Here come the gun control creeps.

[jon lynn]

Get ready folks. Since the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords yesterday, the controllers are starting to zap the internet with their "Guns kill innocent people"

2011 is going to suck.

[Adam Helmer]

jon,

You may be right. On the news last night a reporter said, "This may ignite the debate on gun control and keeping guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed persons." I wished I could have told him to read GCA 1968 and subsequent federal laws already on the books. Further, he should go to a gun shop and read the current BATFE Form 4476 about "Prohibited Persons" who cannot legally buy a gun.

As a retired federal agent, I must say NO law prevents anything. Drug laws have not stopped drug dealers from dealing in every high school and on every street corner in America. Gun Control merely controls honest folks who comply with licensing, registration, Firearms Identity Cards, etc. They have yet to get the bad guys and "nuts" to comply.

Adam

[jon lynn]

Don't forget Adam, they call us "Gun Enthusiast" But when they say the second word like "In-thoooooooziest" and get a sour look on their faces.

They really mean "Gun Nuts" they are just too chicken to say it.

I get truly angry with those clowns. I know I posted this point dozens of times, but they say the Constitutions Second Amendment is obsolete. But for their Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of the Press, and Religion, well then, "that's okay"

They pick and choose what Amendment suits their weenie needs........Great now I am mad again:mad:

[MtnMike2]

I'll state the obvious and say that the media likes to stir it up; I'm sure it helps their ratings. "News" is all about ratings, that's what's important, right?

Mike

[Dan Morris]

It bleeds.....it reads.
dan

[buckhunter]

Suprisingly nothing has been said in the Peoples Republic yet. The murder rate is raising dalily from Gang Bangers with illegal firearms but they keep trying to take mine. I suspect Holder will try something soon. At this point I may just buy another couple.

[GoodOlBoy]

The bigest argument has been how is it that a person considered to mentally unstable to be allowed to go to a public college was allowed to purchase a handgun. I pointed out on another board that when I fill out the paperwork to legally buy a gun they are supposed to do that as part of the background check. If it didn't happen then the feds dropped the ball. No need for new gun control laws until we enforce the ones we already have.

GoodOlBoy

[skeeter@ccia.com]

I watched BBC broadcast on the event....the person they were talking to kept mentioning gun control but the broadcaster kept cutting him off..maybe those in England already understand the results of gun control?...I also hear they want more public officials in Arizona to carry?...Already say most people in that area do carry...I hear she is pro gun and hope she stays that way.

[PJgunner]

OK, the shooter bought the gun at our local Sportsman's Warehouse. The sales person who sold him the gun stated that he really did not want to sell him the gun as he felt the shooter was acting strange. However, because the background check passed him, he had to let him have the gun.
As far as Pima County community college suspending himuntil he passed a mental evaluation, I don't know how they could have passed something on that along? technically, he hadn't been committed either voluntarily or by a doctor's or court order so there wasn't a hell of a lot they could do. Who would they even notify?
Hell! The system has even given him an anti-death penalty lawyer who specializes in badass death penalty cases with a track record of winning. I'll even give odds he beats it with an insanity plea. Too bad they moved it to Phoenix. I'd love to be on that jury. I've heard rumors that his lawyer wants to move the case out of state Figures too much prejudice in AZ. Ya think?
The media keeps saying how Gabby was pro-gun. If that was the case, how come the NRA gave her a "D" rating? According to her web site she was against ownership of semi-auto handguns, yet owned a Glock herself. IIRC, she was also in favor of "sensible" laws Dunno what her defintion of sensible was though. I don't think it was as rabid as Feinstein, Schumer and those guys. I only glanced through the site and don't remember all that much.
It does make me wonder though what her attitude toward us gun owners will be once she's up and about and back to work?
It just don't look good.
Paul B.

[Seawolf1090]

Any time a really bad shooting occurs, the rabid Moonbats take wing and desecrate our countryside with their droppings...... and now that a couple of their own were gunned down (by a LIBERAL!) they are on the warpath against the GUN. It is easier to fight against an inanimate object than against the CRIMINALS committing the crimes.

[jon lynn]

A woman ran down her boyfriend somewhere in northern Kentucky recently, and messed him up pretty bad......do I try and lobby to ban cars?

[jplonghunter]

Jon

It won't work. It was a Toyota and she claimed the accelerator got stuck.

jplonghunter

[FromBearCreek]

OK, the shooter bought the gun at our local Sportsman's Warehouse. The sales person who sold him the gun stated that he really did not want to sell him the gun as he felt the shooter was acting strange. However, because the background check passed him, he had to let him have the gun.

He didn't have to let him have it. Many years ago when I sold guns retail, I refused a few people that didn't feel 'right.' The most blatant was a very fat man who was buying a puny Beretta .25 that almost disappeared in his pudgy mitt, and as he was filling out the 4473 (this was before background checks) he told me 'my in-laws won't give me any crap any more now that I have this.' I put the gun back in the box, put it under the counter and told him to get lost. He pointed out that he'd just go buy it someplace else, I said fine, but you're not getting it from me.

Too many people are afraid to make a decision, especially one that might start a confrontation.

[skeet]

I had a few that didn't seem right too..and I did the same thing..refused to sell it to 'em. Pissed one guy off to where I had to order him out of my shop. Luckily I knew and worked with enough cops that I had 'em check him out. Turns out he was a guy with some family problems too. Po Leece took care of that one,,,and in all those years I had one stolen gun brought to me..caught that one too. Sometimes ya just get a feeling

[Jack]

I agree with Ward and Skeet.
When I ran the sporting goods department of a big box store, I told the management that I would only take the job if I had the right to refuse to sell a gun to someone I thought was up to no good. They agreed, and when it happened (only a couple of times), they backed me.
One guy admitted to the police that he wanted to kill himself.....

[Skinny Shooter]

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/27/white-house-to-push-gun-control.html


Obama intentionally did not mention gun control in his State of the Union, but aides say that in the next two weeks the administration will unveil a campaign to get Congress to toughen existing laws.


At the beginning of his State of the Union address, President Obama tipped his hat to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who’s now recuperating in a Houston medical facility. But throughout the hourlong speech, he never addressed the issue at the core of the Giffords tragedy—gun control—and what lawmakers would, or should, do to reform American firearm-access laws.

That was intentional, according to the White House. An administration official says Obama didn’t mention guns in his speech because of the omnipresent controversy surrounding the Second Amendment and gun control. Tuesday’s speech was designed to be more about the economy and how, as Obama repeated nine times, the U.S. could “win the future.”

But in the next two weeks, the White House will unveil a new gun-control effort in which it will urge Congress to strengthen current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people, such as alleged Arizona shooter Jared Loughner, to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check.

Tuesday night after the speech, Obama adviser David Plouffe said to NBC News that the president would not let the moment after the Arizona shootings pass without pushing for some change in the law, to prevent another similar incident. “It’s a very important issue, and one I know there’s going to be debate about on the Hill.”

The White House said that to avoid being accused of capitalizing on the Arizona shootings for political gain, Obama will address the gun issue in a separate speech, likely early next month. He’s also expected to use Arizona as a starting point, but make the case that America’s gun laws have been too loose for much longer than just the past few weeks.

As the White House prepares its strategy, several gun-policy groups are saying they were burned by the lack of any mention of guns in the president’s highest-profile speech of the year. “President Obama tonight failed to challenge old assumptions on the need for, and political possibilities of, reducing the gun violence—which he suggested should be done two weeks ago in Tucson,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the nation’s largest gun-safety group. No group said it had been consulted by the White House regarding legislative suggestions.

Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association has stayed largely silent following the Arizona shootings. Asked about a specialized White House effort on guns, a spokesman for the powerful gun lobby declined to comment.



And the comments are interesting too:



Stephen
Like everyone else I cannot believe the way this article is written. "The issue at the core of the Giffords tragedy—gun control...", "assault weapons", "Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the nation’s largest gun-safety group."

And my favorite: "The White House said that to avoid being accused of capitalizing on the Arizona shootings for political gain... Obama expected to use Arizona as a starting point," I mean come on! Those sentences are back-to-back!

Obama is not stupid. The reason he didn't mention his anti-gun stance it in the State of the Union speech is because he knows it is a losing agenda. This is probably about the LAST thing he should be trying to push for to keep his ratings from falling any lower. He'll put on a dog and pony show, waste everyones time, and then accomplish nothing.

Although this may be a good remember to WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMEN and ask them to not support any anti-gun nonsense.
Today, 4:17:53 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

D James
Oh goody... BHO will make another speech. The man does love the sound of his own voice.

Joe
I believe in gun control, in fact every time I squeeze the trigger with a clear sight picture, my gun is in my complete control.
Today, 4:08:02 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – ModerateLiked byRod in KS

Tamara Kreisler
The strongest reason for the
people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves
against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson

FYI...In cases of mass genocide it always started with disarming the people.
Today, 4:06:00 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – ModerateLiked byRod in KS

Michael Miller
FYI Jefferson didn't write the Constitution, nor was he even in the US at the time of the writing. Seems no one quotes the people who were there.
Today, 4:11:06 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

Tim Gunderson
FYI - She didn't say that he helped write the Constitution
Today, 4:14:45 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

Dave Colf
Why, then, do Statists use Jefferson to subvert the First Amendment by making the specious claim that there is a "wall of separation between the church and the state"?
Today, 4:16:12 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

Lex Terry
Typical; Where did he say that was in the constitution. You are to eager to disagree and argue, engage your brain first.
Today, 4:17:31 PM– Flag – Like – Reply

Wndsrf Boston
I cannot believe I am lowering myself to post on a "Newsweek" story, but I knew Obama would use this as a way to try to disarm people (i.e. pee on the Constitution yet even more than he has). Constitutional Attorney indeed, more like Anti-Constitutional attorney. People have that right to arm themselves but I do agree people should have mental health exams and then training prior to purchasing in addition to the background check. of course there is always the black market so the point is meaningless.
Today, 4:00:05 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – ModerateLiked byRod in KS

scott c
The 1st step toards total control is to take away the peoples ability to fight back. The founders of this nation specifically put the 2nd Amendment in as a check against government oppression.
For those that are not very good at history, the founders fought against an oppressive, totalitarian governemnt that didn't care about their rights. They used guns to do so, they made sure that if the new government they formed became something like the one they overthrew, their decendants would have the ability to stop an oppressive government.

Government officials that want to ban guns, don't want to ban them to prevent civilians from shooting civilians. They want to ban them to prevent civilians from shooting government officals and as a measure of control over the populace. They want the law abiding to live in fear. People living in fear will accept the loss of their rights if it gives them a sense of security.
Just look at the TSA. We've gone from metal detectors, to nude body images to full on molestation, all in the name of "safety".


But as has been mentioned every time a shooting like this occurs, the liberals can't grow the man bits to lay the blame where it belongs. The criminal that did the shooting is the problem. Not the firearm.
Today, 3:59:47 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

D James
Citizens do not shoot citizens, criminals shot citizens. Bo you think a criminal gives a rats @ss about the law?
Today, 4:17:46 PM– Flag – Like – Reply

Jon D
"... the issue at the core of the Giffords tragedy - Gun Control".

This is about as stupid as stupid can be. To suggest that the GUN had some sort of control over that wacko is not only miss leading, but people are put into padded rooms for projecting human attributes onto inanimate object.
Today, 3:57:02 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

[PJgunner]

"as Obama repeated nine times, the U.S. could “win the future.”

That translates out to putting WE THE PEOPLE under the government's thumb. :mad::mad::mad:
Note to Obabma. Show me a birth certificate or get your sorry ass out of my White House.
Paul B.
"What good fortine for government that the people do not think."
Adolph Hitler

[8X56MS]

Here come the gun control creeps? It is time to disabuse ourselves of the thought that they ever went away in the first place.

Hussein, and every other liberal has always had gun control in mind. A disarmed Citizen is one that cannot refuse that 3 AM knock on the door.

Hey, it's all about absolute control, and without banning guns, the marxists that run our Country can't have that sort of control.

[buckhunter]

Ya see whats going on in Egypt and Tuninisa. Take heart my fiends, its just a matter of time until that happens here. Maybe not in my lifetime but my kids will have to face it.

[Larryjk]

I have a sign on the wall of my shop that says I reserve the right to refuse to do business with anyone I chose. There was one guy who used to stop by that I told he wouldn't get a gun from me. He is now in prison for shooting his brother-in-law. The fellow in AZ was known by the loud mouth sheriff but was passed on. His mother is a secretary for the Board of Supervisors for that county. IMHO the sheriff let that give the nutball a "by". The shooter isn't insane, just crazy, and that won't give h im immunity from prosecution.

[skeet]

Just a couple of quotes of our founding fathers that seem to be very timely on this issue

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"
Benjamin Franklin

"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
-James Madison, Federalist Papers, No. 46.

that second quote surely is clear enough on the issue of the 2nd amendment I think....leading to another quote as follows

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen"
***8212;Samuel Adams
Pretty clear don't you think.

The Wyoming legislature is just now attempting to pass a bill reinforcing the intent of the 2nd amendment which I do hope passes. It allows the concealed carry of a firearm without a required permit such as a few other states already do.. It has passed the house and hopefully will pass the senate soon. ..It disallows that right to felons. Every state should allow this right...yes Fabs...even Maryland

I truly believe an armed society IS a polite society.