What’s Gun-Control Proponents’ Next Move After Sandy Hook?
When shots rang out Friday morning at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., it was inevitable that the gunfire would reverberate in Washington.
With other recent mass shootings, such as the Sikh temple massacre in Oak Creek, Wis., and the movie theater slayings in Aurora, Colo., talk of greater gun control efforts ballooned on the Hill, then deflated quickly as other headlines from the campaign to the fiscal cliff weighed in.
Now, gun-control proponents are hoping a newly emboldened President Obama fresh off re-election will lead a charge to push through any number of stricter laws.
Obama says he’s game for “change,” but is not quite elaborating on what that means.
Longtime proponents of gun control on Capitol Hill quickly jumped on the news to push their cause.
“Leaders in Washington from both parties, and groups like the NRA, all say that now is not the time to talk about how gun safety laws can save lives in America,” Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), who ran for Congress after her husband was killed in a 1993 mass shooting, said on Friday. “I agree, now is not the time to talk about gun laws – the time for that conversation was long before all those kids in Connecticut died today.”
“The Second Amendment is the law of the land but it was never intended to allow murderers to take the lives of innocent kids,” she added. “It’s our moral obligation as policymakers and as parents to do more to save lives.”
“We cannot tolerate mass shootings as a mere inconvenience or a normal part of our everyday lives,” said Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.). “Easy availability of the deadliest weapons to the most dangerous people has cost countless lives and caused immeasurable suffering, never more so than today.”
Retiring Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) on Sunday suggested a “national commission on mass violence,” not lieu of “anything else the president or Congress or state governments want to do, but to make sure that the heartbreak and anger that we feel now is not dissipated over time or lost in legislative gridlock.”
And Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) penned an op-ed in this morning’s Chicago Tribune calling for “the majority of Americans, and the majority of thoughtful gun owners and hunters, to agree that there must be reasonable limits on gun ownership and weapons.”
“The U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that our Second Amendment rights are not absolute. So can we come together and agree that Americans have a right to own and use firearms for sport and self-defense within certain limits?” Durbin wrote.
Before many of the facts are known in the fluid investigation of the Newtown shooting, in which Adam Lanza opened fire on 6- and 7-year-olds with guns reportedly taken from his just-slain mother, Democrats are basically resurrecting every recent nugget of gun-control efforts — which have little connection to the Connecticut case thus far.
Arguing that they’re addressing a phenomenon more than a single crime, lawmakers have cited the renewal of the assault weapons ban, prohibition on magazines carrying more than 10 rounds, limiting the purchase of firearms to two a month, requiring safety locks on guns within reach of children, eliminating gun-show loopholes, and keeping the mentally unstable from acquiring weapons.
There won’t be a lack of headlines from which gun-control proponents can draw to push specific tenets of legislation if they can’t zero in on Newtown. For example, George Zimmerman, standing trial in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, took Adderall for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and could be a prime starting point for debate about which psychiatric conditions could disqualify applicants from a gun permit.
The office of one House liberal told PJM today that they were waiting for specific facts about the Newtown case, then would “be able to look at the overall picture for gun violence as a whole along with mental issues.”
But that doesn’t mean some aren’t pushing forward while emotions are still high.
“As President Obama said last night, no one law can erase evil. No policy can prevent a determined madman from committing a senseless act of violence,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said on the floor today. “But we need to accept the reality that we are not doing enough to protect our citizens.”
Republicans focused on the tragedy itself, even declining to deliver a traditional weekend address on Saturday out of respect for the victims.
“In a world that can at times be defined by its darkness, children are a reminder of what is good, cheerful and beautiful about life,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). “An act of violence against these defenseless young people, as well as the faculty and staff who dedicate themselves daily to educating and caring for them, is a deed of unconscionable evil.”
“We have to deal with the mental health aspect. I think it’s fair game. I think we absolutely should talk about the intersection of a lethal weapon and it relates to — to mental health. Absolutely. We got to have that discussion in this country,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said Sunday on ABC’s This Week.
“And we also have to deal with the new social ramifications of the bombardment and the immediacy of social interaction between violence, the realism that you find in games and movies. Some people, young people, as they’re making this transition from their teen years into adulthood, aren’t able to mentally make that transition. And there does need to be help,” Chaffetz continued. “But we’re also going to need to look to families and communities and churches. It’s not just a government solution.”
And even though Obama advocated unspecified change while speaking at the Newtown vigil Sunday night, spokesman Jay Carney today demurred about what concrete action might be coming.
“It’s a complex problem that will require a complex solution. No single piece of legislation, no single action will fully address the problem,” Carney said at today’s press briefing. “So I don’t have a specific agenda to announce to you today. I would simply point you to what the president said last night about moving forward in coming weeks. And I would look for him to do that.”
Meanwhile, Democratic lawmakers swarmed the airwaves with a gun-control message and sharper agenda.
“I think this is the straw that broke the camel’s back, to be very honest with you,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said today on PBS.
Feinstein was author of the assault weapons ban that was law for 10 years but hasn’t been renewed by Congress since its 2004 expiration. Multiple attempts at reauthorization over the years have been unsuccessful.
“I don’t see how Americans can want, you know, a situation where a 20-year-old gets a gun from his mother, kills his mother, goes into a school, shoots his way through the glass, goes in and puts three to 11 bullets in 6-year-olds, 20 of them,” she said. “…And I gather this particular Bushmaster, you can actually sort of dial down the ease with which you pull the trigger and its frequency. So you can just pump those bullets out in a very few seconds.”
Feinstein said she hadn’t yet had a chance to talk with Republicans to see if any have had a change of heart about helping her bill, but she did ring the White House to try for a call with Obama.
“I think the president now has an open mind,” she said. “…I want to work with members in this body, members in the other body, and try to see that, by the beginning of the year, we have got something where there is some very good support.”
She already has some backers in the House, with Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) calling on the chamber to immediately pass a ban on all assault weapons and eliminate gun-show exemptions.
“This Congress must rise above partisan politics and now come together to pass these important gun safety laws,” Jackson Lee said. “The safety of America and its children should be at the forefront when it comes to making these gun safety laws. The politics of outside groups like the NRA should not play a factor when we consider the safety of our citizens.”
The National Rifle Association has been silent — both in its press shop and on social media — since the tragedy.
But one Democratic senator — and NRA member — advocated all-of-the-above gun-law discussions that include the gun lobby.
“I’m a proud member of the NRA and I’m a defender of the 2nd Amendment,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said on CNN International today. “It’s more than just gun control they’re talking about. The NRA, first of all, needs to be at the table. They need to be sitting there and we need to be working through this and looking at what we can and should be doing in America.”
“The 2nd Amendment is very near and dear to us. And the people that are afraid, oh, now, if we start talking about this, you might take my 2nd Amendment rights away,” Manchin added. “Absolutely not.”
The Dems have a false sense of empowerment…as if they won by a landslide…they did not. Let them go ahead and shoot themselves in the foot with this issue. The parasite Dem voters do not care that much about this.
NOT only don’t they have a mandate, but the fact of the matter is that a Congressional mandate, to eviscerate the Second Amendment, regardless how they parse ‘is’, is a dead letter.
And Repubs would do well to watch them VERY carefully on this issue because they have been gunning for it for decades. But it didn’t take on a ‘life’ of its own until the Thug-in-Chief arrived on the scene. And as the sun rises and sets they will set the stage to make it appear as if their mandate is lock, stock and barrel.
Again, they are gunning for LEGAL guns and aiming for TOTAL control -http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/08/07/barack-hussein-obamas-deconstruction-plans-green-wise-via-the-economy-disarming-the-citizens-via-gun-control-connecting-the-dots-addendum-to-the-second-term-plans-of-an-obama-presidency-c/
And this is just the beginning….
Murder is illegal in most jurisdictions….globally.
Done.
Exactly. Criminals are by definition not deterred by laws.
And Fast and Furious.
Ahhh… Fast and Furious.
There’s a domestic version of F&F still going on – you can take that one to the bank. Don’t be fooled by the crocodile tears of our Democrat enemies. They LOVE these school shootings.
Wouldn’t surprise me if Internet trolls (probably paid by Soros or other corrupt sources) are egging on anybody they think is crazy, just to incite their targets to commit high-profile gun crimes – preferably at schools or other places where children are present. What a pretext for more gun laws and more government tyranny!
When you come right down to it, there is only ONE way to eliminate public school violence.
Outlaws and scofflaws ignore laws?
Why are we all so certain that this freak Lanza was the actual killer and not a pathetic fall guy, dragged to the school and executed by the actual killers? Fast and Furious should have shown us that the Obama administration will do anything to advance the confiscation of firearms. What happened to the man in camouflage fleeing through the woods behind the school that the police apprehended? We never heard another thing about him. Doesn’t this all seem just a little too convenient for the Obama administration’s purposes, and just a month after the election? I’m sorry, but I smell a big, horrible rat, and the Obamanation’s crocodile tears give me little comfort.
Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner. Although I do find it perfectly reasonable that the story happened as reported, I also consider this administration capable of *anything* and if they thought that doing this would get them momentum on seizing guns they would not hesitate to do it. They already know they can get away with it, if MSM hacks and vile toadies like Chris Matthews had hardcore evidence that this was the case, do you really thing they would reveal it? Of course not, the media is rolling in it, Feinstein and Michael Moore got raging hard-ons the second they heard about this, every time a mass shooting happens (bonus if children are involved) these parasitic wastes of life revel in it to shamelessly push their agenda. They know full that many other countries lost their gun rights in the hysteria following a mass shooting and consider that to be their formula for success here.
Oh yeah, and another thing supporting your contention. Isn’t it awfully convenient that he was wearing a mask? There are survivors who witnessed the incident, but it’ll be almost impossible for them to differentiate one gunman dressed in all black wearing a mask from another. One thing is very much certain, they were willing to cause the deaths of US border agents along with countless innocent Mexicans to push their agenda back home, this we know. Anybody willing to kill 300+ innocent people, including a goodly number of children, to push their vile agenda is perfectly capable of something like this.
Camel. Nose. Tent.
The right should start with the premise that inalienable rights and the phrase ‘shall not be infringed’ apply to this issue. iow, the starting point, and the line in the sand, begins with the premis that the government has no right to license and regulate gun ownerhip. Period. Dot. End of discussion.
If you accept any other starting point, you’ve already lost the argument and have surrendered your freedom to the government.
As for the video game blame game or the blame Hollywood meme?
I wonder what influenced the madmen, serial killers and mass murderers before movies and video games became such an obvious ill influence on them?
Otherwise, what you’re saying is that the world was a perfectly safe place before Hollywood and video gamesd came along and ruined it all…when the world wasn’t a safe place, never was a safe place and never has been.
Focus, people. Take a deep breath and…think for a change. Act, instead of react. Don’t let anyone, not Hollywood, not the MSM, not your favorite or least favorite politicion, not even Breitbart, push your buttons. At least, stop and think about it for more than ten seconds, anyway.
You are not free when you react to button pushing by anyone not yourself. You’re a slave when you do that.
“This concern with the basic condition of freedom — the absence of physical constraint — is unquestionably necessary, but is not all that is necessary. It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison and yet not free — to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national State, or of some private interest within the nation, want him to think, feel and act.”
I’m with Warren Bonesteel, as well as adamantly opposed to the Stalinist attitude of the Democratic [sic] party: some people commit crimes; therefore, the all wise, all-powerful state is entitled to punish everyone.
The fake term “assault rifle” is all but impossibe to define tightly enough for the feral government to ban scary-looking military-style rifles. That failing, I expect representatives of the Democratic [sic] party will try to ban magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. Would that make anyone so-called “safer?” No, of course not, if only because it takes only second or two to replace an empty magazine with a full.
Safety isn’t the point, nor ever has been, nor ever will be. The Democratic [sic] party’s hope is to deliver a hard slap across the face to all us commoners who believe we have a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. The only thing totalitarianists in America hate more than the Second Amendment is uppity commoners. They’ve been sneering at “NRA dupes,” “knuckle draggers,” “Neanderthals,” “bitter clingers,” et alia for years. It’s all about exercising social control and abusing the raw power of the feral government to burnish their claims of moral and intellectual superiority.
Why do they hate us so much? I believe it’s partly fear of people who decline to succumb to their childish, irrational fears and beliefs, partly envy and hatred of normal people.
Standingwolf said “That failing, I expect representatives of the Democratic [sic] party will try to ban magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. Would that make anyone so-called “safer?” No, of course not, if only because it takes only second or two to replace an empty magazine with a full.”
What would be SAFER is to eliminate “gun free zones” and allow teachers to carry concealed weapons. How quickly would this messed up pos been taken down if somebody or a few somebodies in there had been armed?
The liberal world is like riding a fancy merry-go-round while the crazies are taking pop-shots at you.
Good point. There should be no “gun free” zones without trained and armed security on site, enough to cover the whole area- not squads, but one in a theater, one or two in a small school, two or three and a office with monitors in a medium size high school.
These shooters are cowards, they will inflict pain, live out their fantasies, but not take a chance on being hurt. Almost all have killed themselves rather than confront police. The Aurora shooter disarmed himself and waited for the cops. The recent Oregon shooter killed himself when he saw a gun pointed at him.
If they know they will have to confront real, armed opposition, most will look for someplace else they can act out without shooting it out. Beyond that, all I can think of is careful appliction of the laws to minimize the ability of the deranged to obtain arms and an equally careful securing of our own ability to defend ourselves and those we love.
As to the rest, the hysteria of the moment will be fed and milked as far as it can be, don’t even bother arguing with any liberals until they calm down. We have to be stubborn “clingers”, quiet and stubborn, ’cause the left loves stampedes and is no longer capable of carefully thought out action. I guess that’s our job, us stubborn bible clingers, traditionalists, and cautious, conservative types.
@ Standing Wolf,
Exactly. And it should be noted that in Sheila Jackson Lee’s district, bars over the windows of homes is the rule not the exception. People who succumbe to smoke inhalation before the first responders can pull these people out is quite common.
If they outlaw high-capacity magazines, how would that help their cause? There are already hundreds of millions of them in the hands of the citizenry. In some states you have to register your firearms. In no state are you required to register the clips that are sold separately. The Feds have no way of knowing which gun owners have them, or how many they have. Such legislation would be meaningless.
“I wonder what influenced the madmen, serial killers and mass murderers before movies and video games became such an obvious ill influence on them?”
When I was a kid such things were blamed on comic books and cartoons.
How do you know a Democrat is lying about their true intentions?
If they use the word “reasonable” in any part of a sentence, they’re lying.
“common sense” is another tell. It’s all about trying to paint the opposition as extreme, when the reality is that they are the extreme ones acting to defile the constitution.
“…for the children” is another good one, although at this point I’d take any positive, conciliatory or cooperative language (barring just going straight to that their lips are moving) any more.
Anyone… particularly any one in government advocating any gun ban/confiscation should have to live by their own rules. Bloomberg/obama/feinstien … all of Congress, SCOTUS, and every branch/bureaucrat/court should be Gun Free Zones…. just like they have made our schools… our children.
Let them die… no armed guards, no protection at all.
Let them be Sandy Hook.
Maybe then common sense would have some venue.
No, of course not… it’s left/liberal sacriledge for power and responsibility to EVER go together. Responsibility is for the little people or anyone else the powerful don’t like.
Senator Durbin : “So can we come together and agree that Americans have a right to own and use firearms for sport and self-defense within certain limits?” Durbin wrote.”
So please explain why, Senator Durbin, you took that right of self defense away from those teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary by declaring schools as gun free zones? Do you not understand that such a declaration is only obeyed by law abiding citizens?
Senator Reid then goes on to say ” But we need to accept the reality that we are not doing enough to protect our citizens.” Which is exactly true made worse by the simple fact that what you are doing makes it worse in every regard.
When will the leadership of the democrat party admit that this is not about ‘gun control’. This is about population control, keeping the serfs tied up in confusing, conflicting, and restrictive laws that keep the population under the control of the political elite. There is no intent to ‘keep citizens safe’. The intent is to keep the ruling elite safe from the population.
To the libturds: You can have my guns when:1. you disarm and either lock up, forever, or deport forever every MS13 and other hispanic/latino gang member or wanna be from this nation; 2. lock up forever every black gang member; 3. every member of Congress and the administration live without SS or police protection; 4. lock up every criminal, felony and federal, forever with no chance of parole or early release; 5. station LEOs on my block 24/7; and 6. lock up all mentally unstable person especially those who tend toward aggression.
There I think that about does it. So you libturds want to live in a utopia- free of guns, well here it is. Until then, “…from my cold, dead hands.”
“I agree, now is not the time to talk about gun laws”–some leftoid
I didn’t kill anybody, and no one is going to control me or take my guns away, least of all a government that has itself killed millions with guns and bombs and whatnot.
End of discussion.
Some libtard blogger wrote: “When the Second Amendment was written, they were referring to muskets. You can’t commit mass murder with a musket.”
Fool. You can commit mass murder with an axe if nobody else is armed.
Cannons with grapeshot were a little difficult to obtain at the time, but it was doable. I don’t believe the laws then prohibited anyone from owning one.
We are often told that alcohol prohibition didn’t work because alcohol was just too intrinsic to American culture. Well, one other thing that is also intrinsic to American culture? Her firearms. If you want to make the argument that alcohol prohibition didn’t work because too many Americans were just too wrapped up with alcohol to give it up. In effect, you made a large segment of the American public criminal by prohibiting alcohol. Well, at least 40% of American households own a firearm. To effect serious gun controls or bans, you’re looking at the same type of situation – criminalizing a very large segment of the American population. And if you think that Americans will give up their guns any more than they gave up their beers …
Now, in answer to the title of the article…
The left is playing with us. Strictly speaking, they don’t need to get rid of the Second Amendment. They will try to cripple it or eliminate it, in all but name.
They think they own the federal LEO’s, alpha-bits and military, national guard and what have you. …and they do own the top spots in all of those orgnizations. But they don’t own all the little guys within those organizations. (History is a bitch if you never learn from it.)
Read Obama’s Executive Orders, combined with the previous Adminstrations E.O.’s. (Short version: We’re screwed.)
Look at D.C. The left owns it all, except for the House and the Supremes, and they have the Supremes on a leash – and they have the House by the balls. If they took the House, too, that’d be like having ice cream with their cake. Not neccessary, but nice.
All they really need now is a ‘national emergency’ and we’re under martial law. Any ‘reasonable’ purpose will do the trick. Natural disaster? A major riot? An economic collapse? Anything will do for a reason…mebbe even a refusal to surrender your guns on a more or less mass scale. Any. Reason.
Everything and everyone…and every penny everyone has, and everything you own, – literally – gets ‘nationalized’ under martial law or if a war is ‘officially’ declared. If/when it happens and you object to such nationalization, you’re automatically a criminal.
So, listen to the left-wingers with those thoughts in mind. There’s a reason they’re so overjoyed, pushy and excited about things. Their ‘Long March’ through our institutions is almost over.
They’re not stupid (although they may be nuts). They’ve got us right where they want us…and from their perspective, there ain’t a thing we can do about it except pick up our guns…and die, or go to prison/camps…alone and one at a time.
Personally, I think they’ve engaged in strategic over-reach. They shoulda waited a few more years, or even another decade or two, in order to ensure their success.
That’s my opinion.
One thing, my friend. First off, the pansies are gonna have take the 2nd AD hook, line, and sinker, and I predict a sinker. Secondly, where do most of our troops come from? The southern to midwestern states. You think they gonna stand stand for that sort of take over?
“… but is not quite elaborating on what that means.”
Maybe we’ll be so lucky that he’ll go off-TOTUS and say we need to get rid of the Bibles being clung to, along with the guns.
/bitterly
/Frank Marshall Davis would certainly tell him so, via the ouija board.
I have a brother who is a bit of a moocher, guess that explains his vote for the Bamster.
Anyway, he is such an avid hunter he’s been know to quit his job for the three months of deer season. Hunting he does with a semi-automatic Browning rifle.
Christmas conversations should be interesting and his cognitive dissonance should be quite enjoyable….
Of course, maybe we’re all wrong and the Bamster will NOT go after gun control as the losing strategy that it is, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Do we have anyone to play the role in 2014 that Newt Gingrich played in 1994 after the Clinton assault weapons ban was passed? After all, that gave the Republicans control of the House of Representatives for years!
There’s a certain innumeracy involved in the reactions to shootings like this. In the last ten years, about 100 people per year have been killed in mass shootings. According to the CDC, 2,437,163 people died in 2009 from all causes. Therefore, in 2009, the odds of someone who died dying because they were shot in a mass shooting was about 1 in 25,000.
In comparison, given that you died that year: the odds that you died of heart disease was 1 in 4; the odds that you died from some time of accident was 1 in 20; the odds that you died from influenza or pneumonia was 1 in 45; the odds that you died because you committed suicide is 1 in 66; and perhaps the most comparable one is that the odds you died because you were murdered is 1 in 140.
There are a lot of ways to die, but one of the least likely, and less likely than the common causes listed above by several orders of magnitude, is that you died because you were in a crowd during a mass shooting spree.
While unbelievably sad, it makes little sense that the occurrence of mass shootings should have more than a really tiny, if any, influence on policy.
Gun control? “Congress must enforce stricter gun-control measures on the Obama administration and end the rampant proliferation of firearms via gunrunning operations so that Fast & Furious will never be allowed to happen again – we owe it to Brian Terry and his bereaved family.”
http://obamareport.blogspot.com/2012/12/why-didnt-obama-seek-stricter-gun.html
Obama says he’s game for “change,”
His last “game for change” was furnishing thousands of assault weapons to Mexican gangs to kill hundreds, maybe even thousands, of people including children. I think he should just sit down.
Yeah, and these are the guys that are going to “control” guns!
Hardy har har.
Republicans should be repeating those three words ad nauseum.
Anything except a revolver, lever action Winchester ’73 or a bolt-action .30-06 will be considered an “assualt weapon” that can “spray bullets fast as you can pull the trigger”… ban it! (Thanks, left/liberals.)
Ever seen Jerry Miculek shoot a revolver?
A lever action carbine in a pistol caliber is fast and effective out to 200 yards.
And a .30-06 properly scoped and sighted will drop a deer size mammal out to 800 yards. Once they get the AKs and ARs and other semi autos and hi cap magazines off the market are you really foolish enough to think they’ll stop there?
Especially since it’s not the “assault weapon” that’s at fault no matter what the fear mongers preach, it’s the assault person controlling that weapon be it gun, knife, flammable liquid, or chunk of rock.
@ Uncle Lar
Facts, they don’t need no facts, man. Hollywood has edumacated them on how gloriously awful guns are, and since they are afraid to touch them themselves, they, well, they know how they feel about all this gun stuff, and what else do you need man. Give ‘em up or you are just a horrible person and shouldn’t have any rights. Anyone edumacated with a sheepskin and all knows that! All them smart people!
During the Clinton Administration, ATF tried to include lever-action rifles and even pump-action .22 rifles under the Assault Weapon ban, on the grounds that they generally held 11 to 12 cartridges in their non-detachable magazines. They were slapped down hard by the Supreme Court three times, as each time they tried to sleaze around the district and appellate courts, which had the poor grace to point out (repeatedly) that such rifles (1) were not “self-actuating”, (2) did not have detachable magazines, and (3) were generally based on designs that have existed for a century or more.
It finally reached the point where the Deputy U.S. Attorney General whom Janet Reno had designated her “point man” on gun control had to be threatened with contempt of SCOTUS charges to get him to stop bringing the case back to the high court and demanding that they allow exactly what the law, as written, prohibited the government from doing. His statement was, “We will use this law to capture an entire new category of guns.”
That Deputy Attorney General’s name was Eric Holder.
Don’t bet that your Uberti Winchester 1873 reproduction isn’t on the ban list. Or your grandfather’s ninety-year-old Winchester .22 pump, either.
They won’t rest until you are disarmed, defenseless, and at their mercy.
“Mercy” being a word progressives laugh at. In their minds, non-progressives are evil, and deserve none. (And besides, abusing the defenseless is fun- ask any bully.)
Keep that firmly in mind.
clear ether
eon
Eon, you make my point extremely well, thanks.
The anti gun crowd, having learned their lesson well, are all incrementalists. Having failed miserably with broad sweeping bans they now chip away at any particularly vulnerable points where they believe they can win. One of their especially successful tactics was to sell the media on the use of the bogus term “assault weapon” which not only demonizes a class of firearm it also conflates semi and full auto mechanisms in the minds of the uneducated.
Make no mistake, their ultimate goal is total disarmament of the public with all firearms under complete government control. Of course that’s an impossible pipe dream as proven everywhere it’s been implemented. Great Britain and Mexico both have draconian gun control and both are orders of magnitude more violent that we here in cowboy country. And of course as is typical the gun banners desire is to impose restrictions on the great unwashed while keeping all rights and privileges to themselves. Lying elitist bastards is the phrase that immediately comes to mind.
An interesting sport I’ve made of the whole thing is to watch for the ignorance issuing from the mouths of the gun control proponents. It rapidly becomes painfully obvious that they’ve never handled a firearm in their life and know little to nothing about the laws already governing them. Look for all the usual suspects calling for bans on “automatic weapons”, even though such weapons have effectively been banned from civilian use since the 1930s. Look for them to rail against “high capacity magazines” with over 10 rounds, unaware that a standard semi-auto 9mm handgun comes with a factory clip containing between 13-18 rounds. Other instances of outright and willful ignorance abound, but I’m too tired to list them all now, see how many you can find skimming the news.
I’m convinced these people more or less determine what constitutes an “assault weapon” based on what they think looks scary, rather than actual function or practicality. They’ve tried to ban bayonets in the past, despite the fact that it’s basically just taping a knife to a stick, probably because some libtard member of congress pointed to a picture of one and said “ooh, what’s that? it looks scary, lets ban it.” If we all painted our guns pink and put sparkles and ribbons on them they’d probably lose interest.
During the “assault weapon” ban debate, Dianne Feinstein was on several of the Sunday morning shows, demanding that all civilian-owned firearms be banned, specifically mentioning lever-action “deer rifles”. “Turn them all in!” was her screed- the “or else” being unvoiced, but clearly understood. (And considering the venue, approved of by the punditry present in the studio.)
Her “dream” was a “drop dead” date, by which all civilian firearms must be turned in for destruction. Followed by house-to-house searches to confiscate any arms for which 4473 forms existed which had not already been accounted for. She called for the military to “cooperate” with LEO in this holy quest, stating that posse comitatus did not apply when dealing with such a “threat”.
Today, she’s still in the Senate, and I suspect still has the same dream. As does Obama. But now, they have the Department of Homeland Security (an organization I have opposed the existence of from the start- and yes, I told the Bush WH this), plus SEIU, ACORN, etc., to “help”.
The results would be a progressive Utopian autocrat’s wet dream come to life. And make the Palmer Raids under Woodrow Wilson look like a four-year-old’s birthday party. (Coincidentally, we are approaching the centenary of those.)
The fact that the result could cause a civil war is somewhere between irrelevant, and lusted after, by this lot. They don’t like our “unjust society” to begin with, and would love to have a chance to use America’s “evil military” for what they define as a “just cause”; namely, punishing all those trigger-happy rednecks for their “lack of enlightenment”. (Besides, they never wanted to have to share “Holy Mother Gaia” with all those Neanderthals anyway.)
We don’t need more “gun laws”. We need laws prohibiting lawyers for running for any public office except judgeships. Not to mention term limits; maximum of two terms of anything in a lifetime.
We also need political candidates to be required to take the same psych exams I had to take as a police lab tech. The ones designed to spot megalomania and other mental afflictions you really don’t want in someone with that sort of responsibility.
My guess is, Feinstein, Obama, and most progressive “thought leaders” in general, wouldn’t pass.
clear ether
eon
Such proposals by our elected officials always bring this quote to mind:
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [...] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!” —Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
Obama spoke “Onamish” in his vaunted teary-eyed (not) address. He gave us the “Tip-Off” twice! ‘something has to be done” etc. Now we will see Holder et al try to ameliorate Fast & Furious by using this tragedy for their own nefarious purposes in targeting the 1st AND second amendments. Lose the 2nd and the first goes along with it. THAT what these morons want …. complete control. Well; those that want to “make history” all by themselves are so far off the mark it’s becoming hideously Stalinist. They’ll never get their Socialism fix.
I agree wrt Obama’s speech. It had a distinct ‘final solution’ vibe to it.
The ‘..not quite elaborating’ President – has there been ANY other response from our flaccid-minded, faux intellect?
Of course Obama hasn’t elaborated. Our empty vessel will take talking points his administration draws up, spoon feeds him and/ or sound bites provided by his sycophantic press or emotionally-led catch phrase that WILL come of this tragedy and he’ll use it ad nausea.
The guy hasn’t an original thought in his head.
What was the quote from the ghost writer in 1 of his AUTO bio’s – ‘I’m what people envision me to be’ or something similar? What a putz.
When off tele-prompt Obama sounds an awful lot like an uniformed tweener.
From the ‘Austrian language’ to his many bully-like tactics and quotes – he’ll not get the MENSA invitation anytime soon.
“the majority of Americans, and the majority of thoughtful gun owners and hunters, to agree that there must be reasonable limits on gun ownership and weapons.”
Accepting that at face value, why do we never hear any reasonable proposals? All I keep hearing are things that wouldn’t have affected this incident.
Guns: In left/liberal minds, only Mexican narco-criminals should have them to show how law-abiding Americans shouldn’t.
GUN EXPERT LOTT: LET TEACHERS CARRY ARMS, BAN GUN-FREE ZONES TO HALT MASS SHOOTINGS. Whenever you see more than a few murders taking place, the odds are almost a hundred percent that they are going to occur at a place where permit-concealed handguns are banned. And they were doing it, ironically, in an attempt to try and make people … READ MORE: http://bwcentral.org/2012/12/gun-expert-lott-let-teachers-carry-arms-ban-gun-free-zones-to-halt-mass-shootings/
“Never let a crisis (or tragedy) go to waste.” Or words to that effect. What kind of people would use, yes use, the horrible deaths of children to advance their political agenda? I don’t have to answer that question – we all know. “Reasonable” and “common sense” mean nothing to them. I’ve not heard a single proposal for new law or regulation that would have prevented the most recent massacre – none. Just incessant bleating from sheep like Bloomberg who surround themselves with armed security personnel while they seek to disarm us. The progressives are not only free with our money, they are free with our liberty as well.
You progressives want to have a “frank” discussion about violence in America. Fine, but you better include the real causal and underlying societal factors.
Politicians are invariably knee-jerk reactionaries. They always think they have to “do something”, and that something is almost always wrong.
Using due process, lock up nutbags with violent tendencies if you want to “do something”.
Never let a crisis go to waste!
DOJ: Murders of School-Age Children Down 42%; Only 1% Take Place at School By Terence P. Jeffrey December 17, 2012
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-murders-school-age-children-down-42-only-1-take-place-school
If they can manage to outlaw guns, then guns will be as difficult to acquire as cocaine.
Professor: I Want NRA Vice President’s “Head on a Stick” Katie Pavlich News Editor, Townhal
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/12/18/professor-i-want-nra-vice-presidents-head-on-a-stick-n1469395
If the weapons were locked up in a safe,chances are that none of this would have happened! The responsibility of gun ownership must include the duty to keep them out of the hands of children and crazy people! How about a tax break or rebate from the feds for the purchase of and American made gun safe. I can think of worse ways the government spends taxpayer money!
Come and get em.. I’m right here waiting for you government scum.
I doubt this is new to everyone but I found this article on Oxford University Press website stating “The Seven Myths of Mass Murders” many of which are found in the developing story of the Newtown murders.
http://blog.oup.com/2012/09/seven-myths-of-mass-murder/
Make gun control the Republicans’ version of abortion. Make it clear that every senator or representative that votes for gun control will be targeted in every election here on out. And make it the only issue. Just like the Dems do with abortion. Call it “Obama’s war on freedom”. People seem to like catchy phrases.
Make a list of pro gun control congressmen and pass it around ad infinitum. I may live in the backwater midwest, but I know a lot of Democrats that like their guns too. There’s a lot of talk now, but I think that most congressmen know that gun control could be a career killer and a cause of early retirement from politics.
“…And I gather this particular Bushmaster, you can actually sort of dial down the ease with which you pull the trigger and its frequency. So you can just pump those bullets out in a very few seconds.” Sen. Fienstein conveniently overlooks the fact that the shooter left the Bushmaster in the trunk of his car. Never even fired a single shot with it at the school.
Do not worry, we are from the government and we are here to help!
The NSA Wants Hackers, And It Wants Them On Its Side BY NEAL UNGERLEIDER SEPTEMBER 12, 2012
Got a knack for hacking and a desire to save the world? The NSA has a college program just for you.
http://www.fastcompany.com/3000879/nsa-wants-hackers-and-it-wants-them-its-side
Internet Security, and protection anybody?
“The U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that our Second Amendment rights are not absolute. So can we come together and agree that Americans have a right to own and use firearms for sport and self-defense within certain limits?” Durbin wrote.
“The 2nd Amendment is very near and dear to us. And the people that are afraid, oh, now, if we start talking about this, you might take my 2nd Amendment rights away,” Manchin added. “Absolutely not.”
“…the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED(emphasis added)” Sounds pretty absolute to me. And it specifically says “infringed”, not “denied”, which means congress can do NOTHING to affect firearms possession. Not “assault weapon” bans, not background checks, not ammunition sales limits, nothing. So as soon as you start talking about banning certain kinds of weapons, or limiting how many weapons can be purchased at any one time, you are infringing on the 2nd Amendment. Period.
The second amendment speaks of “a well-ordered militia.” Who don’t you want in “a well-ordered militia”? 1)criminals, 2)the insane, 3)the mentally deficient, 4)illegal aliens. Keep guns away from them, and lock up (or deport) any of them found with guns. The shooter in Newark who killed the two college-bound kids was an illegal alien.
Quite true, but look at the mess the Supremes have made of the 1st Amendment’s “Congress shall make no law . . . ” limitations. Only Justice Black had the judicial stones to say, ” ‘No law’ means no law.”
Let’s see if I get this straight:
I’m in my 60s, never been arrested, no parking tickets, no dmv tickets, nothing. zip, ever.
Did 3 years in US Army 1971-73, enlisted, discharged at E5 rank.. 3 years Army reserve.
Worked for IBM for 13 years, began self employed contracting since 1982.
Never received ONE cent from any government handout.
Not one cent of food stamps, year old blocks of cheese, used government toilet paper, zip.
Own various guns for target practice, bench rest shooting, and personal defense.
Never once used or drawn my gun(s) on anyone, avoidance policy always first choice.
Guns locked 24/7 in massive safes except for 1 nearby defense weapon.
Condition of ALL weapons known at ALL times. Periodic checks to assure nothing is not
where it’s not supposed to be.
And some wacked out nut job 20 year old is going to have the jack boots come and confiscate my weapons? Leaving me defenseless in a society going increasingly hostile to law abiding citizens? Because I have been 100% responsible for 40+ years?
BULL CRAP – I DARE THE GUVMINT to try.. I DOUBLE DARE YOU.
The sad truth is, they may do so. If Obama has his way, every law abiding gun owner will be turned into criminals overnight with the stroke of pen. As such, Most Freedom loving conseratives that believe in the constitution will no longer be allowed to vote. The socialists win.
I really think they are going to overreach and do exactly as you outline. Previously lawabiding citizens turned into felons. Some will cave and turn in their weapons. Real Americans will fight the tyranny unto death.
“Did 3 years in US Army 1971-73, enlisted, discharged at E5 rank.”
Joe, Obama sees all veterans as terrorists, criminals and enemies.
Joe, there is a movement as we speak to open all veterans files to search for war criminals, what you did during the Vietnam war would be scrutinized and since there is no statute of limitations on war crimes if something you did was found you would be charged and no doubt imprisoned or executed. (example: Sailor on Ship who loaded bombs on strike aircraft that bombed Vietnam during a mass civilian death event) and find those vets that are the most dangerous according to the government and MUST be disarmed at all cost and or imprisoned.
These hippy phucs are coming after the vets again. this time they mean to punish us in detail to prevent future unlawful wars (wars not planned and fought by a democrat administration that is)so future enlistees would think twice about being service members.
The voice of reason. At last!
You have a better clue than most. Don’t let anyone try to tell you to shut up.
We’re a hop, skp and a jump from open tyranny. Stay chilly and keep yer socks dry.
ABORTION AND BANNING GUNS IN MORALLY CRAZY AMERICA
What are innocent children infrequently killed by gunfire in savage mass murder attacks compared to the holocaust of unborn children-one million a year-brutally murdered in abortion clinics? Which is worse? A senseless AK-47 that can’t shoot itself (and is neither good nor evil) but can be used to protect life from killers or take it in crime? Or an abortion doctor serially killing one unborn baby after another on a deadly assembly line? Now I’m no more for killing abortion doctors for their evil practices and crimes than are people on the Left for killing gun manufacturers or retailers who do nothing wrong when selling guns to law abiding citizens. But those who want to uphold the laws that keep mass murdering abortion clinics and doctors in business-and a president who pours out his heart over young Newtown victims but believes in live birth abortions (the most heinous kind)-are hypocritical for wanting to ban guns, any guns, because they could be used to kill innocent children or anyone. Where’s the moral sanity in this?
To be exact, 1.3 million people are killed every year in America, all children, all by devices made to suction or cut up a baby while in the dubious safety of the willing mothers womb.
Now the libs are fudging around with auto deaths to somehow make guns kill more people than cars.
Obama expects American’s to roll over and submit to all liberal laws and rules, gun deaths bad, abortion deaths good.
Will American’s by the most part be too fat dumb and happy fight for their rights?
I don’t think so, I think American’s are too comfortable to fight as well as being stupid.
The America of four years ago does not exist any longer it has been destroyed.
In one form or another, I spent my prime years in military service to defend this nation and the Constitution. From 19 years of age until I was 40.
No foreign aggressor could ever successfully destroy the United States and the culture of freedom that gave it birth. That,it appears, is the sworn mission of the new brand of fascist wreckers that currently holds political power in my country.
The rights I defended, and still defend, are enshrined in the Bill of Rights, but they do not emanate from any act of government. They are the gift of God, to me and to my ancestors, and to my posterity, and I will stand for them at whatever cost.
To Bloomberg, Obama, and the other anti-American proto-tyrannts, I say “Molon Labbe.” Come and take them.
“We cannot tolerate mass shootings as a mere inconvenience or a normal part of our everyday lives,” said Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.).
Oh? Really? Everyone seems cool with it as long as they happen in black or latino inner city neighborhoods. Let a bunch of moon-faced white kids get killed, and suddenly “we can’t tolerate” it. Shameful. Truly shameful.
I constantly on the radio all these women that want guns registered, locked up, disassembled, no ammo allowed to be purchased more than 1 round a year and other such tripe.
I suggest, no I demand that vaginas be registered.. their clothing be inspected for semen monthly, and females must douche every day to keep the stench level down.. especially that we are all going to be use public transportation soon when the dems outlaw cars and trucks.
Why ? Because vaginas have caused 50 million dead babies, whereas ALL of my guns have caused ZERO deaths. Which is ONE LESS than Ted Dead Kennedy’s car.
That’s 650 million.
What’s clear to me is the guvmint should ban children from being herded into groups of more than 2 or 3.
What’s clear to me is the schools should put massive bullet proof, auto-locking doors on all classrooms.. for getting in, getting out still works in case of fire. There are magnetic door holders to hold them open if needed, an emergency panic button(s) can release that hold and the door auto-closes. I’m serious.. this would at least limit a nut case from going room to room. My first comment above was to get your attention…