If the Sandy Hook incident does not bring on changes due to the NRA NO

[OODA_Loop]

Others claim they will take the life of peace officers who might be detailed to search and or confiscate illegal firearms - showing Mens Rea

Link ?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why can't we make murder illegal?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The more the rabid gun owners rant, whine and lie, the greater the likelihood rational citizens will demand Congress take some action to control guns. Many of the posts since Sandy Hook on this message board are quite disturbing, so disturbing as to cause a rational reader to wonder if some of you should ever be trusted to own, possess or have in you custody and control any gun.

We of the gun owners world are the rational ones. Do you have something to suggest that hasn't already been tried?

Yep. As you know I've posted them several times. The fact is the rabid gun owner, and you are one, is unwilling to take any action which might save even one life. You and others are so focused on your rights, you forget that others have rights too.

You have claimed the right to own a 100-round magazine and even bragged recently - post Sandy Hook - you have purchased 10 of them. Others claim they will take the life of peace officers who might be detailed to search and or confiscate illegal firearms - showing Mens Rea for all to see when no one in authority is even advocating that such an action be taken.

The behavior as witnessed by anyone who has read your posts, and the posts of others who defend the Second Amendment as sacrosanct is distubing.

 

[Stephanie]

The more the rabid gun owners rant, whine and lie, the greater the likelihood rational citizens will demand Congress take some action to control guns. Many of the posts since Sandy Hook on this message board are quite disturbing, so disturbing as to cause a rational reader to wonder if some of you should ever be trusted to own, possess or have in you custody and control any gun.

We of the gun owners world are the rational ones. Do you have something to suggest that hasn't already been tried?

Yep. As you know I've posted them several times. The fact is the rabid gun owner, and you are one, is unwilling to take any action which might save even one life. You and others are so focused on your rights, you forget that others have rights too.

You have claimed the right to own a 100-round magazine and even bragged recently - post Sandy Hook - you have purchased 10 of them. Others claim they will take the life of peace officers who might be detailed to search and or confiscate illegal firearms - showing Mens Rea for all to see when no one in authority is even advocating the such an action be taken.

The behavior as witnessed by anyone who has read your posts, and the posts of others who defend the Second Amendment as sacrosanct is distubing.

 

[Pogo]

More from previous link:

The NRA's top corporate benefactor is MidwayUSA... MidwayUSA sells ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other shooting accessories and has contributed between five and 10 million dollars to the NRA via its NRA Round-Up Program (which rounds up customer purchases to the nearest dollar with the difference going to the NRA) and other contributions. One Pittsburgh resident who apparently took part in the NRA’s Round-Up Program through MidwayUSA was concealed carry permit holder George Sodini, who in August 2009 opened fire at an LA Fitness Center in Collier, PA, killing three women and wounding nine others before turning the gun on himself and taking his own life.

... The study concludes, "The mutually dependent nature of the National Rifle Association and the gun industry explains the NRA’s unwillingness to compromise on even the most limited controls over firearms or related products (such as restrictions on high-capacity ammunition magazines)....The NRA claims that its positions are driven solely by a concern for the interests of gun owners, never mentioning its own financial stake in protecting the profits of its gun industry patrons. At the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told a cheering crowd that 'the guys with the guns make the rules.' The information contained in this report raises the question as to what degree it is the guys who make the guns who make the rules."

(ibid)

 

[The Infidel]

So, keeping war weopons out of the hands of the crazies is gun grabbing. And what do you think is going to happen if all this is just passed over, and then we have another Sandy Hook?

Not only that, but the fact that in a short time, there are going to be more deaths from guns than from traffic accidents. This is no cause for concern?

Well, some good ideas have been suggested as to how to prevent the ease at which these guns are aquired by anyone with the cash. But those ideas have been met with the same rejection as suggestions that actually do infringe on your right to own a gun.

Absolutism, meet absolutism. In other words, address this issue with reason, or in the future when we lose another bunch of innocents to a crazy with the type of war weopon you people are so determined to keep in open circulation. And then you will see some draconian gun laws, and blame for that will lay on you.

No, but your plan is to keep semi-autos out of the hands of of anyone, regardless of the fact that THEY are not crazy.

Those are not "weapons of war"... Don't give into the lefts attempt to control the language as well as everything else.

 

[Nosmo King]

So, keeping war weopons out of the hands of the crazies is gun grabbing. And what do you think is going to happen if all this is just passed over, and then we have another Sandy Hook?

Not only that, but the fact that in a short time, there are going to be more deaths from guns than from traffic accidents. This is no cause for concern?

Well, some good ideas have been suggested as to how to prevent the ease at which these guns are aquired by anyone with the cash. But those ideas have been met with the same rejection as suggestions that actually do infringe on your right to own a gun.

Absolutism, meet absolutism. In other words, address this issue with reason, or in the future when we lose another bunch of innocents to a crazy with the type of war weopon you people are so determined to keep in open circulation. And then you will see some draconian gun laws, and blame for that will lay on you.

No, but your plan is to keep semi-autos out of the hands of of anyone, regardless of the fact that THEY are not crazy.

Those are not "weapons of war"... Don't give into the lefts attempt to control the language as well as everything else.

Yeah. You negged me for writing "assault weapons" as if the very notion of a weapon with a semi-automatic firing system and fitted with a high capacity magazine is something other than an "assault weapon".

How can there be any discussion, any progress if simply calling a spade a spade causes some to go apoplectic?

Here's what an "assault weapon" is: any firearm equipped with a semi-automatic firing system and a high capacity ammunition magazine. Firearms such as, but not exclusively, shotguns with pump actions, bolt action rifles, revolvers and single action pistols are perfectly acceptable to be held by the general public. Assault weapons, which meet the criteria I set out above are arms best held by well regulated militias and not on the streets.

Hunting, target shooting, personal defense are all legitimate uses for fire arms. Assault weapons are not legitimately used for any of those activities. At least their design was not driven by those activities. In fact, the design of assault weapons is to kill as many people as quickly as possible. Should implements with that as the primary design be held by the general public? Are those weapons designed for combat operations? For law enforcement?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yes, they do.

Please stop using this tragedy to push your political agenda.

Thanks in advance.

If this tragedy does not merit a responsible debate about the presence of assault weapons on our streets, I dread the tragedy that does.

Well please go on suggest something that hasn't already been tried.

Simply review these threads:

Guns - a list

Reasonable gun control

Concealed Carry versus Real World - a study

Any idea offered to you or the other rabid gun huggers is meet with the same response: "Yes, but" ... followed by The BIG LIE.

 

[Missourian]

They don't represent the majority of gun owners anymore.

Yes, they do.

Please stop using this tragedy to push your political agenda.

Thanks in advance.

If this tragedy does not merit a responsible debate about the presence of assault weapons on our streets, I dread the tragedy that does.

I'm not opposed to a responsible debate Nosmo.

I'm not even opposed to tweaks in the law that will actually accomplish something.

What I am opposed to is gun grabbers using a tragedy to advance their predetermined agenda.

What I am opposed to is knee jerk reactions that only do something for the sake of doing something, things that have NO EFFECT whatsoever.

How is extending background checks going to stop anything?

Cho, Loughner, and Holmes all purchased there guns legally, passed background checks and all...Lanza stole a gun that was legally purchased in a state with a assault weapons ban.

So how does that solve any problems?

IT DOESN'T! Just an agenda to be advanced.

OK, let's ignore that Lanza had a legally owned gun in a state with an assault weapons ban in place. Cho killed more with two pistols. Loughner had a pistol.

So how is an AWB going to help stop these shootings?

IT DOESN'T!

So, what's the solution?

Let's ignore the 2nd Amendment for a minute and say we ban all guns everywhere in the U.S.

How has banning stuff worked out in the past in the U.S.?

We banned alcohol, that went swimmingly...war in the streets, alcohol everywhere, gang violence, and in the end, the cure was worse than the disease and we ammended the Constitution to bring it back.

Drugs? We're winning the war on illegal drugs, right?
Able to keep drugs out of the hands of the gangs, keep it from being smuggled into the country by the ton?

No?

How about illegal aliens? surely we can keep people from entering the country illegally? Right?

Laws only restrict the lawful.

Criminals are going to do what they always do, break the law.

And the only people whose rights will be infringed are law abiding citizens.

 

[Mustang]

This will be an atrocity. There are so many things that could be done to assure that this never happens again. But if there is mention of gun laws or anything to do with guns the NRA says NO.

They don't represent the majority of gun owners anymore. They respresent the manufactorers. Sooner or later, the NO, is going to start costing them memberships.

Maybe someday someone will walk into the NRA headquarters armed to the teeth and just start shooting. I wonder what the official NRA position would be after such an event. Armed guards in every office across the US?

 

[OODA_Loop]

.

Hunting, target shooting, personal defense are all legitimate uses for fire arms. Assault weapons are not legitimately used for any of those activities.

The largest civilian target match in the world uses AR15 at Camp Perry

CMP - Service Rifle

You really are out of your lane.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Maybe someday someone will walk into the NRA headquarters armed to the teeth and just start shooting.

Yes when you had enough bathing in child blood.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Hunting, target shooting, personal defense are all legitimate uses for fire arms. Assault weapons are not legitimately used for any of those activities.

Houston, TX — The teenaged son of a Harris County Precinct 1 deputy shot a home intruder Tuesday afternoon with his father’s AR-15 rifle, according to deputies.

The 15-year-old boy was home with his 12-year-old sister when a pair of burglars tried to come into the home through the front and back doors. When that failed, the intruders broke a back window. The teenager allegedly grabbed his father’s assault rifle and defended himself and his sister.

Read more at Gun Control: 15-Year-Old Defends Sister From Burglars With AR-15 Rifle

 

[Nosmo King]

Hunting, target shooting, personal defense are all legitimate uses for fire arms. Assault weapons are not legitimately used for any of those activities.

Houston, TX — The teenaged son of a Harris County Precinct 1 deputy shot a home intruder Tuesday afternoon with his father’s AR-15 rifle, according to deputies.

The 15-year-old boy was home with his 12-year-old sister when a pair of burglars tried to come into the home through the front and back doors. When that failed, the intruders broke a back window. The teenager allegedly grabbed his father’s assault rifle and defended himself and his sister.

Read more at Gun Control: 15-Year-Old Defends Sister From Burglars With AR-15 Rifle

Is that something he could not possibly do without an assault weapon? Could it be possible that other weapons, other firearms could have been used to accomplish the same thing?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

They don't represent the majority of gun owners anymore.

Yes, they do.

Please stop using this tragedy to push your political agenda.

Thanks in advance.

Honey, the NRA is not a benevolent, educational organization dedicated to enlightening and informing gun owners. It's a lobby. A big lobby. And they are hiding behind the likes of ignorant people like yourself. Wise up. And cancel your membership.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Could it be possible that other weapons, other firearms could have been used to accomplish the same thing?

Sure.

 

[JimH52]

More from previous link:

The NRA's top corporate benefactor is MidwayUSA... MidwayUSA sells ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other shooting accessories and has contributed between five and 10 million dollars to the NRA via its NRA Round-Up Program (which rounds up customer purchases to the nearest dollar with the difference going to the NRA) and other contributions. One Pittsburgh resident who apparently took part in the NRA’s Round-Up Program through MidwayUSA was concealed carry permit holder George Sodini, who in August 2009 opened fire at an LA Fitness Center in Collier, PA, killing three women and wounding nine others before turning the gun on himself and taking his own life.

... The study concludes, "The mutually dependent nature of the National Rifle Association and the gun industry explains the NRA’s unwillingness to compromise on even the most limited controls over firearms or related products (such as restrictions on high-capacity ammunition magazines)....The NRA claims that its positions are driven solely by a concern for the interests of gun owners, never mentioning its own financial stake in protecting the profits of its gun industry patrons. At the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told a cheering crowd that 'the guys with the guns make the rules.' The information contained in this report raises the question as to what degree it is the guys who make the guns who make the rules."

(ibid)

NICE! I guess Obama is getting too close the Golden Goose that feeds to animal.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yes, they do.

Please stop using this tragedy to push your political agenda.

Thanks in advance.

If this tragedy does not merit a responsible debate about the presence of assault weapons on our streets, I dread the tragedy that does.

I'm not opposed to a responsible debate Nosmo.

I'm not even opposed to tweaks in the law that will actually accomplish something.

What I am opposed to is gun grabbers using a tragedy to advance their predetermined agenda.

What I am opposed to is knee jerk reactions that only do something for the sake of doing something, things that have NO EFFECT whatsoever.

How is extending background checks going to stop anything?

Cho, Loughner, and Holmes all purchased there guns legally, passed background checks and all...Lanza stole a gun that was legally purchased in a state with a assault weapons ban.

So how does that solve any problems?

IT DOESN'T! Just an agenda to be advanced.

OK, let's ignore that Lanza had a legally owned gun in a state with an assault weapons ban in place. Cho killed more with two pistols. Loughner had a pistol.

So how is an AWB going to help stop these shootings?

IT DOESN'T!

So, what's the solution?

Let's ignore the 2nd Amendment for a minute and say we ban all guns everywhere in the U.S.

How has banning stuff worked out in the past in the U.S.?

We banned alcohol, that went swimmingly...war in the streets, alcohol everywhere, gang violence, and in the end, the cure was worse than the disease and we ammended the Constitution to bring it back.

Drugs? We're winning the war on illegal drugs, right?
Able to keep drugs out of the hands of the gangs, keep it from being smuggled into the country by the ton?

No?

How about illegal aliens? surely we can keep people from entering the country illegally? Right?

Laws only restrict the lawful.

Criminals are going to do what they always do, break the law.

And the only people whose rights will be infringed are law abiding citizens.

"The idea that no solution exists never occurs to them and in this lies their strength."

A gun, any gun, makes the taking of a human life easy. True or false?

All criminals were not criminals until they committed a criminal act. True or false?

A person in possession of a gun acts differently than a person without a gun in his/her possession. True or false?

Gun control means the total ban on firearms in civilian hands. True or false?

The Second Amendment is sacrosanct. True or false?

 

[OODA_Loop]

And they are hiding behind the likes of ignorant people like yourself.

Ignorant how, Honey ?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If this tragedy does not merit a responsible debate about the presence of assault weapons on our streets, I dread the tragedy that does.

Well please go on suggest something that hasn't already been tried.

Simply review these threads:

Guns - a list

Reasonable gun control

Concealed Carry versus Real World - a study

Any idea offered to you or the other rabid gun huggers is meet with the same response: "Yes, but" ... followed by The BIG LIE.

Holy shit dude it's still the same old shit. Damn if you don't have nothing new let's do it my way.