Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ColDayMan

Gun Rights

Recommended Posts

I just bought my first gun at the age of 32.  I personally believe the gun rights of Americans will always be "pro gun" regardless of what pressure is put on the politicians that serve us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought my first gun at the age of 32.  I personally believe the gun rights of Americans will always be "pro gun" regardless of what pressure is put on the politicians that serve us.

 

I got mine a bit older, even though I was always a bit more "extreme" on this issue than most.  What it boils down to is a politician who doesn't trust the people to be armed shouldn't be trusted to govern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still have yet to see the gun ban bill on which you all continually premise your argument.  We will never be able to have an adult conversation on this topic as long as that is the MO of those who are intent on making sure that conversation never takes place.  Fact is, there already are several lines which the 2nd Amendment does not reach...... automatic weapons, nuclear submarines, chemical weapons, etc.  These are lines which are continually re-examined as society evolves and technology changes.  If Sandy Hook is not reason to re-open the discussion, in a non "I'm rubber you're glue" fashion, then nothing ever will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that spirit I offer this. Shared on FB by my former roommate who liked to fiddle with his handgun while wasted.

564131_10151208782122939_645971273_n.jpg

 

I'll try and remember to save some absurd twitter comments from folks I follow that skew the other way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

December 26, 2012

TWO SCHOOLS: NEWTOWN AND TOULOUSE

Posted by Cecile Alduy

 

...Sylvie Kauffmann, the editorial director for Le Monde and their correspondent in Washington, D.C., and New York from 1993 to 2001, pointed out an underlying paradox here: “That a country so attached to its civil liberties is able to come together and accept significant restrictions to its individual rights to fight against terrorism in the wake of September 11th but is unable to limit the availability of firearms that kill their own children, that’s properly impossible to understand for Europeans.”

 

The French are hardly the only ones to be bewildered, as Evan Osnos reported from China. The United States’ cultural insularity is vividly captured by a simple fact: only two countries in the world consider gun possession a citizen’s basic right rather than a privilege. The other is Yemen. Even in this select class of two, there are an estimated eighty-eight guns for every hundred people in the United States, compared to fifty-five per person in Yemen, according to the Small Arms Survey. Between three and seven million illegal weapons are in circulation in France, according to police sources, or between five and ten for every hundred—a figure that shocked the French when it was released in the wake of the Toulouse shooting, but which pales in comparison to the more than two hundred seventy million firearms legally owned by American civilians. The United States has the glorious record of counting almost as many guns as people.

 

Seen from abroad, there’s a new American geography, one of places strung together by a narrative of terror. Littleton, Aurora, Virginia Tech, Oak Creek, Newtown: the names ring like a litany of preventable massacres—blots of blood on the map of a country more and more foreign to others in the depth and absurdity of its tragedy.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/12/two-schools-newtown-and-toulouse.html#ixzz2GHHut1Pi


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone that's curious about what we probably should pass but never will, Sen Feinstein has released a summary of the bill she intends to introduce on the first day of the new congress. http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve/?File_id=10993387-5d4d-4680-a872-ac8ca4359119

 

I suppose a 'grandfather' clause for those already owning these guns is a must.  But I would wonder what happens to them when the owner dies.  Without seeing the precise language, it seems the ban on "transfer" would apply to inheritence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As grandfather clauses go, that's not much of one considers it still requires registration.  Also, it allows for grandfathered-in registration of guns, but apparently not magazines.

 

I'm both predicting and hoping that this goes nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As grandfather clauses go, that's not much of one considers it still requires registration.  Also, it allows for grandfathered-in registration of guns, but apparently not magazines.

 

I'm both predicting and hoping that this goes nowhere.

 

I'm pretty certain it's going nowhere.  I think Feinstein realizes this.  She's posturing for her constituency.

 

The 10 limit on the clip (a carryover from 1994) is particularly odious because it's artificially set below an industry norm.  It's like the time the EPA tried to define a large container as 50 gallons or more, when the standard drum is 55.  Or saying pop can't be sold in bottles greater than a half gallon when the 2L is the standard.

 

As for the NFA registration, any comprehensive list of who has what guns will be opposed.  Strenuously.  Both for reasons like we're seeing with the NYC area newspaper that just reaped a whirlwind, or for more sinister potential government aims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As grandfather clauses go, that's not much of one considers it still requires registration.  Also, it allows for grandfathered-in registration of guns, but apparently not magazines.

 

I'm both predicting and hoping that this goes nowhere.

 

I'm pretty certain it's going nowhere.  I think Feinstein realizes this.  She's posturing for her constituency.

My guess is that it's an opening shot to get the debate going and that everyone including Feinstein would be happy with a watered down version of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As grandfather clauses go, that's not much of one considers it still requires registration.  Also, it allows for grandfathered-in registration of guns, but apparently not magazines.

 

I'm both predicting and hoping that this goes nowhere.

 

I'm pretty certain it's going nowhere.  I think Feinstein realizes this.  She's posturing for her constituency.

My guess is that it's an opening shot to get the debate going and that everyone including Feinstein would be happy with a watered down version of this.

 

Exactly.  Big changes are unavoidable.  Public sentiment has shifted.  I can only hope that the out-of-touch NRA continues to do press conferences and stay involved in the discussion so the public can see how extremist these people are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As grandfather clauses go, that's not much of one considers it still requires registration.  Also, it allows for grandfathered-in registration of guns, but apparently not magazines.

 

I'm both predicting and hoping that this goes nowhere.

 

I'm pretty certain it's going nowhere.  I think Feinstein realizes this.  She's posturing for her constituency.

My guess is that it's an opening shot to get the debate going and that everyone including Feinstein would be happy with a watered down version of this.

 

Exactly.  Big changes are unavoidable.  Public sentiment has shifted.  I can only hope that the out-of-touch NRA continues to do press conferences and stay involved in the discussion so the public can see how extremist these people are.

 

Ummm.......on gun ownership rights, the NRA are moderates.  Gun Owners of America is somewhat less moderate.  Most of the people you'd consider "extreme" don't belong to either group, they think they are too soft.

 

Nor do I think public sentiment has actually shifted.  One side's gotten louder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As grandfather clauses go, that's not much of one considers it still requires registration.  Also, it allows for grandfathered-in registration of guns, but apparently not magazines.

 

I'm both predicting and hoping that this goes nowhere.

 

I'm pretty certain it's going nowhere.  I think Feinstein realizes this.  She's posturing for her constituency.

My guess is that it's an opening shot to get the debate going and that everyone including Feinstein would be happy with a watered down version of this.

 

Exactly.  Big changes are unavoidable.  Public sentiment has shifted.  I can only hope that the out-of-touch NRA continues to do press conferences and stay involved in the discussion so the public can see how extremist these people are.

 

Ummm.......on gun ownership rights, the NRA are moderates.  Gun Owners of America is somewhat less moderate.  Most of the people you'd consider "extreme" don't belong to either group, they think they are too soft.

 

Nor do I think public sentiment has actually shifted.  One side's gotten louder. 

 

Sorry, but the NRA's response to the tragedy is not a "moderate" view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nor do I think public sentiment has actually shifted.  One side's gotten louder.  [/color]
Some polls I've seen, but am far too lazy to look up again, have shown a shift in public sentiment toward controls on "assault rifles" and large magazines. Whether these sentiments are significant enough and will hold for long enough for any changes to pass remains to be seen.

 

Ummm.......on gun ownership rights, the NRA are moderates.  Gun Owners of America is somewhat less moderate.  Most of the people you'd consider "extreme" don't belong to either group, they think they are too soft.
The NRA is certainly not the most extreme voice out there, but not being the most extreme does not equal moderate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Brent Larkin's my NEW HERO! -- of all people; who'd a thunk? ... Give 'em hell, Brent!!

 

The NRA loves complacent, compliant Ohio: Brent Larkin

 

By Brent Larkin, The Plain Dealer The Plain Dealer

on January 05, 2013 at 9:00 AM, updated January 05, 2013 at 9:07 AM

 

The National Rifle Association's most productive, Ohio-based affiliate will be on the job and open for business Monday in Columbus.

 

The group's biennial session will be held in what are otherwise known as the chambers of the Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio Senate.

 

And no senseless slaughter of children is likely to deter this gun-loving bunch from its relentless pursuit of allowing deadly weapons in every Ohio building except one:

 

The building in which these world-class phonies work.

 

And when members of Ohio's 130th General Assembly convene in the Statehouse, they will do so secure in the knowledge that on the 30th floor of a building across the street sits a governor who will sign just about any crazy gun bill they send his way.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/01/the_nra_loves_complacent_compl.html#incart_2box

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Brent Larkin's my NEW HERO! -- of all people; who'd a thunk? ... Give 'em hell, Brent!!

 

The NRA loves complacent, compliant Ohio: Brent Larkin

 

By Brent Larkin, The Plain Dealer The Plain Dealer

on January 05, 2013 at 9:00 AM, updated January 05, 2013 at 9:07 AM

 

The National Rifle Association's most productive, Ohio-based affiliate will be on the job and open for business Monday in Columbus.

 

The group's biennial session will be held in what are otherwise known as the chambers of the Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio Senate.

 

And no senseless slaughter of children is likely to deter this gun-loving bunch from its relentless pursuit of allowing deadly weapons in every Ohio building except one:

 

The building in which these world-class phonies work.

 

And when members of Ohio's 130th General Assembly convene in the Statehouse, they will do so secure in the knowledge that on the 30th floor of a building across the street sits a governor who will sign just about any crazy gun bill they send his way.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/01/the_nra_loves_complacent_compl.html#incart_2box

 

This was about the Republicans, not gun control.  He failed to mention that Strickland is even more pro-Second Amendment than Kasich.  The NRA endorsed Strickland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Brent Larkin's my NEW HERO! -- of all people; who'd a thunk? ... Give 'em hell, Brent!!

 

The NRA loves complacent, compliant Ohio: Brent Larkin

 

By Brent Larkin, The Plain Dealer The Plain Dealer

on January 05, 2013 at 9:00 AM, updated January 05, 2013 at 9:07 AM

 

The National Rifle Association's most productive, Ohio-based affiliate will be on the job and open for business Monday in Columbus.

 

The group's biennial session will be held in what are otherwise known as the chambers of the Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio Senate.

 

And no senseless slaughter of children is likely to deter this gun-loving bunch from its relentless pursuit of allowing deadly weapons in every Ohio building except one:

 

The building in which these world-class phonies work.

 

And when members of Ohio's 130th General Assembly convene in the Statehouse, they will do so secure in the knowledge that on the 30th floor of a building across the street sits a governor who will sign just about any crazy gun bill they send his way.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/01/the_nra_loves_complacent_compl.html#incart_2box

 

This was about the Republicans, not gun control.  He failed to mention that Strickland is even more pro-Second Amendment than Kasich.  The NRA endorsed Strickland.

 

And I'm sure Strickland has the balls to stand up to the NRA on such low hanging fruit as assault weapons after some nut-job mows down 20 babies and 6 other helpless women.  Brent Larkin a center right columnist who attacked the statehouse because what they are doing, and not doing, is wrong.  That Republicans occupy the Statehouse, just like Republicans, nationally, punked out and foolishly/cowardly let the assault weapons ban expire under Dubya, ... deal with it!... Fact is WVs Joe Manchin, a Democrat and staunch NRA member, did have the balls to stand up and advocate stiffer gun control after Newtown ... again, deal with it.!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually.... when they were in Congress, Strickland opposed Clinton's crime bill, which had an emphasis on assault weapon ban, while Kasich helped to get it passed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually.... when they were in Congress, Strickland opposed Clinton's crime bill, which had an emphasis on assault weapon ban, while Kasich helped to get it passed.

 

Yep.  Thank you.

 

Strickland constantly got better NRA grades than Kasich and he got the endorsement for governor.  Contrary to rants like the one above (any "argument" using phrases like "deal with it" that you would never hear in a real-world debate not intended to stir up hostility qualifies as such), gun ownership rights aren't a strictly partisan issue.  In fact, if Strickland had stood up to Obama on health care and/or generally distanced himself from him, I would have considered voting for him....largely based on this reason.  To me, it speaks volumes on how much you trust the people.  Congressman Dingell of Michigan was a powerful liberal who was a staunch supporter of gun ownership rights.  Tim Ryan's good on the issue too.

 

President Bush officially supported renewing the assault weapons ban.  Of course, he knew the Congress would never let it get to him.

 

By the way, Larkin's definitely left of center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I agreed with a candidate on everything but gun control, I'd say they were a pretty great candidate. Not that I don't care about the issue, but it's not a deal breaker at all. I think the passion for this issue is on the right. Like the passion for gay rights is on the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wanna to talk about passion?  Check out the tirade this guy goes on - http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/alex-jones-piers-morgan-video-140201992.html

 

Ha, that was funny.

 

Have to hand it to Piers, he remained calm.  However, I saw him be equally as passionate arguing the other side during a town hall he hosted a day or 2 after the Sandy Hook shooting.  And my all time favorite was from many years ago when Rosie O'Donnel and Tom Selleck went at it on her talk show about this same issue.

 

So I would say passion exists equally on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like Cleveland may have dodged a bullet here. Presumably, the husband owned his weapons legally, by the way.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/chagrin-valley/index.ssf/2013/01/gross_schechter_day_school_in.html

Gross Schechter Day School in Pepper Pike closed over concern about parent with gun

 

Dodged a bullet?

 

There's no evidence he went near the school or even considered doing so.  There's also no evidence but the wife's words that he was suicidal.  It sounds like he took his property, including some of his more valuable items called "guns", and moved out.

 

I'm not faulting the school for closing but I don't think the husband should be blamed for this either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure, if it came down to it, this country could come to a consensus on whether the sky is blue or water is wet.  The divide is simply growing larger and is more amplified with every passing year.  At present, Governors from blue states such as NYC, Maryland, and Delaware are working to pass legislation which would toughen assault weapons bans, step up background checks, and limit the capacity of magazines.  At the same time, Governors from red states, such as Texas and Tennessee, are working to pass laws which makes it will allow concealed carry within school buildings.

 

salute.gif

 

 

Meanwhile, a group of parents from the Newtown tragedy have formed have joined/formed an antiviolence group which preaches that doing nothing is "not an option."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wanna to talk about passion?  Check out the tirade this guy goes on - http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/alex-jones-piers-morgan-video-140201992.html

 

Oh I love Alex Jones.

 

I'm disappointed they gave this guy a national pulpit from which to speak.

 

Can we just tax bullets at $1,000 each and be done with this debate?


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that his rant led even Glenn Beck, of all people, to label him a facsist, I would say it was mission accomplished for Morgan.  He wasn't given a pulpit to spread the good word.  He was given a pulpit to hang himself as an extremist.  Much of the pro-gun lobby has sought to distance themselves from his yeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaw "the south will rise again" attitude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^as if only law abiding citizens are the ones buying ammunition and paying taxes...

 

NRA totally missed the boat on this issue.  As soon as they came under the spotlight after this Newton school shooting, they should've gotten back out in front and conceded to more restrictions on assault weapons, high capacity magazines and background checks.  Rather than digging in and saying this wasn't the answer, they should've gotten on board and said "Yes, we agree, responsible gun ownership is the only kind of gun ownership we want.  And we'll offer expanded gun safety & training courses at no cost with every new NRA membership over the next six months". 

 

They missed a major opportunity to expand their brand from redneck hunters and ex military types to include soccer moms and white collar professionals.  Revisiting the NRA logo itself, to something a little softer, more appealing to the mainstream even, might be in order as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Rather than digging in and saying this wasn't the answer, they should've gotten on board and said "Yes, we agree, responsible gun ownership is the only kind of gun ownership we want.  And we'll offer expanded gun safety & training courses at no cost with every new NRA membership over the next six months". 

 

They missed a major opportunity to expand their brand from redneck hunters and ex military types to include soccer moms and white collar professionals.  Revisiting the NRA logo itself, to something a little softer, more appealing to the mainstream even, might be in order as well.

More than just soccer moms and white collar professionals, they're risking their appeal to the more moderate legislators by becoming more extreme. Had they advocated responsible gun ownership, they'd have respect and a seat at the table for negotiations. They didn't and will have a more limited place in the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^as if only law abiding citizens are the ones buying ammunition and paying taxes...

 

 

No, but it allows the feds to get these yahoos off the streets and into the prisons where they belong.


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bucking the NRA line, to some consternation from conservatives (at least those taking the NRA line) and liberals (who think this is inviting the devil to dinner), is the nation's largest gun retailer, Wal-Mart:

 

http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/238720/guns-walmart-and-crony-capitalism

 

As the article notes, Wal-Mart may have a self-interested reason for wanting to close the gun show loophole (if everyone is forced to undergo background checks anyway, then Wal-Mart has closed a competitive disadvantage), but on the flip side, they do want to be able to continue their sales, so they're going to be seriously opposed to outright bans, especially on popular styles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Walmart sell anything that is seriously in danger of a ban?  I thought they only sold hunting rifles and shotguns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I dont understand is the "We need to ban assault weapons to lower the homicide rate and numbers" argument.

 

Doing so will hardly put a dent in those number with assault weapon death being so low. Rifles accounted for only 2.5% of homicides in 2011. Assault rifles are just a subcategory of this, probably less than .5%

 

Also homicides are on the way down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radical Islamists account for even a smaller fraction of US homicides.  Should we do nothing about them?  I think, just like terrorists, the fear about assault weapons is the capability to cause so much harm.  I also think your percentages would greatly increase if you limited the numbers to mass shootings.

 

The issue I see as being improperly ignored is gun security.  I have no problem with you owning a gun.  I do have a problem with you not properly securing your gun.  The Newtown shooting would not have occured if the mother had properly secured her weapons.  The Chardon shooting occured because some relative did not properly secure his weapons.  We can talk about mental health, assault weapons, magazine capacity, etc...... but let's not forget that Americans who do choose to exercise whatever rights the 2nd Amendment might grant, should understand that a great deal of RESPONSIBILITY comes along with that choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bucking the NRA line, to some consternation from conservatives (at least those taking the NRA line) and liberals (who think this is inviting the devil to dinner), is the nation's largest gun retailer, Wal-Mart:

 

http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/238720/guns-walmart-and-crony-capitalism

 

As the article notes, Wal-Mart may have a self-interested reason for wanting to close the gun show loophole (if everyone is forced to undergo background checks anyway, then Wal-Mart has closed a competitive disadvantage), but on the flip side, they do want to be able to continue their sales, so they're going to be seriously opposed to outright bans, especially on popular styles.

Their clientele is largely suburban and rural, so they'd have a lot to lose if they came out in favor of something that unpopular in those areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...