Let’s limit guns to sane, responsible gun owners

… and limit the KINDS of guns they can have …

and WHERE and HOW those guns are stored – so that any yahoo (or child) can’t stumble on them and steal / use them

• Link
• Report this comment

woo hoo!

two firsties in a row.

• Link
• Report this comment

The lady was lucky the intruder did not use a gun.

• Link
• Report this comment

yawn!

• Link
• Report this comment

td, extensive response for your downstairs on the topic of “well-regulated militia,” sir.

• Link
• Report this comment

Of course, some posters have ridiculously claimed that the gun was a deterrent for Herman….. they apparently do not understand what “deterrent” means.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is so well written and has so many paragraphs for me to cite to my gun nut friends that I just have to give Jay standing applause for this one.

• Link
• Report this comment

You know Republicans would oppose this because “sane and responsible” eliminates so many of them.

*chuckle*

• Link
• Report this comment

I have a question that hopefully, someone can answer.

Let’s take Andy Average, an average American, homeowner, married, has a decent job, pays his taxes and all that. Also a gun owner and occasional hunter, and compliant with the law, properly licensed, it’s all good.

For whatever reason, let’s assume that Andy Average is adjudged mentally ill, either by competent medical authority or by a duly appointed judge.

Isn’t it the case that Andy Average no longer meets the standard to purchase a firearm? Would he therefore no longer have the right to *possess* the firearms he already owned?

If not, why not?

And if so, does law enforcement do anything about that (like come and confiscate them, for example)?

• Link
• Report this comment

JHM: Oh, nice set of questions. I sure can’t answer them or I would try. But I also kind of don’t want to touch those. I suspect my method of speech/writing would not lend itself well to the argument anyway.

• Link
• Report this comment

In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.

and that might just save 500-1000 lives a year…maybe….not to sound cold, but small potatoes

• Link
• Report this comment

It was many years after automobiles were introduced to Americans before licenses were required.

Now, few people would think requiring people to be tested before being allowed to legally drive is a bad ides.

Why can’t we have a system for testing people’s competence with guns, along with a background check, and then issuing them a license to own a gun?

http://www.ehow.com/about_5552087_history-drivers-license.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Let me explain something: This “administration” wishes to use Executive Order to limit the rightful free flow of weaponry. Many liberal folk on here say that it’s not a big deal. It is a huge deal and now I’ll explain the common sense position on gun control. Here’s the thing: This Executive Order is just the start of the Socialist-Democrat members and secular progressives slowly chipping away at what our Founding Fathers so bravely fought for over 230 years ago. When Big Federal Gov’t issues an edict such as Executive Order, it tears at the very fabric of The United States of America. It’s funny how you liberals cry out when there are any common sense rules on abortion access. Secular progressives and UnPlanned Parenthood fools cry out that WE THE PEOPLE place rightful restrictions on abortion like parental notification — that WE THE PEOPLE are chipping away at abortion. NOW, do you hypocrites get it? Amen, Bill

• Link
• Report this comment

I have no problem with your proposed law, Jay. But when it doesn’t do any good, what will be next?
The reason that NRA membership has jumped by 100K in the past month, and that guns and ammo are flying off the shelves, is the rhetoric expounded daily by those that will seem hell bent on preventing law abiding citizens from their recreational activities for the sake of DOING SOMETHING.

• Link
• Report this comment

and that might just save 500-1000 lives a year…maybe….not to sound cold, but small potatoes

Assuming that the only deaths it stops are accidental ones. What about the number of people who will be stopped from buying ammo who would otherwise be hotheaded and go shoot up someplace or kill a person that offended them? People who take training classes are much more likely NOT to lose their cool with a deadly weapon they are trained to use.

• Link
• Report this comment

godless: But when it doesn’t do any good, what will be next?

What would be “doesn’t work” and how many days would you give before declaring it a failure? 10?

• Link
• Report this comment

Unless it’s your younguns in the mix.

I am a believer in professional training. Just saying there are fatter rabbits out there than accidental gun deaths…heck, gravity kills 10x plus more people….should people show proof they have balance before they can buy a ladder too?

• Link
• Report this comment

Scout: If I could pass just one vehicle law, it would be a law that required all new vehicles (made or imported in the United States) to have a computer chip restricting the top speed of that vehcile to 65 mph. It would save thousands and thousands of lives.

Amend to include computer chips that are at posted speed limit areas, that interact with computer chips in cars, to limit their top speed to the currently posted speed limit, and you’ve got my support.

And anyway, only CRIMINALS break speed limit laws. Surely that means we don’t need speed limit laws, right?

• Link
• Report this comment

Adam – People who take training classes are much more likely NOT to lose their cool with a deadly weapon they are trained to use.

If you are gonna resort to making shyte up…go big

• Link
• Report this comment

godless heathen: You don’t have to have a drivers license to own a car.

Yes, let’s treat guns in EXACTLY the way you just described. You can buy the gun, but you can’t get it home if you haven’t gotten your license yet so you’ll have to give it to a responsible gun owner to hold on to and lock up for you, until you get your license. Or they have to be with you at all times you are carrying it. Just like you can’t drive your new car home if you don’t have a license nor can you operate it without an experienced driver in the car with you until you have a full license.

Great idea godless, wish I had thought of it

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep, “Now where do I order my $28 Obamacare pizza?”

It was $25 and here’s your answer.

http://mypizza.com/restaurant/menu/849

Even the veggie pie is over $25. You asked for it and now you have the proof, so STFU!!

• Link
• Report this comment

RB: Vegan and gluten free pizzas being more expensive proves…. what, exactly? And what does that have to do with Obamacare?

• Link
• Report this comment

godless: It will be the gun grabbers that declare it didn’t work 15 minutes after the next school shooting.

Exactly my point.

• Link
• Report this comment

td: and the resource officers were not allowed to follow them.

That is so much bullsh*t.

• Link
• Report this comment

Adam: I have to have a license to carry a concealed weapon. It’s a condition of operating it in public.

So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?

• Link
• Report this comment

RB picks a boutique pizza joint in Manhattan and that’s supposed to prove something, I guess.

Anyone got an idea what it was he was trying to prove? That food’s expensive in Manhattan, maybe? I can attest to that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fun Facts:
Obesity kills exponentially more people each year than all violent crime, accidental deaths, and DUI per year combined. Smoking kills more than that.

No one is limited in the amount of booze they can by, food they can buy, or how many packs of cigarettes they can buy.

I’ve owned over 60 guns in my lifetime and all of them, so-called ‘assault-rifles’ included have killed less people than Ted Kennedy’s car.

What is an ‘assualt-rifle’ anyway? Any gun can be used for evil, so can any blunt object. Why aren’t there ‘assault-bats’ or ‘assault-hammers’ or ‘assualt-chainsaws’…all of which have various models that are bigger and scarier looking and can inflict more damage if used for sinister actions than other ones? News flash idiots…AR stands for Armalite not ‘assualt-rifle’.

Lastly, if you are too ‘blinded by caring for the kids rainbow’ to see what is really afoot here, God help you. Every Liberal in Congress behind closed doors are rubbing their hands together like Smithers from the Simpsons cackling, “We can begin to disarm the public now…piece by piece we will take all of their guns and then we have the ultimate power. Muah haha!”

• Link
• Report this comment

So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?

Not really—I don’t think Nancy Lanza broke any laws and her guns sure turned out to be other people’s damn business.

• Link
• Report this comment

godless: And then will come another useless law to limit the freedom of law abiding citizens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

• Link
• Report this comment

b. frog — “My experience is that most Judges issue orders to a detainee
regarding the disabilities imposed by sentence or finding but
the actual enforcement is only if the offender is in violation
henceforth and nothing is done at the time. I have helped
many people get the disabilities removed which does not
require an attorney.”

If I’m reading you right, you’re saying that law enforcement won’t get involved unless Andy Average tries to buy another weapon or unless he commits a crime or causes a ruckus involving one of his firearms. Is that correct?

So long as he’s institutionalized or behaves himself at home, he can keep his weapons, that’s what I think I’m hearing.

• Link
• Report this comment

“So you agree that if I want to own a Bushmaster with a 30 round clip, as long as I don’t break any laws with it, it’s noone’s damn business?”

Mr. heathen, what is its purpose, except to kill many people very quickly? I ask as a serious question.

• Link
• Report this comment

Obesity kills exponentially more people each year than all violent crime, accidental deaths, and DUI per year combined. Smoking kills more than that.

No one is limited in the amount of booze they can by, food they can buy, or how many packs of cigarettes they can buy.

Uhhhh, actually….

The amount of alcohol you can buy at a bar is limited to whether the bartender thinks you are too drunk.

The amount of food you can buy is not the issue, and measures are already in place that limit both that and certain ingredients

How many packs of cigarettes is also not the issue, but you are limited as to where you can smoke and who you can smoke around.

All of these are about public safety dude. We DO take legal action to limit activities that harm others all the time.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Mr. heathen, what is its purpose, except to kill many people very quickly? I ask as a serious question.”

I’m sure it has nothing to do with (ahem) COMPENSATING for other shortcomings …

• Link
• Report this comment

<i.Likewise, you would not want ME owning vials of plutonium (or, if you really don’t mind, you’re nuts), and me declaring it’s no one’s damned business.

Wow. really? Comparing a highly radioactive material, plutonium, with a rifle? Will that Bushmaster cause ratiation to accumulate in your bones just by mere contact with it and cause you to DIE just by standing by it?

That HAS to be one of the most insane “arguments” I’ve read here and there have been some really insipidly insane ones here.

Maybe you are right. To have posted something THAT stupid you have to be a Republican………..

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred: I choose Medium Rare on steaks and burgers (when given the option). What’s your fave?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Obesity kills exponentially more people each year than all violent crime, accidental deaths, and DUI per year combined. Smoking kills more than that.”

hrm. when have you ever seen anyone french fry someone to death? or drive-by taco innocent bystanders???

the things you mention are what people do to THEMSELVES, not others. And, where other people ARE affected (such as second-hand smoke), there ARE regulations in place.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Fred: I choose Medium Rare on steaks and burgers ”

mmmmmmmmmmmm … hungry …

• Link
• Report this comment

All, for weeks, Keep has been whining about proof of a $25 pizza from a comment I made about costs rising as a result of healthcare cost. It doesn’t seem to matter to the idiot that I can’t provide proof for a year when those rules actually take effect, he just keeps asking for proof. I guess he thinks he’s clever or cute to demand I show him menu pricing from 2014 or something. I can’t speak for the head case.

So, for all on this board, I have provided Keep the evidence of a $25 pizza he demanded I provide. We’ll just consider any further requests on the matter to be the blatherings of an idiot.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — ” Maybe brain dead folks with no taste buds think Papa John’s rules”

Word. If I’m dropping $25 on a pizza, it damn sure won’t be one from Papa John’s.

Mellow Mushroom, maybe. Or Savage Pizza. Or DaVinci’s. Not PJ’s.

• Link
• Report this comment

As for DUI analogies, to wit:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-8-2013/scapegoat-hunter—gun-control

“[Do we ban cars] because people get drunk and kill people in cars?”
Jon Stewart: “No, but we do enact stricter blood alcohol limits, raise the drinking age, ramp up enforcement and penalties, and charge bartenders who server drunks and launch huge public awareness campaigns to stigmatize the dangerous behavior in question and we do all those things because it MIGHT just help bring drunk driving rates down, I don’t know, by two thirds in a few decades!”

“There’s all sorts of stuff you can’t have already: …. F-16 fighter jets, Surface-to-air ANYTHING!”

“Now I see what’s happening. So this is what it is: Their paranoid fear of a possible dystopic future prevents us from addressing our ACTUAL dystopic present. We can’t even begin to address 30,000 gun deaths that are actually, in reality, happening in this country every year because a few of us must remain vigilant against the rise of Imaginary Hitler.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Skipper, I’m glad I could brighten your gloomy Friday with visions of convicted felon organ donors dancing in your head.

• Link
• Report this comment

RB — “We’ll just consider any further requests on the matter to be the blatherings of an idiot.”

Who’s “we?” I don’t think you speak for many people other than yourself here, Champ.

• Link
• Report this comment

I would love to eat medium rare burgers, but for quite a few years…just can’t justify the perceived risk.

(It would be a different story if I were personally responsible for grinding the meat to be consumed.)

• Link
• Report this comment

” That would save more lives per year then.”

td – it’s hard to take anything you post seriously as long as you keep posting stuff like ” taking every gun in America”

If you want to convince people of your position, it helps to stay real.

Of course, if your’e just here to rant, please carry on – sorry to have interrupted.

• Link
• Report this comment

no burgers and steak for us tonight … Chinese … omnomnomnom …

• Link
• Report this comment

Six shots, empty gun and the intruder was still standing. She ran him off by bluffing that she had more shots ready to fire.

What if there were two intruders? Maybe a high capacity clip would have been nice in that situation. I’m not saying we shouldn’t have a discussion about reasonable limits. We already do have a lot of limits on gun ownership. I just want to point this out to the people who say there should never be any need for high capacity clips. If you have two or three intruders in your house, you would be pretty happy to have a 20 round magazine.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dang I keep screwing up the italics lol.

Adam: What’s my fav what? Steak place? Steak cut? Hamburger joint?

Given how much hamburger are handled (ground beef) I like them a little more done for safety, but I STILL want them juicy. As for steaks? It depends on the cut. A Ribeye needs to get to a bare medium for the connective tissue (fat) to “melt” they say, but I still like it medium rare.

A filet or New York Strip I will take rare+ to medium rare since there is no fat to break down. Back when I was younger and stuff was more local, thus imho cleaner, I would eat raw slices of steak with salt on them. I won’t do that now though. Especially not a steak tartare since it also has raw egg, although IO USED to like it.

And yet I’ll still eat sushi. Go figure……….

• Link
• Report this comment

“In other words, let’s keep this reasonable and rational, on all sides of the issue.”

There’s the typical liberal gesture. Always at pains to demonstrate that they’re ‘rational’ or not ‘extreme’, etc.

Well, that’s too bad, because in order to put anything ’sensible’ or ‘rational’ into effect, you’re going to have to go through a determined gun industry lobby that is one of countless tentacles of the Oligarchy that rules us. And that, unfortunately, will require measures that are anything but calm and sensible and reasonable.

Against an extremist and insane and ruthless opposition, reason simply does not prevail.

• Link
• Report this comment

You should TOTALLY make medium rare burgers at home. I do and they are MMMMMMMM

Probably ought to get one of those meat grinder attachments for the KitchenAid. I’ll take it up with the committee (i.e., mrs. sfd.)

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK, I’m sending that idea to Betty White’s show – drive-by taco’ing innocent bystanders.

• Link
• Report this comment

If you have two or three intruders in your house

Kind of what I mean by paranoia. Groups of people generally aren’t after you or your family. They are after your STUFF, and usually run like babies if you have just one gun.

But there are other methods that work. Pepper spray/mace has been shown to work on multiple people and disables them pretty effectively. Threat neutralized. And that’s just one example. Why do you have to KILL others that threaten you? Bloodlust?

• Link
• Report this comment

Mr. heathen, what is its purpose, except to kill many people very quickly? I ask as a serious question.

Recreational target shooting.

I’m sure it has nothing to do with (ahem) COMPENSATING for other shortcomings …

So what if it is. We don’t have freedom of compensation anymore?

• Link
• Report this comment

I should think that someone who believes that certain weapons are being marketed as a *cure for those insecure in their masculinity* should not be considered reasonable or rational. The kid who did the shooting in California yesterday had compiled a hit list a year before he took any action. School authorities and parents knew that he was a threat. Gabby Giffords knew her stalker and had been confronted by him several times in the years before he shot her and innocent bystanders. The sheriff was also aware that he was a threat and that the situation predated the TEA party for several years. In most of these cases the persons blamed are the ones who had noting to do with the shooting. As far as the individual right to self-defense, the lives of Obama’s children are no more precious than those of the Chicago kids caught in gang crossfire every week.

• Link
• Report this comment

“easily drawn, both in law and in logic”

Problem: Not a lot of logic in the lawmakers nowadays.

• Link
• Report this comment

““and WHERE and HOW those guns are stored” – Who’s going to go house-to-house to check this?”

to qualify for a license to OWN a firearm, you should undergo a house inspection where you show a police officer your gun locker to show where / how the gun will be secured. If someone accesses your gun and commits a crime, you will be charged for not keeping it secure.

• Link
• Report this comment

(oh, and to qualify for said license, you should also demonstrate that you’ve passed an accredited gun safety course)

• Link
• Report this comment

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
11:25 am

IMO Best burger at home involves ground 80/20 beef via Kitchenaide or even cuisinart…cut in small pieces and freeze somewhat in freezer before grinding. Take two patties, stick a block of cheese in the middle and press together…pan fry for seal and finish to desired temp in medium oven….

• Link
• Report this comment

“I see defining “responsible and sane” as a nightmarish, ACLU bonanza…”

I suspect any almost attempt at gun control from a mental health POV is doomed to fail on civil liberties grounds. If anyone wants to try to define a reasonalbe “sanity standard” for gun possession, have at it – you’re braver than I am.

• Link
• Report this comment

Besides, Jay, what exactly are the “sides” of this gun issue? I’d really like to know?

Are we talking about a diamond, for example, with many many sides? Or is there maybe just a nice and simple two sides, one on the “left” and the other on the “right”?

The way I see it there are not really any sides to this issue at all. Slaughter implements have to be drastically reduced. Period.

Which means that the back of the National Child Slaughter R’Us Association (NRA) must be broken. Period.

And that ain’t gonna be easy.

So tell me. Where are those “sides” you keep speaking of?

• Link
• Report this comment

Yearly psyche testing for all gun licenses to be renewed, and paid for by the gun owner out-of-pocket… that, and having to pay about $1,000 per bullet might just solve the problems we’re having with too many gun owners in America today. No more cheap bullets!

• Link
• Report this comment

Requiring anyone wanting to purchase a handgun or semi-automatic rifle to follow the same procedure as someone wanting to buy a machine gun and you can legally own a machine gun.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK: “to qualify for a license to OWN a firearm, you should undergo a house inspection where you show a police officer your gun locker to show where / how the gun will be secured. If someone accesses your gun and commits a crime, you will be charged for not keeping it secure.”

I’m trying to determine if you are serious about this. That sounds like a big infringement.

• Link
• Report this comment

Given the state of the economy under Obama, the Obama pizza would be a yummy 99 cent Totino’s Pizza from the grocery store.

Cheese on cardboard – kind of descriptive of Obama’s presidency also.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dang it. I got off topic talking about food. It’s my fat boy weakness, sorry.

Gun Control: As a brain washed talk radio listening disciple of Neal I was all against Gun Control. Give them damn libruls and inch and they’ll be stealing my guns dammit.

But when I broke away and freed my mind I saw there were some common sense measures that NEED to be taken. The one Jay suggests is in my opinion too little. I think you should have to have training to buy a fire arm of ANY type as well as the ammo. It should require a refresher course EVERY YEAR. In the military you retrain and re-qualify on weapons EVERY YEAR. Well at least in the Army. Who knows what them civies in the blue suits (Air Force) do……….. if it’s a sane policy for our military, many of whom handle weapons on at least a weekly if not daily basis, then why not for us civilians?

As to JHM’s question about losing one’s sanity after the fact……… it’s a tough one. Remember how mad GMare got at me when I said that I thought that if old people could no longer pass drivers tests they should have their licenses revoked? Do we really want to tell a mentally unstable person that they have to give up their arms by next Tuesday or someone will come get them? I sure as hell wouldn’t want to be the person responsible for getting those weapons lol.

So there is a forseeable flaw in the “system” that I don’t see a reasonable answer for, but that doesn’t mean we should just scrap everything.

I also like Brocephus’s fingerprinted Gun safe idea. He also linked one small enough to hold a fully loaded pistol right by your bed. It would take no longer to retreive your Dirty Harry .44 mag from that than it would from a holster with a strap.

• Link
• Report this comment

The debating skill of ignoring the elephant in the room, by using the few examples of the good results and saying that is worth the cost of the far larger number of violate deaths to good people cannot be how we govern this country. Put the real facts on the table and have a real discussion with common sense. This is not you against us unless you are one of the crazy ones that want to kill our children, this is us against them so get a clear picture make a clear decision that saves lives of innocent people which today’s conditions are obviously not doing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Adam

January 11th, 2013
11:28 am

You didn’t ask me but 48oz porterhouse with side salad or spinach….crab cake starter…just damn

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred: But when I broke away and freed my mind I saw there were some common sense measures that NEED to be taken

I’m pretty sure that’s where a majority of us are, Fred. It baffles me the people who are not and fight against it, sometimes like a rabid dog (see Piers Morgan’s interview of such a rabid dog). OMG CONFISCATION is all they think about it seems.

• Link
• Report this comment

Revolutions usually do not turn on the number of weapons held
by the populace.

• Link
• Report this comment

Stevie Ray: That SOUNDS good but I can promise I can’t fill myself with 48oz of meat in one sitting. No way!

• Link
• Report this comment

Adam, “And your proof of such a pizza existing does exactly nothing to prove it’s because of Obamacare.”

I know that and you know that, but for some reason, Keep seems to think I can provide him proof today of something that won’t happen for another year.

And for the record, It might not make a Papa Johns pizza $25, but it is going to impact the price of it. Not owning a pizza business, I can’t tell you exactly how much it will be, but it won’t be zero and everybody is going to pay. Even those Wendy’s employees who are going to have to figure out how to make it on 28 hrs/week instead of 40. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/09/nebraska-wendy-franchisee-slashes-worker-hours-to-sidestep-obamacare/

You can boycott NE Wendy’s if you want to, but the one down the street from you, and the McD’s and “Mellow Mushroom, maybe. Or Savage Pizza. Or DaVinci’s” are all having the same conversation in the back room.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think it is criminal that so many fine men are subjected to
death by gun as they try to enforce our laws.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And for the record, It might not make a Papa Johns pizza $25, but it is going to impact the price of it. Not owning a pizza business, I can’t tell you exactly how much it will be, but it won’t be zero and everybody is going to pay”

Way to back down, RB! It takes a man to admit when he’s wrong. I’m proud of you.

• Link
• Report this comment

“a semi-automatic high-velocity assault weapon with a large-capacity magazine being marketed as a cure for those insecure in their masculinity:

And that is the type of silly-assed statement that prevents logical discussion

• Link
• Report this comment

Life expectantcy is 75 for men. Lowest of all the wealthy nations. The leading reason sited for the low number was gun violence, next, heart dsease. Those lucky enough to make it to 75[my self] the out look for the next several years is better. That is because, seniors have poorer eyesight which means they hit other people less frequently. Sooooo put away those six shooters pardner.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — ” In the military you retrain and re-qualify on weapons EVERY YEAR.”

When I was active-duty Army, all soldiers were required to qualify with their primary weapon via a documented record fire at least once per year. If you wanted to qualify or retain your qualification in a different weapon, you had to do that once per year as well.

However, it was common practice to have combat arms soldiers– particularly infantryment of any sort — requalify *quarterly.* Friends I had in the infantry battalions said that ‘range days’ were major screw-off time; if you got at the head of the line and requalified quickly, you could piddle around doing nothing for the rest of the day while everyone else qualified.

Well at least in the Army. Who knows what them civies in the blue suits (Air Force) do………..

• Link
• Report this comment

And that is the type of silly-assed statement that prevents logical discussion

I will say it again–that is EXACTLY how Bushmaster had been marketing this particular firearm. Jay posted that “silly-assed statement” because I provided him with the advertisement’s graphic, which he substituted for the generic gun photo.

here it is again, since you seem to have missed it:

http://disinfo.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/mncards.jpg

I’ve read some truly lousy pro-gun arguments and scroll past most, but this complete denial of the reality of gun marketing needs to be addressed.

• Link
• Report this comment

here it is again, since you seem to have missed it:

Well, no Man Card for markie mark.

• Link
• Report this comment

When gun enthusiasts talk about “freedom,” they have something specific in mind—freedom from government oppression. In their view, unfettered access to firearms is the key ingredient to protecting individual rights from overreaching by government. They argue that the only way to keep centralized authority in check is to ensure that individual citizens retain the capability to confront the government with force of arms. As NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre has said, “The people have a right to take whatever measures necessary, including force, to abolish oppressive government.”

This idea, which we call “insurrectionism,” is part of a broader ideological perspective that opposes a strong, activist government in nearly all of its forms. Insurrectionist philosophy degrades the democratic values and institutions that protect all of the freedoms we enjoy as Americans. Gun lobby extremists have been perfectly willing to trample on any freedom that gets in the way of their pursuit of unrestricted private access to firearms (i.e., property rights, access to justice, freedom of information, public safety, etc.). This toxic mix of ideology and firepower has moved beyond rhetoric and resulted in real violence in our country.

• Link
• Report this comment

“for starters if found that she was not life threatened she can be
charged with murder/manslaughter or many lesser charges.’

Not sure of the standard for GA, but the standard I’m familiar with is “fear for one’s life,” which is difficult to refute, and most LE officers don’t try.

• Link
• Report this comment

JoeHusseinMama
I qualified as Expert (got a ribbon) in Basic training with
a real crappy M1 carbine due to my experience as a civilian and
one other time during my 4 years. We were not allowed to possess
firearms on base on or off duty but could if we lived off base.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dang these GOP no nothings

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, weetamoe?

Marky Mark?

Given the irrefutable evidence presented to you, are either of you man enough to admit you were incorrect about what Jay had asserted?

.

.

/drive-by, back later, likely

• Link
• Report this comment

stands
stand your ground addresses that situation but it is not proven that
the intruder would actually have harmed anyone. Personally I
would have reacted as she did but I am aware how that reaction
can easily put you in jail or in a civil suit which gun toters never
acknowledge.

• Link
• Report this comment

Goldie @11:30

So only the rich should be able to get the ammo to defend themselves? And are you willing to pay the extra taxes for our Armed Forces to afford your proposed $1,000 bullets?

• Link
• Report this comment

Simple Truths and Peadawg –

That is how you get a gun license here in the UK – you have to have character references (helps week out the nutters) … and, yes, a police officer comes to your house to see where / how you will store it. Guns have to be kept in metal lockers that are affixed to a solid wall (such as an exterior wall), so couldn’t easily be jimmied.

Additionally, they also want to know where you keep the keys to the locker.

shall we compare gun death statistics??

• Link
• Report this comment

Ok Dorkman…..please explain how you know if someone has met the standards for “limiting gun possession and ammunition purchase to responsible citizens who are trained in their proper use — people such as Melinda Herman — would go a long way in reducing the carnage and heartbreak. In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.” Are you gonna require the gun holder to pay for a test every five years and if they fail to renew thru the test….are you gonna send the Army in to snatch his or her’s personal property? Then lets add you comment about sanity….someone could be sane 1 yr and crazy as a mocking bird the next…it’s against the law to release medical info…..how do you propose to get his gun….

• Link
• Report this comment

What if one has pharmaceutically-enabled sanity…..
buys a bushmaster…then stops taking his meds….

• Link
• Report this comment

that should be weed out the nutters … not week them out …

• Link
• Report this comment

“In fact, if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years…”

I assume that would require a government document stating such including an ID number of some sort to be entered into a POS terminal recording the transaction. It’s to ensure compliance, don’t cha know.

I kinda like anonymity though. Of course my CCW doesn’t provide that, and since I had to be subjected to that background check thing when I purchased my handgun, the government knows i have it.

However, I own a number of other weapons very few people know I have. Certainly not the government. If I have to produce such documentation, wouldn’t the government know the type of firearms in my possession, or at least a pretty good idea?

If so, I don’t like that. I also don’t like the risk of being put on some list should I purchase a thousand rounds as opposed to a box of fifty.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay asked us about gun safety legislation, so…….guns just have a way of just goin’ off, and no safety training can stop it. Guns are a trip mechanism that relies on a Rube Goldberg series of events that can be accomplished just be having your face in the way of the barrel. Gun safety? How much safety do you need to mistake a human being lying in a beach chair for a deer? That’s what happened to a frat-bro of mine (1970) when he went deer hunting and decided to bring the chair along to just lie and wait for some luck. There is no gun safety that can thwart a gun just goin’ off. Empty guns go off all the time. Guns don’t kill people, they just kinda go off, sometimes, that’s all. Look, only a lunatic can stop a lunatic. You see, some more-heroic lunatics kill themselves first, before killing anyone else and I like to only see the good in people and I like to think that the motive was to preserve others’ lives. A suicide might be motivated by the blind rage to kill others, but the good in the suicide victim maybe lets him save his own soul, I don’t know. What is love but laying down your life for another voter? Patriotically, we lose more voters to gun accidents than to mass murder. Far, far more voter deaths occur when those guns just go off, without nobody doin’ nuthin’. “Hey, my gun’s jammed. I’ll try thisKRABOOM! oh that’s grim. Oh well, I …..I……I’m a member of the NRA!! I’ve got my rights. Too bad if you’re dead, it was an accident.” Judge’s ruling: Sometimes guns just go off. Next case. Goin’ huntin’??

• Link
• Report this comment

barking frog

January 11th, 2013
11:58 am

I think another aspect of gun issue that seems elusive is that fact that we have 310,000,000 known firearms in our country….

I remain convinced that no knee jerk political reaction or government reaction will keep these incidents from occuring with same frequency. IMO the only real solution is to keep intruders out…perimeter motion detector devices enabled during school hours (new technology needed)would be effective to keep bad guys out of schools. Malls and other places will need different angle..those are a puzzle.

• Link
• Report this comment

The Castle doctrine also permits the use of deadly force in defense of one’s home.

• Link
• Report this comment

Aquagirl – “You know Republicans would oppose this because
“sane and responsible” eliminates so many of them.”

hot damn, 3 chords and the Truth right there, girl.

• Link
• Report this comment

As I’ve said before, I support background checks for gun purchases. I’ve had background checks before. The only question that I have about the mentally ill being excluded from purchasing/owning guns. There is the small issue of the Health Insurance Portability and Affordability Act (HIPAA) of 1996. A mental illness, as well as, well, a bunionectomy, for that matter is “protected” under this act. So, how are law enforcement agencies to gain access to this info? I guess the law(s) could be amended?

Let’s take this a step further, my father had a “nervous breakdown” about 40 years ago. He admitted himself and got things straightened out. He held a good job, retired early and now, at 74 can still physically out-work me. He has never had an violent outbursts, never been arrested. He does not drink, smoke or take drugs. He has two gun safes full of guns and ammo. He doesn’t hunt anymore, doesn’t carry a weapon in his truck, etc. Hell, he’d probably have to find the combination to open the safes. He just likes guns. Why? I don’t know. Some people collect snow babies, some collect guns! Because of his “mental” issues 40 years ago, would he no longer be able to purchase or own guns? Who makes that determination?

Also, there is a gun show in Albany tomorrow. I have only been to one in my life. I don’t need / want another gun, I’ve got plenty of ammo. But, I’m going tomorrow just to see for myself if the so-called “gun show loophole” exists. If anyone cares, I’ll report back.

Good debate, for the most part!

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — “Could you please direct me to the part in our Constitution or Bill of Rights that says we have the right to Obamacare?”

It’s riiiiiight next to the part that says “right to life.”

Actually, here:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

• Link
• Report this comment

Stevie Ray

If you can get a whole untrimmed brisket where you live, try grinding that twice and using it for ‘burgers.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Way to back down, RB! It takes a man to admit when he’s wrong. I’m proud of you.”

For the record, I never claimed Papa Johns pizza would be $25. Yes the conversation was about PJ so one could infer I was speaking for/about them (even though my comment also included hamburgers….), but never did I state that PJ’s pizza’s would be $25 as a fact.

• Link
• Report this comment

But, I’m going tomorrow just to see for myself if the so-called “gun show loophole” exists. If anyone cares, I’ll report back.

I care. I’ll be interested in what you find. Mr. Downin.

/drive-by

• Link
• Report this comment

The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government. Think Syria. The United States was founded by people who rebelled and fought against the British government control. They envisioned the day when our government would become over reaching and tyrannical, and that day might not be far off. So, I say, we keep our guns.

• Link
• Report this comment

The army and the marines spend months training soldiers before they are deployed to a battlefield. Firing the weapon is a small portion of that training. Equally important is the training in how function as a unit, how to store the weapon safely, and how to distinguish between targets and innocents. Police receive similar training. The repeated statements here that knowing how to fire the gun is sufficient training is absurd.
Years ago my 6 year old son got in our car, started the engine, and drove into the bushes. He probably had as much training in driving (by watching us) as many gun owners do with their basic gun training – i.e. they know where the trigger is and where the bullet comes out.
I remember in the service coming back from the firing range at the end of the day. Another member of our unit said, “I am now probably the most dangerous person in the navy.” I didn’t think about it a lot, but it is now clear that the weapons available today require a lot more training than pointing and shooting.
The NRA proposes additional spending to provide security at schools. If that is caused by the prolifieration of guns, then gun owners should pay that expense. They can be required to buy liability insurance like car owners, or they can pay a gun tax. Either way, it can start at $4 billion per year, until we figure out the total cost of medical and death benefits caused by guns in America. Auto insurance companies have figured this out pretty well, so I’m confident they are up to this task.

• Link
• Report this comment

mm

January 11th, 2013
12:00 pm

Which amendment to our constitution says we have a right to healthcare?

• Link
• Report this comment

More jobs may help but I don’t see anything on the table or on the horizon that will contribute toward that outcome..

Many of those shooters and victims had good paying jobs—in the drug industry. The problem isn’t lack of money, it’s too much money, which is spent on guns to protect the product.

Pretty soon you have guns everywhere and shootings galore, including innocent victims caught in the crossfire. Prohibition Part II.

• Link
• Report this comment

FRED

My experience with the rightwingers who I find not unintelligent, is that they are prefer a country where everyone has access to healthcare, just the means of accomplishing seems to be debatable. This subset clearly excludes those on the right (a ton of them) who opposed this as another tax that like all taxes, will exceed any current estimates geometrically.

After the small ball-no impact and ideologically driven tax increase recently agreed to, clearly DEMS lost and GOP lost as well. The common thread is that all politicians operate in a system that views courage as a liability. Transaction taxes and some of the automatic spending cuts should have remained in place in addition to increased rates over $200K IMO.

BO et al will lose supporters if they cut anything, particularly in the entitlement area since they have sold hard that the oppositions goal is to leave millions of americans destitude…of course that is not the case. I understand the original Tea Party premise but they have become stark raving loonies…stuck in the middle eh?

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
12:12 pm

Fred — “Could you please direct me to the part in our Constitution or Bill of Rights that says we have the right to Obamacare?”

It’s riiiiiight next to the part that says “right to life.”

Actually, here:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
+++++++++++++++++++

Cool, so according to THAT logic I have a Constitutional “right” to all the Free beer I want. Where do I go pick that crap up? And what if I’m too drunk to drive? Does that mean I now have the “right” to have it delivered?

Great, go get my free beer Skippy and bring it by the house. And don’t dally, I’m thirsty.

• Link
• Report this comment

Funny how obozo is protected by guns & his kids are protected by guns!!

According to the attached article, it would appear that taxes will go up & up & up with obozo as the leader. Like all politicians, he is a lying pile of dog squeeze. People are so gullible!!

Braces for the Kids Just Got More Expensive: Obamacare Tax Hike Case Study
WASHINGTON, D.C.—In 2013, the tax increases in Obamacare will increasingly conspire against kitchen-table family healthcare decisions. As just one example, below are some of the taxes that will impact the purchase of dental braces:
Obamacare Medical Device Tax: As of Jan.1, Obamacare imposes a new tax of 2.3 percent on medical device manufacturers, including those who make dental braces. The tax is imposed on gross sales — even if the company does not earn a profit in a given year. While the tax will be paid to the IRS by the manufacturer, the tax will be passed along as a higher cost of the product, ultimately to be borne by the parent buying the braces for their child. With the cost of braces being as high as $7,625 this new tax could raise the cost of these braces by $175.
Obamacare Flexible Spending Account Cap: As of Jan. 1, the 30-35 million Americans who use a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account (FSA) at work to pay for their family’s basic medical needs face a new government cap of $2,500. This will squeeze $13 billion of tax money from Americans over the next ten years. (Currently, the accounts are unlimited under federal law, though employers are allowed to set a cap.) A parent looking to sock away extra money to pay for braces would find themselves quickly hitting this new cap, meaning they would have to pony up some or all of the cost with after-tax dollars. Needless to say, this tax will especially impact middle class families.
Obamacare “Haircut” to the Medical Itemized Deduction: Faced with higher prices for braces and a reduced ability to pay for them with their FSA, parents might decide to deduct the cost of braces on their tax returns. Unfortunately, Obamacare makes this harder, too.
Before Obamacare, Americans facing high medical and dental expenses were allowed a deduction to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). As of Jan. 1, Obamacare imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Therefore, Obamacare not only makes it more difficult to claim this deduction, it widens the net of taxable income.
According to the IRS, 10 million families took advantage of this tax deduction in 2009, the latest year of available data. Almost all are middle class. The average taxpayer claiming this deduction earned just over $53,000 annually. ATR estimates that the average income tax increase for the average family claiming this tax benefit will be $200 – $400 per year. To learn more about this tax, click here.
This is just a small example of how a simple, everyday, kitchen table decision has been fundamentally altered by the tax hikes in Obamacare. It does not even take into account the indirect effects of the rest of the tax hikes in the law, which will reduce family income and kill jobs.
ATR is a non-partisan coalition of taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose all tax increases. For more information or to arrange an interview please contact John Kartch at (202) 785-0266 or by email at jkartch@atr.org.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, the Connecticut shooter had plenty of training. It just made him a better shooter.
The law needed is one that outlaws and rids assault weapons and high capacity clips from the population. Gradually such weapons will become completely unobtainable to everyone.

• Link
• Report this comment

harvey

“The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government. ”

I know that’s repeated a lot on tv and radio, but you may want to do a bit of independent research and see the concern not for a tyrannical government, but for a standing army.

Of course, the NRA and the gun manufacturers’ lobby would have a dickens of a time casting the US military in the same demonic light as they cast the US government, wouldn’t they?

It’s all about marketing.

• Link
• Report this comment

“No serious gun law proposal in the wake of the Connecticut tragedy — and certainly no gun law that I would ever support — would attempt to disarm Herman or deny her the right to protect herself and her loved ones. That is simply not at issue.”

It would appear Obama thinks, or at least has thought, differently:

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/01/11/obama-opposed-gun-ban-exception-defend-home/

” Likewise, a .38 pistol kept for home defense is not a semi-automatic high-velocity assault weapon with a large-capacity magazine being marketed as a cure for those insecure in their masculinity. Those distinctions are critical and easily drawn, both in law and in logic, and it’s important that they be recognized.”

I am unable to judge the degree or kind of one’s insecurity, but I believe there is a VERY strong argument to be made that the Constitutional right to bear arms codified in the 2nd Amendment is to ensure the freedom of “the people” against tyranny, foreign and domestic. Hence, I believe people should be able to arm themselves sufficiently to counter such a threat. You don’t have to be much of a student of history to know that anything can happen, including the “unthinkable”. I do, however, agree that one’s responsibility should be demonstrated in order to bear arms.

• Link
• Report this comment

Let’s also make criminals pledge not to buy guns & ammo!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — “Cool, so according to THAT logic I have a Constitutional “right” to all the Free beer I want.”

If you have an argument with the Founders’ logic in putting that Amendment in, then argue with them, not me.

“Great, go get my free beer Skippy and bring it by the house. And don’t dally, I’m thirsty.”

You might have the right to the beer, but you certainly don’t have the right to have it delivered by me.

Remember, Fred, you right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.

• Link
• Report this comment

cmac22

“Funny how obozo is protected by guns & his kids are protected by guns!! ”

You expect to be taken seriously when you pose that as a question?

“Hey folks, let’s stop Secret Service protection for the President and First Family. Great idea, huh?”

• Link
• Report this comment

@stands – I stand by my statement. Just because some stupid marketeer attempts to make a silly assed point, I do not think that is a rational starting point for the discussion. And yes, I saw their stupid ad.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep Up
From the law
(b) The use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to prevent trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property is not justified unless the person using such force reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
…………………………………………………………………………….
guess you can shoot some one taking your stuff from you or your home.

• Link
• Report this comment

Simple Truths

January 11th, 2013
11:26 am

Who gets to decide what qualifies as “sane” and “responsible”?

Let’s limit voting to sane, responsible voters.

YES! YES! YES!

• Link
• Report this comment

stands, for those of us who work for a living, there will always be long lags times to respond….sorry to try your patience…..and aquagirl…..if I need a gun to get my Man Card…..well, that aint what does it.

• Link
• Report this comment

frog, exactly. The problem is that idiotic laws like “stand your ground” create a situation where someone with an unreasonable belief will claim the “right” like the guy who shot the unarmed kids in another car in a parking lot in Florida.

• Link
• Report this comment

I mean, let’s be honest … if government really IS that tyrannical, do you honestly think that you will be able to fight off the DoD??? really???

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — “You bring my damn beer or we’ll SEE where my fist rights begin and end. I may be fat and slow but I can STILL outrun a hover round. Now hurry up before I decide that I WON’T share……….”

Denied. Bailiff, take the jackazz, um plaintiff into custody, please.

“(all that earlier talk of steaks has me wanting to take the spoiled child out of Parkers on Ponce, mom’s out of town again at school so we save 1/3 in cost lol).”

I’m thinking that the crabcake and a strip are the way to go.

• Link
• Report this comment

cmac22

“What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander!!”

So now cmac22 advocates Secret Service protection for all US citizens.

Great idea there, cmac22 -

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK

” if government really IS that tyrannical, do you honestly think that you will be able to fight off the DoD??? really???”

If you have the DVD of Rambo and a Bushmaster, the answer is “YES!!!”

• Link
• Report this comment

As Piers Morgan pointed out last night, one can’t walk into a drugstore and buy 6 boxes of Sudafed. We have restrictions in a modern society. Why are guns immune to restrictions? Does the 2nd Amendment say that? Absolutely not.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay thank you for acknowledging the Melinda Herman incident. The story has been largely absent in the anti-gun mainstream media.

My biggest concern about having guns in schools, especially grade schools, would be keeping the guns away from little hands. A teacher/principal would literally have to wear her gun all day because it’s not something you can just drop in a desk drawer.

• Link
• Report this comment

“If you have the DVD of Rambo and a Bushmaster, … and a really small penis … then the answer is “YES!!!””

… there … fixed your typo

• Link
• Report this comment

“As Piers Morgan pointed out last night … ”

can’t stand … I mean cannot STAND … Piers Morgan … but, am glad to see him doubling down.

• Link
• Report this comment

indigo – Out of all the industrialized Western nations on Earth, we have, by far, the highest gun murder rate

and yet we don’t have the highest murder rate if you include everything from guns to hammers

• Link
• Report this comment

Piers Morgan is in this country illegally and will soon be deported. there was a recent news article on this.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

“I would put the very same challenge to you – start with the English Bill of Rights (and the history behind it) and proceed to the contemporaneous statements”

Nice deflection. Point was, the reasons for voting against a bill have less to do with the specifics than with the principles.

As far as your rabbit holes, as I posted yesterday, all one has to do is read Scalia’s majority and Stevens’s minority opinions in District of Columbia v Heller.

But what comes across is, you seem to put yourself in the group of those who think that our government of the people is somehow going to morph into a kingship and it’s the valiant gun owners who will save our Republic.

O-kaaaayyyyyy…….

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

Sorry , that line of ” Point was, the reasons for voting against a bill have less to do with the specifics than with the principles.” was for another blogger.

• Link
• Report this comment

Time for the Dirty Birds to show up. Falcons 27 – Seattle 21.

• Link
• Report this comment

usinuk-can you please expound on the requirement of having references before being allowed to purchase a gun? How exactly does that work?

• Link
• Report this comment

Gun Safety should be an oxymoron for voters…..or do I mean it should be a red herring? Guns have a way of just goin’ off. For no reason. Please stop cleaning your guns in the kitchen, voters. Historically, Judges’ Rulings have been the same on all five million voter deaths by gun accidents: “Sometimes guns just kinda go off, like. . Next Case. No, stop, let me guess, you were in the kitchen cleaning your gun before supper…..(Yeahhhhhhh)……” and your wife started shouting about the mess cause she wanted to set the table……(Yeahhhhh)…..and then she was the stew…….(Yeahhhhh)……don’t feel bad son, sometimes guns just got a way of like goin’ off kinda sudden like……..(Yeah, that’s what happened. The.gun.just.kinda.went.off.sudden.like.)

• Link
• Report this comment

Actually Krystall’s Balls, I stand corrected. After watching more of that video, I think you would want an AA12 not the SAIGA-12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOoUVeyaY_8

(I wonder if THIS is the guy who got shot recently (Keith Ratliff) and how THAT investigation will turn out)

• Link
• Report this comment

that .38 revolver used by the mother with 5 of the six shots to the torso STILL was not enough to totally neutralize her perpetrator.

Sure it was. He stopped trying to get to her and posed no further threat. Oh, wait, that’s not good enough is it?

You’re showing your hand, in which you’re the hero of your home defense fantasy where you “totally neutralize” those who deserve it with “extreme prejudice” and all that Chuck Norris lingo.

It’s all about the Man Card.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — “JHM: I get the strip for the rotter (they serve it with broccoli which she loves) and I get some fish or other seafood (the diet). Occasionally I’ll get a steak, but usually I’m too cheap to pay steak prices for a steak out.”

Im my travels, I have often found fine steaks at outstanding prices close to where the beef is raised. For that reason, I recommend a visit to west or north Texas (rangeland) or the Texas Hill Country (Austin and surrounding areas) or even Kansas City.

I found some *fine* establishments in KC with quite reasonable prices and some GIGANTIC steaks with outstanding flavor. Of course, you probably won’t get the freshest seafood so far from the ocean, but if the beef is what you’re after, IMO you’ve got to go to the source.

• Link
• Report this comment

@JHM.
Well, I live in an area where I would have never expected I would have gunshots flying in my subdivision. That did not however stop that feom becoming a reality when “social networking” drew hundreds of people to party, many of which were riff-raff that got out of control and resulted in the gunshots. It also did not prevent my area from showing up on the news some years back when what was believed to be gangs made ot out our way and tore up many (occupied) homes in the subdivision. Now JHM, if I lived in SW/NW Atlanta, midtown, let’s just throw in South Fulton for good measure. These things take place more and more and in more places. No one is immune. You never know when it will be YOUR residence who’s “number is called”. As it is said. I would rather HAVE that extra firepower and never have to use it than to need it and NOT have it, which again I make no apologies for. You may not be granted a second chance by your captors. I will not take that chance. YOU can though. Great!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay:

“…if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.”

If you would be willing to rescind the thousands of existing gun laws to replace with your “one law”, then you might have some takers. If you are proposing to add another (that will also be a nuisance to law-abiding citizens and ignored by criminals), then it would be met with a similar response to current proposals.

I do note the speed with which so many opponents of gun rights seek to classify those who disagree with them to be unfit. In the same breath, they mock those who identify the risk of what bureaucrats / politicians might do with firearms registration of law-abiding citizens.

-SD

• Link
• Report this comment

For that reason, I recommend a visit to west or north Texas (rangeland) or the Texas Hill Country (Austin and surrounding areas) or even Kansas City.

and Argentina

• Link
• Report this comment

Uh oh Falcons fans…

Nate Silver predicts New England vs Seattle Super Bowl match-up.

Anyone know what unskewedpolls.com or Dick Morris are predicting?

Anyone going to the Socialist Dome on Sunday to watch the Falcons playoff game?

• Link
• Report this comment

Need a link showing where the Prez gets to pick and choose what laws he wants to enforce or ignore and what illegal aliens (Piers Morgan) should be deported or allowed illegally to remain in this country. There is no link because what Obama is doing is illegal.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK – not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

January 11th, 2013
12:42 pm

“If you have the DVD of Rambo and a Bushmaster, … and a really small penis … then the answer is “YES!!!””

… there … fixed your typo
++++++++++++++++++

My small penis has nothing to do with Rambo OR an AR 15. What’s your point? i need Steroids and an AR 15?

• Link
• Report this comment

K. Balls — “As it is said. I would rather HAVE that extra firepower and never have to use it than to need it and NOT have it, which again I make no apologies for. You may not be granted a second chance by your captors. I will not take that chance. YOU can though. Great!

Please don’t make assumptions about me, my residence, or my degree of preparedness for such an eventuality.

I simply asked you a question. There’s no need for you to become defensive.

IMO, many individuals who claim they “need” a large amount of weaponry to protect themselves, their families and their property from depredations don’t really need it at all, particularly given where they live and given other security measures they may have already taken. I simply asked you to clarify something about your circumstances in that regard.

• Link
• Report this comment

DIA — “I ask again, what about HIPAA and Protected Health Information (PHI)? Right now, no one has access to any health records, including mental health, unless express permission is given by the patient? ”

Answered you already @12;17, top of page 3.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Nice deflection.”

A deflection? I was challenging your understanding of the 2nd Amendment. And that is how you respond?

“As far as your rabbit holes, as I posted yesterday, all one has to do is read Scalia’s majority and Stevens’s minority opinions in District of Columbia v Heller.”

Nice ad hominen response. Zero points scored, however. BTW, I am still waiting on your rationale for believing that 1) the apostle Paul had “sexual hangups” (based on evidence) 2) gay marriage is permitted by the Scriptures despite there being no explicit discussion of anything but heterosexual marriage and 3) plain prohibitions of homosexuality by Paul in the NT should be ignored or dismissed because of belief # 1.

“But what comes across is, you seem to put yourself in the group of those who think that our government of the people is somehow going to morph into a kingship and it’s the valiant gun owners who will save our Republic.”

You must have studied very little history in school. You should review the history of the 20th century very carefully to see what “unthinkable” things actually happened. It’s funny that people who so zealously guard against restrictions on the 1st or 5th Amendments (like those in the ACLU) for FEAR that it may lead to all sorts of horrible things done by the government seem incapable of understanding how others have a similar fear with respect to the 2nd Amendment. Maybe it’s not funny at all. Maybe it’s something else, something far less positive.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

When you return – reread my posts – didn’t mean to come across as snarky or combative – just get a bit amazed at how some of the dots are connected. Like with that chain email and Facebook thing I saw about “Obama has secret plan for US Military to take your guns!!!!” when it was part of an Army MP course curriculum on preventing rioting and civil unrest after certain disasters. And it was enacted during Bush’s term.

Morality?

“So our Dictator In Chief picks and chooses the laws he wants to abide by and they don’t suit him he just ignores them. Not abiding by the law is a criminal offense. Impeach Obama.”

Okay…. just what crimes has he committed? And haven’t House Republicans aided him in that by not bringing forth Articles of Impeachment?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bet on Seattle.

loser bet

• Link
• Report this comment

E. Cat — “and Argentina”

Well, yeah, but I was trying to stay reasonable.

If you can afford to jet off to Buenos Aires for some dinner, good for you. And take me with you.

• Link
• Report this comment

Morality?

“Need a link showing where the Prez gets to pick and choose what laws he wants to enforce or ignore and what illegal aliens (Piers Morgan) should be deported or allowed illegally to remain in this country. There is no link because what Obama is doing is illegal.”

You mean, Hannity or Rush didn’t send you a link?!!?

For what they get paid, it’s the least they could do.

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife

January 11th, 2013
1:03 pm

“Leave. We don’t need you negative vibes”

Just call em like I see em.

Bet on Seattle.
++++++++++++++++++++++

The only bet I’M making is that I’m having wings on my Green Egg for the game…….. unless I get a better offer and go somewhere. If you start driving at Midnight Saturday, you can easily make it in time for the game. Bring some Sal and Judy’s BBQ sauce if you come though……..

http://www.salandjudys.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=17&zenid=ccbe99f4a3762f2a2d3da330e6b4b9cb

or maybe some of their jarred sauce as well. I’ve never tried it before……..

• Link
• Report this comment

DIA — “It was Wagyu (sp?) beef. I think it’s Australia’s Kobe. You’ve heard of “melt-in-your-mouth?” This literally did. The four of us all agreed it was the best meal we’d EVER had!”

Wagyu and Kobe are both Japanese. And you don’t want to know what a steak costs in Japan, trust me.

IIRC, Wagyu’s a *breed* of cattle and Kobe refers to specific cuts from Wagyu catttle that are raised, treated and handled in certain prescribed ways.

• Link
• Report this comment

Limit guns to the sane.. good idea. Unfortunately you want the insane in D.C. to decide who is sane. That’s just a blank check to pick and choose who OBAMA decides should have or not have a gun based primarily on their loyalty to the SOCIALIST DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

• Link
• Report this comment

“… a woman’s body has a way of shutting down so the pregnancy would not occur. He’s partly right on that.”

Republican birth control…Holding a loaded gun next to your wife’s head during sex.

Republican men love this method, gun porn and sex porn, all at the same time. Very explosive.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
1:10 pm
Wagyu and Kobe are both Japanese. And you don’t want to know what a steak costs in Japan, trust me.

I’m a bit embarrassed at what we paid for the meal in Vegas, Joe!

Yeah, I’ve watched documentaries on Kobe. I think they feed them beer and take extraordinary measures in making sure they cows remain calm. The waiter brought out the entire loin. It was almost totall white. Amazing stuff!

• Link
• Report this comment

@JHM

“Please don’t make assumptions about me, my residence, or my degree of preparedness for such an eventuality.”

Dude… are you FLIPPING OUT or something. Did I even ONCE make a reference to where YOU live or all that other crap?? Could you not determine that I clearly spoke of where I-I-I live giving concrete examples and pointed out other areas of metro Atlanta that have notoriously received news coverage for such occurences?? You DID ask, remember? Maybe you did not expect me to have an answer. Personally, I think it is YOU who has a problem with being “defensive” or some type of agenda to push.

Have your agenda if you must. It bears nothing on my personal life.

• Link
• Report this comment

If you really think a nation of people who were largely hunters for survival at the time the 2nd amendment was written wrote it becuase someone would someday take from them the tool of their survival, you’re kidding yourself. They wrote it to protect themselves from a government like the one they had just fought their way out from under.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mrs. Herman should’ve had hollowpoints.

• Link
• Report this comment

oh…and all that red meat goodness was 550 peso’s

• Link
• Report this comment

“Why are guns immune to restrictions? Does the 2nd Amendment say that? Absolutely not.”

It says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. There is probably not a lot of wiggle room in that. It gets down to the purpose for bearing arms. For self protection, one probably only needs a handun. For hunting (this can probably only be said to be an unenumerated right), semi-automatic weapons are not probably needed. For defense of a community or state against tyranny, semi-automatic weapons at the very least (given the fire power of the modern government).

• Link
• Report this comment

Piers for Prez

January 11th, 2013
11:09 am
Fun Facts:
I’ve owned over 60 guns in my lifetime and all of them, so-called ‘assault-rifles’ included have killed less people than Ted Kennedy’s car.

THAT’S HILARIOUS!!! And sadly the truth.

That’s a fact most libs like to “overlook”. The infamous lion of the senate was a drunk and a murderer who tried to cover up the murder.

And yet the dimlibs claim to be the party for women. Oh…forgot about Clinton….maybe they are after all!

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry – but I couldn’t watch the “so called” news on TV ’cause it is a waste of time – both sides exaggerate and lie. PBS is the closest thing to being honest though they are obviously coming at you with a left of center view point. Falcons by SIX. I checked this out and EVERY time an NFL owner is wanting the tax payers to buy him a new stadium his team wins their first playoff game – coincidence or a rigged game? Don’t know – Falcons by SIX.

• Link
• Report this comment

The Truth

January 11th, 2013
1:12 pm
One way gun usage could be eliminated is banning ammunition. If you follow the letter of the Constitution…”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” You can bear arms… You just won’t have any ammunition to shoot. Not saying that I agree with this, but that would follow the letter of the Constitution.

The concept of arms included ammo.

• Link
• Report this comment

Trolls Bane

“2. Using the “well regulated militia” language, and cite this in the bill, require some sort of military training everyone upon highschool graduation – assuming of course that those so trained are deemed mentally fit and have no history of violence. Require an additional two weeks of training for everyone in the community capable of bearing arms each year. ”

And everyone who want to own weapons so they can be part of the well-regulated militia should be federalized and sent to Afghanistan!

Towncrier

Most of the gun control statements here are rendered moot by the Heller decision. As are the interpretations of the history and application of the 2nd Amendment. It’s a nice case because both the majority and minority opinions address the points made here and elsewhere – and the research contained goes far beyond even what you’ve cited.

Point is, though, the majority opinion is the majority opinion. And it doesn’t ‘guarantee’ much of what some advocates say it does.

As far as the Apostle Paul and sexual hangups, I’d say any person who thinks it preferable to be single rather than married, who says if you can’t control your urges and can’t be like he is, is better off getting married than risking sexual contact, has hangups.

Of course, for all the talk about marriage, what he’s saying is all you married types can’t live as righteously as he did so you’re taking the easier way out cause you can’t control yourselves.

I never said gay marriage was permitted by the scriptures, did I?

BTW – where is adoption – cross cultural – cross religion or otherwise – permitted by the scriptures, hmmmm? Ready to ban adoptions? I did say many people using arguments as you do confuse the act with the actor. And as josef weighed in, you generalize across genders, where the Jewish holdings – upon which those writings are based, Paul being a Pharisee and all – dealt with men. Not women.

You ignore plenty of NT rulings as well, but seem to be hung up on gays.

Ready to outlaw all divorce except for adultery?

Ready to ban men from having long hair? (And ready to take down almost all the Jesus pictures in your church because they show him with long hair?)

It’s another false argument, Towncrier, centered on some weird, overbearing angst with gays.

I’m just amazed at how people focus all their energy on one thing and attempt to justify it by the scriptures while ignoring a host of others.

BTW – as you seem to like history – this is related to your gay marriage question. Take a look at writings from the US. 18th and 19th centuries. Read the arguments religious leaders used to justify holding blacks as slaves. All biblical arguments. To fight against slavery was to be opposed to God and the scriptures.

• Link
• Report this comment

K. Balls — “Dude… are you FLIPPING OUT or something.”

No, but you are. Look at all the capital letters and emphasis you’re using. Look at the language you’re using to talk to me.

Now look back at what I’m posting.

If one of us is “flipping out,” it’s not me.

“Did I even ONCE make a reference to where YOU live or all that other crap??”

Actually, yes. Your comment to the effect of “YOU can take that chance” belies the fact that you don’t know a thing about me. Maybe you should leap to fewer conclusions and ask more questions instead.

“Could you not determine that I clearly spoke of where I-I-I live giving concrete examples and pointed out other areas of metro Atlanta that have notoriously received news coverage for such occurences?? You DID ask, remember?”

I did. But I didn’t ask you to make inaccurate guesses about my circumstances and then act as if you were teaching me some sort of valuable lesson.

“Maybe you did not expect me to have an answer. Personally, I think it is YOU who has a problem with being “defensive” or some type of agenda to push.”

Well, that’s because you don’t know anything about me and because you’re having a kneejerk defensive reaction to being asked a polite question. Personally, I don’t have an agenda. I just don’t like it when people who don’t know me presume to act as if they know something about me or the way I live.

“Have your agenda if you must.”

I don’t have an agenda. And I’m a firearm-owning disabled veteran, pal.

Once again, you don’t know the first thing about me, my circumstances or how I live. But don’t let that stop you from making something up and acting like it’s true.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Mrs. Herman should’ve had hollowpoints.”

^^^ Death-porn ^^^

• Link
• Report this comment

straitroad

January 11th, 2013
1:19 pm

This is the typical, emotional, liberal knee-jerk reaction…placing restrictions on the rights of law-abiding citizens due the the actions of non-law-abiding citizens. If we are going to restrict constitutional rights, why stop with firearms? Jay, if memory serves, you are against identification for voting rights, yet you have no problem with adding a layer of bureacracy for the constitutionally protected right to own firearms. This isn’t logical

Excellent point.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier — “It says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. There is probably not a lot of wiggle room in that.”

I might actually agree with you, if that’s *all* it said.

However, the fact that you don’t even mention the rest of the Amendment’s content suggests to me that you’d rather dismiss it out of hand and behave as if it doesn’t exist.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred

http://www.kayranchtexas.com/

Texas Wagyu.

• Link
• Report this comment

“In all seriousness I’m become kind of a nut on food. I want to get a cow from someplace that raises them naturally with no steroids. I’m about to till up my back yard and turn it into a big garden and maybe see if I can make a deal with the feller down the street who has gotten too old to do his whole garden to use some of his land.”

Fred, I live on a 2 acre lot in Decatur, I have a huge vegetable garden and will be tilling it this weekend. I have a 6 horsepower 18″ tiller that rips right through it. Luckily I have a creek on my land and don’t have to pay for water. There is nothing better than home grown vegetables.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 11th, 2013
1:26 pm

td, from 1996? When Obama was running for state senator? Prior to the Heller decision? And relating only to handguns?

I guess you don’t know stupidity when you see it.

Oh Yes, Obama has been very careful not to offend Conservative Dems for the past two election cycles but his true heart comes out when answering these questions when he did not think it mattered.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred – I don’t HATE Obama. in fact I pray for his safety quite often. I never said I HATE Obama – where did you get that from? I don’t agree with his SOCIALIST wasteful plan to spend our way out of debt. I am a FISCAL conservative. I did not vote for “W” and I did not vote for Obama because they are FISCAL liberals. Also I resent him lying under oath to abide by and uphold the laws on the books – he picks and chooses the laws he wants to enforce based on politics.

• Link
• Report this comment

So which is it that you want: insults and belittling of those that have a different perspective from you

for the THIRD TIME TODAY:

Jay is directly referencing a very real marketing campaign employed by the manufacturer of the Bushmaster, one that was still active as of a week or so ago.

It is not “insulting” for Jay to point out that this marketer was, in fact, selling these weapons as a cure for diminished masculinity. He is pointing out a verifiable fact.

• Link
• Report this comment

DowninAlbany: I can’t have chickens here I don’t think and I don’t hunt. I don’t know anyone who has land, I’m too cheap to pay 1000’s of dollars to lease any, and I’m not about to go out on public land with a bunch of idiot Yankees who think a shot or 4 of Jack in their morning coffee is the way to wake up.

i HAD a neighbor who wiped out herds of deer every year. I gave him my tags and he brought me the meat. It worked for both of us. I don’t live there anymore though. Around Atlanta there really is no place to hunt or fish without the right connections which I don’t have. Oh well. If I could I would hunt, birds, rabbits, squirrels, deer, I’m not picky, I’ll eat it all……..

• Link
• Report this comment

Go to DC and get a steak our pols eat paid for by lobbyists.

Good stuff.

• Link
• Report this comment

td, many people have been against handguns, especially Saturday night specials. Heller changed that.

Do you have a rational sane point?

• Link
• Report this comment

My father always has a garden, but, we are about out of the peas/beans from this past summer. He never fails to take veggies to the widow ladies around town. He grows grapes and makes several gallons of wine every year (though he has been a tee-totaller for about 25 years now). He grows cane and cooks it into syrup every fall. Has a couple of bee hives (though he tends to be a little stingey with the honey ). Damn, the more I type, the more I see what an amazing man he is and what a blessing he is. Anyway, I digress.

One other thing…not much on this green earth that I won’t eat, but, I draw the line at liver! No, no, no!

• Link
• Report this comment

” I did not vote for “W””

I will call that a lie.

cons cheered on w blowing our surplus then suddenly became fiscal cons under President Obama.

Fact.

• Link
• Report this comment

Morality – Blank wants Atlanta to give him a billion – and Atlanta wants a win. Rigged or not Falcons by SIX. You illustrious mayor has already declared that Blank will get his free stadium

Do some basic research at least…The city will kick in 300M, Blank 600M…so it’s not “free” and not “a billion” from the city

• Link
• Report this comment

Our President is staying the course on Afghanistan withdrawal.

• Link
• Report this comment

Why does Jay want Ted Turner to have to give up his guns?

• Link
• Report this comment

Of course the harmless masculinity challenged as Jay presumptuously labels those who collect or target shoot with such weapons

I know that Paul’s already addressed this, but in case Recon never saw it:

http://cdn03.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/17/bushmaster-ad1-600×450.jpg

This was an active part of Bushmaster’s marketing campaign until very recently. It is not something that Jay imagined. Please stop denying it, or deflecting by imagining that Jay is saying something that he is not.

• Link
• Report this comment

@JHM
There is no need for you and I to engage any further. You obviously have some type of hang up. CAPS are for emphasis in case you didn’t know. I need to ask no questions. MY post’s purpose was to state my perspective. You cannot deal with that, your problem. I lack no credibility in the military area. I am a well seasoned VETERAN as well, though an “abled” one. I just don’t understand what it even had to do with anything anyway. Have a nice day, because I am done exchanging with your JHM moniker.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul: Manor is real close to Killeen. I have a buddy that lives there. Maybe the next time I go visit I’ll drive down there for some Kobe…….

• Link
• Report this comment

“Morality” — “I don’t agree with his SOCIALIST wasteful plan to spend our way out of debt.”

Why? Ronald Reagan did the same thing. His “Prime the Pump” domestic policy was simply massive domestic deficit spending in order to jump-start the economy.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Why does Jay want Ted Turner to have to give up his guns?”

Seriously, Jm? You’re going to keep to playing this angle? Don’t make me post a list of all the Republican crazies that will have to turn in their guns, that’s too much typing for me.

• Link
• Report this comment

stands – I’m at the point where I’m going to need to know my doctor’s political beliefs before I hire him. There are just too many wingnut doctors in Congress spouting ridiculous views for me to take for granted that the medical profession isn’t filled with them

remember …half of all doctors finished in the bottom half of their class

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
11:15 am
Maybe you are right. To have posted something THAT stupid you have to be a Republican………..
_________________________________
Fred

• Link
• Report this comment

Stands,

“So which is it that you want: insults and belittling of those that have a different perspective from you

for the THIRD TIME TODAY:

Jay is directly referencing a very real marketing campaign employed by the manufacturer of the Bushmaster, one that was still active as of a week or so ago.

It is not “insulting” for Jay to point out that this marketer was, in fact, selling these weapons as a cure for diminished masculinity. He is pointing out a verifiable fact.”

You do know that Bushmaster does not manufacture ALL semi-automatic rifles, right? You do realize that many, MANY different manufacturers produce AR-15 and M4gery rifles, and that most do not have any such marketing campaigns that you reference in the defense of Jay’s insults directed towards gun rights advocates?

And just because one moronic marketer uses an idiotic campaign, that means it’s okay to use this one campaign to question the masculinity of anyone that supports the right to own semi-automatic rifles?

Sorry, you are wrong. And even if you were right, that still does not help with the stated objective of having a reasonable, sane discussion about gun control/gun rights. You think petty insults is the means of having a sane and reasonable discussion on anything?

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
1:14 pm

Fred, check with your local Farmers COOP, I am sure they can recommend local farmers that raise beef for sale.

• Link
• Report this comment

Some people are in fact insane,but they have not been declared insane. In addition, it’s still an educated guess for mental health workers to predict who will be violent and who won’t be. Then too, some people are just bad to the bone and bad people do bad things…insane or not.

America has made it’s bed with all this silly “gun love” that is going on today, Our country is choc full of guns, and now it’s time to pay the price for our stupidity and suffer one blood bath after another, I’m afraid. I mean I read where we have 300M guns floating around the fruited plain…

• Link
• Report this comment

Herman it lately is said,
shot an intruder in the head.
If she had no gun
he’d STILL be havin’ fun
and she just might even be dead!

Gotta find balance somewhere, folks!

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,
Bushmaster is but only one of many who manufacture and sell AR’s. Most people who own them like them because there’s a variety of optics and other accessories that easily mount on the Piccatinny rails. They’re fun to target shoot and have minimal recoil. Banning will only result in an underground market and won’t make anyone safer. A well structured and maintained national data base is the best approach. The NRA has advocated for such a database for years.

• Link
• Report this comment

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 11th, 2013
1:59 pm
Rightwingextreme, you forgot to yell “Wolverines” when posting such insurgency tripe. Where did you get your AQ training for being a terrorist. That is what you are claiming as a constitutional right.

I have no clue what you’re talking about…..although the Wolverines did win!

• Link
• Report this comment

Clyde Frog — “So look at the whole thing;

A properly-operating (practiced and equipped) civilian armed force being necessary to the security of a free state (as opposed to a tyrannical state), the right of each individual (those of us that make up “the people”) shall not be infringed.

PERIOD.”

Sorry, nothing doing.

You’re wrong in a number of places and you pretty clearly need to familiarize yourself with the writings and opinions of the Founders on this topic.

• Link
• Report this comment

“You (not just you but most progressives) has had the strategy since at least the 1920’s to get their philosophy implemented one piece at a time. This is well documented if you go and look and read the strategies of the movement…The progressive movement have been using the same tactics with their gun control (gun elimination philosophy). They have been trying for years to get rid of guns one step at a time.”

Oh, noes! You found out the TRUTH! It’s all being run by the MIB in area 51! Behghazi! Wolverines! The Loch Ness monster is in on it too; they’re all out to get you! Rush said so!

• Link
• Report this comment

Rightwingextreme, yep we agree. You’re clueless.

• Link
• Report this comment

Peadawg

January 11th, 2013
1:56 pm

“Let’s limit guns to sane, responsible gun owners”

Can we do the same to voting?

I would be satisfied if we only were able to verify that only the legal voters were voting.

• Link
• Report this comment

The flaw with firearm/ammo ban solutions is that they don’t address the real problem. To me, there’s only 2 real categories to slot death by firearm.

1. Accidental
2. The result of an evil and/or mentally ill person committing a crime

Firearm/ammo bans and restrictions greatly impact the first category but do little for the second. Reduce the number of firearms/ammo, reduce the risk of accidents. However, people intent on committing crime are not going to reconsider just because obtaining lethal tools are illegal. These people already commit murder with any tool available. Firearms are only one issue.

• Link
• Report this comment

It is gonna be damn difficult to disarm the mental midgets and their gun love.

What they need is some Kiss.

You pulled the trigger on my…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trR5ROuf1Uk

• Link
• Report this comment

“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.”

If only they knew the types of weapons that lie ahead, that seems to be the problem, weapons of war. Those weapons should meet a higher bar for purchase. Still, we loves our guns we do…

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife, Erwin’s–

I don’t mean literally “what digby said.” being that she is of the female persuasion, there is a whole ‘nother dynamic involved with her medical care.

Politics is extremely unlikely to factor into any care I may receive… although I guess if I were to work at it I could come up with some hypotheticals…

“sfd, you SURE you want to tie those tubes? Aren’t you concerned about the potential need to re-populate the white race?”

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
2:03 pm

Seeing how you lack an understanding of the Founding Fathers views on the Second Amendment, I’ve included a few below for you. At the very bottom there is a section of quotes from people who are in favor of gun control.

I only ask that you read this with an open mind.

“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia’s Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

——————————————————————————–

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”
Richard Henry Lee
writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

——————————————————————————–

“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full posession of them.”
Zachariah Johnson
Elliot’s Debates, vol. 3 “The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution.”

——————————————————————————–

“… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”
Philadelphia Federal Gazette
June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2
Article on the Bill of Rights

——————————————————————————–

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …”
Samuel Adams
quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, “Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State”

——————————————————————————–

The Founding Fathers on Arms
“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
George Washington
First President of the United States

——————————————————————————–

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.”
Thomas Paine

——————————————————————————–

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788

——————————————————————————–

“The great object is that every man be armed.” and “Everyone who is able may have a gun.”
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

——————————————————————————–

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

——————————————————————————–

“Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not.”
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

——————————————————————————–

“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … ”
Thomas Jefferson
letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.

——————————————————————————–

“The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist Papers at 184-8

——————————————————————————–

The Founding Fathers on Maintaining Freedom
“The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.”
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

——————————————————————————–

“There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. ”
Noah Webster
American Lexicographer

——————————————————————————–

“The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.”
Edmund Burke
British Statesman, 1784

——————————————————————————–

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”
Thomas Jefferson
to James Madison

——————————————————————————–

“They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
American Statesman

——————————————————————————–

Later Quotes on Gun Control
“The ruling class doesn’t care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake.”
Malcolm Wallop
former U.S. Sen. (R-WY)

——————————————————————————–

“An armed man is a citizen. A disarmed man is a subject.”
Anon.
Seen on a bumper sticker

——————————————————————————–

Pro Gun Control
“Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn’t matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.”
Sara Brady
Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum
The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.

——————————————————————————–

“If you wish the sympathy of the broad masses, you must tell them the crudest and most stupid things.”

“This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!”
Adolph Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933

• Link
• Report this comment

“These people already commit murder with any tool available. Firearms are only one issue”

True. But if they have to shoot slowly, and reload more often, lives could be saved, with only minimum inconvenience to sportsmen.

• Link
• Report this comment

To me, there’s only 2 real categories to slot death by firearm.

I read yesterday that @ half of all gun deaths are suicides…so you need a third category

• Link
• Report this comment

I figured sooner or later the fake Hitler quote would make an appearance. Thanks, “rightwingextreme.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Guns and abortion, two issues that tend to knot up the thinking of our beloved conned right wingers! Ain’t that america???

• Link
• Report this comment

stands for decibels

January 11th, 2013
2:16 pm
I figured sooner or later the fake Hitler quote would make an appearance. Thanks, “rightwingextreme.”

ok…take out the quote from hitler……any problems with the rest??

• Link
• Report this comment

Recon

” A well structured and maintained national data base is the best approach. The NRA has advocated for such a database for years.”

That would be a good step.

When I did a google search, all I found was a reference that said the NRA chief advocated a national database – of the mentally ill.

I kid you not.

• Link
• Report this comment

“if I could pass just one gun law, it would be a law barring the sale of ammunition to anyone who cannot demonstrate that had taken and passed a gun-safety course within the last five years.” And how would that have stopped any of the recent shootings?

• Link
• Report this comment

TBG: For example, people who get SOOOO angry when debating climate change that they lose control and call names and insult those they are debating.

I agree. People like that should not own a gun and should be listed on a national mental health database.

Except for “being listed” I agree with you. The general public should not have access to such a database.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And I feel my finger on your trigger (oh, yeah)
I know nobody can do me no harm (oh, yeah)
Because, (happiness) is a warm gun, mama (bang bang shoot shoot)
Happiness is a warm gun, yes it is (bang bang shoot shoot)

Happiness is a warm, yes it is, gun
Happiness (bang bang shoot shoot)

Well don’t you know that happiness (happiness) is a warm gun, (is a warm gun, yeah).”

lennon/mccartney

• Link
• Report this comment

TBG: Yes, anyone who acts as I just did and loses their cool should be treated for a mental illness classification of hotheadedness. I never said I wasn’t one on certain subjects. But I bet I would be much better about it if there were therapy or drugs to help me deal with it, provided as a part of preventative care that all citizens get.

If it leads to a more civil discourse from ALL parties I am all for it, even if just for that reason.

• Link
• Report this comment

TBG: But again, the general public should not be able to know what is in a “national mental health database.”

• Link
• Report this comment

I am so sick of these people who classify those that commit these crimes like shooting up movie theaters and schools as social misfits or loaners…..NO THEY ARE CRAZY, MENTALLY ILL…the kids mother who got killed and her 20 year old CRAZY son went out and killed 20 children was CRAZY TOO..she left guns out, hide knives..
THE media id crazy too, they had the nerve to suggest that the boy wore ear plugs so he would not HEAR the SCREAMS of th e children….NO MORON he wore ear plugs because his mother took him to the gun range and yuo wear ear plugs at the gun range to deafen the sound of the gun….SO he knew exactly what he was doing….aside from being crazy…

• Link
• Report this comment

The reload speed of the weapon doesn’t matter. Now you’re justifying deaths by quantity. Would it have been okay if only 1 student died at Sandy Hook? Heck no! One death by murder is one unnecessary death too many. When an individual commits a crime, it shouldn’t matter how many people are victims of the crime before we consider it a “bad” thing. Justifying and/or accepting bad behavior is a dangerous thing.

As for suicides, that’s not accidental and technically is a crime so there is no 3rd category. It still falls into the 2nd category of someone inflicting harm (intentionally self-inflicted). Just because we cannot punish the dead does not make it any less a violent criminal act.

Further, guns do not cause suicides anymore than they cause homicide and assault with a deadly weapon. Ban guns and suicidal people will just fall back on pills, blades, and hanging as their method of choice. With all the crazy medicines on the market these days it seems that would be the easiest way to kill yourself via OD when you add things on top like liquor!

• Link
• Report this comment

My resistance to gun laws is they self perpetuate themselves. Politically and emotional restrictions are placed to prevent tragedies of the day, but such isolated tragedies cannot be prevented in a society our size. So the next tragedy perpetuates similar response for stricter regulations. Where would it end?

• Link
• Report this comment

Driving is not a privilege.

It is a right.

I hope you are being sarcastic ’cause the Dept of Trans may disagree with you on that one

• Link
• Report this comment

BTB: Also, I agree with people getting firearms instruction but don’t advocate using law enforcement people; reference NYPD shooting at a perp and wounding multiple bystanders

What you are really advocating for is that training should be greater than that provided to a police officer. To which I say highlights that even the training a police officer receives should be better.

• Link
• Report this comment

Before you read this news release from the Southern States PBA, please keep in mind that rank and file law enforcement officers generally do NOT support emotional “eye wash” legislation that accomplishes nothing.

Politically appointed chiefs and other administrators do.

The reason should be obvious.

“As president of Southern States PBA, a professional law enforcement association with over 30,000 members from federal, state, county and municipal agencies, I would like to express our support for the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution and for law abiding citizens to purchase and own firearms. From hunting to shooting sports, firearms are a part of the American culture that are passed from generation to generation. Rank and file law enforcement officers realize that gun ownership from law abiding citizens poses no threat to the law enforcement community or to the public. New legislation aimed at reducing or restricting law abiding citizens from purchasing or owning firearms will do nothing to reduce violent crime nor will it stop criminals or those who want to commit evil acts from obtaining weapons. We, as law enforcement officers, take an oath of office to enforce the laws in our communities and support and defend the Constitution of the United States. We will continue to do so. It is our hope that our leaders in Washington will look at reasonable measures to help keep guns out of the hands of the criminals and punish those more severely who are violating those laws.”

Southern States PBA President,
Chris Skinner

• Link
• Report this comment

“Would it have been okay if only 1 student died at Sandy Hook? Heck no! One death by murder is one unnecessary death too many”

Would it have been better than 20 deaths? Duh. Lower rate of fire and more frequent reloads can save lives.

• Link
• Report this comment

NO. The marketing campaign was humor.

There are any number of other grotesque, misogynist ad campaigns out there are “just humor.” It makes their misogyny no less obnoxious; if anything, it makes it even more so.

(You might want to google the word “mansplaining” since this appears to be an utterly foreign concept to you.)

You believe that injecting petty insults is the path to a sane, reasonable discussion on ANY topic with anyone?

I wasn’t aware that I was avoiding this question, since it seems pretty self evident that injecting truly petty insults are not necessarily helpful to a sane, reasonable discussion. I simply reject your notion that Jay had injected any petty insults.

He was stating a fact, about a specific brand of weapon that was used to slaughter a score of children.

• Link
• Report this comment

Clyde Frog — “If you see how foolish of a notion it is to expect that when one side of any argument can’t leave insults out of the “discussion”, there will be no rational sane discussion”

Then perhaps you should leave the insults and absolute pronouncements out of your posts as well, sir.

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet
This is simply incorrect. Driving is not a privilege.

It is a right.
……………………………………………
for Nascar it’s a left…

• Link
• Report this comment

Scout: New legislation aimed at reducing or restricting law abiding citizens from purchasing or owning firearms will do nothing to reduce violent crime

Testbeds known as just about every other country that has done exactly that would disagree with you.

Facts show that violent crimes have indeed fallen after gun bans in other countries. Especially those where guns are used. The violent crimes that were committed with guns were not replaced point for point with new ways of killing, contrary to gun nuts assertions.

• Link
• Report this comment

R. W. Extreme, here are some quotes for *you* to chew on.

And please, fill me in on your legal teaching experience. I taught Constitutional Law for two semesters.

Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist #29: “The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.

Hamilton doesn’t like the notion of training the citizenry to the standard of a “well-regulated militia,” but he clearly admits that it includes lots and lots of training and military drills.

Records of the Continental Congress agree: “Resolved , That this appointment be conferred on experienced and vigilant general officers, who are acquainted with whatever relates to the general economy, manoeuvres and discipline of a well regulated army.”

George Washington spoke approvingly of the proper regulation of troops and the value thereof: “I am unacquainted with the extent of your works, and consequently ignorant of the number or men necessary to man them. If your present numbers should be insufficient for that purpose, I would then by all means advise your making up the deficiency out of the best regulated militia that can be got.”

It’s worth observing that several individual States ( VA and PA among them), in their Constitutions and founding document, *specifically* spoke to and addressed an *individual right* to keep firearms, but the Federal Constitution does not. Despite that, the SCOTUS in Heller decided that the Founders meant it anyway (despite the fact that they could have put it in but didn’t).

If the Founders *wanted* a personal right to keep firearms *distinct* and separate from the militia, they could easily have put in into the Constitution. But they didn’t — they linked it to being part of the militia, since they didn’t envision a standing army.

US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 states that Congress has the authority to: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”

“To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”

Uh, isn’t all that the job of the Army?

Nope. Not as the Founders saw it. They provided for a standing Navy to protect commerce and shipping from piracy on the high seas, but they didn’t like the notion of a standing Army. In fact, the Constitution expressly FORBIDS Congress for appropriating any money for an Army for a period longer than two years. They *clearly* intended for an Army to be raised only when needed — because the militia wasn’t enough to do the job. And they *clearly* intended for the Army to be *disbanded* following the completion of its task.

It always amazes me how conservatives go on and on about “original intent” while not really being all that conversant with the Constitution, its history and the opinions and writings of the Founders.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Hussein Mama;

“R. W. Extreme — “Seeing how you lack an understanding of the Founding Fathers views on the Second Amendment, I’ve included a few below for you. At the very bottom there is a section of quotes from people who are in favor of gun control.”

“I only ask that you read this with an open mind.”

Seeing as how you opened your entreaty with an insult, I can only ask that *you* read *this* with an open mind.

Go get stuffed.”

He insulted you? Sorry, I don’t see it. He did expose your ignorance, and you supported his argument with your refusal to acknowledge truth and facts based on an imagined insult. You truly do wish to be ignorant, it’s amazing.

Though I don’t see any insult whatsoever, I challenge you to be the bigger man and respond to the evidence he presented to you. You seem to think you have a clear grasp on what the Founders intended so why don’t you present some verifiable quotes for us to support your position just as righwingextreme did? Can you?

• Link
• Report this comment

Job Creator

January 11th, 2013
1:58 pm

Fred ™

January 11th, 2013
1:14 pm

Fred, check with your local Farmers COOP, I am sure they can recommend local farmers that raise beef for sale.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

lol I live in Atlanta. I doubt we HAVE a local Coop. There however a tree hugger garden store in Tucker that is close to me, they would know. I also have a neighbor that does the CCP (I think that’s what it’s called) thing where she gets a box of in season tree hugger veggies and some tree hugger meat every week.

I have a normal sized deep freezer, would that be enough to hold a cow or should I get another? They are dirt cheap, (the freezers, not the cows). Well not as cheap as they used to be (I just looked) but not bad……….

• Link
• Report this comment

Clyde Frog — “Well I think you’ve been properly schooled by rightwingextreme.”

Not to worry. I haven’t.

“Don’t take his word for it though, go do some research on your own and see the actual truth to the meaning and intention of the Second Amendment.”

Gosh, you mean those two semesters I spent *teaching* Constitutional law won’t be enough?

How much Con Law did you and Rightwingextreme teach?

“I doubt you will, I am fairly sure you will choose to remain ignorant in the face of information that proves that it is in fact YOU that has no idea what he’s talking about.”

I’m fairly sure that I’m better educated than you and RWE put together, but if it makes you feel better to call others “ignorant” instead of opening your own mind and dispensing with the insults — as you’ve been asking others to do — then go ahead and invalidate your own position, Punkin.

“But please, show me some of these writings of the Founding Fathers you seem to suggest contradict what I have stated and what rightwingextreme has demonstrated.”

Done.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bottom line: Tell the people you love that you love them. Make each day count. None of us knows how long we have.

The problem is US. Americans have a love-hate relationship with ourselves. We can’t live with us; we can’t live without us. Domestic violence is the result, and we are our own worst enemy — complicit enablers each and every one of us.

When everything we hold dear is gone, we’ll have only ourselves to blame.

Oh, and Happy Friday!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jam – It’s what I’ve always heard….If it were a “right” then every DUI case and revoked licenses could use this as an out, the court wouldn’t be able to limit drivers rights … That said, I can find as many articles that support your POV as well

http://driversed.com/teen-drivers-education/driving-is-a-privilege-not-a-right.aspx

• Link
• Report this comment

Erwin’s cat

January 11th, 2013
10:56 am

It’s very hard to use a ladder to kill someone, and that’s certainly not what it’s designed for.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, There are many different kinds of guns for many different uses, Shotguns have a particular use, Rifles have a certain kind of use and pistols have another kind of use.

I don’t think anyone nees 20 guns but 4 or 5 don’t bother me, that being said, it only takes one to kill someone.

I think if you look at all the killers out there, you will find that 99% of them don’t belong to the NRA and they don’t care about gun safety rules.

• Link
• Report this comment

Clyde Frog — “He insulted you? Sorry, I don’t see it.”

You don’t start off a polite conversation by calling someone “ignorant,” especially when you yourself don’t have any idea of the other person’s education or experience. It takes quite a bit of ignorance, however, to call someone “ignorant” simply because you don’t agree with them.

“He did expose your ignorance”

He did no such thing, for I don’t have any ignorance on the topic to be exposed. He and I *disagree,* but that doesn’t make either one of us *stupid.* That said, if he wants to toss around terms like “ignorance,” it’s more applicable to him than to me. Unless, of course, he’d like to regale us with his legal teaching experience?

“and you supported his argument with your refusal to acknowledge truth and facts based on an imagined insult.”

Anyone can cherry-pick quotes, and they don’t prove a thing. Lacking context, he might as well be quoting episodes of Dragnet to prove his point.

“You truly do wish to be ignorant, it’s amazing.”

(laughing)

I really do wish one of my students had tried that on me after getting a poor grade.

“Though I don’t see any insult whatsoever, I challenge you to be the bigger man and respond to the evidence he presented to you.”

I challenge *you* to adhere to your own standard. And I’ve *already* responded to it.

“You seem to think you have a clear grasp on what the Founders intended so why don’t you present some verifiable quotes for us to support your position just as righwingextreme did? Can you?”

Once again, done.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Why does Jay want Ted Turner to have to give up his guns?”

Seriously, Jm?

———–

Yep. Seriously. I myself rather like Ted and don’t think he should have to turn in his guns merely because he’s bipolar.

So who gets to decide who’s sane and who isn’t.

• Link
• Report this comment

saban should go pro again.

Cash in again.

• Link
• Report this comment

matti

Nice thoughts in the middle of the dreck of negativity, have a great weekend yourself…

• Link
• Report this comment

It is all about making money for the Gun makers. Why are we selling so many guns. The type is not a big problem. Most semi-automatic weapons are used to have fun. Yes most people do not need to have a semi-automatic because they cannot handle the weapon. The more guns the more problem we are going to have with violence and gun shootings. People obeying the law are not buying all those guns. The gun makers know about how many of the guns they make will end up stolen or end up being sold by a gun seller to criminals. Yes we know people buy guns in the South and sell then in the Northeast to criminals. Look at history. We need to get real. The 2nd amendment will never change even if it is out dated because we have a monster federal military. Now if you want to make sure we can defend against the Government the we need to take about the size of our federal military vs. the States National Guard. Having all those gun is a joke when we talk about going up against the US Military.

• Link
• Report this comment

JHM: Can you link back to the writings you posted? I am… admittedly, a bit too lazy to go back and look for them haha.

• Link
• Report this comment

“So who gets to decide who’s sane and who isn’t.””

Yes, who decides that you are not entitled to have constitutional rights? In criminal cases, it’s a jury of peers, with a variety of safeguards put in place over the centuries.

Who do you trust to determine a person’s “mental state?” Who here can define what should disqualify a person from being protected by the second amendment?

• Link
• Report this comment

I could get banned from here for posting my idea on what I think would happen if we instituted a ban and confiscate law on guns, so I won’t. But I would say it would be a short lived law because of the outcome of instituting it and I would reference Darwin.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Hussein Mama

January 11th, 2013
2:38 pm

I’m glad you taught for two semesters…Obama taught Constitutional Law as well and we see how he views the Constutition. I’ve seen a lot of Supreme’s read into the Constitution stuff that isn’t in the document.

As far as you know I’m a Constitutional scholar with a PHD in astrophysics. Anyone can post or claim anything on a blog.

That being said.

I’ll continue to stand by the quotes I posted. The intent of the Founding Fathers was to provide the People with a means to fight a tyrannical government and to protect themselves as you can tell from the quotes provided. This has obviously been a debate for a long time in our country’s history. You don’t agree with that. Fine. That’s the beauty of this country.

We do have the advantage of only having two wars fought on our soil….1812 and the Civil War. Perhaps if our experience had been different we might have a different view on this topic. I’m sure the Jews in Nazi Germany would have wanted a gun or two when their deportations began. I’m sure anyone living in a dictatorship would love to have a means to stop that government.

It is that ever present fear by a government that the people may rise up and overthrow that government if the people judge the actions to be wrong that has kept things pretty quiet in our country.

And all of this is provided under the Right as enumerated by the Second Amendment.

I hope that you are never in a situation where you need a firearm more powerful than a six shot revolver. I really mean that in all seriousness. I hope none of us on this blog are ever in that postion.

• Link
• Report this comment