boosters, and media allies relentlessly pushing out their talking points.
> 
> The Liberals are doing everything possible to change the channel, and they are willing to demonize and criminalize law-abiding Canadian firearm owners to do it.
> 
> Meanwhile, they’re giving gangs a free pass.


Wait. Wha...???

I'm sorry. Who was in power in 2017?


----------



## FeXL

But how is that possible? The Progs all tell me that if we have background checks, assault weapons bans and large magazine capacity bans, all this will magically go away!!!

9 Shot in D.C. Despite Gun Licensing, ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban, Magazine Ban



> Nine people were shot, two fatally, during a 30-minute time frame in Washington, DC, despite the district’s gun licensing requirement, “assault weapons” ban, and ban on “high capacity” magazines.
> 
> WUSA9 reported that the incident occurred Thursday night, and consisted of “two men armed with AK-47 style weapons [firing] dozens of shots in the apartment courtyard on Columbia Road.”
> 
> Gabby Giffords’ gun group, the Giffords Law Center, reported that in addition to an “assault weapons” ban, a “high capacity” magazine ban, and licensing requirements, the district also has a 10-day waiting period for gun purchases, a purchase limit of one handgun a month, and a ban on private gun sales, among other things.
> 
> *The number of homicides in D.C. is up 17 percent over last year, despite the district’s stringent gun controls.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!*

Trudeau goes for fear over facts once again on gun violence



> The main problem with linking these two ideas is that the doctors were talking about dealing with the violence, the pain and the carnage caused illegal guns wielded by gang members shooting up city streets across the country. Trudeau’s proposals, meanwhile, only targets law-abiding and licensed gun owners.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me these little snippets of truth that sneak past the narrative...

Dem gun control backers are trying to distance themselves from Beto’s ‘hell yeah’ pledge



> Gun control talk continues on Capitol Hill, and Democrats are distancing their legislative efforts from the brazen gun confiscation pledge made by one of the presidential candidates last week.
> 
> In response to 2020 presidential candidate Robert “Beto” O’Rourke’s “hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15” comment at the third Democratic debate, and President Donald Trump’s complaints that it’s made working on gun control more difficult, *Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, “I don’t know of any other Democrat who agrees with Beto O’Rourke*, but it’s no excuse not to go forward” with new gun control.


Bold mine.

Liar...


----------



## FeXL

Leftist CEOs Swoop in to ‘Save the Day’ on Guns



> Last week, 145 American CEOs sent a letter to the U.S. Senate pleading for action on gun violence. In one resounding voice, they cried out to the federal government to just “do something!”
> 
> The question is, so what?
> 
> All of a sudden, the media dropped their demonization campaign of corporate executives, whom they routinely accuse of buying political access and influence, to shower these out-of-touch elites with glowing praise. *Now that Big Business supports leftist policies, these CEOs are suddenly enlightened individuals who know what they are talking about and care about the safety of the nation.*


Bold mine.

Curious, that...


----------



## FeXL

The FBI’s annual crime report is out, and the anti-gun crowd won’t like it



> The Federal Bureau of Investigation released its Uniform Crime Report for 2018 on Monday, and the numbers indicate that more people were killed by knives than rifles.


Knife registry coming in three, two...

More:



> The annual report touts an overall drop in violent crime for the second consecutive year, according to the Bureau’s news release on the numbers. However, the numbers specifically on homicides in the United States offer some insight into America’s ongoing gun control debate.
> 
> Due to multiple shooting massacres that took place in August, gun control proponents have once again turned their animus toward semi-automatic rifles such as the AR-15. Perhaps the most salient example of this is 2020 Democratic candidate Beto O’Rourke’s pledge, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.”
> 
> *However, as has been the case in previous years, the numbers show that rifles in general — including semi-automatics as well as others — only account for a fraction of a percent of the total homicide rate in the United States.*


Bold mine. 

Doesn't matter. They _look so scary_...


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

Poll shows Trudeau gun control promises firing blanks



> It seemed an odd choice, Justin Trudeau spent two precious days in the middle of an election campaign holding events in Toronto and speaking on an issue he should own — gun control. Now we may know why.
> 
> Polling on how Canadians view gun crime in Canada and gun control promises from politicians shows that the majority of Canadians — in all regions of the country, across party lines and among men and women — are cynical of what is on offer.
> 
> When asked about the source of shootings, 80% of Canadians agreed with the statement that “gun violence and shootings are mainly committed by gangs or criminals with handguns smuggled into the country from across the border.”
> 
> That compares to just 20% who believed “gun violence comes mainly from guns that have been stolen from or used by vetted and licensed handgun owners.”


So, 20% of the polled population is still stupid. The good news is the number is dropping...


----------



## FeXL

Democrats Come Out Guns Blazing on Guns



> Joe Biden: I'll give you two options: Turn over your guns to Daddy Government, or register them with a federal database.
> 
> And banning further purchases of them.
> 
> As part of his plan to curb gun violence in America, former Vice President Joe Biden is proposing that owners of assault-style weapons either sell their firearms through a voluntary buyback program or register their weapons with the government.
> 
> ...
> 
> The former vice president's plan also calls for banning high capacity magazines as well as assault-style weapons, closing loopholes in background checks before firearms purchases, banning the online sale of guns, eliminating legal protections that currently protect gun manufacturers from being held legally liable if their weapons are used in mass shootings and allowing states to implement "red flag" laws.​


Good luck collecting the ones that haven't been turned in or registered, Joe...


----------



## FeXL

Once again, if you don't get the joke you're part of the problem.

The Right To Keep And Bear Arms Is More Than That....It Is A Responsibility To Our Society And Culture



> The embarrassing stupidity and mendaciousness of American gun grabbers reaches its peak when they jabber about how we don't need weapons of war to go deer hunting. Well, that's true! But what does that have to do with our natural and God-given right to self defense? If America outlawed hunting, I would be irritated by the overreach and idiocy, but it would be difficult to argue against the ban on constitutional or perhaps natural rights grounds.


----------



## FeXL

Giant Eagle and the Second Amendment



> Beto O’Rourke and the Democrat Presidential candidates talk about big splashy plans to confiscate or license guns and deny services to gun and ammunition manufacturers. That is unlikely to happen. *What is more likely is a subtle, step by step non-legislative action that will ultimately lead to the nullification of the Second Amendment. *
> 
> Another retailer has joined the growing list of large shopping locations to ban open carry of firearms on their properties. That may not seem earth shaking by itself but wait -- there’s more.
> 
> Giant Eagle has joined Walmart, CVS, Walgreens, Starbucks, Wendy’s, Target, and Wegman’s in requesting customers not to open carry a gun unless they are police officers.
> 
> Giant Eagle has 216 supermarkets, primarily in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania and Ohio are among the 37 states that allow open carry in one form or another.


Bold mine.

Which is precisely why firearm owners must not let the bastards get their foor in the door, even once.


----------



## FeXL

Dick’s CEO Says Anti-Gun Policy Shrank Company by a ‘Quarter Billion Dollars’



> The CEO of Dick's Sporting Goods told CBS News this weekend that his decisions to stop selling certain guns and hire lobbyists to push for new gun bans have cost his company roughly $250 million.


h/t JJ Sefton at AoS, who nailed it: "And he's still CEO?".


----------



## FeXL

Kansas Schoolgirl Arrested, Charged with Felony for Brandishing Finger Gun



> One of the nice things about a moral panic is that it frees up individuals from responsibility for their own actions. If everybody's panicked about some supposed social ill, it's okay to do very silly things because you're just trying to protect people. Whether the boogeyman is global warming, or explicit song lyrics, or violent video games, or whatever else you're convinced is dangerous, your righteous indignation is justifiable. And if it's about guns? Dude, panicking about guns is pretty much mandatory. They don't even need to be real guns. These days you can freak out about toy guns, bubble guns, cookies in the shape of guns... even finger guns! The important thing is that you're protecting the children.


More:



> *Seriously, though, how is this a police matter? It's a 12-year-old girl, armed with nothing but her finger. Are we going to force kids to wear mittens year-round so they don't accidentally shoot somebody?*


Bold mine.

:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

ABC News Airs U.S. Gun Range Video, Calling It a Syrian War Zone — Twice



> ABC News on Monday removed a video which the network presented as Turkish military forces attacking Kurdish fighters in northern Syria — amid reports that the footage may, in fact, be from a U.S. gun demonstration.
> 
> The footage, which ABC News purported was of an attack on the border town of Tal Abyad, was aired Sunday on World News Tonight and Good Morning America on Monday morning. However, a comparison by Gizmodo shows the video was captured at Knob Creek Gun Range in West Point, Kentucky back in 2017.
> 
> “_t’s clear that the videos are the same,” said the website._


----------



## FeXL

In Chicago, 2,199 people have been shot this year. That is 212 fewer than 2018.



> The Chicago Tribune crime team tracks shooting victims in Chicago. Data represents number of victims, not shooting incidents. Homicide data can be found here.


But...but...but...Righty ****** with an AR!!! GUN CONTROL!!!


----------



## FeXL

Target farmers, hunters & skeet shooters...



> ...but this violent felon gets the benefit of the doubt?
> 
> Peter Aiken, 27, *fired an illegal handgun five times at two Peel Regional Police officers* in 2016 and a Judge imposed a sentence that could see the man free in a year.
> 
> "I find *I am left in a reasonable doubt* about whether Mr. Aiken, in all the circumstances of this case, had that requisite intention to kill," said Justice Paul Currie.​
> **********
> 
> *RELATED:* Hmmm... smells like a clue to me...
> 
> * "Three-hundred and twenty six people charged with firearms offences are free on bail in Toronto today, Chief Mark Saunders revealed Friday as he seeks to redistribute blame for the sudden increase in gun violence in the city over the last seven days."*​


Last bold mine.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> ABC News Airs U.S. Gun Range Video, Calling It a Syrian War Zone — Twice


Yep, last I heard ABC had doubled down on their stupidity claiming the video shows the essence of the situation.

For those unaware, the real Syrian Army is in the process of joining with the Kurds to drive the Turks out of Northern Syria.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> For those unaware, the real Syrian Army is in the process of joining with the Kurds to drive the Turks out of Northern Syria.


Which seems like a great outcome to me.


----------



## FeXL

Wait! I thought the narrative went that all these guns on the street came from farmers, skeet shooters & duck hunters who had failed to secure their weapons properly...

Public Safety Alert,
Stolen R.C.M.P. firearm



> On Wednesday, October 30, 2019, at 10:04 p.m., officers began an investigation into the theft of an RCMP firearm at Sherway Gardens shopping mall.
> 
> It is reported that:
> 
> - between 7:30 - 9:45 p.m., a black satchel with a blue stripe was stolen
> 
> - the satchel contained a Smith & Wesson 9mm model 5946 pistol
> 
> - the pistol has a silhouette of a horse and rider with GRC and RCMP engraved on the right side of the firearm
> 
> - also stolen were three magazines and a police radio


----------



## FeXL

Further to the above:

Toronto police searching for RCMP firearm stolen from Sherway Gardens in Etobicoke



> A recent count prepared by the RCMP shows that police forces and other government agencies have lost 813 firearms, including 173 to theft, since 2005.


----------



## FeXL

How is this possible?! There's a law against that!!!

Cop car gun concealer has lifetime firearms ban



> It turns out the handcuffed suspect with the gun in the back of the police car not only had previous weapons convictions, but was subject to a lifetime firearms ban!
> 
> It seems two 51 Division Toronto Police officers metaphorically dodged a potential bullet.
> 
> As TPS brass investigate how in-car video of the suspect was leaked out, officers are calling the video a giant wake up call.
> 
> And to make things even more alarming, _the Sun_ has learned that the man in the video — 38-year-old Ali Nassir Showbeg of Mississauga — was previously charged when he was 23 with attempted murder, accused of shooting up a car outside a grocery store at Thistle Downs Blvd. and Albion Rd. on Feb. 13th 2005.


----------



## FeXL

How many other gun control nuts are telegraphing?

Anti-Gun Activist Shoots Her Three Children Dead



> When these people say that citizens are not capable of responsible gun ownership, they're telling you "I'm too crazy to be trusted with a gun."
> 
> So we should take away the guns of anti-gun activists. *They're telling us, straight up, "Take my gun away before I do something terrible."*


Bold mine.

No $h!t...


----------



## FeXL

Who Will Disarm Us Now?



> Now that Beto O’Rourke’s candidacy is relegated to the trash heap of history where it belongs, and derpy turnip Eric Swalwell Smallballs hurred and durred his way out of the 2020 Democratic primary, who will disarm the vulnerable?
> 
> Not that I really believed that either Smallballs or Robert Francis had any capability to disarm anyone, both these awkward, weird, creepy tool wagons talked a good disarmament game.


More:



> Who will disarm pregnant women, using AR-15s to defend their unborn babies and their husbands from getting beaten to death by armed goblins invading their home?
> 
> [Jeremy] King said one of the men started pistol-whipping him while another kicked him repeatedly in the head. His wife, who is eight months pregnant, was in the back bedroom and peeked out to see what was going on.
> 
> King said one of the men shot at her. She retreated, grabbed an AR-15 and returned fire.​


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

Finally!

Archaeologists Discover AR-15 Cain Used To Kill Abel



> IRAQ—Archaeologists working near the ancient Fertile Crescent made a stunning discovery Friday morning: the AR-15 Cain used to kill Abel as recorded in the Bible.
> 
> Scholars have long suspected Cain could not have committed history's first murder without access to some kind of assault weapon since guns are the root of all violence. Now, there's proof, in the form of Cain's personal, heavily customized AR-15.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Finally!
> 
> Archaeologists Discover AR-15 Cain Used To Kill Abel



:lmao::clap::lmao::clap::lmao:


----------



## FeXL

But how is this possible? There are laws against this sort of thing!!!

Man detained in TPS drug raid had $200K ‘on his person’ at time of arrest



> The raids led investigators to a 2010 Ford Escape SUV which had been modified to include a hydraulically-powered trap door in its rear compartment.
> 
> Inside the trap door, investigators found numerous loaded guns, including a 9mm Sterling submachine gun capable of fully-automatic fire, revolvers, two silencers, a bulletproof vest, an assault-style carbine, a 50 round drum magazine for a semi-automatic handgun and a Taurus “Judge” revolver capable of carrying pistol and shotgun rounds at the same time.


More:



> The Maragh brothers were denied bail and remanded into custody.


What? Not out on a $10,000 bond? Where's the justice?!!!


----------



## FeXL

So, for you gun control nuts, I pose the same unanswered question: What gun control law would have prevented the following from happening?

Be precise...

Saugus High School Shooting In Santa Clarita: Teen Girl And Boy Dead, Alleged Shooter In 'Grave Condition'



> A Saugus High School student who turned 16 today shot five of his fellow students, fatally wounding two before turning the gun on himself, according to authorities.
> 
> The alleged shooter was among the wounded students found when authorities arrived at the school shortly after 7:30 a.m. Thursday. The suspect was hospitalized in critical condition, officials said.


Two Dead, Four Wounded In California School Shooting: Report



> The police added that they believe the shooter was a “male Asian suspect” in black clothing. The suspect is 15-years-old and is in grave condition at a local hospital following a self-inflicted gunshot wound.


"Asian". Curious, that word...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> So, for you gun control nuts, I pose the same unanswered question: What gun control law would have prevented the following from happening?
> 
> Be precise...
> 
> Saugus High School Shooting In Santa Clarita: Teen Girl And Boy Dead, Alleged Shooter In 'Grave Condition'
> 
> Two Dead, Four Wounded In California School Shooting: Report
> 
> "Asian". Curious, that word...


I find the 'black clothing' bit curious. Are they trying to make listening to Johnny Cash a criminal activity?


----------



## FeXL

Curious this didn't show up on The Bigot's newsfeed.

Armed Citizen Stopped Oklahoma Walmart Shooter



> A report by the _Daily Mail_ indicates that Monday’s shooting outside a Duncan, Oklahoma, Walmart was cut short by an armed citizen who confronted the gunman.
> 
> Breitbart News reported that three deaths resulted from a shooting outside the Walmart around 10 a.m. Two individuals were fatally shot while sitting in a car, and a third person died outside the vehicle when police arrived.
> 
> The _Daily Mail_ reported that the deceased individual outside the car was the gunman, and that he allegedly took his life after being confronted by an armed citizen.


Right, I forgot. His newsfeed is only programmed to search for attacks on Muslims in Canada and, thus far, is an empty set...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Curious this didn't show up on The Bigot's newsfeed.
> 
> Armed Citizen Stopped Oklahoma Walmart Shooter
> 
> 
> 
> Right, I forgot. His newsfeed is only programmed to search for attacks on Muslims in Canada and, thus far, is an empty set...


Also curated to prevent that academic snowflake from being triggered by anything that upsets his precious worldview.


----------



## FeXL

How is the possible?!  There are _laws_ against this sort of thing!!

Man arrested after being in possession of gun in Toronto’s north end: police



> Toronto police say a man has been arrested after he was found with a handgun in the city’s north end.


This shining example of law-abiding citizenship, Feisal Noor, is charged with:



> 1) Possess Loaded Firearm
> 2) Carry Concealed Weapon
> 3) Weapons Dangerous to the Public Peace
> 4) Possess Firearm with Altered Serial Number
> 5) Possess Restricted Firearm Without Holding a Licence
> 6) Possess Restricted Firearm Knowingly Not Holding a Licence
> 7) Possess Ammunition Dangerous to the Public Peace​


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Curious this didn't show up on The Bigot's newsfeed.
> 
> Armed Citizen Stopped Oklahoma Walmart Shooter
> 
> Right, I forgot. His newsfeed is only programmed to search for attacks on Muslims in Canada and, thus far, is an empty set...



Latest info I have is that this was a domestic violence case. Suspect shot his wife and her lover, then shot himself. He was already dead when the armed citizen approached the shooters vehicle.


----------



## FeXL

The Progs are the best gun salesmen manufacturers could ask for...

October Gun Sales Jump 10 Percent, Continuing Recent Rise



> Americans buying more guns as Democrats propose confiscation


----------



## CubaMark

eMacMan said:


> Latest info I have is that this was a domestic violence case. Suspect shot his wife and her lover, then shot himself. He was already dead when the armed citizen approached the shooters vehicle.


It's a rare instance when a 'good guy with a gun' can stop a 'bad guy with a gun' unless they're y'know, _The Flash_, but then they wouldn't need a gun, would they?

:lmao:


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Asked, answered. A long time ago.

You may wish to get your Alzheimer's meds checked...



CubaMark said:


> It's a rare instance when a 'good guy with a gun' can stop a 'bad guy with a gun'...


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Hello, Bigot.
> 
> Asked, answered. A long time ago.
> 
> You may wish to get your Alzheimer's meds checked...


There's something worrisome going on...


----------



## FeXL

The Gun-Control Left Is A Toxic Combination Of Maniacal And Really, Really Dumb



> Gabrielle Blair is a blogger and an ardent hater of freedom, liberty, self determination and self reliance. And dumber than a bag of rocks. Otherwise, how does one explain this profound disconnect?
> 
> *There are far better ways to protect your family than a gun. Get a life insurance policy.* https://t.co/sKtXngJft0
> — Gabrielle Blair (@designmom) November 24, 2019​


Bold mine.

And these idiots vote...


----------



## FeXL

The Great White Mother Lied



> Fascist oppressors confiscate aboriginal healing herbs and traditional hunting implements...
> 
> *• TYENDINAGA MOHAWK TERRITORY •
> 
> Ontario Provincial Police* have charged an 18-year-old with trafficking after *finding a live hand grenade* while searching a home on the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory in eastern Ontario.
> 
> Investigators say they also found *illegal drugs and a handgun* during the search on Thursday.​


Links' bold.

I know, I know. Some errant duck hunter left his grenade safe unlocked...


----------



## SINC

CubaMark said:


> It's a rare instance when a 'good guy with a gun' can stop a 'bad guy with a gun' unless they're y'know, _The Flash_, but then they wouldn't need a gun, would they?
> 
> :lmao:


Sorry to burst your bubble, but 'good guys with guns' win far more times than you think.



> Son Saves Family Of 6; Takes Out Armed Home Invader With Head Shot While Sisters Hide In Closet
> 
> HOUSTON, TEXAS — A planned attack on a family was thwarted by the son who was returning to the home with his mother. Upon arrival, chaos was happening inside the home as 3 armed intruders ambushed the father as he arrived home from work and forced him inside.
> 
> The armed suspects were hiding in the bushes when the father approached the home.
> 
> Two sisters inside hid in a bedroom closet while the suspects ransacked the property.
> 
> The girls, a 21 year old and a 15 year old, managed to hit a panic alarm as the home invasion continued. Eventually, the suspects found the girls while searching the home.
> 
> Shortly after this began, the son arrived at the home with his mother and another sibling in the vehicle. Once he realized that something was wrong, he grabbed his gun and went after the armed suspects in an attempt to stop them from terrorizing his family.
> 
> Police told reporters that it doesn’t appear that any of the suspects fired their guns.
> 
> They were probably too busy worrying about whether or not their lives were about to end at the hands of an angry member of the family they just attacked.


https://concealednation.org/2019/04...wvvqEyN4mKklFAl3GttE_WlUkVJjRIsrlTwE-w4LQodEA


----------



## Macfury

SINC said:


> Sorry to burst your bubble, but 'good guys with guns' win far more times than you think.


CM is already weeping over the fate of the punk who was eliminated.


----------



## FeXL

It's All About Feelz



> A recent buyback in New Bedford, Massachusetts, however, may take the cake for stupid.
> 
> About 40 weapons were collected during a “Groceries for Guns” program Saturday at the Pilgrim United Church in New Bedford.
> 
> Police Chief Joseph Cordeiro says the haul included 18 guns and 22 BB and pellet guns, some of which looked like the real thing.
> 
> ...
> 
> *Now, it should be noted that at least one of these air guns still has the orange tip on it. That means that literally no one should mistake it for a live firearm unless they’re too braindead to comprehend reality in general.*​


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

Duplicate.


----------



## FeXL

Miami man ’emptied’ Glock into robbery suspect toting AK-47: ‘I’m not going out like a punk’



> A Miami man said he was forced to “empty” his Glock into a man’s chest during a brazen robbery attempt Monday morning, when the attacker pointed an AK-47 into his face and demanded jewelry.
> 
> Donovan Stewart, 60, told CBS 4 Miami that he was sitting in his van when he was confronted. Stewart, an NRA member, said he was with his son, 11, and his girlfriend at the time. He told the station that he is originally from Jamaica and is trained at handling a firearm. Naturally, he was concerned for their safety.
> 
> “The guy I killed last night, he put an AK-47 to my damn face,” said Stewart. “I am going to defend my life and those I love,” he said. “My family is innocent and just don’t put an AK-47 in my face. I will not allow that to happen. This guy also hijacked a woman in a van and was found with her car key. He robbed another woman at gunpoint.”


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Miami man ’emptied’ Glock into robbery suspect toting AK-47: ‘I’m not going out like a punk’


CM sez: "Wahhhhhh. Maybe if they had redistributed their wealth to this unfortunate man, his life might have been saved!"


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> CM sez: "Wahhhhhh. Maybe if they had redistributed their wealth to this unfortunate man, his life might have been saved!"


I believe that's precisely what he was attempting to do...


----------



## FeXL

Let's ask Staff-Inspector Mike Earl...
...who headed up Toronto’s Holdup Squad...



> There is one strategy that has proven extremely effective... alas, in today's increasingly politically-correct society, it's radioactive to even discuss...
> 
> _*In 2013, when police did 196,907 street checks* — while carding was increasingly under attack by its critics — *there were 22 gun murders in Toronto.*
> 
> In 2018, when police did none, there were 51, *an increase of 132%.*
> 
> With a month to go this year, there have been 38 gun murders, lower than in 2018, but *still 73% higher than in 2013.*​_


Links' bold.


----------



## FeXL

Illinois girl, 14, tried to rob woman who shot her in chest, both charged, Chicago police say



> A teenage girl who was shot in the chest in a Chicago neighborhood Friday night is now facing an attempted robbery charge after officials said she tried to rob a woman she was meeting for a sale.
> 
> The Chicago Police Department said in a news release on Saturday the incident happened around 5:45 p.m. in the city's Little Village neighborhood, when 21-year-old Araceli Diaz met with the 14-year-old girl after the teenager arranged the meeting to buy a dog.
> 
> When the 14-year-old met up with Diaz, officials said the teen pulled out a pellet gun, struck the 21-year-old on the head with it and tried to take the dog without paying for it.
> 
> ...
> 
> In response, Diaz then allegedly pulled out a handgun and shot the girl in the chest.


She was physically attacked. It doesn't matter if the object used was a BB gun or a sledge hammer. She was defending herself.


----------



## FeXL

Gun Confiscation Comes to Virginia



> Next year, Democrats will control both houses of Virginia’s state Legislature as well as its governorship. On November 18, State Sen. Dick Saslaw introduced a bill that he will sponsor in the 2020 legislative session. That bill will outlaw not only the sale or transfer but also the possession of certain firearms.
> 
> ...
> 
> Thus, every rifle of the common AR-15 design and a great many pistols and shotguns in common use for personal defense, target shooting, and hunting would be banned.
> 
> Not only would they be banned, but because SB 16 makes it illegal to possess such firearms, they also would have to be either surrendered to or seized by police authorities in the jurisdiction in which they are located.


Related:

‘They’ve Awoken a Giant’: 20+ Virginia Counties Become 2A Sanctuaries Overnight



> Virginia gun owners have gathered by the hundreds at Board of Supervisors meetings in counties across the state to send a message to the newly elected Democratic legislature in Richmond.
> 
> As of this writing, 23 counties and towns have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries since Michael Bloomberg flipped the state legislature from red to blue earlier this month. Second Amendment sanctuaries exist in many states across the country, but no state has seen so many in such a short span of time.
> 
> “It’s sending a message to Richmond saying we don’t want any more gun control out here,” Philip Van Cleave told GunsAmerica. Van Cleave is the President of the gun-rights group Virginia Citizens Defense League, which has been fighting for Second Amendment rights in Virginia since 1994, when they helped turned the state from may-issue to shall-issue.


----------



## FeXL

Shocka...

NYC Lawyer Admits to SCOTUS Gun Regulation Had No Impact on Safety



> The lawyer defending New York City in a Second Amendment case on Monday admitted to the Supreme Court that the city's gun restrictions had no impact on public safety and that gun rights extend beyond the home.


----------



## FeXL

How was this possible?! There was a law!!! :-(

What could possibly go wrong?



> Remember, he was under a weapons prohibition at the time of the double murder...
> 
> Christopher Husbands, the man who opened fire inside Eaton Centre’s food court has been sentenced to life in prison but he *could be eligible for parole* in as little as *16 months.*​


----------



## FeXL

Americans Own 423 Million Firearms…And Climbing



> The NSSF, the firearms industry’s trade group, has released some interesting production and other statistics they’ve accumulated from the ATF. A couple of statistics are sure to cause Moms and media members to lunge for their fainting couches.
> 
> Imagine the tremors of terror that will reverberate through Giffords and Everytown at the news that Americans own well over 400 million firearms (shhh…don’t tell them the real number is probably north of half a billion).
> 
> Or that, among those hundreds of millions of guns is almost 18 million modern sporting rifles…otherwise known to the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex and the anti-gun media…as “assault weapons.”


The punch line:



> The report also shows that as lawful firearms ownership in America continues to grow, criminal and unintentional misuse of firearms is falling. During the 25-year period covered in this report (1993–2017) the violent crime rate has decreased by 48.6 percent and unintentional firearm-related fatalities have declined by 68 percent.


Prog heads exploding...


----------



## FeXL

MLB Star Teaches Sons About Guns In Case Sanders And Socialism Win. Celebs Rip Him. He Hammers Them.



> This week, former MLB baseball star Aubrey Huff triggered outrage on social media after he tweeted a picture from a gun range, adding he was training his sons to shoot in the “unlikely event @Bernie Sanders beats @realDonald Trump in 2020. *In which case knowing how to effectively use a gun under socialism will be a must.*” That elicited hostile responses from comedienne Kathy Griffin and actor Tom Arnold, both off which received blunt responses from Huff, as The Daily Mail reported.


Bold mine.

Prog heads exploding...


----------



## eMacMan

https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...-mayors-react-to-boost-in-rural-rcmp-officers

Am I missing something here? This pair fired a shotgun at a police officer and were not even charged with assault or attempted murder in relation to that offense?

Putting bums like this behind bars is how you solve gun violence. More laws will have zero impact when we fail miserably to enforce the laws already in force.


----------



## Macfury

eMacMan said:


> https://calgaryherald.com/news/poli...-mayors-react-to-boost-in-rural-rcmp-officers
> 
> Am I missing something here? This pair fired a shotgun at a police officer and were not even charged with assault or attempted murder in relation to that offense?
> 
> Putting bums like this behind bars is how you solve gun violence. More laws will have zero impact when we fail miserably to enforce the laws already in force.


Confiscation is the only goal of gun control--not a reduction in gun voiolence.


----------



## CubaMark

*Houston police chief criticizes McConnell and Senate Republicans over guns: 'Whose side are you on?'*








Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo criticized Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other Republican lawmakers for not reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act and taking action against gun violence, asking them in emotional remarks to choose between the nation's foremost gun lobby and "the children that are getting gunned down in this country every single day."

Acevedo made his remarks to reporters Monday as the Houston Police Department prepared to escort the body of Sgt. Chris Brewster, an officer who died in the line of duty, to a funeral home. The 32-year-old was shot and killed while responding to a call with a team on Saturday.

"I don't want to hear about how much they support law enforcement," Acevedo said. 

"I don't want to hear about how much they care about lives and the sanctity of lives yet, we all know in law enforcement that one of the biggest reasons that the Senate and Mitch McConnell and (Texas Sens.) John Cornyn and Ted Cruz and others are not getting into a room and having a conference committee with the House and getting the Violence Against Women's Act (passed) is because the NRA doesn't like the fact that we want to take firearms out of the hands of boyfriends that abuse their girlfriends. 

And who killed our sergeant? A boyfriend abusing his girlfriend. So you're either here for women and children and our daughters and our sisters and our aunts, or you're here for the (National Rifle Association)."

He continued: "So I don't want to see their little smug faces talking about how much they care about law enforcement when I'm burying a sergeant because they don't want to **** off the NRA. Make up your minds, whose side are you on? Gun manufacturers, the gun lobby, or the children that are getting gunned down in this country every single day."
Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which was enacted in 1994, has stalled in Congress. The bill provides grants and support to various groups that work on issues relating to sexual assault and domestic violence and prevention, among other things.

(CNN)​


----------



## Macfury

The efforts by Democrats to change VAWA legislation has led to holding up renewal of this act. Would have passed long ago if left as it was. 

Thanks for another insightful post, CM. You really have a way of "reading between the lines" to get at the truth.


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Exactly what gun control law would you institute that would have stopped this shooting?

Be precise.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> Hello, Bigot.
> 
> Exactly what gun control law would you institute that would have stopped this shooting?
> 
> Be precise.


He just pulled the handle on the prog rage machine this morning and it spat out this article like a gumball. Don't expect any further engagement than that.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> He just pulled the handle on the prog rage machine this morning and it spat out this article like a gumball. Don't expect any further engagement than that.


What The Bigot refuses to acknowledge is that guns kill people like forks make people fat. And, _and_, if this is all an end user's game like he recently claimed, then it _still_ isn't about law-abiding firearms owners.

Progs always want it both ways: have their cake & eat it, too...


----------



## FeXL

Not so enraged they want to commit political suicide.

Virginia Dems Cave on Confiscation as 2A Sanctuaries Expand



> Virginia Democratic leaders abandoned their gun confiscation proposal Monday following a grassroots outpouring of opposition to gun control across the state.
> 
> Governor Ralph Northam (D.) and incoming Senate majority leader Dick Saslaw (D.) said they will no longer pursue their marquee plan to ban the possession of "assault weapons." Instead, they will include a provision to allow Virginians to keep the firearms they already own. The reversal comes before the newly elected Democratic majority has even been sworn in, after a majority of the state's counties declared themselves "Second Amendment sanctuaries."
> 
> "*In this case, the governor's assault weapons ban will include a grandfather clause for individuals who already own assault weapons, with the requirement they register their weapons before the end of a designated grace period*," Northam spokeswoman Alena Yarmosky told the _Virginia Mercury_.


Bold mine.

Not optimal, but better'n the alternative.


----------



## FeXL

Sitting ducks: Why are our soldiers disarmed on our own bases?



> After you recover from the shock of learning that Saudi pilots are training with American soldiers on our military bases, you’ll inevitably stumble across another stupefying question. How is it that the Saudi terrorist attacker at the Pensacola Naval Air Station was shot dead by local Pensacola sheriff’s deputies, while not a single sailor – officer or enlisted – had any firearm to defend himself? Well, much as President Trump promised to shut down visas from countries like Saudi Arabia, he also promised to end the gun-free zone status for our soldiers on bases. The time has come for him to fulfill both promises.


More:



> In the face of mass shootings on military bases, Trump promised emphatically to end the suicidal policies disarming our soldiers. Between terrorist attacks at Chattanooga and Fort Hood and domestic shooters on several other bases, it has become clear that base security only serves to deter good people with guns. As we painfully learned in Pensacola on Friday, the impervious security clearly didn’t stop Mohamad Alshamrani from bringing in a Glock .45.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

Trudeau to spend double disarming hunters than he’ll spend fighting gangs



> Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said during the election that the government plans to outlaw a number of guns and buy back as many as 250,000 rifles from licensed gun owners at a cost of $600 million.
> 
> Think about that, we have a problem with illegally smuggled handguns being used to commit crimes and the government will spend near double buying back legal guns than they will spend on dealing with crime guns.
> 
> Specifically on the issue of stopping guns at the border, the government plans to spend seven times more on buying back legal guns than they will spend on stopping the smuggling.
> 
> *On what planet does this make sense?*


Bold mine.

Ah, that would be planet Lefty Loonie...


----------



## FeXL

Disarm innocents and release gun felons: Jersey City attacker had gun felonies but was released from prison



> Weak sentencing for gun felons plus serving as a sanctuary for criminal alien fugitives minus the ability of peaceful citizens to defend themselves equals New Jersey?
> 
> The Garden State has become a breeding ground for repeat violent offenders who can illegally own firearms, while peaceful citizens face the strictest gun control laws imaginable. The tragic case of the Jersey City attack on a kosher supermarket, resulting in the deaths of three civilians and an ace police detective, should spawn a national discussion on weak sentencing against gun felons paired against the ineffectiveness of broad gun control on the citizenry.


More:



> It turns out that, according to the New Jersey Department of Corrections records, Anderson was charged with weapons offenses in 2004, 2007, and 2011, yet he never spent a significant amount of time in prison and mainly got probation. He was also convicted on a drug charge in December 2008 for which he served no time. In 2009, he was arrested for domestic violence in Ohio, but spent just 30 days in jail. According to the New York Post, he was picked up by Portage County, Ohio, police again in April 2011 following another incident of domestic violence, and Ohio police discovered an outstanding warrant from Hudson County, New Jersey, for violating his probation on a previous gun felony. Ohio police did their job, but when he was extradited back to New Jersey, authorities there rewarded the probation violation with … more probation. Although he was sentenced to five years in prison in June 2011, he was released after just _four months_.


Further:



> The sad “irony,” which isn’t that ironic when you study crime and gun control, is that New Jersey has the toughest gun laws in the nation. Nobody can carry a weapon outside their homes, and so-called assault weapons have been banned for years. As of this year, anyone in New Jersey who owns a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition is officially in possession of illegal contraband and is deemed a fourth-degree felon. Unlike magazine bans in other states, this one _retroactively_ banned people from even _owning_ such magazines in their _homes_, even though they had been purchased legally.


Finally:



> *Here’s the enduring lesson of the Jersey City attacker and over 90 percent of other homicides in America. You can have all the gun control you want and it won’t stop shootings, but if you keep the known violent criminals, particularly violent gun felons, locked up, you will prevent the overwhelming number of homicides, which are committed by recidivists. If, on the other hand, you have gun control, but empty out the prisons to serve the idols of “criminal justice reform,” you get a security nightmare.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

And so it starts...

First Red Flag Conviction In Florida After Man Refuses To Give Up His Guns



> A man from Deerfield Beach, Florida, faces a potential of five years in prison after being convicted for defying the state’s “red flag” law, which allows authorities to confiscate weapons from those deemed to be at high risk of committing a crime. The case is the first conviction under the state’s relatively new gun law, which was passed in part as a response to the horrific mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.


----------



## FeXL

Another Prog gun myth busted.

Myth busted: Campus carry never caused that increase in violence liberals predicted



> The argument in favor of arbitrarily revoking the Second Amendment rights of college students, as is done in dozens of states, has ostensibly been rooted in safety concerns.
> 
> And it just got a lot weaker.
> 
> Two anti-gun professors wrote in the _Washington Post_ that “campus-carry laws will invite tragedies on college campuses, not end them.” Another liberal professor, writing for the _New York Times_, warned that “when there are more guns around, there is more risk – it’s as simple as that.”
> 
> The trouble with such predictions is that they tend to be tested as time goes by. And as it turns out, they simply weren’t true. Students just aren't waging the gun battles that anti-gun activists expected. *A new report from the College Fix looked into this narrative, and it came up empty.*


Bold mine.


----------



## FeXL

*~Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

New crime data contradicts government gun plans



> The latest crime data released by Statistics Canada make a mockery of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s posturing on gun violence.
> 
> The newly released data on homicides and gun violence in Canada during 2018 hold some surprises. Overall, murders are down – not up. Gun killings are down – not up. And gang-related homicides are also down – not up. This holds true almost everywhere in Canada, except in Ontario and Quebec.
> 
> For the Liberal government in Ottawa hell-bent on banning hunting and sport rifles, the cold, hard truth spelled out in this StatsCan report is very inconvenient, indeed.


----------



## FeXL

Victims of Toronto’s Danforth shooting launch class-action lawsuit against gun maker Smith & Wesson



> Victims of a Toronto mass shooting have launched a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. company that manufactured the stolen handgun used to kill two people and injure 13 others along Danforth Avenue in July, 2018.
> 
> The suit, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on Monday, alleges that the gun maker, Smith & Wesson, failed to incorporate certain safety features into the design of the handgun that could have prevented the bloodshed. The claim seeks $50-million in general damages and $100-million in punitive damages.
> 
> A spokesman for Smith & Wesson said the company does not comment on pending litigation. The allegations in the suit have not been proven in court.


Like a fat person suing a silverware manufacturer, a Globull Warming acolyte suing an oil company or, as Neo notes:



> Lemme see if I understand this...
> 
> ...a drunk asshole steals a car and runs over your kid.
> 
> DO YOU SUE VOLKSWAGEN?


Purdy much.

Once again, the Prog mindset on display...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Victims of Toronto’s Danforth shooting launch class-action lawsuit against gun maker Smith & Wesson
> 
> 
> 
> Like a fat person suing a silverware manufacturer, a Globull Warming acolyte suing an oil company or, as Neo notes:
> 
> 
> 
> Purdy much.
> 
> Once again, the Prog mindset on display...


Due you sue Volkswagen, yep even if the stolen car was a Fiat.


----------



## FeXL

Virginia County Passes Resolution in Support of Raising Pro-Gun Militia



> Virginia’s Tazewell County passed a Second Amendment Sanctuary declaration and a resolution in support of raising a militia to defend gun rights.
> 
> On December 16, the Washington Examiner reported the passage of the militia resolution, noting it had happened earlier in the month. WJHL reported that the resolution focused on “the right to a well-funded and regulated militia described in the U.S. Constitution and Commonwealth’s constitution.”
> 
> *Eighty-six of Virginia’s 95 counties are now Second Amendment Sanctuaries* and various law enforcement figures in the state have made clear their intention to defend gun rights, should the need arise.


Bold mine.

:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

Impossible!!! There are _laws_ against this sort of thing!!!

13 Shot at Gun Violence Memorial in Democrat-Controlled Chicago



> The _Chicago Tribune_ reports 22-year-old Irvin was shot and killed during an attack in April of this year.
> 
> Shots rang out about 12:40 a.m. Sunday at an Englewood house party being held to honor Irvin’s birthday. The _Tribune_ reports “13 people were wounded, four of them critically,”
> 
> Fox News reports that the wounded ranged in age from 16 to 48 and police indicate there were multiple shooters.


----------



## FeXL

Shocka...

New Zealand’s Gun Buyback Was A Total Flop, Report Says



> New Zealand announced a massive gun buyback program in the wake of a mass shooting in Christchurch, one of the country’s most populous cities. But despite a wave of praise from gun control activists across the globe, the program, a new report says, was a miserable failure that collected a mere fraction of the number of illegal weapons owned by New Zealanders.


Related:



> Prime Minster Jacinda Ardern announced the “assault weapons” buyback program just days after a mass shooting at a Christchurch mosque and Islamic center that claimed 51 lives and injured 49 more, and it accompanied an “assault weapons” ban, though which guns the ban and buyback covered wasn’t totally clear.


Oh, & before you gun-hating Progs jump up & start shouting, "Righty-****** with an AR!!!", I'm sure the shooter was just some poor, misunderstood yoot who never received enough hugs whilst growing up...


----------



## FeXL

How to fight gun crime in 2020



> The best way to illustrate growing gun violence in Toronto is to compare this year to 2005’s infamous “Summer of the Gun”.
> 
> As of Dec. 22 of this year, shootings are up by 80% and victims are up by 100% compared to 2005.
> 
> In 2019, there have been 471 shootings with 736 victims, compared to 262 shootings with 367 victims in all of 2005.


----------



## FeXL

Good Guys with Guns.

Houston Man Kills 3 Home Invaders With a Shotgun, is Wounded in the Exchange



> At about 9:30 this morning, three males entered a home in the Channelview area east of Houston. Two people were inside the home at the time.
> 
> One of the residents hid while the other one confronted the home invaders with a shotgun. The armed homeowner traded gunfire with the three (apparently only only one of the invaders was armed).
> 
> As click2houston.com reports, all three home invaders were killed in the exchange. The shotgun-wielding homeowner was hit, too, sustaining “serious injuries”.


Robbery turned deadly in central Fresno



> Two men are dead after robbing the Smoke N Vape Smoke Shop on Blackstone and Cambridge in Central Fresno on Friday.
> 
> Fresno Police say at around 9:45 p.m., three masked men armed with guns walked into 'Smoke N Vape', demanding money.
> 
> As the suspects were leaving, the owner of the shop arrived and confronted the robbers.
> 
> Two of the suspects were shot and killed.


Veteran shoots, kills robbery suspect at Kam's Market in Bay Point



> A clerk at Kam's Market on Port Chicago Highway at Lynbrook Street in Bay Point was violently attacked during a robbery at 11 p.m. Sunday and ended up shooting and killing one of the two intruders.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

Two More Virginia Counties Declare Themselves Second Amendment Sanctuaries, Making _Ninety One Percent_ of Counties in Rebellion Against Democrat Gun Confiscation



> The party of blackface and rape has more innovations it will impose on you at gunpoint.
> 
> Despite the efforts of Democrats in Virginia who have plans to interfere with the Second Amendment rights of the state's citizens, on Monday night Fauquier County and Charles City County both voted to become "sanctuary counties," bringing the total of "sanctuary counties" in Virginia to 87, representing 91% of the counties in Virginia.
> 
> Two Virginia counties have discussed the issue but not yet taken any action: Chesterfield County and Essex County, while two counties have said they will not become Second Amendment sanctuaries: Albemarle and Loudoun.​
> Noted Blackface Enthusiast and Democrat Ralph Northam promised that there would not be "retaliation," but that there would be "consequences."
> 
> Also know as "retaliation."


----------



## FeXL

DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS



> Texas Church Shooting stopped by two armed parishioners legally carrying guns. Quoth the sheriff: “Today evil walked boldly among us, let me remind you, good people raised up and stopped it before it got worse.”
> 
> I think we need a federal civil rights law overriding state restrictions on gun ownership and carrying. If it saves just one life, it’s worth it! And I love that it looks like six people drew on the guy. *It shows excellent discipline that only two fired, and no one else but the shooter apparently was hit by them.*


M'bold.

There goes another Prog narrative...

Related:

Black-Hooded Terrorist Opens Fire In Texas Church, Killing One and Wounding One Other, Before Congregation Returns Fire and Shoots His Loser Ass Dead



> The attack seems to me to have the hallmarks of terrorism-- the killer had no connection to the church or anyone in the town, and therefore his motive could not have been personal.
> 
> It was political.
> 
> But I don't imagine the media -- nor the FBI, for that matter -- will be willing to call it such. _Wrong victims._


Yeppers.


----------



## FeXL

So, the Progs think that prison sentences should be reduced (in some cases, eliminated entirely), clean out the prisons, let everybody go & they'll all just behave.

Texas church shooter had massive rap sheet – with almost no prison time



> Keith Thomas Kinnunen, the shooter who killed two people at the West Freeway Church of Christ in Texas on Sunday, was not allowed to own a gun. Under current law, it was 100 percent illegal for him to own or carry any firearm. He had a massive rap sheet dating back to 1998, including gun felonies. Yet he wasn’t locked up. That is why he was able to kill two people in the church. Thank God, Texas allows citizens to carry concealed weapons, so he was stopped before he could shoot and kill more. But the ugly fact is that most mass shooters are repeat offenders and known to law enforcement. If we actually had criminal control, almost all of these attacks would be prevented.


Yeah, not so much.

'Sides, didn't the shooter know there were laws against this sort of thing! How is any of this possible?! :yikes:


----------



## FeXL

When seconds count & the police are minutes away...

X Lt. Gov. Praises Armed Parishioners, Calls Them ‘Immediate Responders’



> Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) praised the reaction of armed parishioners during the White Settlement church attack, referring to them as “immediate responders.”


More:



> The *Dallas Morning News* quoted Lt. Gov. Patrick saying:
> 
> The immediate responder is the most important. The citizen responder. Because even though the chief’s brave officers were here in less than a minute … by the time they got here, the shooting was over. *And that always happens, that over 50 percent of shootings, our first responders, it’s usually over when they get there, no matter how hard they try.*​


Simple math, people. Probably why Progs can't understand it...


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> So, the Progs think that prison sentences should be reduced (in some cases, eliminated entirely), clean out the prisons, let everybody go & they'll all just behave.
> 
> Texas church shooter had massive rap sheet – with almost no prison time
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, not so much.
> 
> 'Sides, didn't the shooter know there were laws against this sort of thing! How is any of this possible?! :yikes:



Wanna bet they won't test for any SSRIs or Scopalamine type mind control drugs either.


----------



## FeXL

Church Shooter Identified



> Get ready for a shock -- he's a repeat felon who should have still been in jail.
> 
> The man who fatally shot two people at a White Settlement Church on Sunday before being killed by church security has been identified as a 43-year-old Keith Thomas Kinnunen, a River Oaks man with a criminal record, according to two law enforcement sources.
> 
> Kinnunen is believed to have been wearing a disguise, including a fake beard, when he stood up, pulled a shotgun from his clothing and opened fire inside the church...​


----------



## FeXL

Impossible!!! Don't these people know there are laws against this sort of thing?!!!

With 292 people shot, 2019 comes to a close as Toronto’s bloodiest year on record for overall gun violence



> As of 9 p.m. on New Year’s Eve, 292 people had been killed or injured in shootings in the city, 56 more than the previous year, which itself set a record for the most people shot in police data that goes back 15 years.


----------



## FeXL

With laws against this sort of thing, I can't even... It'a almost as if criminals won't obey laws!!! :-(

California, With Strict Gun Controls, Had Most Mass Killings in 2019



> A database compiled by the Associated Press (AP), _USA Today_, and Northeastern University recorded that the United States suffered more mass killings in 2019 than any year on record, with 41 recorded incidents and 211 deaths.
> 
> The AP report stated: “California, with some of the most strict gun laws in the country, had the most, with eight such mass slayings.”
> 
> A December 28 report from Breitbart noted that California has universal background checks, gun registration requirements, gun confiscation laws, a 10-day waiting period on gun purchases, an “assault weapons” ban, a one-handgun-a-month purchase limit, a ban on campus carry for self-defense, and a ban on teachers being armed to return fire if under attack. California also requires would-be gun buyers to acquire a safety certificate from the state before being permitted to purchase a gun.
> 
> Additionally, California has placed controls on ammunition purchases.


----------



## FeXL

Hello, Bigot.

Let's take a look at some numbers that illustrate otherwise, shall we?

The Stats on Self-Defensive Gun Use Liberals Don’t Want You To See



> The National Crime Victimization Survey is administered twice a year by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and provides *the most conservative estimate of SDGU at about 100,000 cases per year.* Of note, the survey requires individuals to self-report to the federal government that they used a firearm in self-defense while providing their name and contact information. Most will be hesitant to do so for obvious reasons, so this estimate should be taken as the absolute minimum.
> A 1994 survey conducted by Bill Clinton’s Center for Disease Control (CDC) found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes *about 500,000 times per year.*
> Obama’s CDC conducted a gun control study in 2013, finding that “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, *with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million…”*
> Criminologists Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz published a study back in 1995 in which they found that _gun use accounted more for defensive gun use than it did for criminal activity.”_ *A literature review of thirteen studies in their paper provides a range of between 800,000-2.5 million SDGUs. A follow-on study in 1997 argues that that SDGU accounted for more than 80% of all gun use in America.*
> CDC survey data from the 1990s that was unpublished but accessed and analyzed in 2018 by Kleck implies *roughly 1 million SDGUs per year.*
> According to the National Survey of Private Firearms Ownership, *there are 1.5 million self-defensive gun uses every year.*
> According to a paper by David Kopel, Paul Gallant, and Joanne Eisen, *“[F]irearms are used over half a million times a year against home invasion burglars;* usually the burglar flees as soon as he finds out that the victim is armed, and no shot is ever fired,” and *“Annually, three to six times as many victims successfully defend themselves with handguns as criminals misuse handguns* (thus handguns do up to six times more good than harm).”


Bold mine.

Rare, indeed... 

Slamming the door on yet one more Prog narrative.



CubaMark said:


> It's a rare instance when a 'good guy with a gun' can stop a 'bad guy with a gun'...


----------



## FeXL

Once again, progressive hypocrites.

Anti-Gun Hollywood Steps Up Armed Protection for Golden Globes



> Actors and actresses in anti-gun Hollywood will be surrounded by armed security on Sunday as they attend the 77th annual Golden Globes.
> 
> _New York Daily News_ reports Beverly Hill Police Department Capt. Michael Hill saying, “We have a robust security plan that includes assistance from our local, state, and federal law enforcement partners. Additionally, we will be using the most contemporary technologies in an attempt to ensure the ceremony is held without incident.”


----------



## FeXL

Huh. What could they possibly be used for?

New York UN Recruits Paramilitary Troops for 'Disarmament' & 'Reintegration' of US Civilians



> The United Nations is now accepting job applications in New York City, New York for Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration officers to "contribute to security and stability in post-conflict environments."
> 
> UN DDR forces operate under the intergovernmental organization's Department of Peace Operations to "assist" the Member States, including the United States, in a boots on the ground capacity.


----------



## FeXL

'Chaotic scene': No charges for father who pummeled accused pedophile caught naked in toddler bedroom



> Prosecutors declined to press charges against a father who severely beat an accused pedophile found naked in a room with his two toddlers.
> 
> Spotsylvania County police responded to a call about a disturbance in a home outside of Richmond, Virginia, on Sunday. When they arrived, 60-year-old Mark Stanley was found badly beaten in what authorities called a “chaotic scene.” The police released a photograph of Stanley's grotesquely swollen face.
> 
> According to a police press release, Stanley, from North Carolina, had been staying with family members for the holiday season. Early in the morning on Sunday, the father of the two toddlers, ages 2 and 3, went to check on the children and found Stanley naked from the waist down in the children’s bedroom.


----------



## FeXL

Kosher!

Rabbi: Americans May Carry Guns to Synagogue on Sabbath for Self-Defense



> HaGaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky says Americans can carry guns to the synagogue on the Sabbath for self-defense.
> 
> Yeshiva World News reports that the question was specifically framed around having “armed guards” at synagogues, due to an increase in antisemitic incidents.
> 
> Harav Chaim spoke against posting guards but made clear that worshipers could carry firearms to the synagogue if the purpose was saving life.


----------



## FeXL

Prog heads exploding.

NRA Handing Out 30-Round Mags in VA to Fight Northam Gun Ban



> The NRA will be handing out 1,000 30-round magazines in the Virginia Capitol City of Richmond Monday as part of the fight against Gov. Ralph Northam’s (D) gun grab.


----------



## FeXL

Even Journalists Are Forced To Admit Buybacks Don’t Work



> Gun buybacks are common things that we’ve seen over and over as a way to take guns off our streets. Proponents of the idea argue that they’re a good way to take guns off the streets since they’re “no questions asked.”
> 
> Opponents, however, point out that criminals aren’t likely to sell their guns at a buyback because they tend to hold onto their guns. Instead, the people who make use of the buybacks are the very people no one really has to worry about.
> 
> The media, however, tends to side with the proponents in their reporting. Shocking, I know. *However, Journalists Resource has taken a look at buybacks and what they found probably should change the conversation.*


Bold mine.

It won't.


----------



## FeXL

So, the gun control nuts always couch their arguments in soft terms such as, "common sense" gun laws.

Gun Thread: And So It Begins



> Over the last few days, radical leftist politicians in Virginia have filed a comprehensive array of proposed gun control legislation which should make all but the most committed anti-gun tyrant cringe. Think I'm exaggerating? Let's have a look. The links will take you to the legislative language.
> 
> * S.B. 12 - Firearm transfers; criminal history record information checks
> * S.B. 16 - Prohibiting sale, transport, etc., of assault firearms and certain firearm magazines
> * S.B. 22 - Purchase of handguns; limitation on handgun purchases
> * S.B. 35 - Control of firearms by localities; permitted events
> * S.B. 69 - Purchase of handguns; limitation on handgun purchases
> * S.B. 70 - Firearm transfers; criminal history record information checks
> * S.B. 240 - Firearms; removal from persons posing substantial risk
> * S.B. 450 - Control of firearms; chambers of local governing bodies
> * S.B. 505 - Control of firearms by localities; local government buildings
> * S.B. 543 - Firearms shows; mandatory background check
> * S.B. 615 - Control of firearms by localities; local government buildings and parks
> 
> I may have missed something, but you get the idea.
> 
> *This isn't about safety, and it sure as hell isn't about "common sense" gun laws.*


Bold mine.

Yeppers.

And the Progs get all up in arms when 2A proponents flatly refuse to even let the bastards get their foot in the door.


----------



## FeXL

Next thing you know, they'll be voting Republican! :clap::clap::clap:

Gun registrations surge in NYC’s Jewish neighborhoods



> Must be to protect themselves from those roaming bands of white neo-Nazis . . . Oh wait!


----------



## FeXL

Virginia's Blackface Governor Declares a Fake "Emergency" to Preemptively Disarm Gun-Carriers; Author of Bill Protecting That Right Says The Bill Specifically Forbids Declaring an Emergency to Disarm Citizens



> Virginia's Governor Mammy issued this illegal order:
> 
> Governor Ralph Northam today declared a state of emergency in advance of expected demonstrations on Capitol Square on Monday, January 20, 2020. Law enforcement intelligence analysts have identified credible threats of violence surrounding the event, along with white nationalist rhetoric and plans by out-of-state militia groups to attend.
> 
> The Governor’s declaration prohibits all weapons, including firearms, from Capitol grounds, and will provide joint law enforcement and public safety agencies the resources they need to keep demonstrators, policymakers, and all Virginians safe.​
> Commenters quickly called foul


----------



## FeXL

Wait! That's not Righty ****** with an AR!

Black Gun Rights Activist: ‘Black Americans, Asian Americans, Americans in General Care About the 2nd Amendment’



> UNKNOWN MALE: "The reason I'm out here is that I do not support in any way, shape, or form Governor Northam and the Democrats' gun control. What I also don't support is the fact that every news piece you've seen on this, this weekend they always brought the issue of race as though it's nothing but white, ******** and hillbillies out here who care for the Second Amendment. When actually black Americans, Asian Americans Hispanic Americans, Americans in general care about the Second Amendment. I work at a gun store part time and I can tell you that the number of customers I see of all races, all colors, all creeds who care about the Second Amendment and who just want to peaceably live their lives, enjoy their rights and the Second Amendment. So that's why I'm out here. And main — big media, mainstream media, be damned. If you take a good look at me you can see I'm a black American and all I'm out here for is to enjoy in my Second Amendment rights. That's why I'm here."


Related:

Minorities At Pro-Second Amendment Rally Rip Media Over ‘White Supremacist’ Narrative



> A black man at the rally was facetiously asked if he was a “white supremacist,” as a way to dog the media.
> 
> The Second Amendment supporter was holding an old image of Governor Northam in either blackface or a KKK hood, captioned, “The man behind the sheets wants your guns.”
> 
> “United we stand,” the man said, noting that the media is going to be “mad” because there was “no civil unrest” or “arrests” at the rally. “They gonna be mad because all the officers are at peace, they gonna be mad because ain’t nobody out here fighting.”


Damn. Hate when the Prog narrative collapses. Again...

:lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## SINC

One is left to wonder if either Turdeau or any of his party ever read about just what type of guns are a problem in this country or where they come from. The police know. Why don't they tell politicians they've got it all wrong. It's not hard to find either. Take this one in the Edmonton Journal for example.

*Edmonton police say Somali gangs work a circuit across Canada*



> EDMONTON – Somali drug gangs appear to be highly mobile and loosely organized without the hierarchy of traditional criminal gangs, says Staff Sgt. Jim Peebles of Edmonton city police.
> 
> These gang members work a circuit — Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary to Fort McMurray and Ottawa, Peebles said in a recent interview, moving cocaine and guns around the country.
> 
> “The group is in Edmonton one day, then they turn up in Ft. McMurray and next week we see them in Toronto or Ottawa,” he said.
> 
> Police forces across the country, especially in Ontario and Alberta, worked closely together in the last couple of years to identity core gang members, uncover their movements and follow the shifting leadership, said Peebles, who works with the Alberta Law Enforcement Team, a special unit of RCMP and municipal police forces set up in 2006 to combat drug gangs and organized crime.
> 
> Police here believe gang guns are imported from Minneapolis and Columbus, Ohio.


https://edmontonjournal.com/news/ed..._2XBAVQn6w4S7Y6F4RNo-k9Y8gSHjV1-4cGn0Z6UpmYek


----------



## FeXL

Civil War Redux? Some Virginia Counties May Want to Secede to Join West Virginia Over Gun Control



> It's far fetched and no one is taking it seriously -- yet. But there are some Virginia counties that border West Virginia that are talking about secession from the Old Dominion and joining the Mountain State.
> 
> Just a lot of chatter, right? True, but the fact that people are even talking about it shows how serious the situation is getting in Virginia. As of January 16, 105 Virginia cities and counties had passed some kind of resolution declaring themselves "sanctuary" locations for gun owners.
> 
> Who would have predicted that six months ago?


Related:

Virginia Dem: Gun-Rights Rally Was ‘Terrorism’



> A Virginia Democrat said Tuesday that Second Amendment supporters who protested new gun-control legislation at the Virginia State Capitol had "terrorized Richmond."
> 
> House Delegate Lee Carter, a self-professed democratic socialist, accused participants in Monday's peaceful protest of menacing lawmakers, saying the thousands of "idiots" who demonstrated would only embolden the Democratic majority on gun control.


<snort> That all terrorists were equally as peaceful...

Related, too:

NAZIS, NAZIS _EVERYWHERE:_ As _Stars & Stripes_ reported in 2018: Writer resigns from _New Yorker_ magazine after Twitter flap over Marine vet’s tattoo.



> Talia Lavin, whose tweet about a veteran’s tattoo implied he was a Nazi, has apologized to him and *resigned from her position as a fact-checker at the New Yorker magazine.*
> 
> But in another tweet, Thursday evening, Lavin also lashed out at the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, saying it unfairly targeted her in its own tweet about combat-wounded veteran Justin Gaertner.
> 
> “This has been a wild and difficult week,” Lavin said in the tweet. “I owe ICE agent Justin Gaertner a sincere apology for spreading an rumor about his tattoo. However, I do not think it is acceptable for a federal agency to target a private citizen for a good faith, hastily rectified error.”


Bold mine.

The iron...

More:



> Or as Jim Treacher adds, “If you don’t get the violence you desperately wanted, just pretend you did.”


Yeppers.


----------



## FeXL

It appears that Hogg is digging a bit too deep into the Toledo Window Box...

David Hogg: The "Gun Violence Prevention Movement" Was Started "Centuries Ago" by "Almost Entirely Black, Brown, and Indigenous LGBTQ Women and Non Binary People That Never Got On the News or In Most History Books"



> This might just be the most SJW sentence ever constructed.


Yeppers.

More:



> this kid is so extremely retarded that it almost takes the art out of dunking on him
> — Robert Mariani (@robert_mariani) January 27, 2020​


Nails it.

Basic Stupidity simply cannot account for this. It's gotta be drugs...


----------



## FeXL

No information given on what gun club they belonged to...

The healing, restorative power...



> ...of rap music...
> 
> _ Four men were arrested in Chicago yesterday after allegedly resisting arrest as police tried to disperse an over-capacity video shoot for a rap song, authorities said. "Officers formulated a plan and made entry into the building where individuals streamed out of the building, pushing and fighting police, *discarding weapons as they fled*."
> 
> "A systematic search of the building yielded *a total of 24 handguns* and one semi-automatic, short barrel rifle."_​


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> No information given on what gun club they belonged to...
> 
> The healing, restorative power...


They were planning to hunt deer later...


----------



## FeXL

Denial. Not just a river in Egypt anymore...

Liberals talk but won’t get to the root of the gun problem in our cities



> I don’t know why this is so hard for liberal politicians to understand. The guns used on the streets are illegal. They are primarily smuggled into this country over land crossings and illegal crossings such as Akwesasne Reserve which straddles the border between Ontario and New York state.


----------



## FeXL

Prog heads exploding.

Sahel crisis: Burkina Faso to arm civilians against militants



> The authorities in Burkina Faso, struggling to grapple with a growing wave of Islamist militant attacks that is affecting the region, are planning to give weapons to civilians, as Louise Dewast reports.


----------



## FeXL

Petition against Liberal gun ban signed by over 100,000 upset Canadians



> A petition against the Liberal gun ban has just accumulated over 100,000 signatures. Petition E2341 is a petition against a ban on “military-style assault rifles.” The petition was initiated by Alberta resident, Bradley Manysiak.
> 
> With over 100,000 signatures, the petition is the second largest in Canadian history.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Petition against Liberal gun ban signed by over 100,000 upset Canadians


Had I known Ida signed.


----------



## FeXL

Biden: ‘Rational’ Gun ‘Policy’ Is Banning ‘50 Clips In A Weapon’; AK-47 Won’t Protect You From Government



> Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden said on Sunday that he believes that having a “rational policy” on guns means making sure that people can’t have “50 clips in a weapon,” which is gibberish, and said that a person would need a lot more than an AK-47 to take on a tyrannical government.
> 
> Biden made the remarks on the campaign trail in New Hampshire while talking about why kids learn active shooter drills in school, saying, “because we’re unwilling to have a rational policy that says you cannot have 20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon.”


Drugs...

Scary thing is, the Progs will eat this slop up like they've been starving.


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Biden: ‘Rational’ Gun ‘Policy’ Is Banning ‘50 Clips In A Weapon’; AK-47 Won’t Protect You From Government
> 
> 
> 
> Drugs...
> 
> Scary thing is, the Progs will eat this slop up like they've been starving.


Well he is right that an AK47 is not gonna be much of a deterrent when the tyrants are fronted by tanks and guns. This is clearly evidenced by the recent and current all out governmental assaults on the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th amendments.

Other than that everything he said is pretty much total gibberish. I've never even heard of a 50 clip weapon.


----------



## FeXL

I ran across this on Wednesday shortly after it happened. News coverage has been sporadic, at best.

Wonder why...

There's a very good reason the media are silent about the Milwaukee mass shooting



> On Wednesday, an angry ex-employee got a gun, put a silencer on it, went to the MillersCoors facility where he had once worked, and shot five people to death before shooting himself. One would expect to have a barrage of news stories about America's gun violence problem and the need to ban guns. After all, on Tuesday, before the shooting happened, the Democrat candidates were all over each other trying to explain why each would be more effective at destroying the Second Amendment. Instead, we got crickets.
> 
> *The reason for the media's silence became apparent when the media identified the shooter: 51-year-old Anthony Ferrill was black. This meant that the media couldn't use its white supremacist narrative to justify grabbing guns.*


Bold mine.

Ah. Suddenly all is crystal clear.

If this had been Righty-****** w/ an AR, the gun control nuts would have been making political hay for 2 days now.

Related:

Milwaukee Gunman Identified as Molson Coors Electrician Anthony Ferrill



> Ferrill was allegedly involved into an ongoing “dispute” that resulted in violence on Wednesday. A coworker “who asked not to be identified for fear of being disciplined said Ferrill believed he was being discriminated against because he was African American, and that he frequently argued with at least one of the victims.”


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> I ran across this on Wednesday shortly after it happened. News coverage has been sporadic, at best.
> 
> Wonder why...
> 
> There's a very good reason the media are silent about the Milwaukee mass shooting
> 
> 
> 
> Bold mine.
> 
> Ah. Suddenly all is crystal clear.
> 
> If this had been Righty-****** w/ an AR, the gun control nuts would have been making political hay for 2 days now.
> 
> Related:
> 
> Milwaukee Gunman Identified as Molson Coors Electrician Anthony Ferrill


I can recall one black co-worker who was convinced he was being discriminated against. The real reason no one wanted anything to do with him was that he was a coke headed A$$#01E. Have to wonder if Farrel fell into the same category.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. Not Righty-****** with an AR. Not a country full of farmers, duck hunters & skeet shooters who left their gun safes open.

Could it actually be?

Watch the Toronto Star skip over...



> ...details about *a man called "Apache"* who smuggled
> (*oh, pardon me, "shepherded"*) the guns over the Canadian border at • wait for it • Cornwall...
> 
> After those illegal firearms were "*shepherded*" by Apache, then ol' Harris, well... he "*took responsibility*"... after cops caught his felonious ass driving a car full of hot guns.
> 
> Smell that "*Professional*" Journalism.


Emphasis from the link.

Yeppers. That's why nobody is talking about this...


----------



## FeXL

Prog heads exploding...

11-Year-Old Idaho Girl Supports Gun Freedom Bill By Carrying Loaded AR-15 Into Statehouse



> On Feb. 24, 2020, Bailey Nielsen walked into the Idaho Statehouse and stood by her grandfather as he addressed lawmakers about the gun legislation proposal currently before the legislature. And 11-year-old Bailey held a loaded AR-15 rifle the whole time.
> 
> “Bailey is carrying a loaded AR-15,” grandfather Charles Nielsen told lawmakers as they sat mere feet away, according to the _AP._
> 
> Charles and Bailey were there to support a piece of legislation that would allow visitors to the state who are legally allowed to own firearms to carry concealed handguns within city limits.


----------



## FeXL

Question, questions, questions...

Audience Member Calls Out Bloomberg For Pushing Gun Control While Using Armed Guards: ‘Does Your Life Matter More Than Mine?’



> An audience member called out former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg for “pushing for more gun control” when he has “an armed security detail.”
> 
> “How do you justify pushing for more gun control when you have an armed security detail that’s likely equipped with the same firearms and magazines that you seek to ban the common citizen from owning?” the man asked at a Monday evening Fox News town hall in Manassas, Virginia. “Does your life matter more than mine or my family’s or these peoples’?”
> 
> The audience applauded before Bloomberg’s answer.


----------



## FeXL

*~v Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

Feds can't control their own guns, but want to control yours



> The Trudeau government might be promising to crack down on civilian guns owners with increased paperwork and tougher storage laws, but it turns out the feds can’t even keep track of their own guns.
> 
> An audit of firearms under the control of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, which includes the Coast Guard, found record keeping and safe storage were lax at times.
> 
> The audit found that some firearms were missing trigger locks while others were not secured properly to allow tracking of who was accessing and using them.
> 
> It’s all pretty rich when you consider that the Trudeau government’s answer to gang gun violence is to demand licenced gun owners follow even more rules.


More:



> *“The audit found that 410 out of 1,908 active firearms (21%) were not recorded as required by Departmental policy,” the audit states.*


Bold mine.

Close enough for gov't work...


----------



## FeXL

Sundown Joe Calls a Voter "Full of ****," Talks About the Dangerous "AR-14" Assault Weapon



> Someone I know asked, "Doesn't dementia also make you bad-tempered?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Biden is touring an auto plant in Michigan, a *must win* for Democrats.
> A blue collar Union autoworker asks Joe about protecting gun rights.
> Biden:
> - Screams at voter
> - Points finger in his face
> - Says he will ban “AR-14s”
> - Insults him
> - Looks scaredpic.twitter.com/xgVLRDd2SR
> — Benny (@bennyjohnson) March 10, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected] touring auto plant in Detroit quickly gets into an argument with a worker over guns. pic.twitter.com/37oCrX62HS
> — Natasha Korecki (@natashakorecki) March 10, 2020
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WATCH: "You’re full of sh*t," @JoeBiden tells a man who accused him of "actively trying to end our Second Amendment right."
> 
> "I support the Second Amendment," Biden adds while vising under-construction auto plant in Detroit. @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/sueOSBaY9P
> — Bo Erickson CBS (@BoKnowsNews) March 10, 2020
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Notice that Sundown Joe said "AR-14." He really knows the details of the weapons he wants to ban,.
Click to expand...


----------



## FeXL

Seems purdy simple to me.

A tip for criminals who don't want to get shot in the act



> Here’s a helpful tip for would-be thieves, muggers and murderers who fear getting shot by their victims: just don’t do the crime.
> 
> There have been several cases in recent years of thieves being shot by their intended victims, then suing for their injuries. Or, in the case of criminals who didn’t survive, their families demanding charges against the self-defending victim.
> 
> *If the prospect of getting shot by a citizen protecting his family, himself or his property bothers you that much, don’t rob, steal, beat, cheat, sell drugs or trespass in the first place.*


Bold mine.

See? That was easy.

Next!


----------



## FeXL

If only there was a law...

100,000 Convicted Felons Across US Likely Still Own Guns, Despite Being Banned From Doing So



> Around 100,000 convicted felons across the US still likely own a gun, despite being banned from doing so, concludes the first study of its kind, published online in Injury Prevention.
> 
> There’s no nationwide program to recover these weapons, with California the only state to do so. But such an initiative might go some way to curbing firearm violence in the US, suggest the researchers.


----------



## FeXL

Calling Public Safety Minister Bill Blair...



> Did Julian's "*social justice warrior*" Mummy pony up $2000 for that *"restricted"* rifle?insert alt text here
> 
> _ "Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath's son, *aspiring rapper Julian Leonetti, 27,* has uploaded photos of himself to social media where he *called the ongoing coronavirus pandemic a 'hoax.'*"
> 
> "In one photo, which Leonetti captioned, *'I got hella shooters like I’m hunting,'* where he appears to be holding an AR-15."_


Are they sure about that gun ID? It looks like an AR-14 to me...


----------



## FeXL

Concealed carry permit holder fatally shoots armed woman outside north Tulsa shopping center



> A concealed carry permit holder fatally shot a woman outside a north Tulsa shopping center Friday evening after she reportedly opened fire on customers.


----------



## FeXL

I jes' luvs me sum good, ol' fashioned, iron...

Virus-Panicked Liberal Gun Buyers Are Getting Angry When They Discover Their Own Gun Control Laws



> I was chatting with a friend of mine recently and the topic of gun sales came up. My friend’s father owns a gun range near me and she said he’s seen a huge amount of liberals coming in to purchase weapons in recent weeks.
> 
> How does he know they’re liberals?
> 
> *“They’re shocked to discover they can’t just walk out of the store with a gun.”*


Yeah, my bold.

Sonuvagun...

More:



> More than a dozen of these buyers (men and women) actually thought that since they filled out and signed everything, they could just walk out and go home with the firearm. Several actually said they saw how easy it was to buy a gun on TV and why did they have to fill out all these forms.
> 
> The majority of these first timers lost their minds when we went through the Ammo Law requirements. Most used language not normally heard, even in a gun range. We pointed out that since no one working here voted for these laws, then maybe they might know someone who did. And, maybe they should go back and talk to those people and tell them to re-think their position on firearms – we were trying to be nice.​


The sharp slap of gov't imposed reality is delivered to one more ignorant Prog.


----------



## FeXL

TX Woman In Her 60s Takes Down 19-Year Old Home Invader



> A 19-year old who broke into a Fredericksburg, Texas home early Saturday morning was shot and killed after attacking one of the residents inside.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

*~v Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

Once again I pose the question to all of you gun control nuts out there: What gun law would have prevented this tragedy? Be specific.

Nova Scotia mass shooter BANNED from owning guns after 2002 assault conviction



> The gunman in the massacre that left at least 19 dead in Nova Scotia had been prohibited from owning firearms after an assault conviction stemming from an incident more than 18 years ago.


And, even though nobody has confirmed precisely what type of firearms were used, Trudles is going after "assault rifles" again.

Trudeau needs to distract Canadians...



> ...from *disastrous performance* on coronavirus...
> 
> ...
> 
> _ "Authorities have yet to confirm that *'assault-style weapons'* were used in the attack, but Trudeau indicated *he already intended* to secure the ban."_​
> The RCMP and Public Safety Minister Bill Blair have yet to say whether Wortman legally acquired his firearm, or even *whether it involved rifles or handguns.*


Never let a tragedy go to waste...

Related:

Yet another problem emerges in the Liberal firearms plan



> Jumping through hoops.
> 
> If you’re a gun owner in Canada, you have to get used to jumping through hoops. Harassing law-abiding gun owners is a common way for “progressive” politicians to prove they’re getting tough on crime.
> 
> The problem with this approach, it’s useless. The country’s 2.2 million legit owners aren’t responsible for gun crime, so making them jump through more and more hoops will in no way make us safer.


Related, too:

Justin Trudeau Is Calling For A Ban On All "Assault-Style Weapons" Following The Rampage In Canada



> Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is pledging to continue to push for stricter gun laws in the wake of the mass shooting in Nova Scotia that killed at least 23 people, the deadliest mass shooting in the country's modern history.
> 
> “I can say that we were on the verge of introducing legislation to ban assault-style weapons across this country,” Trudeau told reporters during his daily coronavirus briefing on Monday — a briefing that instead largely focused on the weekend shooting. “It was interrupted when the pandemic caused parliament to be suspended, but we have every intention of moving forward on that measure, and potentially other measures, when parliament returns."


Related, three:

Trudeau Says Canada ‘On the Verge’ of Banning Semi-Automatic Rifles Following Deadly Shooting



> Rod Giltaca, chief executive of the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, said the country should focus on supporting “those affected by this senseless tragedy,” not gun control.
> 
> “Just shy of 24 hours past the tragedy in Nova Scotia, the gun-control lobby is leveraging this community’s suffering for their own political gain,” he said. *“No law in this country could have stopped a madman with this level of determination and resources.”*


Bold mine.

Agreed. But an armed populace would have had a better chance...


----------



## FeXL

First-Time Buyers Explain Why Coronavirus Drove Them to Gun Stores in Record Numbers



> *Many of the new gun owners cited concerns about personal protection as states began emptying jail cells and police departments announced they would no longer enforce certain laws.* Jake Wilhelm, a Virginia-based environmental consultant and lacrosse coach, purchased a Sig Sauer P226 after seeing Italy enact a nationwide lockdown on March 9.
> 
> "[My fiancée and I] came to the conclusion in early March that if a nation like Italy was going into full lockdown, we in the U.S. were likely on the same path," Wilhelm said. "Given that, and knowing that police resources would be stretched to the max, I decided to purchase a handgun."
> 
> The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the gun industry's trade group, said new customers represented a large swath of new gun sales even as gun stores faced depleted stocks and shutdown orders from state and local governments across the country. "A large portion of the 2.3 million sales during the month of March were to first-time buyers is what we're hearing back from our retailers," Mark Oliva, a spokesman for the group, said.


Bold mine...


----------



## FeXL

Anti-Gun Activist: Gun Purchases Will Cause More Wuhan Coronavirus Deaths or Something



> So, in the latest episode of ‘Orange man…bad,’ we have an anti-gun activist suggesting that Trump is killing people because he’s designated gun stores as essential businesses. So, gun purchases could lead to more Wuhan coronavirus deaths or something. It’s absurd. It’s an overreach, one that was primed to be exploited in the Wuhan era. Anti-gun liberals’ lust for any reason to ban or restrict gun sales is encapsulated here. It harkens back to what Katie wrote right before this outbreak became serious on the coasts and in the New York City area, where an Illinois mayor tried to ban ammunition and gun sales due to the virus.


----------



## wonderings

FeXL said:


> Anti-Gun Activist: Gun Purchases Will Cause More Wuhan Coronavirus Deaths or Something


Here comes the reactionary assault rifle ban
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ault-weapons-ban-trudeau-nova-scotia-shooting

Pretty crazy reaction especially considering Police believe his guns were acquired ILLEGALLY. 

Quote from the above link:
"The new ban would probably not have stopped Wortman from obtaining his weapons: he did not have a license to possess or purchase firearms, and police have said they believe the guns were obtained illegally in Canada and the United States."


----------



## FeXL

wonderings said:


> Pretty crazy reaction especially considering Police believe his guns were acquired ILLEGALLY.


To the gun-grabbers, it does not matter.

All guns are evil in the hands of the public & if a thousand laws have to be specifically tailored to remove a thousand different firearms from law-abiding citizens, so be it.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the prick's gun grab.

Canada set to ban assault-style weapons, including AR-15 and the gun used in Polytechnique massacre



> The Liberals placed an estimated price tag of $250-million on the program in the election campaign, but critics said the final tab will likely be much higher to reflect the market value of the weapons. *Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said earlier this year that the buyback program could come later than the ban.*
> 
> The banning of firearms can be done by a decision of cabinet called an order-in-council and does not require the adoption of new legislation. There is no exact definition of a military-style firearm, which means the government’s decision is based on science as well as political choices.


Bold mine.

First, notice how quiescent the Grope 'n Flail's headline is.

Second, in a link below there is a comment that this went through as an order-in-council and, as such, means no compensation will be given to owners because that entails money, which requires a vote in parliament. Interesting observation.

Trudeau lies and subverts democracy to push his anti-gun agenda



> Justin Trudeau is about to sell the confiscation of private property and the outlay of close to $1 billion to do it as a matter of public safety.
> 
> That’s nothing but an outright lie.


Huh. A Trudeau, lying. A Prog politician, lying. A Lieberal, never letting a crisis go to waste.

Shocka.

More:



> “Including, banning military style assault weapons. There is no need in Canada for guns designed to kill the largest amount of people in the shortest amount of time.”


Unless, you'll note, you happen to be a First Immigrant. Then, _then_, it's hokay to possess & hunt with them.

But don't you lowlife RACIS'! whiteys dare bring up that blatant hypocrisy. And, _and_, if one of these guys happens to go off the reserve (pun intended) and kill a bunch of people, it'll be A-OK. Because.

I Want A New Country



> (Unless you’re First Nations and use these “military firearms which are only designed to kill people” to hunt, in which case — carry on.)
> 
> Over 1500 models and variants banned instantly. https://t.co/51nTjaSro4
> 
> — CCFR/CCDAF (@CCFR_CCDAF) May 1, 2020​





> Dennis says:
> May 1, 2020 at 2:06 pm
> 
> According to my friend who owns an AR15, there is also no compensation. So we have seizure of property without compensation by order in council. Just great. We are well down the slope to a totalitarian dictatorship.
> Reply
> 
> 1.
> That guy says:
> May 1, 2020 at 2:12 pm
> 
> Because that involves money, which involves a vote in parliament. Can’t let a little thing like democracy get in the way.


Comments salient.


Liberals Preparing To Bypass Parliament In Attack On Law-Abiding Gun Owners, Ignoring Real Source Of Crime



> The Nova Scotia killer who perpetrated the worst mass shooting in history did NOT have a firearms license.
> 
> As a result, he was a criminal.
> 
> Once again, we see that the source of gun crime in Canada is never law-abiding Canadian gun owners. In fact, Canadian gun owners are among the least criminally-inclined of all Canadians, as they are hard-working Patriotic Citizens prepared to defend their families and communities while following the laws of the land.
> 
> Meanwhile, the true source of gun crime in Canada is gangs and insane criminals who are already violating the laws.


----------



## FeXL

Huh. Wonder if that handgun was registered & if Mr. Neck Tattoo had a license to carry...

Tony Cushingberry-Mays: Suspect Arrested In Murder of Indiana Mail Carrier Angela Summers



> Tony Cushingberry-Mays, 21, has been charged for the murder of United States Postal Service mail carrier Angela Summers. Summers was shot while delivering the mail along her regular route on April 27 in Indianapolis. She later died at the hospital.
> 
> Cushingberry-Mays is facing federal charges because Summers was a federal government employee. The charges, filed in the Southern District of Indiana, include:
> 
> 
> Murder in the second degree
> Assaulting, Resisting or Impeding Certain Officers or Employees
> Discharging a Firearm during and in Relation to a Crime of Violence
> 
> Cushingberry-Mays was arrested on April 28 and booked into the Marion County Jail in Indianapolis. According to the affidavit, Cushingberry-Mays admitted shooting Summers but told investigators he “did not mean to kill the letter carrier, but wanted to scare her.”


----------



## FeXL

*~v Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

Canada's Sanctimonious Lying Prime Minstrel



> The wisdom of a former snowboard instructor...
> 
> _• "Nobody needs an AR15 *to hunt deer*."_
> 
> How about, _"These guns *belong on a battlefield*."_
> 
> And here's the crowning glory of his ignorance...
> 
> _• "They shape our identity, they stain our conscience."_
> 
> No, you dumbass, they don't. Yet all of this melodramatic misdirection and outright lies are being touted as "accepted wisdom."
> 
> Let's pull apart Justin's little dog & pony show.
> 
> *• No one in Canada hunts deer with an AR15.*
> 
> The AR15 is classified as a *"Restricted Rifle"* which requires a separate _"license"_ and can only be taken to a *"Restricted Rifle Range."* It cannot be used for hunting... whether it's deer, song sparrows or snapping turtles.
> 
> Also, for many years now, these (semi-automatic) firearms have been restricted further to using only 5 round magazines.
> 
> *No one uses an AR15 on the battlefield.*
> 
> The C7 and C8 variants of this rifle used by Canadian military is a fully automatic select-fire weapon capable of using 30 round magazines. Neither the rifle or the magazines are available to the public.
> 
> *• "All Canadians must be in compliance with the law."*
> 
> You mean like Gamil Gharbi, Gabriel Wortman, Faisal Hussain, Kimveer Gill and Michael Zehaf-Bibeau... or the Five Point Generals and the Driftwood Crips?
> 
> This is another Liberal Party publicity stunt. It will do nothing to reduce crime or criminals.


Are Canadian borders actually that porous...



> ...or did Gabriel Wortman get his *"assault rifle"* off either of *the two Mounties he bested* on his deadly journey?
> 
> _ At a press conference in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, RCMP Supt. Darren Campbell said the man who carried out the *deadliest mass shooting in Canada’s history* was carrying *several semi-automatic handguns and two semi-automatic rifles.*
> 
> Asked if the shooter was carrying a *“military-style assault rifle,”* Campbell replied that police had found a weapon *that could be described that way.*_​
> Say, what? C'mon Clouseau... just tell us what it was. We already know he stole the dead cops's handgun.
> 
> Why will nobody ask the obvious questions?


Trudeau says feds banning 1,500 types of ’military-style’ guns — order takes effect immediately



> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unveiled his government’s ban on “military-style” assault rifles on Friday, fulfilling an election promise in the wake of a mass shooting in Nova Scotia two weeks ago that killed 22 people.
> 
> The government implemented the ban immediately, and without the need for legislation in Parliament, by reclassifying about 1,500 firearm models as prohibited. A program that will buy back banned firearms from current owners is also in the works.


“You don’t need an AR-15 to bring down a deer,” said Trudeau.

First comment nails it:



> 1000’s of new Metis discovered living in the west.
> 
> Simply declare your status, it worked for sex.
> 
> Then vote for #wexit / separation


Yeppers.

Also this one:



> Hmm. Gun laws don’t apply to natives.
> Helmet laws don’t apply to turban wearers.
> Whites are racist.


He’s A Liberal. It’s His Nature.



> *What happened to @JustinTrudeau promise that registering firearms with the gov. will never lead to the confiscation of firearms from legal gun owners?* pic.twitter.com/P3WCVuSfKz
> 
> — Walid (@walid_horus) May 1, 2020


Bold mine.

What? You expect a Prog not to lie through his teeth?


----------



## FeXL

I Want A New Country



> Your open thread on the just announced Trudeau gun grab and instant criminalization of thousands of law abiding Canadians by Order in Council.
> 
> (Unless you’re First Nations and use these “military firearms which are only designed to kill people” to hunt, in which case — carry on.)


—

Kenney slams Liberal gun plan, says it 'does little to target criminals'



> Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has slammed Ottawa’s gun ban in an afternoon statement Friday, accusing the federal Liberal government of going after law-abiding gun owners and doing nothing to tackle illegal gun violence.
> 
> “Today’s order does little to target criminals,” said Kenney in a statement. “Instead Ottawa is singling out law-abiding gun Canadians who purchased their property legally.”


—

It Begins: Trudeau BANS 'Assault-Style' Firearms Including... Wait for It... 'Shotguns'



> On Friday, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a ban on 1,500 firearms that takes effect immediately. Referring to them as “assault-style” weapons, Trudeau will enact his ban through orders, bypassing the Canadian Parliament. Once again, the government punishes law-abiding citizens for the outrageous acts of a criminal who found a way around laws against him owning guns. The new order will also apply to shotguns, and they’ve proposed bans on handguns as well.


—

Sask. firearm community unhappy with semi-auto rifle ban



> The federal government’s decision to ban the sale and use of what it calls “military-grade assault weapons” is not going over well in some corners of Saskatchewan.


—

Meme nails it.

2 long-guns used by N.S. shooter covered by ‘assault-style’ firearms ban, Blair says



> Canada’s public safety minister said two long-guns used in the Nova Scotia mass shooting are included in the list of more than 1,500 “military-style assault weapons” now banned in Canada.
> 
> Public Safety Minister Bill Blair told reporters Friday the firearms used by the gunman who killed 22 people are covered by the ban, but did not specify the models. He said it’s the responsibility of the RCMP to release that information.


—

The Liberals' conniving and undemocratic gun control measures



> Gun control “was one of the key planks in our election campaign,” Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland told a news briefing on Thursday. “We received a strong mandate from Canadians to act on gun control.”
> 
> Um, maybe I should Google the results of the 2019 federal election again just to be sure but, if memory serves me, the Liberals only won a minority in that vote.
> 
> *That means the Trudeau government doesn’t have a “strong mandate from Canadians” to do anything.*


Bold mine.

Yeppers.

—

Yep. That legal gun control sure works good...

Report: 17 Shot, 3 Fatally, During 36 Hours in Gun-Controlled Chicago… Damn Canadians!



> At least 17 people were shot, three fatally, from Friday afternoon into Saturday night in gun-controlled Chicago.


—

Trudeau says legislation on municipal handgun bans will move ahead but doesn't say when



> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended his assault-rifle ban on Sunday and promised to go even further by targeting handguns and tightening border security with new legislation introduced in the Parliament.
> 
> Yet he stopped short of providing a timeline for when such measures would be introduced, saying only that the federal Liberal government would move forward with legislation “when Parliament allows.”


—

Meme nails it.

Liberals will propose expanding ‘red flag’ gun laws, Blair says



> In the wake of the horrific Nova Scotia shooting rampage that cost 22 people their lives, Canada’s public safety minister has shed some light on Ottawa’s plan to expand who can sound the alarm on someone believed to be at risk or harming themselves or others with firearms.


—

Cold, Canuck Hands



> Sask Premier Scott Moe just now on John Gormley Live: the Saskatchewan government will be working to bring in measures to ensure the Trudeau gun ban will be _“rendered as ineffective as possible”_.


—

Driftwood Crips turn in illegal guns... 



> _"That Justin Trudeau... *he's just too damn smart for us*"...
> 
> “Takes measures to *permit municipalities to ban handguns* within their city limits.”_


----------



## FeXL

A few more articles on the TGF and his TGF OiC.

Caution: Link to MOtherCorpse inside. (Notice the ignorant's use of the word "silencer"?)

Obviously, confiscating "restricted" rifles...



> ...from privileged middle-aged white guys will reduce crime...
> 
> _ A *15-year-old boy has been charged with murder and attempted murder* in January's shooting at a downtown Ottawa Airbnb. Earlier this week, police released a photo of a handgun with a silencer that was believed to have been used in Akol's death._​


—

The problem with articles like this is they're trying to logic a Prog. That dog won't hunt. Prog's don't care about billions of $$$ lost and tens of thousands of unemployed because, guns!!!

Trudeau gun ban threatens $8B industry and 48,000 full-time equivalent jobs



> Canadian gun owners have had their cultural, constitutional and charter rights decimated by successive, mostly Liberal, governments for nothing more than political expediency. They introduced Bill C-68, passed into law in 1995, to hoodwink the public into believing they were tougher on crime than the Conservatives. It worked very well for them! Trudeau Jr. used the same successful strategy, won again and now we have Bill C-71, ‘the gun confiscation bill’. He is now threatening an Order In Council, bypassing parliamentary debate, to ban and confiscate an unknown and expanding number of firearms.


—

Criminals are loving Justin Trudeau’s gun grab



> With Justin Trudeau being slammed by premiers and law-enforcement experts for his disgraceful gun grab against law-abiding Canadians, we can clearly see that criminals are the biggest winners in all this.
> 
> In fact, criminals must be absolutely loving this.
> 
> The federal government is now going to expend gigantic amounts of money, time, and political capital to take guns away from Canadians who follow the law.
> 
> Meanwhile, that money, time, and political capital will be taken away from the growing threat of violent gangs.


—

Once again, trying to logic a Prog. Pointless. To those with the intellectual depth of a puddle, this is viewed as outstanding progress.

So much of Canada's new gun ban doesn't make sense



> Last weekend I said there was one word – useless – to describe the ban on what the federal Liberals like to call “assault rifles.”
> 
> Let me add another: chaotic.
> 
> Banning legal gun owners from possessing certain models of firearms would not have prevented any of the mass killings in recent Canadian history – Ecole Polytechnique, the Quebec City mosque or last month in Nova Scotia.
> 
> That makes the ban useless.
> 
> Nor will the ban announced by the Trudeau government prevent bank heists or drug gang turf wars, because the ban only impacts legit owners and legit owners are not the source of crime.
> 
> But the ban is worse than useless. It’s almost impossible to comprehend.


—

'Incoherent' Liberal firearm ban excludes several semi-automatics, potentially outlaws big-game hunting rifles



> The Liberal government’s “incoherent” firearm ban excludes several rifles that are nearly identical to the so-called “military-style” firearms that Ottawa intends to outlaw, gun retailers say.
> 
> The ban, announced late last week, does not include the Chinese-made Norinco Type 97, for example, a semi-automatic version of the standard-issued rifles used by the People’s Liberation Army of China. Nor does it include the Russian-designed SKS rifle, the precursor to the popular AK-47; the Israeli-made Tavor .223, a semi-automatic rifle developed with the aid of the Israeli Defense Force, or the Canadian-made WK180-C, which gun publication CalibreMag said “functions much like an AR-15”, a firearm Justin Trudeau was at pains to highlight.


—

“I'm a legal gun owner... my background gets checked every day”: Toronto man protests Trudeau's gun grab



> “From my cold, dead hands…”
> 
> At the latest Queen’s Park protest by everyday citizens clamouring for the provincial government to reopen the economy, a gun owner vented that *at least two of his firearms were suddenly declared illegal by the Justin Trudeau Liberals last week – and if he doesn’t turn in those rifles by a certain date, he will go from legal gun owner to criminal overnight.*
> 
> His take: Justin Trudeau is exploiting two tragedies to ramrod his anti-gun agenda through parliament.


Ya think?!!! :yikes:

—

Who do you trust? The legislation or another Lyin' Lieberal?

FACT CHECK: Have the Liberals banned hunting shotguns?



> Is your shotgun now illegal?: According to the regulations, yes. According to Minister Blair, no.


More:



> The Canadian Sport Shooting Association [CSSA] says that Blair may just not understand what his own regulations mean in practice.
> 
> *“Minister Blair is either too inept to comprehend the scope of his regulations…or he lied to the Government and Canadians…The list was incoherent.”*


Bold mine.

I'll take C, Alex: All of the above.

—

Let's call a pile of feces what it actually is: Bull$h!t...

Trudeau's legal gun ban smells like a takeover



> The obsession of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to disarm Canada’s civilian population of certain legally-obtained weapons has the earmarks of a dictatorial regime-in-the-making.
> 
> ...
> 
> Justin Trudeau, an admitted admirer of China’s communist government — as well as the Marxist doctrines of Fidel Castro — would know this better than most because he was taught on his daddy’s knee.


—

RACIS'!!!

Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Should Be Treated the Same in New Firearms Ban, Says NWT Gun Owner



> Willard Hagen flew bush planes in Canada’s far north for 30 years, negotiated one of Northwest Territory’s largest Indigenous land claims, and even tangled with the RCMP over some improperly stored and unregistered firearms back in 2005.
> 
> “[Police] were looking for a lost trapper so I let them use my cabin about 60 miles out of town, had a bunch of guns there and they grabbed them,” Hagen recalls. “They ended up dropping all the charges, but it was pretty ridiculous.”
> 
> After Ottawa’s ban on nearly 1,500 models of “assault-style” weapons announced on May 1, the former Gwich’in Tribal Council president told The Epoch Times that he won’t be giving up his guns and hasn’t renewed his gun licence since 2005 when police seized his firearms.
> 
> He also says the “Aboriginal hunter” exemption included in the new measures is divisive.
> 
> “It just creates another rift,” Hagen said of special treatment allotted for Indigenous hunters that could have saved him some trouble 15 years ago.


----------



## FeXL

Let's talk Benito Trudolini's gun confiscation s'more!

RCMP Deletes ‘Grandfathering’ Option From Web Page on Gun Bans



> The RCMP deleted the option for so-called “grandfathering” this week from its web page on the Canadian government’s mass gun confiscations, igniting concern owners will face jail unless we surrender our gear within two years.


—

Who do I send the cheque to?

Firearms Group Legally Challenges Canadian Gun Ban



> On Wednesday, the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights (CCFR) officially launched a charter challenge of the government’s ban on “military-style assault weapons.”
> 
> The Liberals rushed the ban with an order-in-council from the cabinet, not through legislation. The group believes the ban is a wrongful deprivation of liberty arising from an improper exercise of legislative power.
> 
> They refer to section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that states, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”
> 
> “The government, in an entirely arbitrary and irrational way, has created legislation that will deprive us of our property and our freedom to live as we wish, on pains of incarceration for failing to comply,” said Rod Giltaca, CEO and executive director of the CCFR.


—

RCMP Officer: Banned guns are “not assault rifles or military weapons”



> As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau makes the case that police want carbine rifles like the AR-15 banned because it is a “military-style assault rifle”, he is being contradicted by a recently surfaced article by an RCMP officer.
> 
> Writing in Blue Line – which describes itself as “Canada’s national law enforcement magazine”- RCMP officer Dave Brown writes that that carbine rifles “are not ‘assault rifles’ or military weapons. They have no full-auto capability.”


Doesn't matter. Tryin' to logic a Prog again.

—

I dunno. I seen some pretty fast bolt action shooters. They can git a shot off every, say, 5 or 6 seconds!

Justin Trudeau’s ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Includes Numerous Bolt Action Rifles



> An close examination of Canadian PM Justin Trudeau’s ban of 1,500 “assault weapons” reveals the list of prohibited firearms includes a number of bolt action rifles.
> 
> Bolt action rifles have been go-to rifles for the hunters and the sport community for over a century and do not have a self-loading action–a semiautomatic action–but are fed a new round only when the hunter or sportsman manually pulls back a bolt to reload.


----------



## FeXL

They Always Psychoanalyze Their Man



> Maybe the real answer is to ban the RCMP. We now have two separate incidents where people called the Mounties on Nova Scotia shooter Gabriel Wortman and told them about his violence against women and illegal stash of guns. Nothing was done.https://t.co/SJckj69HaW
> 
> — Brian Lilley (@brianlilley) May 13, 2020​
> But all is not lost. The “behavioral analysis unit” is performing a psychological autopsy on the gunman, that will include _talking to people who knew him._ Because science.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> They Always Psychoanalyze Their Man
> 
> :clap::clap::clap:


Maybe, just maybe it was anti-social distancing that pushed the creep over the edge? 

Maybe that was even one of the goals of the lockdown plan. Cause someone to go bonkers, so the Prime Moron will have an excuse to launch a gun seizure campaign, without even paying lip service to Parliament.

A thought on Bolt action rifles. Even with a clip, firing more than 4 or 5 rounds a minute and hitting different targets would be very difficult, at least for the average weekend shooter, ditto lever or pump action.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> A thought on Bolt action rifles. Even with a clip, firing more than 4 or 5 rounds a minute and hitting different targets would be very difficult, at least for the average weekend shooter, ditto lever or pump action.


I've fired both lever action & bolt action larger bore rifles. Lever action is much faster. I've fired bolt action & pump .22's. Bolt action isn't even in the same category as pump. I've also fired pump shotguns, very quick to reacquire (if your eye even left) the target & fire again.

There is no, zero, logic to the breadth of the bans. Benito Trudolini simply wanted to be seen as doing something on gun control. It also distracts much of the public from the $h!t job they're doing on coronavirus.


----------



## Macfury

FeXL said:


> It also distracts much of the public from the $h!t job they're doing on coronavirus.


I've been looking at those numbers. We keep catching up to other countries who I would expect to do far worse. Trudeau is a national disgrace.


----------



## FeXL

Macfury said:


> Trudeau is a national disgrace.


:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## FeXL

If only there was a law...

Shootings Up Citywide Despite Pandemic And Stay-At-Home Order; Humboldt Park In Particular Struggles



> First, the good news – crime is down in Chicago during the pandemic.
> 
> The bad news is that shootings are still up.


----------



## FeXL

Even anti-gun activists say Trudeau's gun ban will fail



> Even a leading anti-gun advocacy group is unhappy with Justin Trudeau's gun ban after it was discovered that it has been made easily reversible.
> 
> This legislation, they complain, would allow pro-gun governments to roll back the legislation that the current Trudeau government enacted, according to CTV News.


—

The gun grabbers don't care...

Justin Trudeau’s Assault-Rifle Ban Could Cost Gun Sellers Hundreds of Millions



> Between his two gun stores, JR Cox estimates he’s losing about half a million dollars in sales due to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s firearms ban.
> 
> “It’s attacked so many facets of my business,” said Cox, who runs two retail stores with shooting ranges—Target Sports Canada and The Shooting Edge—in Toronto and Calgary, respectively.


—

Federal firearms ban misses mark—badly



> Again, it’s difficult to see how this ban will make Canadians safer. It essentially penalizes millions of law-abiding firearms owners, both hunters and sport shooters. Hunters are among the most law-abiding people in Canada. Many Canadian families and Indigenous peoples depend upon hunting to provide food for the family dinner table through legal harvesting, with the added benefit of getting out in the wilderness and spending time with family and friends. And hunters are the largest contributors to conservation efforts, as the money they pay for licences helps secure conservation lands and fund projects to manage wildlife.


—

“TYRANT” Trudeau: Protesters won't comply with gun grab 



> *“Come and take it…”*
> 
> Well, that gun legislation protester we featured (watch our interview with him HERE) from Queen’s Park protest #2 was back for protest #3 on Saturday – and this time, he brought his friends.
> 
> Their take: Justin Trudeau is exploiting not one but two tragedies in order to ramrod his anti-gun agenda through Parliament.


Bold mine... 

—

Once the foot's in the door...

Caution: Link to MotherCorpse inside.

Why Canada should ban the sale, ownership of handguns



> The government has finally moved to ban military-style assault rifles. Great. So now let’s go to the next step, a complete and comprehensive ban on the sale and ownership of all handguns.


—

“What's an assault rifle?” Toronto responds to Trudeau's gun grab



> Justin Trudeau's recent gun ban that banned “assault style rifles” is a troubling act of political overreach simply to fulfill a campaign promise.
> 
> It offers no basis nor factual evidence in terms of justification. Rather, it simply capitalizes on recent tragedies which have, and almost always, include the use of unlicensed and/or illegal firearms.


—

Canadian Local MPs Upset Over Gun Ban



> The gun ban has been met with criticism by gun owners and Conservative leaders because they say it targets legal gun owners.
> 
> “Taking firearms away from law-abiding citizens does nothing to stop dangerous criminals who obtain their guns illegally,” said Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer. “The reality is, the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with illegally obtained firearms.”


—

They had their best activist on it!

'Incoherent' Liberal firearm ban excludes several semi-automatics, potentially outlaws big-game hunting rifles



> 'Minister Blair is either too inept to comprehend the scope of his regulations… or he lied to the government and Canadians,' a sporting arms association said


—

N.S. mass killer’s semi-automatic guns believed to have come from U.S.



> The RCMP says three of the four semi-automatic weapons used by a gunman during last month’s mass shooting in Nova Scotia are believed to have come from the United States.
> 
> *The federal force says in a news release today that only one of the guns could be traced back to a source in Canada.*
> 
> The Mounties are still declining to reveal the brand or the calibre of the weapons – two handguns and two rifles – used during the April 18-19 rampage that killed 22 people in five communities around the province.


Bold mine.

Would that one be the one that was taken from the dead police officer?


----------



## FeXL

Interesting take.

E-2574 Petition: Call Upon the PM to withdraw GunBan OIC



> We the lawful firearm owners of Canada would like to call on The Right Honorable Justin Trudeau, as a show of solidarity and understanding in relation to the May 1, 2020 “assault style” rifle ban to hereby relinquish and consider as banned the 1960 Mercedes Benz 300SL owned by Mr. Trudeau and passed down to Mr. Trudeau by his late father Mr. Pierre Trudeau.
> We feel that Mr. Trudeau should surrender this vehicle for the following reasons:
> 1. The maximum speed limit anywhere in Canada is 120 KM/h (74.57 Mph), a Mercedes Benz 300SL can achieve 257 KM/h (160 Mph) far in excess of the legal limit. We believe that no one needs a race car to go buy milk.
> 2. This vehicle looks like it will go very fast and looks like it was made to serve no other purpose than to participate in illegal street racing. Street racing has cost many lives in Canada and there is no place in Canada for a vehicle who’s only purpose is to street race.
> 3. Drinking and driving as well as impaired driving under the influence of drugs is a major issue in Canada and in particular the use of race car style vehicles has been shown to be a major factor on Canada’s roads.
> We understand that Mr. Trudeau may have a reluctance to surrender his privately owned property and may site such reasons as:


Knocks it out of the park.


----------



## FeXL

Further on the newest prohibited firearms, a .22 and a .410.

Cold, Canuck Hands



> Minister Blair outright lies in the House of Commons today when questioned about the newly prohibited Mossberg .22 by Opposition Critic @PierrePaulHus . It’s wildly inappropriate to see this government behave in this manner. 🇨🇦 pic.twitter.com/YQRUIxEuEg
> 
> — CCFR/CCDAF (@CCFR_CCDAF) May 21, 2020​


Huh. A lyin' Lieberal. 'Magine that...

From the comments:



> Canadians are arguing about the color of the blindfold they want used at their execution, rather than the execution itself. You apparently stopped fighting long ago.


Yeppers.

WEXIT!!!

Related (spot on & and hilarious!):

Cold, Quick Dick Hands


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Further on the newest prohibited firearms, a .22 and a .410.
> 
> Cold, Canuck Hands
> 
> 
> 
> Huh. A lyin' Lieberal. 'Magine that...
> 
> From the comments:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeppers.
> 
> WEXIT!!!
> 
> Related (spot on & and hilarious!):
> 
> Cold, Quick Dick Hands


Had the chance to fire a Mossberg semi-auto .22 many many years ago at a range. Fell short of my Browning T-Bolt when it came to accuracy, but it was a nice rifle. When I say short I was still in the black just not as tightly grouped and not a single 2 bullets in the same hole.

That said as .22s are usually used for small game, and second shots tend to be futile, I was never convinced of a personal need for a semi-auto.


----------



## FeXL

eMacMan said:


> Had the chance to fire a Mossberg semi-auto .22 many many years ago at a range. Fell short of my Browning T-Bolt when it came to accuracy, but it was a nice rifle. When I say short I was still in the black just not as tightly grouped and not a single 2 bullets in the same hole.
> 
> That said as .22s are usually used for small game, and second shots tend to be futile, I was never convinced of a personal need for a semi-auto.


Never fired a Mossberg semi-auto but have fired other semi-auto .22's, years ago. As a teenager it was remotely interesting but that's about where it ended. We had a Remington .22 pump on the farm that worked well for gophers.


----------



## FeXL

RCMP Says Over 100,000 Gun Owners May Be Target of Confiscation



> The RCMP, which controls private gun ownership in Canada, said more than 100,000 hunters, sport shooters, firearm collectors and other owners may have been targeted in this month’s order for mass confiscations.


----------



## FeXL

First-Time Gun Buyers Explain How Coronavirus Changed Their Politics



> Scott Kane went 38 years without ever touching a gun. That streak would have continued had it not been for the coronavirus. In March, fearful of the harassment his wife and child experienced over their Asian ancestry, Kane found himself in a California gun shop. His March 11 purchase of a 9mm would have been the end of the story, were it not for a political standoff over shutdown orders and background checks. Now Kane, a former supporter of gun-control measures and AR-15 bans, is frustrated by the arduous process that has denied his family a sense of security. The pandemic has made the soft-spoken software engineer an unlikely Second Amendment supporter.
> 
> "This has taken me, a law-abiding citizen with nary an unpaid parking ticket to my name, over a month," he told the _Washington Free Beacon_. "Meanwhile Joe Bad Guy has probably purchased several fully automatic AK-47s out of the back of an El Camino in a shady part of town with zero background checks."


----------



## eMacMan

FeXL said:


> Never fired a Mossberg semi-auto but have fired other semi-auto .22's, years ago. As a teenager it was remotely interesting but that's about where it ended. We had a Remington .22 pump on the farm that worked well for gophers.


Had one of those as well. Belonged to my Grand dad when he was young. Trying to remember the date, early 1900s for sure. Possibly pre WWI. Given it's age and extensive use it was reasonably accurate, as long as you used .22 Long Rifle ammo.


----------



## FeXL

There goes the narrative. Once again.

Canada Border Services Agency stops another 65 prohibited firearms from entering our communities



> Today, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) announced the largest single firearm seizure, on record, with the interdiction of 65 prohibited guns at the Toronto Pearson International Airport.


Lemme guess: The consignee wasn't a licensed farmer, duck hunter or skeet shooter..


----------



## FeXL

A Lieberal lying?

Shocka...

Despicable Misinformation: Bill Blair Lies To Canadians About AR-15



> Liberal Public Safety Minister Bill Blair is spreading misinformation to Canadians.
> 
> Blair is lying about the AR-15, falsely claiming it has been involved in many Canadian mass shootings.
> 
> “The AR-15, and other weapons like it, have been used in mass killings in Canada including at École Polytechnique, Dawson College, the Islamic Cultural Centre of Quebec City, Moncton, and against children at Sandy Hook in the U.S. These weapons have no place in our communities.”
> 
> — Bill Blair (@BillBlair) June 15, 202​0
> 
> His claim is simply a lie.


----------



## FeXL

*~v Becauth ith's 2015!!!*

Bill Blair is on it!



> _ Ok, so the veh was stolen around 3amish, cops notified at 7am, this article issued at 4:30pm.
> Rifle, handgun, ammo, 2 stun-guns in car. Are the police not required to take the guns out of the veh at night and lock them up?
> Someone pls educate me, something doesn't seem right https://t.co/ds9gcSFTnB
> 
> — CZV (@CZV416) June 11, 2020_


Damn those farmers, duck hunters & skeet shooters that leave their gun safes open!!!


----------



## FeXL

The 9th Circus gets one right? :yikes:

9th Circuit ends California ban on high-capacity magazines



> A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday threw out California’s ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, saying the law violates the U.S. Constitution’s protection of the right to bear firearms.
> 
> “Even well-intentioned laws must pass constitutional muster,” appellate Judge Kenneth Lee wrote for the panel’s majority. California’s ban on magazines holding more than 10 bullets “strikes at the core of the Second Amendment — the right to armed self-defense.”
> 
> He noted that California passed the law “in the wake of heart-wrenching and highly publicized mass shootings,” but said that isn’t enough to justify a ban whose scope “is so sweeping that half of all magazines in America are now unlawful to own in California.”


Every so often, even a blind squirrel finds a nut...


----------



## FeXL

Nearly Five Million Americans Became Gun Owners in First Half of 2020



> *Nearly five million Americans became first-time gun owners in 2020*, according to a new report.
> 
> The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the gun industry's trade group, estimates that 17.1 million guns have been sold between January and August with 4.84 million Americans purchasing their first guns. *The sales—especially to new owners—represent a significant shift in American attitudes on gun ownership.*


More:



> Wex Gunworks in Delray Beach, Fla., has been "slammed" with demand from first-time buyers, according to owner Brandon Wexler. Wexler attributed the surge—which threatened to cause supply shortages—to uncertainty fostered by the coronavirus pandemic and rioting in cities across the country.
> 
> "Since the eruption of Covid-19 and the age of protests *new gun owners have flocked to the shop to buy firearms, accessories, and get firearms training*," Wexler told the Washington Free Beacon. "We were slammed up through about six weeks ago, then inventory dried up from a manufacturing standpoint."


All bold mine.

Five million new legal gun owners. Prog heads exploding...


----------



## FeXL

Apparently a complete absence of genitals (not to mention brain & spine) is sufficient justification to become a Prog politician...

Democrat Congressman Blames Gun Ownership on ‘Small Genitals’



> Over the weekend Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL) suggested militia service is the litmus test for gun ownership and noted that “having small genitals is not sufficient reason to own a gun.”


----------



## FeXL

Good!

Detroit Women Flock to Gun Training



> Tanisha Moner has had a gun pointed at her twice in her life. Once by two strangers who kidnapped, robbed, and sexually assaulted her when she was 17. And, again, by another robber as she worked a management shift at a restaurant.
> 
> The traumatic experiences left her scarred, afraid of guns, shuddering at the sound of a firework and popped balloon. That changed the day she decided to face her fears and showed up for a gun-carry class at a local range.
> 
> "Succumbing to your own fear is the only thing that can stop you from doing anything you want to do," Moner told the Washington Free Beacon.
> 
> She said that first gun-safety training class years ago helped her overcome her fear and ignited a passion to help others overcome their own fears. That's why she says she decided to become an NRA-certified instructor. *Last weekend she took part in a basic handgun safety training event where she helped to train 1,938 Detroit women*—more than double the event's 2019 attendance. The Sunday session was so popular that the classroom portion had to be changed to an open-air event in the range's parking lot due to overcrowding concerns and coronavirus-related precautions.


Bold mine.


----------

